HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/18/2014 - RegularNovember 18, 2014 743
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 third Tuesday and the only
regularly scheduled meeting of the month of November 2014. 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
Kyle Ferguson of Westminster Presbyterian Church. 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: Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim 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: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF
AGENDA ITEMS
Chairman McNamara requested that agenda item C.1 the resolution
expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Kurt P.
Kipley, Sr., Firefighter/EMT, upon his retirement after more than sixteen (16) years be
moved to the Consent Agenda as item 1.5. There were no objections.
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
744 November 18, 2014
A
r
�i
r
This item was moved to the Consent Agenda as Mr. Kipley could not be in
attendance.
IN RE: BRIEFINGS
1. Briefing on progress to date on the removal of surplus property
from Old William Byrd High School (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim
County Administrator)
Mr. O'Donnell advised that the ceiling tiles do not have asbestos. He
indicated staff is working with the Sheriff's Office, Parks and Recreation and General
Services to clear out the lower building either December 6, 2014 or December 13, 2014.
It is anticipated they will put everything outside and see what type of reaction they
receive and then do the large building in the spring. Staff is working on getting the word
out to the public.
Supervisor Peters thanked Mr. O'Donnell and Sheriff Poff for their help
and cooperation. He indicated he felt this would be great for everyone.
Supervisor Bedrosian inquired if the items would be purchased or if the
County would be giving away with Mr. O'Donnell advising they would be given away.
Supervisor Church thanked Sheriff Poff for his assistance.
Supervisor Peters advised that staff would need to check with the Town of
Vinton as they used the property for the Vinton Christmas Parade on December 4,
2014. Mr. O'Donnell advised he would check with the Town and plan accordingly.
Chairman McNamara advised citizens to check the website that staff
would make sure all the final details would be posted.
IN RE: NEW BUSINESS
1. Resolution appointing the County Administrator and approval of
an employment agreement (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the resolution would be to appoint Candidate #6
effective December 28th and approve an employment agreement.
Chairman McNamara stated we began the process on May 9, 2014 and at
that point the Board established it would maintain confidentiality of the applicants. The
media has probably contacted all of the Board and everyone wants to know who
applicant #6. It is not our intent to keep this information private any longer than we
November 18, 2014 745
need to, but for today's purposes, it will remain applicant #6. Applicant #6 is currently
employed somewhere else and we will try out best to not let the name slip.
Supervisor Church wants to go on record to help guide future Boards.
Hopefully, we will not have to do this for a lifetime, but if we do, he has some
suggestions. The process he encountered had flaws in it; every process does. He
would like to go on record when somebody looks back, they will be able to say,
"Supervisor Church wanted to revamp the process to allow more time for the interview
process." He would allow more time to do a complete vetting process and feels that is
more important than anything. Make sure we allow each Board member a sufficient
opportunity to have private time with the candidates. He knows he has spent private
time with Candidate #6; it is critical in his opinion to not just have a number, a face. He
would also like to see the future process supply the Board with the names of the
references. We received a list of comments, a summary statement, but we had no idea
who they are, what relationship they had with the candidate, etc. He did go into depth
because he felt this is a critical decision and asked questions of Candidate #6. He
made himself available to all Board members and he took him up on that. Contrary to
some media reports, he has been involved since day 1. We are all separate individuals
and we have separate ways of doing things. He wanted to have private interview time.
We had a full Board interview with the candidates and he just did not see enough time
to allow him to feel good about a decision-making process. He was able to get an extra
two (2) hours. It was the consensus of the Board the first week that we were not going
to have individual time. We need to look at that in the future, if we ever have it, it is very
important. He spent the extra two (2) hours with Candidate #6. He took the opportunity
to find out and identify the references, very easily given and had at least three (3) from
different parts of the Country. He did many interviews with them; who they were, what
interaction did they have with the candidate, how did they know the candidate, what was
their past with them, what would they do if xyz question was asked. He wanted to ask
his own selected questions, that was a sticking point. When we started the process, the
Board was given a selected number of preselected questions and that really bothered
him. With no disrespect to the search committee, he wanted to ask his own questions,
not generic questions. He spent invaluable time, over three plus (3+) hours, and we
methodically handled every question that he felt like he needed to ask. He wished we
had a really strong field of candidates; we did not have a strong field as he would have
liked, but does believe Candidate #6 brings some extremely good qualities to Roanoke
County. He has some credentials that we have not seen before in his opinion and is
planning to vote yes on Candidate #6.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he agreed with a lot of the things the
Supervisor from Catawba has stated. He actually thought we were rushed into a
process; he does not think the candidates were as strong as he thought they should be.
Candidate #6 seems fine, but they should all be like Candidate #6. In fact, we should
be ready to offer three or four (3 to 4) candidates the position. If the first candidate does
not accept on the terms we have, we move to the next candidate. They should all be
746 November 18, 2014
that good. He advised he has some prepared remarks and would like to state them
right now. "As you know, we are getting ready to make one of the biggest decisions for
Roanoke County government. We are going to be voting for the person who will
manage the County from an Administrative perspective. This person will manage
employees and carry out the wishes of the Board of Supervisors, which really means
that this person will be carrying out the wishes of the people of Roanoke County. Now,
he has been criticized by the opinion pages of the Roanoke Times and by some of his
colleagues for not jumping on board with this entire process from the beginning and
they have questioned my reasoning for this and he thinks it is a fair question and he
thinks it is fair for them to ask. So on the eve of making this step, he thinks in his
judgment it is not a good decision. He thinks it is a quick decision. He advised he is
going to take them on their challenge and be more specific in his reasoning. Now, he
warned that there are some directors and administrative staff here today and some of
his colleagues that are going to be offended with what he says; so be it. From the
opening letter from my colleges reprimanding him for not attending closed sessions to
discussing a new County Administrator to what he feels is resistance by the
Administration to get to the bottom of the current personnel issues. He thinks it is
important that he speak to the citizens of Roanoke County. First of all, he advised this
has nothing to do with the people that have applied for this job. He thinks everyone has
the right to search for a job they think will improve their quality of life for their financial
standing. The issue he has had all along is how do we deal; how does the Board deal
with this issue and how high levels of County Administration deal with current personnel
issues. He is pretty sure that Candidate #6 will be voted on soon or possibly tonight
because he is very concerned and wondering what he is getting into. So, what he is
about to say is for that individual to ponder also. The reason we are in this situation
today in looking for a new Administrator is that our former Administrator gave his notice
of resignation while involved in an internal investigation regarding employees and two
(2) specific department heads. About nine (9) days after the Board of Supervisors were
told of these allegations for the first time, our County Administrator physically left the
building and one of the Assistant County Administrators, Dan O'Donnell, took over as
Interim. Now, today he is speaking to the citizens of Roanoke County. He does not
work for the County Administration, he does not work for his colleagues on this Board.
He works for the citizens of Roanoke County. He is not going to recount the entire story
since it has been told before. One of the investigations regarding allegations concerns
our Human Resources. As you can imagine, this immediately put a strong hold on his
desire to move forward with Human Resources looking for a new County Administrator
until he was absolutely sure that the serious allegations had been dealt with correctly.
He will not go into the allegations since he has already had a press conference last
month. Two Directors were given suspensions; one for three (3) weeks and the Director
of Human Resources for three (3) days. He wants to concentrate on Human Resources
because this is extremely important as we look for a County Administrator. They work
hand in hand. In fact, our prospective new County Administrator mentioned this in his
November 18, 2014 747
interview; how important this position was. It would be his right arm. The position of
Human Resource Director is by far the most powerful position in County government."
Chairman McNamara advised he wanted to make sure that the Board was
staying on the topic of the County Administrator and asked Mr. Mahoney if they were
going into personnel issues. Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative. Chairman
McNamara then asked Supervisor Bedrosian to refocus his comments to the County
Administrator selection.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated, "He has been asked by many people why he
is not willing to proceed and his fear is that we proceed when this position that we have
issues with and has not been dealt with and we are proceeding. To him, that is wrong.
It is wrong for the citizens and thinks he has every right. He has not convicted anybody,
he has said allegations. Things have been brought up. All of our lives are an open
book for the press and especially when these people are paid by the citizens of
Roanoke County. He has lost confidence and he has told people this in our
Administration in dealing with these issues. He thinks as we move forward to select a
new County Administrator, just because we are moving forward does not mean that we
have resolved issues and we continue to have the same issues again. He has not only
an obligation, but a responsibility to those who have elected him to oversee what is
happening in our Administration and report to them if he does not feel they are being
best served. They are due an explanation of why he did not take part in seeking a new
County Administrator, except for interviewing the candidates, which he felt was
important just to find out a little bit about these people we are looking at. One of the
allegations was about this person was where was this person during the day, the
Director of Human Resources. He has asked repeatedly."
Chairman McNamara again reminded Supervisor Bedrosian to focus on
the County Administrator and the selection process.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated, "Be it noted, that a County Supervisor who
represents his district is trying to enlighten the people of Roanoke County on why we
are treading on dangerous ground going ahead." "This position, the County
Administrator, is extremely important to him. He thinks the Board is rushing this
decision. In the process, we started with six to ten (6 to 10) candidates. When we
interviewed them, he asked for four (4) of them again and was told no, we will only
interview two (2). So, to him it seems like the process is kind of done. But, he will go
down to the end and wish our new Administrator well. It is not often that he can say he
hopes that he is wrong and this new Administrator will not allow the same issues that
currently are in Roanoke County to persist. We in Roanoke County have a duty to our
citizens to always do the right thing and when something internally is not right, we need
to fix it. When allegations are made, we need to persevere and pursue the allegations
to see if they are right are wrong. He thinks that is the Board's responsibility to the
citizens of Roanoke County. He would also like to let us know that another reason that
he will be voting no today is that we are providing a three-year (3) year contract for a
position that is supposed to serve at the pleasure of the Board of Supervisors. Think
748 November 18, 2014
about it. This position we are hiring today and this is why he brings all this up is that to
him it seems like something is wrong. This position is to serve at the pleasure of the
Board, the five of us. This Board could be very different next year and how dare we put
a contract together for somebody and commit for three (3) years. We have not done
this before. He looked at the prior County Administrator and it was our intent that he
would have a two (2) -year contract and if anything happened, he would be given a six
(6) -month severance. For this County Administrator, we are giving him a three (3) -year
contract and if the next group does not like that County Administrator or cannot work
with that County Administrator, we have to pay out his remaining three (3) -year contract.
He does not understand. Why are we doing that? Why don't we do it like we normally
do, at the pleasure of the Board? He takes the risk for taking the job in Roanoke
County. He works for a company; he takes the risk. His company tomorrow could let
him go. He does not know why we are doing this. It seems wrong to him that we are
doing this. In addition, we are providing this individual with a $12,000 increase over
what the prior County Administrator was making. If our former County Administrator
was still here, his salary would be $165,000. Why are we raising it to $177,000? He
has not worked a day in Roanoke County.
Chairman McNamara asked Supervisor Bedrosian to wrap up.
Supervisor Bedrosian responded in the affirmative and stated we are
doing this so quickly, and putting all of our eggs in one basket that we feel we have no
choice. We should be in a position, as he has stated before, that we have several great
candidates and we could offer $165,000 to any of them or the first one and if he does
not accept we will have another one to go to. He just thinks we are doing some things
wrong; we moved so fast, the way we did it, how we did it, the contract we are offering
somebody is unprecedented, we have not done this before with three (3) years out and
pay the remainder of a contract. That is wrong, that is wrong for the citizens of
Roanoke County.
Supervisor Moore stated she thinks we have a good candidate, number
six (6), who will bring the County forward in a very positive way. She thinks they will
work well with staff and employees and with other regions and localities. She thinks
they have the vision and they will be focused on the issues in Roanoke County.
Supervisor Peters stated he had only been here for eleven (11) months as
well and he will say what he said in a meeting several months ago and he will say it
again. He looks at Roanoke County no different than he does a business and if a CEO
leaves under a cloud of doubt, we want to get someone in there to clean house so to
speak. Candidate #6 brought to the table the leadership and the need we are looking
for in Roanoke County as it has been quoted in the paper. This has been an awesome
experience for him because being able to find that person who is going to lead the
County, who is going to help put us in the next decade and to help us evolve. He
believes he will bring along some leadership that we desperately need at this time. He
hopefully looks forward to welcoming this person to the valley.
November 18, 2014 749
Chairman McNamara stated he would like to say there has been an awful
lot of people who have worked very hard, community leaders that have met with some
of our candidates. Staff within Roanoke County, everybody has done a fabulous job of
working with this Board as we accomplish with what he feels is the most important thing
to accomplish this year. This is the most important thing we need to accomplish. You
are not looking at an individual, one of 900. We are looking for somebody to lead an
entire organization of 950 people. You are looking at an individual that will be a leader
in the Roanoke Valley. We are looking for an individual who will be a difference maker
in the quality of lives of the people in the Roanoke Valley for the next decade; he thinks
we have that individuals. He thinks we are very, very fortunate that we have that
individual. He would again like to thank everybody that has been involved with the
process including members of the Board as well as County staff and community
leaders. It is our hope that if this resolution is approved, we can move forward very
quickly and have an announcement of this individual and introduce to the media within
the next forty-eight (48) hours. He also stated he wanted to touch base briefly on the
contract since it has been brought up. When we looked to evaluate what the
contractual provisions should be for a leader of Roanoke County, the first thing we do is
try to evaluate the competitive market space. The competitive market space is very
clear and very easy to evaluate. We did that evaluation based on every county in the
Commonwealth of Virginia between 70,000 in population and 138,000 in population.
Based on the pay and benefits package for those counties, we established a pay and
benefits package for our prospective new leader. The pay and benefit package is not
rich, it is not poor, it is fair; as it should be. He does not believe the people of the
Roanoke Valley, the people in Roanoke County or any of us that are served by seeing if
we can get a person twenty percent (20%) under the market. He does not think we are
best served if we try to hire teachers at twenty percent (20%) under market, finance
directors, police officers, firefighters, sheriff or anybody else. If we want the best
people, we have to pay fairly. Certainly, when you look at the contractual
arrangements, we do have a three (3) -year contract. The three (3) -year contract is
unusual in Roanoke County, but remember Roanoke County has only hired two (2)
administrators in the last twenty-nine (29) years. A contractual arrangement for this
type of position is not unusual and quite frankly it was very, very important in our total
package to Candidate #6 as well it should be. He does not believe the people of the
Roanoke Valley would be best served if we found somebody who wanted to move to
Roanoke without some sort of contract, some sort of assurance and thinks we owe that
to that person. So, he is very pleased that he was able to move this resolution and
would like to thank everybody who has been involved and hope we are going to have
real good news to announce within the next day or so.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he would just like to make a couple of
comments about this. It seems when we talk about these positions, we are very
concerned about the person we are hiring and we should be, but what about having a
concern about the people of Roanoke County. We talked about the salary package that
750 November 18, 2014
is a fair salary package. We were paying our current County Administrator $165,000.
Does that mean if he still stayed in Roanoke County that we would give him a $12,000
raise in order to keep him up with everybody else? The other thing that it does, is there
is now a larger discrepancy between the County Administrator and all the other
positions in Roanoke County government. He would foresee next year that everybody,
every director, would have the right to say, "Wait a minute, the discrepancy is a lot
larger now than it used to be." The salaries are out of pace with what we as Roanoke
County can offer, can afford. He does not want to keep reiterating this, but Roanoke
County is closer to $200 million in debt and we act like a County that continues to have
extra money to spend. We do not. The three-year contract, the other thing, we keep
talking about this is what somebody would like to have when they come to Roanoke
County. Who out there has a job where they have a contract for employment? Most
people sign up for a job and you know what, it is their performance that is going to keep
them in the job and how well they do. None of us have this agreement that we cannot
get fired for three (3) years. He just finds this unbelievable that we would offer this and
he also thinks it encroaches upon the whole fact that the County Administrator serves at
the pleasure of the Board. We have just nullified that and would like to ask the County
Attorney, if he can, does this nullify the rights of the County Board of Supervisors that
this County Administrator serves at our pleasure if we are now saddled with the fact if
our pleasure is not to have this County Administrator, and he hopes he does very well
and we never get to this, but if the next Supervisors say, "You know what, you are not
serving at our pleasure and if there is two (2) years remaining, we basically will almost
have to give you $350,000." He is supposed to be working at our pleasure, he does not
see how this is even allowable. How does he serve at our pleasure then, if we cannot
allow him to be dismissed without a huge penalty upon us and the citizens of Roanoke
County?
Mr. Mahoney responded that he believed he still serves at the pleasure of
the governing body; the governing body would have to make that difficult decision if they
want to in effect, suffer the penalty of making that change in the future. Supervisor
Bedrosian stated that does not sound like "pleasure" when we have to suffer and the
Roanoke County citizens have to suffer by paying $350,000.
Mr. Mahoney advised that when serving at the pleasure typically means
when you terminate someone, you terminate that person for hopefully cause and in this
situation, with County Administrator and County Attorney, you do not need a cause to
terminate that individual. You could terminate that individual because he or she is bald
or he or she has blue eyes. Typically, when you terminate an employee, you terminate
him or her for cause for performance and in this instance the governing body would not
have to show or prove any cause to terminate the County Administrator in the future.
So, the Board always retains that which he feels is a very broad power, when you can
terminate an individual for no reason whatsoever.
Supervisor Bedrosian then asked if Mr. Mahoney served at the pleasure of
the Board with Mr. Mahoney responding in the affirmative. So, he could be terminated
November 18, 2014 751
by three (3) County Supervisors? Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative.
Supervisor Bedrosian then asked if Mr. Mahoney had a contract which gives him the
payment. Mr. Mahoney responded in the negative stating that he was also retained by
the Board of Supervisors in 1984 and in that time period, that was not the custom or
practice. Even if the governing body had given him a three (3) -year contract then, that
contract would have long ago ended. Will we be setting a precedent that the people
serve at our pleasure will now be receiving three -(3) year contracts. Mr. Mahoney
advised he would hesitate to guess as to what the future might hold. As he has
indicated to the Board, back in February or March that he was planning on retiring
sometime in 2015. Whatever the Board's choice is with respect to his placement as
County Attorney that would be a negotiation that the Board would engage in at that
point in time. Custom and practice has been somewhat different in the Commonwealth
of Virginia with respect to what municipalities, cities and towns do with respect to their
managers, their administrators and their attorneys, the people who serve at their
pleasure do. Typically, counties, many of the older more traditional counties have not
engaged in contracts, but that was also a practice that is twenty or thirty (20 or 30)
years ago. He knows back in the seventies and eighties, Roanoke City, for example
had contracts for City Manager and City Attorney. Many cities have done that and
historically that had been their practice. So, sometime next year when the Board goes
through that process for his position, the Board may or may not be in the position that
you may have to offer some kind of contract if the individual if you choose him or her
and you think that person is the one you want.
Supervisor Bedrosian then asked if the phrase you serve at the Board's
pleasure means what? Mr. Mahoney advised in his opinion serving at the Board
pleasure means you can terminate an individual without cause, without any reason.
Supervisor Bedrosian asked if the penalty should be so grave that it would really make
that unrealistic because that is the position you have put us in as County Attorney with
this contract that we can dismiss the County Administrator without any real reason, but
the penalty you have put on us is rather high. So, he questions is this really a smart
idea? Why are we doing this? Let's remove the "at our pleasure" and just say it is three
(3) years. Mr. Mahoney stated he did not want to trivialize the situation. Historically,
you may have some familiarity whereby many local governments enter into copier
contracts and those copier contracts were multi-year contracts. The local governing
body can get out of those contracts, but in order to do so you have to pay a penalty. Mr.
Mahoney advised that is a fairly standard approach in any type of commercial
transaction. Supervisor Bedrosian stated this is different; we are a governing body that
is elected by the people of Roanoke County and coming into this he thought the Board's
authority was and one of the positions we used to have authority over was the Clerk.
This was removed from us at the beginning of the year. So, we no longer have
authority over that position. So we have two remaining positions; the County
Administrator and County Attorney. Basically, you have removed the authority from us
unless we want to pay a very high penalty and that person you can say they serve at
752 November 18, 2014
our pleasure, but technically the pleasure is not going to be very pleasurable. If we say,
"you know what, with a new Board maybe in a year, we just don't see eye to eye and we
would like to remove you." Now, there will be a very high penalty and he is going to
leave with that. He finds it and the whole process has left a very bad taste in his mouth
in doing this in this way and at the end the contracts we were given, he just finds that it
is just not in the best interest of himself as a County Supervisor or the people of
Roanoke County.
Chairman McNamara wrapped up by saying the contractual process was
not created by Mr. Mahoney. Mr. Mahoney drafted the contract at the direction of the
Board. Certainly, anybody up here is welcome to participate in the process and
welcome to participate when we look for a County Attorney and how that contract is
drafted in the future.
RESOLUTION 111814-1 APPOINTING THE COUNTY
ADMINISTRATOR AND APPROVAL OF AN EMPLOYMENT
AGREEMENT
WHEREAS, Section 4 of the Roanoke County Charter provides for the
appointment of a County Administrator, his or her powers and duties, compensation and
tenure of office; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1540 of the Code of Virginia provides for the
appointment of a chief administrative officer by the governing body of that locality; and
WHEREAS, Section 15.2-1541 of the Code of Virginia establishes the various
duties and responsibilities of the administrative head of the local government; and
WHEREAS, an employment agreement between the County Administrator and
the Board of Supervisors has been negotiated.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows -
1 .
ollows:1. That Candidate #6 is hereby appointed County Administrator for Roanoke
County, and that his/her tenure shall commence on or before December 28, 2014.
2. That Candidate #6 shall exercise all of the powers and fulfill all of the
duties and obligations of County Administrator as provided in the Roanoke County
Charter, the Code of Virginia, the position description, the policies and regulations
adopted by the Board and the legal directives of the Board.
3. That the employment agreement negotiated between the Board and
Candidate #6 is hereby approved, and the Chairman of the Board is hereby authorized
to execute this agreement of behalf the Board.
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: Supervisors Bedrosian
November 18, 2014 753
2. Request to accept audited financial results for the fiscal year
ended June 30, 2014 (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance)
Ms. Owens read the Board Report. There was no discussion.
A-111814-2
Supervisor McNamara moved to approve the staff recommendation to
accept the audited financial results. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
3. Resolution supporting the display of the national motto, "In God
We Trust" in the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors meeting
room in a prominent location (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County
Administrator)
Mr. O'Donnell turned to Supervisor Church to explain the intent.
Supervisor Church advised the Board has received a request asking municipalities to
reaffi rm.
Supervisor Moore asked that the Board have an opportunity to look at and
see what it is going to cost.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he thinks this is a great idea.
Supervisor Church stated he would be glad to revise his motion to have
the funds come from Board Contingency.
Chairman McNamara stated he did not think that it would be necessary as
the funds should be small.
RESOLUTION 111814-3 SUPPORTING THE DISPLAY OF THE
NATIONAL MOTTO, "IN GOD WE TRUST" IN THE ROANOKE
COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS MEETING ROOM IN A
PROMINENT LOCATION
WHEREAS, "In God We Trust" became the United States national motto on July
30, 1956, shortly after our nation led the world through the trauma of World War I I; and
WHEREAS, the words have been used on U.S. currency since 1864; and
WHEREAS, the same inspiring slogan is engraved above the entrance to the
Senate Chamber as well as above the Speaker's dais in the House of Representatives;
and
754 November 18, 2014
WHEREAS, in both war and peace, these words have been a profound source of
strength and guidance to many generations of Americans; and
WHEREAS, the County desires to display this patriotic motto in the Board of
Supervisors Meeting Room as a way to solemnize public occasions and express
confidence in our society.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors does hereby resolve as follows -
1 .
ollows:1. That the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors, does hereby determine
that the historic and patriotic words of our national motto, "In God We
Trust," shall be permanently and prominently displayed in the Board of
Supervisors Meeting Room.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
4. Resolution adopting a Legislative Program for the 2015 session of
the Virginia General Assembly and petitioning the General
Assembly to favorably consider the topics and issues addressed
herein (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the resolution and advised that the Board adopts
every year for the next upcoming session. The legislative program was discussed in
work session on October 28, 2014. Mr. Mahoney outlined the entire list.
Supervisor Peters stated he has been an advocate of strategic planning
and setting goals and feels like this is one of the things that this Board should be doing
when it gets into 2015 and setting out priorities for the year, which is setting out two or
three things and that is what we should strive for. In looking at this document, he knows
we are going to our legislative people in Richmond and asking for their help; whatever
they can do to help us in Roanoke County. Would we be better off to make it more
pointed instead of hitting the onslaught and here is our wish list versus saying here is
three (3) things we are passionate about that we really want you to focus on for us. He
is asking for future reference. Mr. Mahoney stated that has been a discussion and
consideration that all the Boards in Roanoke County that he has served since 1984
where the Board felt it wanted to focus on one, two or three items and put all their effort
on these items and other Boards have had different approaches. Many of you have
seen the items on the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo) list or the Virginia
Municipal League and goes on for twenty to thirty (20 to 30) pages. The difficulty is that
you lose focus if you have several pages of "stuff' that you want to pursue. Conversely
though there are times when he or Mr. James or Sue Rollin, our legislative liaisons, are
in Richmond and may be in a Committee Hearing and one of the bills happens to be on
November 18, 2014 755
that agenda. There are twenty (20) other bills at the same time and they will come to
him and say what is Roanoke County's position on bill x. He does not have the time to
call all the Board members because it is at a hearing before a Committee at 8:30 a.m.
and they fly by the seat of their pants and sometimes it is good to hear from the Board
what are their priorities in a variety of different areas.
Supervisor Moore stated most everything is on VACO's agenda because
they represent all of the localities and most of the localities have the same concerns.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he takes exception to removing item number
seven (7). Unless we are not all aware of the fact that the citizens, local, state and
federal, are sick and tired of government officials voting for their own salary increases.
He thinks this would go a long way in putting something forth that makes sense. The
people are our bosses and we always say that; it is a great political slogan but when the
time comes then it would be up the citizens to dictate whether we get a salary increase
or not and not us five (5) on the Board voting for their own salary increases. He knows
the argument has been made why would we want to give this power to the State of
Virginia to tell us how to do things, but he looks at as giving the power, because
sometimes, we don't have the discipline to do it, is giving the power to the people of
Roanoke County. They would be the ones, not the State legislatures that would vote,
Roanoke County citizens, for our salary, if we should or should not get a salary
increase. He firmly wants to say we need item seven (7) and we need to push for that
and we should be an example right here in Roanoke County and see if it can spread
throughout the State and the Country that legislatures should not be voting on their own
salary increases.
Supervisor Church stated he has done the math and two percent (2%)
gives him $18.11 a paycheck, gross and he will clear $9.84. He thinks it is relevant in a
way because he has said before he is the poorest member sitting on this Board; he can
prove that and $18 is really not going to bankrupt him, so he is not afraid at this point in
time if we do come before our citizens and you break it down into the minute figures.
He does not believe the Board has ever had over two to three percent (2 to 3%). He
knows the principle that the Supervisor from Hollins is making. To him personally, he
does not think the legislatures will deal with it from what he is hearing about.
Supervisor Bedrosian clarified that he is not saying people should not get
raises. The point of the dollars is a moot point. It is whose authority should it be to give
the County Supervisors a raise; that is really the whole question not the amount of
money. We all do this voluntarily. We seem to do things in government that have no
connection to the real world. If only at Xerox could he give his own increase and vote
on it himself. It is not realistic. He just wants that authority to go to the people what is
rightfully belongs to.
756 November 18, 2014
RESOLUTION 111814-4 ADOPTING A LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
FOR THE 2015 SESSION OF THE VIRGINIA GENERAL
ASSEMBLY AND PETITIONING THE GENERAL ASSEMBLY TO
FAVORABLY CONSIDER THE TOPICS AND ISSUES
ADDRESSED HEREIN
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has identified
major legislative issues of Statewide concern to be considered by the 2015 session of
the Virginia General Assembly; and
WHEREAS, the Board adopts this resolution as its Legislative Program for the
2015 session of the Virginia General Assembly.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, that the following legislative initiatives are submitted for its legislative
program for the 2015 session of the Virginia General Assembly for its favorable
consideration and adoption.
(1) Oppose the elimination of the authority of local governments to adopt
business, professional and occupation license taxes (BPOL) and
Machinery & Tools taxes (M&T). These local taxes comprise
approximately six percent (6%) of Roanoke County's local tax revenues or
$8,000,000 annually.
(2) Support various public highway issues, including:
a. Restoring Secondary Road Funding (VDOT) from the Commonwealth
to localities/counties, so that local governments have a source of funds
to address local road projects (as they did previously).
b. Supporting Commonwealth Transportation Board funding for specific
highway projects: widening I-81, improvements to S.R. 419, and
improvements to S.R. 220 and/or funding for I-73.
c. Supporting legislative direction to VDOT to maintain primary roads and
urbanized entry corridors in Metropolitan Planning Organizations to the
same standard required by local ordinances for the cutting of grass
and weeds. This initiative would promote urban development areas for
economic development and growth
(3) Support legislation placing the State Executive Council (SEC) for
Comprehensive Services for At -Risk Youth (CSA) under the
Administrative Process Act (Sec. 2.2-4000, et seq.) of the Code of
Virginia.
SEC is not currently subject to the procedural due process protections
found in the Administrative Process Act like other state agencies. This
would provide the County with an opportunity to address changes in rules
and regulations developed by VDSS.
(4) Eliminate the requirement for publishing legal notices in newspapers.
Roanoke County spent over $18,000 in legal notice publication costs last
November 18, 2014 757
year. Paid circulation of newspapers is dropping. More citizens are
getting their information from the internet.
(5) Amend Sec. 15.2-901.0 and D of the Code of Virginia to increase the
authority of local governments to impose civil penalties for violations of
local ordinances requiring the removal of trash or cutting of grass and
weeds or prohibiting littering. Currently the civil penalty is limited to $50
for the first violation and $200 for subsequent violations within a twelve
(12) month period.
(6) Workforce Training. State funding — in the form of performance incentives
for the completion of industry recognized credentials — should be invested
to lower the cost of training and instruction for students and enable
community colleges to expand their capacity to meet this vital need of
business, industry, and Virginia's economy. Using a performance-based
funding model, community colleges should receive state funds for each
student who successfully completes training at a community college
through noncredit workforce training and then obtains — through a third -
party validation process — an industry recognized -credential identified
regionally as high demand by business and industry.
That the Clerk to the Board of Supervisors is directed to send an attested copy of
this resolution to Governor McAuliffe, Senator John S. Edwards, Senator Ralph Smith,
Delegate Greg Habeeb, Delegate Sam Rasoul, Delegate Chris Head, Stephanie Moon,
Roanoke City Clerk; Members of the Roanoke City Council; Kevin S. Boggess, Clerk for
Salem City Council; Members of the Salem City Council; Clerk for the Town of Vinton;
Members of the Vinton Town Council and the Roanoke Valley -Alleghany Regional
Commission, and the Virginia Association of Counties.
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: Supervisors Bedrosian
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizing the granting of a non-exclusive easement,
which varies between twenty (20) and thirty (30) feet in width, to
Verizon Virginia LLC on property owned by the Roanoke County
Board of Supervisors (Tax Map No. 027.13-04-01.0000) for the
purpose of an underground communication system (Anne Marie
Green, Director of General Services)
Ms. Green outlined the need for the ordinance. There was no discussion.
Supervisor Bedrosian's motion to approve the first reading and establish
758 November 18, 2014
the second reading and public hearing for December 9, 2014, was approved by the
following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
2. Ordinance authorizing the vacation of an unimproved right-of-way
shown as Nelms Lane on the Map of Airlee Court Annex in Plat
Book 2, page 103, of the Roanoke County Circuit Court Clerk's
Office, said right-of-way located in the Hollins Magisterial District
(Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the need for the ordinance. Chairman McNamara
asked Mr. Mahoney if he could foresee any further benefit with Mr. Mahoney advising in
the negative.
Supervisor Bedrosian's motion to approve the first reading and establish
the second reading and public hearing for December 9, 2014, was approved by the
following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance authorizing the granting of an electric utility easement
to Appalachian Power (AEP) on property owned by the Roanoke
County Board of Supervisors (Tax Map No. 060.16-08-02.00-0000)
for the purpose of an underground electric power line to the
Vinton Library at 300 South Pollard Street, Vinton Magisterial
District (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
No change from first reading. Chairman McNamara opened and closed
the public hearing with no citizens speaking. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 111814-5 AUTHORIZING THE GRANTING OF AN
ELECTRIC UTILITY EASEMENT TO APPALACHIAN POWER
(AEP) ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE ROANOKE COUNTY
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS (TAX MAP NO. 060.16-08-02.00-
0000) FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN UNDERGROUND ELECTRIC
POWER LINE TO THE VINTON LIBRARY AT 300 SOUTH
POLLARD STREET, VINTON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
November 18, 2014 759
WHEREAS, Appalachian Power Company (AEP) requires a permanent utility
easement for purpose of providing electrical service to the new Vinton Branch Library
from an existing overhead electric line; and
WHEREAS, the proposed utility easement will serve the interests of the public
and is necessary for the public health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Roanoke
County.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows:
1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by
ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2014, and the
second reading and public hearing of this ordinance was held on November 18, 2014.
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the interest in real estate to be conveyed is hereby declared to be surplus, and
is hereby made available for other public uses by conveyance to Appalachian Power
Company for a utility easement.
3. That donation to Appalachian Power Company of a utility easement for
purpose of an underground electric line to the new Vinton Branch Library located at 300
South Pollard Street, as shown on a plat titled "Proposed Right of Way on Property of
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors", prepared by Appalachian Power Company and
dated 9/30/2014, is hereby authorized and approved.
4. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is
hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be
necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the
County Attorney.
5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
2. Ordinance granting an easement across Roanoke County
property (Tax Map No. 038.07-02-56.00-0000) to James E. Lewis,
Hollins Magisterial District (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney advised there were no changes from first reading. Legal
assistant has put a physical sign on the property and has sent letters. Mr. Mahoney
then added that Mr. Crider is a neighbor adjoining this property and it appears Mr.
Crider's predecessor had already put a driveway across the County property. Mr.
Mahoney has spoken with Mr. Lewis and is agreeable to use the driveway.
760 November 18, 2014
Supervisor Bedrosian asked if this was in writing with Mr. Mahoney
advising in the affirmative, assuming that the Board approves.
Supervisor Peters inquired about purchasing the entire property with Mr.
Mahoney advising Mr. Lewis could not obtain bank financing.
Chairman McNamara opened and closed the public hearing with no
citizens speaking. There was no further discussion.
ORDINANCE 111814-6 GRANTING A RIGHT-OF-WAY
EASEMENT ACROSS ROANOKE COUNTY PROPERTY (TAX
MAP NO. 038.07-02-56.00-0000) TO JAMES E. LEWIS, HOLLINS
MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT
WHEREAS, James E. Lewis and Roanoke County own adjacent parcels of real
estate located off Oakland Boulevard in North Roanoke County; the Lewis property
containing approximately two point nine (2.9) acres is identified as Tax Map No. 038.07-
02-55.00-0000; the County property containing approximately two point six (2.6) acres
is identified as Tax Map No. 038.07-02-56.00-0000; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Lewis has requested that the County grant a fifty foot (50') right-
of-way easement to him across the County property to provide access to his property;
and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the County's policy regarding the granting of easements
across County property, the value of this permanent easement is estimated to be in the
range of $600 to $1050; Mr. Lewis has offered to pay $800 for this easement; and
WHEREAS, this right-of-way easement is declared to be surplus and is available
for sale to the public; and
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, as follows -
1 .
ollows:1. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the acquisition and disposition of real estate can be authorized only by
ordinance. A first reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2014, and the
second reading and public hearing of this ordinance was held on November 18, 2014.
2. That pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.01 of the Roanoke County
Charter, the interest in real estate to be conveyed is hereby declared to be surplus, and
is hereby made available for conveyance to James E. Lewis for a right-of-way
easement.
3. That the sale of this fifty foot (50') right-of-way easement to James E.
Lewis is hereby authorized and approved.
4. That the County Administrator, or any Assistant County Administrator, is
hereby authorized to execute such documents and take such further actions as may be
necessary to accomplish this conveyance, all of which shall be on form approved by the
County Attorney.
5. That this ordinance shall be effective on and from the date of its adoption.
November 18, 2014 761
On motion of Supervisor Bedrosian to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
IN RE: APPOINTMENTS
1. Parks, Recreation and Tourism Advisory Commission (appointed
by District)
Supervisor Moore has recommended the appointment of Jay Glenn to fill
the unexpired term of Beth Doughty, who resigned on October 21, 2014. This
appointment will expire on June 30, 2017. Confirmation has been added to the consent
agenda.
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
RESOLUTION 111814-7 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
ollows:That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for November
18, 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 4 inclusive, as follows -
1 .
ollows:1. Approval of minutes — September 23, 2014; October 7, 2014
2. Confirmation of appointments to the Building Code Board of Adjustments and
Appeals (Fire Code Board of Appeals); Court Community Corrections Alcohol
Safety Action Program (ASAP) Policy Board; Court Community Corrections
Program Regional Community Criminal Justice Board; Parks, Recreation and
Tourism Advisory Commission (appointed by District); Roanoke Valley
Resource Authority (At -Large)
3. Resolution requesting acceptance of Hidden Falls Drive into the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT) Secondary System
4. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Michael G. Winston, Sheriff, upon his retirement after
more than forty-four (44) years of service
762 November 18, 2014
5. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Kurt P. Kipley, Sr., Firefighter/EMT, upon his retirement
after more than sixteen (16) years of service.
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
A -111814-7.a
RESOLUTION 111814-7.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
HIDDEN FALLS DRIVE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION (VDOT) SECONDARY SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached Addition Form AM -4.3, fully
incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, the representative for the Virginia Department of Transportation has
advised this Board that the street(s) meet the requirements established by the Virginia
Department of Transportation's Subdivision Street Requirements; and
WHEREAS, the County and the Virginia Department of Transportation have
entered into an agreement on March 9, 1999, for comprehensive stormwater detention,
which applies to this request for addition.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, this Board requests the Virginia
Department of Transportation to add the street(s) described on the attached Additions
Form AM -4.3 to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code
of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements, after receiving a
copy of this resolution and all outstanding fees and documents required of the
developer, whichever occurs last in time; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted
right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage;
and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be
forwarded to the Residency Administrator for the Virginia Department of Transportation.
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
November 18, 2014 763
RESOLUTION 111814-7.c EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
TO MICHAEL G. WINSTON, SHERIFF, UPON HIS
RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN FORTY-FOUR (44) YEARS
OF SERVICE
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston retired on October 31, 2014, after forty-four (44)
years and one (1) month of exemplary service to the Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was employed by Roanoke County on October 1,
1970; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was assigned to the jail and later transferred to
patrol; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston quickly moved through the ranks to corporal and
then to sergeant; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston attended special training in firearms instruction and
built the first official firing range for Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston attended FBI SWAT training and established the first
SWAT team for the Sheriff's Office and managed the team for 10 years; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was promoted to the rank of lieutenant in 1984 and
was assigned to the criminal investigations division; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was transferred to the patrol division in 1987; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was promoted to first lieutenant and assigned to
patrol; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston joined the newly created Roanoke County Police
Department in 1990, as a first lieutenant; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston returned to the Sheriff's Office as the chief deputy
sheriff; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston served in this position until he was appointed to
serve the remainder of Sheriff Gerald Holt's term in 2010.
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was elected in a special election; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston was elected to a full term in 2011; and
WHEREAS, Sheriff Winston has helped build the very foundation that has made
the Sheriff's Office successful.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens
of Roanoke County to MICHAEL G. WINSTON for more that forty-four (44) years of
capable, loyal and exemplary 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 recorded vote:
764 November 18, 2014
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
RESOLUTION 111814-7.d EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION
OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY
TO KURT KIPLEY SR., FIREFIGHTER/EMT UPON HIS
RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN SIXTEEN (16) YEARS OF
SERVICE
WHEREAS, Kurt Kipley Sr. became a volunteer with the County's Cave Spring
Volunteer Fire Department and served many years as a dedicated volunteer; and
WHEREAS, Kurt Kipley Sr. was first employed as a part-time Firefighter/EMT on
December 12, 1997, and then promoted to full time on November 1, 1998; and
WHEREAS, Kurt Kipley Sr. retired on November 1, 2014, after more than sixteen
(16) years of devoted, faithful and expert service with the County; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Kipley being an experienced firefighter provided mentoring to
new firefighters and competent service to the County; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Kipley provided compassionate care to the sick and injured as
an Emergency Medical Technician to all the patients he came in contact with; and
WHEREAS, Mr. Kipley was a well-respected fire engine pump operator and
provided knowledgeable training to countless career and volunteer personnel on the
proper technique of pump operation especially in a rural water system of pumping from
a creek/pond; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of
the citizens of Roanoke County to Kurt Kipley Sr. for over sixteen (16) years of capable,
loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and
FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy
and productive retirement.
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
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
November 18, 2014 765
1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance
2. Capital Reserves
3. Reserve for Board Contingency
4. Outstanding Debt
5. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Revenues as of
October 31, 2014
6. Comparative Statement of Budgeted and Actual Expenditures and
Encumbrances as of October 31, 2014
7. Accounts Paid — October 31, 2014
8. Treasurer's Statement of Accountability per Investment and
Portfolio Policy as of October 31, 2014
IN RE: CLOSED MEETING
At 4:15 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 1
namely discussion concerning appointments to the Western Virginia Regional Jail
Authority; Section 2.2.3711.A.1 To discuss a prospective business or industry or the
expansion of an existing business or industry where no previous announcement has
been made of the business' or industry's interest in locating or expanding its facilities in
the County and Section 2.2.3711.A.3 Discussion or consideration of the acquisition of
real property for a public purpose, where discussion in an open meeting would
adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the Board of
Supervisors
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
The closed session was held from 5:52 p.m. until 6:25 p.m.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1. Work session requested by the Western Virginia Water Authority
regarding a request from Botetourt County to join the water and
sewer system (Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County Administrator)
In attendance for this work session were: Gary Roberts, John Williamson
and Mike McEvoy from the Western Virginia Water Authority.
766 November 18, 2014
A Powerpoint presentation was given outlining the request to expand
membership to Botetourt County. It was the consensus of the Board to move forward.
The work session was held from 4:31 p.m. until 5:10 p.m.
2. Work session to discuss planning and preparation for fiscal year
2015-2016 budget development (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. He advised that he was
building on the August work session in which Supervisor Peters had provided some
approaches.
Supervisor Peters indicated he is concerned that we do not have any
strategic budget planning and seem to be relying on the focuses of prior Boards. He
stated he feels the Board should set the priorities on the key focus areas. He stated he
wants to know what our fixed and variable expenses are and before looking at tax rates
what to know that all of our needs have been met.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he had reviewed and came up with $2.3
million in non-essential items that does not have anything to do with core services.
Supervisor Peters commented that we are not addressing the core
services.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated the only way to do is to set the parameters
up front and only do the core services and discard anything frivolous.
Supervisor Peters stated that you have to understand where you are
before you can decide where you are going to go and the framework is lacking.
Supervisor Church stated the only way to get where you want to go is to
pay yourself first, take $800,000 out first.
Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County Administrator, asked the Board to
clarify what the strategies should be.
Supervisor Church recommended that the Board hold a "retreat" to
determine those strategies right here and take as much time as needed.
It was the consensus of the Board to hold a week -end budget retreat.
The work session was held from 5:12 p.m. until 5:37 p.m.
IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
At 7:01 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to return to open session and
to adopt the certification resolution.
November 18, 2014 767
RESOLUTION 111814-8 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 .
nowledge: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 McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara,
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING
1. Public hearing to receive citizen comments regarding proposed
amendments to the fiscal year 2014-2015 budget in accordance
with Section 15.2-2507, Code of Virginia (W. Brent Robertson,
Director of Management and Budget)
Mr. Robertson gave the overview of the public hearing.
Chairman McNamara opened the public hearing and closed the public
hearing with no citizens speaking on this amendment.
IN RE: FIRST READINGS OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance appropriating $2,042,611 from various sources for the
Department of Social Services Building Renovation Project and
authorizing an internal loan in the amount of $1.5 million from Major
Capital to this project Due to time constraints, it is requested that,
upon a four-fifths vote of the Board, the second reading be
768 November 18, 2014
waived and the ordinance adopted as an emergency measure.)
(Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance)
Ms. Owens outlined the request for the ordinance. Richard L. Caywood,
Assistant County Administrator was also in attendance to answer any questions.
Supervisor Church moved to approve the ordinance.
Supervisor Church asked Joyce Earl, Director of Social Services, to come
forward in case there were any questions. He then asked Mr. Caywood to provide a
brief background of where we are, which Mr. Caywood provided. The building has a
leaking roof that is progressively getting worse, outdated heating and cooling system.
The project as it stands today addresses the roof, which causes extensive relocation of
cellular equipment, replaces the roof membrane, the heating and cooling system,
complete renovation of the fifth floor, which was the floor most heavily damaged by the
leaking and also correct a number of unrelated issues within the parking lot. If the work
that is proposed is added to the project, it would essentially complete the renovation of
the entire building. The reason for bringing this forward at this point in time, when you
look at the effort that it is taking to move staff around to keep the building in operation
during the project, just to go in there once and complete all of the work would seem to
be cost effective in terms of disruption to staff and also we would only move forward if
we could negotiate what we believe what is very close to a market price. Staff feels it is
going to fix the building at the lowest possible cost and only impact staff once. Ms. Earl
explained these renovations would allow staff to move the lobby down to where the
bank lobby was for clients and utilize all four floors for offices and staff. She advised
they have been out of the fifth floor since January because of the working conditions
because of the leaking. We most recently moved all the social workers to the Craig
Center in Vinton because as the renovations happen, staff felt that one move would be
the best. The parking is getting better, we now have the lot on the corner from the
Courthouse now. Things are improving. We are very appreciative of how everyone has
been working with us.
Supervisor Moore stated she felt this was a good plan to expedite and
would make the building safer and more comfortable for the employees and the families
that go there.
Supervisor Peters stated he needed clarification even though we had a
work session last meeting. He went back and Supervisor Church has talked about the
CIP and there is a group of citizens that put that together and when he went back and
looked and pulled the CIP, it is not in Tier I, 2 or 3. He is a little bit confused as to why
we would be elevating to above anything in the CIP.
Supervisor Church and Ms. Earl both explained this building had been at
the top of the CIP list for a number of years and when the $3 million was allocated to
begin the plans it moved off the CIP completely because it was funded. Ms. Owens
explained that is normal process.
Supervisor Peters said but the funds that are being asked for now do not
November 18, 2014 769
appear on the CIP. There was no response.
Supervisor Bedrosian inquired if the reason that staff is asking for this is
because it makes sense economically to do a couple of these projects together. Mr.
Caywood responded in the affirmative stating in addition to having the work priced
because it is very difficult to price renovation type work. In this case, we had the fifth
floor priced with the project so we received market based pricing and the more we got
into the project and realized the amount of disruption and effort that it is going to require
to clear the floors, it seems to make more sense to demo the whole thing and just do it
once. It was really an analysis we did after we saw pricing. In addition, the attractive
pricing led us to this proposal because over the long haul, you have tremendous
savings in a couple of areas, i.e. only one bid package, employee relocation, rework
costs. In effect coming back we would have to redo some of the work that we are doing
now. The original plan made sense when were trying to fix the original crisis with the
budget that we had, but it is really the favorable pricing that has led staff to this proposal
and looks like we are closer to the finish line than we anticipated we would be when we
started.
Supervisor Peters asked for clarification regarding pricing. Mr. Caywood
advised when staff did the work that is currently under contract, it is difficult to price a
renovation contract with a lot of unknowns. Now that we have that pricing, we have a
really good feeling of what the remaining floors should cost. In terms of process of
where we are with the contractor, we have near complete plans from our architect that
we should be returning to them for final pricing this week. We have received a "not to
exceed" price that should fit within the amounts that we are proposing to you and the
intent would be to negotiate that down to what we believe would represent a true market
price. Supervisor Peters then stated so the existing work that is being done is costing
how much. Mr. Caywood advised the existing work in the total project is around $3
million. Supervisor Peters stated so that was in the CIP with Mr. Caywood advising that
is correct. He stated that Supervisor Church has mentioned on several occasions
projects that did not go through the CIP. Mr. Caywood stated he thinks this confusion is
that this project was approved at the same time the Vinton library was approved.
Originally, the DSS Building was looked at as a total replacement, which would have
been somewhere in the $13 million range including the land cost. So, an assessment
was made to address the immediate need, the roof and the heating and air conditioning.
Daniel R. O'Donnell, Interim County Administrator, indicated that the
project was scaled back from the original $12 million on the CIP. He indicated that a
substantial renovation can be done for a little over $5 million. The project was going to
be finished in subsequent years with the rents on a pay as you go basis, now we have
found a way to do it all at once. He indicated he thinks it makes total sense to move
forward on this path.
Chairman McNamara stated at the end of the day we had a set amount of
money, we did what we could do, we recognized there is a need and was an item at the
top of the CIP list for years and years. The fact that we are also getting the fifth floor
770 November 18, 2014
done is a bonus. He is going to suggest something that he could support. He cannot
support the proposal as it sits and this is why. In December of 2004, we created a
capital funding program. We created County major capital reserve, County minor
capital reserve and we created a disciplined approach, which we followed quite
effectively for four or five (4 or 5) years. In 2009, we deviated from that approach. He
did not support it, but we deviated from that approach and built Green Ridge and a
number of other things that were not being funded under the capital improvements
program. The program as designed will lower our debt over time. We are getting beat
up left and right on this Board about our debt load. He has always been a proponent of
staying with a plan; it is a long-term plan which will reduce our debt over time, but still
provide the necessary funding to fund our infrastructure. Major capital reserve by
definition in that plan is to fund items that are identified in the CIP. This was identified,
but is not a currently identified item in the CIP. So, then we say why don't we use
County minor capital reserve. By the way, he knows we have used capital reserve,
major capital, to fund other things in the past similar to this; not that he supported, i.e. a
fire truck when he was not on the Board. He is of the opinion we should stay with our
plan and over time will be a much stronger County. Now, minor capital reserve by
definition is available to buy land or to fund items that are not in the CIP. Then the
minor County capital would be appropriate place to be trying to pull funds to do a social
service renovation of additional floors. This would be the appropriate place. Why does
he have a problem using it from there is because we have two or three (2 or 3) major
projects, major things that we are going to have to spend money on, i.e. the 419 Library
is deteriorating and is going to be ruined if we don't do something with the roof. Social
Services might not be perfect, but at least we are going to have the roof fixed and rain
will not be coming through. At William Byrd, we have an economic development
prospect and we may need to move a bus lot. If we move a bus lot, we are going to
need a source of funds; Minor Capital that is where it comes from. There is $1.4 million
in that account with another $600,000 from this year's savings for a total of $2 million.
He thinks we need to protect that account. He wants to thank everybody, we are going
to do something for that building. Social Services is generating $300,000 to $400,000 a
year profit. He personally does not have a problem with saying we need to maintain our
building, we don't need to go through the CIP process, we don't need to call a capital
improvement and take $300,000 a year to do a floor and a year and a half do another
floor and we dedicate that revenue stream for four or five (4 or 5) years and we pay for
as we generate those revenues. The other big problem he has with this is we are doing
a $1.4 million change order that is not competitively bid and he cannot fly with it. He
cannot fly with it if we had all the money in the world. He does not think it is appropriate
to have that big a change order that is not competitively bid.
Supervisor Church stated to answer his colleague to his left regarding the
CIP, there are two words why the building is not done, Vinton Library. A previous Board
took the Vinton Library from out of nowhere and allocated money for it. Therefore, the
Social Services once again took a tumble. He has been very consistent about the CIP
November 18, 2014 771
and leaving in their spot, but the Vinton Library tumbled us out. What is more important
and he is shocked to hear the Chairman say this, the Chairman and Mr. O'Donnell
almost two (2) weeks ago called me into his office and advised we have a way to do this
and it is a done deal; no problem. Thank you very much you can do what you want to.
It just tells him how you can have cohesiveness or dysfunction. This is what goes on.
He did not even bring this up. He did not ask for this. He expected this. The people
who suffer are the ones who need it the most; that is the real truth.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he agreed with the Chairman on this. He
thinks it is a logical approach. He also has a problem in taking that kind of money and
spending it. We appropriated money to fix what we needed to do, which is the roof, the
leaks, etc. Now, we are finding there are some other things that may be great to do, but
those things are not as a high priority as some other needs around the County. Since
that building generates its own money, he does not see why that would be a problem.
He actually thinks that would be the fiscally prudent thing to do.
Supervisor Church withdrew his motion.
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
Ordinance accepting and appropriating a contribution in the
amount of $5,455 from the Town of Vinton to Fire and Rescue
OCA 487700 for the Town of Vinton's four percent (4%) share of
funding to complete agreed upon capital projects totaling
$136,364 at the Roanoke Valley Regional Fire/EMS Training
Center (Richard E. Burch, Jr., Chief of Fire and Rescue)
Deputy Chief Todd Maxey advised there were no changes from first
reading. There was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 111814-9 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING A
CONTRIBUTION IN THE AMOUNT OF $5,455 FROM THE TOWN
OF VINTON TO FIRE AND RESCUE OCA 487700 FOR THE
TOWN OF VINTON'S FOUR PERCENT (4%) SHARE OF
FUNDING TO COMPLETE AGREED UPON CAPITAL
PROJECTS TOTALING $136,364 AT THE ROANOKE VALLEY
REGIONAL FIRE/EMS TRAINING CENTER
WHEREAS, the Roanoke Valley Regional Fire/EMS Training Center is jointly
operated on funding contributed by Roanoke County, Roanoke City, City of Salem and
the Town of Vinton on a percentage basis; and
WHEREAS, the facility is in need of capital maintenance and equipment
replacements totaling $136,364; and
WHEREAS, the Town of Vinton's four percent (4%) share is $5,455; and
772 November 18, 2014
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 October 28, 2014, and the
second reading was held on November 18, 2014.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows -
1 .
ollows:1. That the sum of $5,455 is hereby accepted and appropriated from the
Town of Vinton to the Fire and Rescue Department OCA 487700; and
2. 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 recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, Peters, McNamara
NAYS: None
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. The petition of Bonsack Baptist Church Trustees and Union First
Market Bank to rezone approximately 4.64 acres to remove
proffered conditions from property zoned C-1CS, Low Intensity
Commercial, District with conditions and special use permit and
C -1C, Low intensity Commercial, District with conditions to
construct additional parking for religious assembly use located
near the 5000 block of Cloverdale Road, Hollins Magisterial
District (Philip Thompson, Deputy Director of Planning)
Mr. Thompson outlined the petition. There were no changes from the first
reading. There was no discussion.
Supervisor Peters advised he is a deacon and member of the Bonsack
Baptist Church and asked Mr. Mahoney if he should abstain with Mr. Mahoney advising
he would recommend abstaining from a vote and participation. Supervisor Peters
advised he would abstain.
Chairman McNamara opened the public hearing and closed the public
hearing with the following citizens speaking:
Betty Anderson stated she owns adjoining property to the property they
are trying to petition. The property is commercial property on Alternate Route 220 and
she thinks it could be used for a higher tax basis for Roanoke County than for a parking
lot for the church since the church is tax-exempt. She thinks we would try to get more
tax base in the County so she is against letting the church continue to buy up property
and not have a higher tax base.
November 18, 2014 773
ORDINANCE 111814-10 TO REZONE APPROXIMATELY 4.64
ACRES TO REMOVE PROFFERED CONDITIONS FROM
PROPERTY ZONED C-1CS, LOW INTENSITY COMMERCIAL,
DISTRICT WITH CONDITIONS AND SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND
C -1C, LOW INTENSITY COMMERCIAL, DISTRICT WITH
CONDITIONS TO CONSTRUCT ADDITIONAL PARKING FOR
RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY USE LOCATED NEAR THE 5000
BLOCK OF CLOVERDALE ROAD, HOLLINS MAGISTERIAL
DISTRICT, UPON APPLICATION OF BONSACK BAPTIST
CHURCH AND UNION FIRST MARKET BANK
WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on October 28, 2014, and
the second reading and public hearing were held November 18, 2014; and
WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Planning Commission held a public hearing on
this matter on November 3, 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
ollows:1. That the zoning classification of a certain tract of real estate containing
approximately 4.64 acres located in the 5000 block of Cloverdale Road (Tax Map No.
040.01-01-11.0000, 12.0000, 13.0000, and 21.0000) in the Hollins Magisterial District, is
hereby changed from the zoning classification of Low Intensity Commercial District with
Conditions, C-1 CS, and Low Intensity Commercial District with Conditions, C-1 C, to the
zoning classification of Low Intensity Commercial District, C-1.
2. That this action is taken upon the application of Bonsack Baptist Church
and First Union Market Bank.
3. That by Ordinance 102709-6 the owner of the property voluntarily
proffered in writing the following conditions which the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke
County, Virginia, accepted and which are HEREBY REMOVED:
a) Substantial conformance with the "StellarOne Bank", Exhibit `A'
Conceptual Masterplan, prepared by Balzer and Associates, Inc.,
dated 08/07/09, and amended 09/16/09, for Future Tract `A' and
substantial conformance for access provided on Future Tract `B'.
b) The architecture of the building will be constructed on Tract `A' will
be in substantial conformance with Exhibit `B', dated 08/06/09.
c) Any freestanding signage shall be restricted to monument signage
for the future use on Future Tract `B'. This proffer, however, will not
prohibit the incorporation of the electronic readerboard into a
freestanding monument sign.
4. That said real estate is more fully described as follows:
774 November 18, 2014
4.64 acres located in the 5000 block of Cloverdale Road (Tax Map No.
040.01-01-11.0000, 12.0000, 13.0000, and 21.0000) in the Hollins
Magisterial District
5. 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 Bedrosian to adopt the resolution, and carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara
NAYS: None
ABSTAIN: Supervisor Peters
2. The petition of IYS XXII, LC to rezone approximately 8.46 acres
from I -1S, Low Intensity Industrial, District with special use permit
to C -2S, High Intensity Commercial, District with special use
permit for the operation of a halfway house, located at 5673
Airport Road, Hollins Magisterial District (Philip Thompson,
Deputy Director of Planning) (THIS PETITION HAS BEEN
WITHDRAWN AT THE REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER)
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Peters stated he would like to recognize and thank all of our
veterans for their service to our Country. He announced that on December 6, 2014, the
Vinton Historical Society will have an open house from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. and the
Vinton Christmas parade will be held on December 4, 2014 at 7:00 p.m. in the Town of
Vinton. He then wished everyone a happy Thanksgiving.
Supervisor Moore stated she would also like to recognize every single one
of our serving veterans and our enlisted men and women. Thank you for your service.
She also thanked the VACo staff and the Board of Directors for another good yearly
conference at VACo. They have some good educational classes. VACo does a good
job of representing the localities by supporting local needs to our legislatures. Also, she
had the pleasure of being able to attend a reception sponsored by the SW Virginia
Firefighters Association for the Virginia Fire Services Board a few weekends ago at
Virginia Tech. This association consists of twenty-three (23) counties and represents
both volunteer and career firefighters. They currently have about 2,300 dues paying
members. Logan Logan with Ft. Lewis Fire Department was one of the approximately
forty (40) attendees. She thanked Larry for his service. The SW Virginia Firefighters
association helps our firefighters by going to Richmond and lobbying for funding,
November 18, 2014 775
training and safety programs. She thanked them for their dedication and help in
keeping our communities safer.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated we had this discussion before about the new
County Administrator and wanted to reiterate his disapproval of the contract that we are
offering the County Administrator. As he stated, when he started this year, he was
elected in November, he started in January the County Administrator, the County
Attorney and the Clerk to the Board all served at the pleasure of the Board. Those
three positions meant that if you were in one of those three (3) positions that if the
majority of the Board did not want you to serve any more, then you would not serve. He
thinks that is okay; it is good. It brings some power to the Board. We would never do it
frivolously, it would not make sense to any of us to do something like that so he thought
that was good and it gave a measure of balance. In the beginning of the year, the Clerk
to the Board, now does not work at the pleasure of the Board. The clerk now works
under the County Administrator. So, we went from three (3) positions serving at the
pleasure of the Board to two (2). Now with the contract we are offered the County
Administrator, a three-year basically iron clad contract that says that the only reason
you can go is if you do something illegal or something wrong and we are now basically
removing another person from working under the pleasure of the Board. He thinks this
is wrong. Next, the County Attorney position will follow the same path and he thinks
there is a reason why certain positions serve at the pleasure of the Board. It keeps a
balance for the citizens and for us and for the Administration. Neither area should have
too much power and now it is shifting over to where we as a Board really have no power
to do things that we should be able to do. When we lose that, the people lose that. He
hopes that the new County Administrator does a great job and that we do not have an
issue, but thinks the failsafe thing was not give a contract. He would just tell the citizens
of Roanoke County and this is where he thinks too much like the citizens that you never
go and get a job and get some kind of a contract that says you are in and if we don't
want you after a year we are going to pay you out the rest of your two or three years.
When we get a job, we get a job and if we perform well, the fact is they will probably let
us stay in that job, but if not we will move on to something else. We are giving very
special treatment to government employees and he thinks that is wrong. In addition, he
hopes the citizens of Roanoke County are happy that we are offering someone almost a
ten percent (10%) salary increase before they have even started the job. This job had
$165,000 salary. To any standard, that is a lot of money. He does not know why we
now think that $165,000 is not a lot of money. Maybe there is somebody on this Board
that makes $165,000, he doesn't. He thinks that is a lot of money. Sure, the County
Administrator works hard. Everybody on this Board works very hard. So, to give that
kind of money, he finds it unbelievable and that we had a County Administrator that
worked for us and was making $165,000. In no way if that County Administrator stayed
with us would we look around and say other counties are giving more money, let's go to
$177,000, let's give him $200,000. Then we could really attract the best in Roanoke
County; he thinks that is wrong. He thinks the citizens of Roanoke County are the only
776 November 18, 2014
ones that can make something different happen. The citizens need to be connected to
what is going on here. We are spending your money. His second point is in preparing
budgets, we are already getting ready to start on the budget process for 2015-2016.
This is one of those items he finds that we always say we cannot reduce anything
because we are going to hurt core services. We are spending an extra $12,000 that he
does not believe is a core service. It is the little things that keep coming out of the
budget and keep costing us more money to operate. He just wants to alert Roanoke
County citizens. Whenever you hear any of us on this Board say that we do not have
enough money and we need to keep taxes high because if we reduce taxes we are not
going to be able to pick up your trash, have the police get to you in time, have fire and
rescue get to you in time, do not believe it that is not what is happening. We have
plenty of money to do core services. In fact, he looked at this year and just off the top of
his head, there were four or five (4 or 5) things, $300,000 that we are giving to Allstate
so they won't move maybe, possibly out of Roanoke County. We gave $50,000 to the
libraries to stay open on Sundays, we gave another $28,000 to Hidden Valley to fix their
track, we gave $1.6 million to non -profits and those types of things that come here every
year to ask for money. When you total up all that money, you get $2.3 million and the
other one was the water tank, $200,000 we paid for a spherical water tank instead of
just a standard one, which would have cost us nothing. The $2.3 million could take
three (3) points off of our real estate taxes. We could go from $1.09 to $1.06 and that
would give everybody money back in Roanoke County, not just a select group of
people, but every citizen that lives in Roanoke County would benefit, even those that
rent because the owner of the property would be paying less and you could keep your
payments down. This would effect everybody and those are the top ones that he took
off the top of his head and knows there are probably more probably $5 to $6 million a
year that we spend on items that are not core services and there is probably a whole lot
more. So, he wants to warn you if the citizens of Roanoke County do not get engaged
to tell their Supervisor no, no, no on spending rates will stay up and things that are not
core services will continue to happen.
Supervisor Church first asked Mr. Caywood to set up a meeting with Mr.
Bill Overstreet of 4930 North Spring Drive and a VDOT official. This gentleman has
some disabilities and has chunks of pavement where he cannot get to his mail box. He
went out and visited with him last week. We need to try and find a way to help him.
Supervisor Church then wished everybody a Happy Thanksgiving. He then
congratulated Northside Vikings and the Glenvar Highlanders, both won in their first
round payoffs for the State. Northside 45-25 and Glenvar 13-6. They both play Friday,
Glenvar plays Union from Big Stone Gap and Northside pays Brookville; brutal cold
Friday. He did not plan to make the following statements, please get this accurate.
Without a doubt this is the most dysfunctional Board in the history of Roanoke County
and is brought about by what you just witnessed about the Social Services Building. All
the minor capital, major capital, upside down capital, all of that sounds great to
someone with a financial background, but it is irreverent because the whole thing was a
November 18, 2014 777
setup. Mr. O'Donnell you don't have to make a face, he can see that you are hurt. You
have your mouth open. Don't forget one thing, he was walking down the hallway
upstairs when the Chairman said, "I have something to talk to you about." He advised
he did not jump for joy something told me, "Look out, training coming." So, that is why
Joyce Earl was not prepared because he did not discuss anything with her. I pretty
much expected what happened here tonight. This is a shame. A shame is the way it
was orchestrated. Do you think this is just coincidental? Do you think this is
coincidental when we have numbers and figures, etc. and questions about, "What is
going on Mr. Church." The facts are the previous Board hopped skipped the Social
Services building that had been there for years. The Chairman wants to throw out a fig
leaf so we will do $300,000 and 54 by 4. It should have been done eight or nine (8 or 9)
years ago total, but the three (3) votes were not there. The irony is that it is not even in
his area, it is in Salem City, but they still feel like they are bothering the minority and that
is their game. The real rush about this new County Administrator is so that the
Chairman can announce him at the State of the County; that is the rush. He knows that;
he said that to him. You can play games, you can do this and you can do that. The
bottom line is that we are here to do an honest job and serve people. Tonight what you
saw was a miscarriage in governance. The Chairman likes to say good governance.
The facts and figures can justify all he wants to say, but the bottom line it was a set up.
He brought him in to Mr. O'Donnell's office and said, "Hey, here is the plan, we can do
this and do that." If you were me and served on the Advisory Board for Social Services
wouldn't you say, "Cool, neat?" He was thinking to himself it is about time. But, no, the
Vinton Library was more important last year so our poor citizens suffer. By the way,
they serve the Town of Vinton, the City of Salem and all of Roanoke County. This is not
a Catawba District project; that is the other irony of it. They serve the people who need
it the most. You are correct, it was not a top project; it was taken off the top so Vinton's
Library could replace it and rah, good for libraries, he has never denied libraries and he
voted yes for the library in Vinton. He did not vote no, like the previous Chairman did
from Vinton three times on the Glenvar Library. You should not have to do things like
this just because you have a majority. You want cohesiveness, you want working
together, it is a two-way street. You don't get three (3) votes and ignore everybody
else. Candidate #6, he knows you are watching. I know he is. You have a tough road.
We have elections next year and majorities can change, but of all the time he has been
on this Board and has served as Chairman three (3) times, he cannot imagine what has
happened since January 1St of this year; he cannot even comprehend it. When he was
Chairman two (2) years in a row, and you and research this, this is factual. Only one
item was done in his area and that was the Glenvar Library and it had been on the CIP
as number two (2) for three years. He had three votes, he could have done what is
being done now, push, push, back and forth. It did not happen. He was a facilitator.
We did not have this stuff going on. There is no need for it. It is a breakdown. The
Chairman has called it dysfunctional and he needs to look in the center seat because
we can work together if you have somebody reaching out. Everything was smiles and
778 November 18, 2014
handshakes until the new Administrator was named and then the games began again.
It is just a crying shame because the people who need it the most, the people who are
desperate once again got short-changed because of an ego, because of a direction or
whatever you want to call it. Check out the facts, look and you will find that he is one
hundred percent (100%) correct. Tonight, he feels sorry for the people that come from
the Town of Vinton, City of Salem and Roanoke County and have to stand in line to get
on the floor and crawl around and hope and pray somebody will help them while games
are being played with the building.
Supervisor McNamara thanked everybody for their involvement in
hiring the new County Administrator. We do have a State of the County address that
will be coming up in December. It is our hope that the new County Administrator might
be there. We do hope to announce the County Administrator within the next twenty-four
to forty-eight (24 to 48) hours. Our intent is to announce the County Administrator just
as soon as some details can be worked out that he needs to work out with his current
employment. We are certainly very excited to do that. His goal, all of our goal, is to do
that as soon as possible and hopefully within the next twenty-four to forty-eight (24 to
48) hours. He does not think there any games relative to Social Services. There is no
question on the need of the Social Services building, but there is a way to fund the
Social Services building needs without a slight to the gentleman from Catawba or
anyone else. The reference of three (3) people ganging up against him, the best he can
infer the three (3) people that he is referring to are the lady from Cave Spring, himself
and the gentleman from Vinton. He does not think those are the three (3) people who
were going to vote against that project if the project did go through. We all, he believes
serve all areas of the County and we try to do the best we can and make the best
decisions we can possibly make. To suggest that members of this Board are somehow
shortchanging Glenvar, he is told to look at the facts. The only fact that he is familiar
with is that Glenvar is the only capital improvement project that this Board has voted on
to the tune of $20 million. Let's look at the facts, he cannot think of another capital
improvement project that we voted on this year that was outside of Glenvar. He would
assume schools would count. Certainly, there is no intent to gang up or otherwise do
anything except try to govern as effectively as possible. He has been consistent from
the uses of capital funds. We did have a lot of very, very good things today and is very
happy for that and wished everyone a happy Thanksgiving and look forward to our
announcement within the next day.
November 18, 2014
IN RE: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman McNamara adjourned the meeting at 7:57 p.m.
Submitted by-
AD'
y:
D' borah C. c
Deputy Clerk to the Board
Approved by:
P. Jaso Peters
Chair an
779
780 November 18, 2014
PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY