Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/12/2015 - RegularMay 12, 2015 229 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the second Tuesday and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of May 2015. 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 Dr. Robert G. Moore 111, Senior Pastor of Bonsack Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. IN RE: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 3-05 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman P. Jason Peters, Supervisors Al Bedrosian, Joseph B. "Butch" Church, Joseph P. McNamara and Charlotte A. Moore MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator; Daniel R. O'Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator- Paul M. '7 Mahoney, County Attorney; Amy Whittaker, Public Information Officer and Deborah C. Jacks, Deputy Clerk to the Board IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to transfer funds in the amount of $18,910 from Board Contingency for the June 9, 2015, Republican Primary Election (Judith Stokes, Registrar) A-051215-1 230 May 12, 2015 Ms. Stokes outlined the request. Supervisor Church asked if Ms. Stokes has heard anything regarding the new voting machines. Ms. Stokes advised the State has no funds and does not expect to hear anything from the State. Supervisor McNamara inquired how many precincts would be effected with Ms. Stokes advising nineteen out of thirty-two (19 out of 32.) She advised this was requested by an incumbent candidate. Supervisor McNamara stated there should be a policy if the major parties both decide to nominate by method other than a primary, then we will reimburse them or not charge them for the use of the County facility. Supervisor Bedrosian asked if the machines being used in June were the same equipment. Ms. Stokes advised the Electoral Board voted optical scan ballot, i.e. hand counted as they expect a low turnout. The $18,000 is labor, advertisement, election officials, ballots printed, purchase ballot bags. On motion of Supervisor Church to transfer funds in the amount of $18,910 from Board Contingency for the June 9, 2015, Republican Primary Election, the motion carried by the following recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYES- None 2. Request to transfer funds in the amount of $6,546 from Board Contingency for the Appalachian Power Company (APCo) negotiations (Anne Marie Green, Acting Director of Human Resources) A-051215-2 Ms. Green outlined the request. Supervisor Church stated going on our own would cost more with Ms. Green responding in the affirmative. On motion of Supervisor Peters to transfer funds in the amount of $6,546 from Board Contingency for the Appalachian Power Company (APCo) negotiations, the motion carried by the following recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYES- None 3. Resolution requesting the Commonwealth Transportation Board to name the bridge on Route 221 in recognition of the Harris Family and to erect signage in recognition of the Harris Family and to transfer funds in the amount of $1,000 from Board Contingency to pay all costs for the signs (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) May 12, 2015 231 Mr. Mahoney outlined the request for the resolution as requested by Supervisor McNamara. Supervisor McNamara provided background advising that the request originated with the Back Creek Civic League. The naming of bridges is common in Salem and Roanoke City, but not Roanoke County. He indicated every time we change Rt. 220, the Harris family gives up more land. The sign would be on both North and South sides, the "Harris Bridge". Supervisors Church and Bedrosian commented they were in agreement. RESOLUTION 051215-3 REQUESTING THE COMMONWEALTH TRANSPORTATION BOARD (CTB) TO NAME THE BRIDGE ON ROUTE 221 IN RECOGNITION OF THE HARRIS FAMILY AND TO ERECT SIGNAGE IN RECOGNITION OF THE HARRIS FAMILY AND TO TRANSFER FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,000 FROM BOARD CONTINGENCY FOR CALL COSTS OF THE SIGNS WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, has received a request from the Back Creek Civic League, Inc. to name one of the newly constructed bridges on Route 221 in recognition of the Harris Family- and WHEREAS, the Back Creek Civic League, Inc. �nd the Board hereby finds that the Harris family provided assistance to many motorists over the years as a result of accidents or other vehicular difficulties in the dangerous curve known as the "Harris Curve"- and �IHEREAS, under Section 33.2-213 of the Code of Virginia the Commonwealth Transportation Board can name a bridge, highway or interchange to honor a deceased person upon a request from a local governing body, and that such request includes a commitment that the local government will pay all costs for the signs-- and WHEREAS, the sign size, exact location, color, font and �ther display details shall be within the discretion of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows - 1 ) That the Commonwealth Transportation Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) are hereby requested to name one of the newly constructed bridges on Route 221 near the "Harris Curve" in recognition of the "Harris Family" and to erect signage in and along the public right-of-way of Route 221 in Roanoke County. 2) That Roanoke County shall pay all costs for the fabrication and installation of signs for this naming. That County staff is directed to use the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices as a guide in selecting text for the proposed signs in coordination with the Back Creek Civic League, Inc. VDOT retains discretion in the selection of sign size, exact location, color, font and other display details. 232 May 12, 2015 3) That the Board hereby authorizes the expenditure of an amount not to exceed $1,000 from Board Contingency to pay all costs for the signs. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance to appropriate funds for the fiscal year 2015-2016 budget and approval of the Classification Plan for fiscal year 2015-2016 (W. Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) Mr. Robertson outlined the ordinance. Supervisor McNamara inquired about the general fund unappropriated balance policy that was approved by the Board. Mr. Gates advised the amount is a part of this year's budget. Supervisor Church inquired what precipitated the change and why. Mr. Gates explained the 2015/2016 presumes the funds appropriated are the correct amounts needed to operate. Any unexpended funds are rolled over. Instead of using that as a budget technique, the monies are allocated as part of the budget. The funds at the end of this year will go into one-time capital. Supervisor Peters commented staff is basically making it a line item in the new budget. Supervisor McNamara stated Mr. Gates is assuming increased revenues and if there are not growing revenues you would need to reduce expenditures somewhere else. Supervisor Bedrosian asked about the policy regarding the eleven percent. Mr. Gates responded the policy states that each year the unappropriated fund balance is to be eleven percent in reserve. The policy is still in place. Supervisor McNamara's motion to approve the first reading and to establish the second reading for May 26, 2015, was approved by the following vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None Supervisor Bedrosian commented with his vote that he is strongly opposed to the budget. He is in the minority in his view of this budget. His vote today is to move forward to the second reading but no intent to approve the budget. May 12, 2015 233 2. Ordinance to approve Intergovernmental Agreement between the County of Roanoke, the City of Roanoke and the County of Franklin for a Joint Public Safety Radio System known as the Roanoke Valley Radio System (Bill Hunter, Director of Communications and Information Technology; Ruth Ellen Kuhnel, Senior Assistant County Attorney) Mr. Hunter outlined the need for the ordinance. Chairman Peters commented this will be a great benefit. Supervisor Peters' motion to approve the first reading and to establish the second reading for May 26, 2015, was approved by the following vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None 3. Ordinance approving a lease amendment agreement for the Tinker Mountain Tower site (Rob Light, Acting Director of General Services; Susan Slough, Assistant Director of Communications) Mr. Light outlined the need for the ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor Peters' motion to approve the first reading and to establish the second reading for May 26, 2015, was approved by the following vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None 4. Ordinance accepting and appropriating a Stormwater Management (SWM) Program fee in the amount of $14,904 from the Department of Environmental Quality to the Department of Community Development's minor capital National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) account for stormwater permit fees collected from local projects prior to July 1, 2014 (Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development) Mr. Moneir outlined the request for the ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor Church's motion to approve the first reading and to establish the second reading for May 26, 2015, was approved by the following vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None 234 May 12, 2015 IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION 1. Public hearing and adoption of a resolution approving the reorganization and expansion of the Western Virginia Water Authority by providing that Botetourt County join the Authority, and approving and authorizing the execution of a Second Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Western Virginia Water Authority to accomplish such joiner (Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney) In attendance from the Water Authority to answer any questions were, Michael McEvoy, Executive Director, Wastewater; Mr. Davis, citizen representative and Gary Robertson, Executive Director, Water Operations. In addition, Kathleen Guzzi, County Administrator from Botetourt County was in attendance Mr. Mahoney outlined the request and explained the need for an appointment for the appointee with the expiring term. Supervisor McNamara asked about the assets being brought to the table and the differentiated rate structure for five (5) years. He asked for an explanation. Mr. Robertson stated the Botetourt County Utility System will be deeded over to the Authority to own and operate and has an approximate value of $19 million. The Authority will also be absorbing the utility debt associated with that system, approximately $9 million, which results in a net value of $10 million. There are approximately 1,200 water customers and 2,500 sewer customers that are served by that system. In addition, Botetourt County will be providing $1.2 million in cash to help with future improvements and also the County water customers will pay a higher rate than the customers in Roanoke and Roanoke County for a five-year period. The differential is worth approximately $1 million. So, they feel like this is a fair arrangement for the services and the capacity they will be given. Supervisor Church welcomed Ms. Guzzi and asked about the infrastructure. Mr. McEvoy stated the area that is primarily not served by Carvin's Cove now but will be is the Greenfield system, which is actually new approximately ten to twelve years old. These are all new lines. The area around Exit 150 and back towards Bonsack is already getting its water from Carvins Cove. The stretch along Rt. 11 has been replaced within the five or six years. There are some areas around Exit 150 that will be replaced with the new interchange. The biggest challenge over the next few years will be the new subdivisions that will require upgrades. The Fee structure on the water rates will be a higher rate for Botetourt County for a five-year period, however, that rate is capped and will not change. At the end of the five-year period, there will be a three-year transition period on those rates, likely going down because those rates are higher than the Roanoke area rates. On sewer, Botetourt County has been a member of the wastewater treatment system since the late 1980's. They have always May 12, 2015 235 contributed to the regional water pollution control plant. They probably have the newest sewer infrastructure than any of the localities in the valley. The sewer rates for Botetourt County will be the same as the Roanoke area rates, which is slightly less than they are paying now, approximately five cents per month. Supervisor Bedrosian stated so there will be no effect on Roanoke County rates, with Mr. McEvoy stating the cash flow in Botetourt County is possible so there will be no effect on Roanoke County rates. This is about efficiencies and a long-term water option for Botetourt County. There is no impact to Roanoke County. Ms. Guzzi provided a briefing. She stated the Authority brings efficiency, water quality and the ability to be a part of a regional initiative. Chairman Peters opened the public hearing with no citizens speaking on this item. Supervisor Church then continued the public hearing and resolution until May 26, 2015, in order to hold a closed session to consider the County appointment to the Authority. Supervisor McNamara inquired if it would be any assistance to go back into open session following the closed session this evening. Mr. Mahoney responded it does not make a difference, but would suggest for public transparency to wait until the next meeting. On Supervisor Church's motion to continue the public hearing and resolution until May 26, 2015, the motion was approved by the following vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES Ordinance accepting and appropriating funds in the amount of $278,950 and approving a Comprehensive Agreement with HHHunt for the design and construction of the Murray Run stream Restoration Project under the Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act (PPEA) of 2002 (Tarek Moneir, Deputy Director of Development; Paul Mahoney, County Attorney) Mr. Moneir outlined the request for the ordinance. There was no discussion. Chairman Peters opened and closed the public hearing with no citizens to speak on this item. Supervisor Moore thanked everyone involved in the project. 236 May 12, 2015 ORDINANCE 051215-4 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $278,950 AND APPROVING A COMPREHENSVIE AGREEMENT WITH HHHUNT FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE MURRAY RUN STREAM RESTORATION PROJECT UNDER THE PUBLIC- PRIVATE EDUCATION FACILITIES AND INFRASTRUCTURE ACT (PPEA) OF 2002 WHEREAS, on September 9, 2014, Roanoke County received an unsolicited proposal under the Virginia Public -Private Education Facilities and Infrastructure Act ("PPEA") for the stream restoration of Murray Run (the "Project")- and WHEREAS, this Project will be designed and c�nstructed to restore approximately 1,460 linear feet of Murray Run, a perennial tributary of the Roanoke River located in southwestern Roanoke County, to stabilize the existing eroded stream and to reduce nutrient and sediment loading to the watershed in accordance with the County's application for a Stormwater Local Assistance Grant from the Department of Environmental Quality; and WHEREAS, on September 23, 2014, the Board adopted resolution R-092314-1 accepting for review this proposal and announcing that it would simultaneously consider competing proposals; however, no other proposals were received; and WHEREAS, on January 27, 2015, the Board adopted a Resolution authorizing the development and submittal of a detailed design phase proposal for this Project; and WHEREAS, the County accepted the unsolicited proposal for consideration, and after exhaustive review, determined in writing that proceeding with the procurement that was the subject of the proposal using competitive negotiation procedures was advantageous to the County and the public based upon probable scope, complexity, urgency of the Project, risk sharing and added value, and/or economic benefit from the Project- and ��HEREAS, the County determined that the project is a qualifying project that serves the public purpose of the PPEA and is in the public interest to pursue; and WHEREAS, the County has received a preliminary commitment of $278,950 pursuant to the Department of Environmental Quality Stormwater Local Assistance Fund grant program; and WHEREAS, that based upon HHHunt's proposal, estimated price and presentation, the County has selected HHHunt for entry into a comprehensive agreement for the Project, and the County and HHHunt wish to enter into this Comprehensive Agreement for the Project; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on April 28, 2015, and the second reading and public hearing was held on May 12, 2015. NOW THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED, By the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows- May 12, 2015 237 1 . That the Comprehensive Agreement between Roanoke County and HHHunt Roanoke, LLC is hereby approved. 2. That HHHunt will pay to the County the matching funds for the Stormwater Local Assistance Fund grant, and the County will use said matching grant funds to pay for completed work on the Project. The County accepts and appropriates the matching grant funds in the amount of $278,950 from HHHunt for this Project. 3. That the County Administrator, or Assistant County Administrator, is authorized to execute the Comprehensive Agreement and such other documents and take such actions on behalf of Roanoke County as are necessary to accomplish the purposes of this Project, all of which shall be upon form approved by the County Attorney. The form of the Comprehensive Agreement presented to the Board is hereby approved with such completions, omissions, insertions and changes as the County Administrator may approve, whose approval shall be evidenced conclusively by the execution and delivery thereof, all of which shall be approved as to form by the County Attorney. 4. That this Ordinance shall be effective from and after its adoption. On motion of Supervisor Moore to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting and appropriating $24,000 from the Virginia Department of Education to Roanoke County Public Schools for the Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) Teacher Recruitment and Retention Incentive Initial and Continuing Awards (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance) Ms. Owens advised there were no changes from the first reading. There was no discussion. ORDINANCE 051215-5 ACCEPTING AND APPROPRIATING $24,000 FROM THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION TO ROANOKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR THE SCIENCE, TECHNOLOGY, ENGINEERING AND MATHMATICS (STEM) TEACHER RECRUITMENT AND RETENTION INCENTIVE INITIAL AND CONTINUING AWARDS 238 May 12, 2015 WHEREAS, The Virginia Department of Education funds the Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) Teacher Recruitment and Retention Incentive Continuing Awards; and WHEREAS, The Virginia Department of Education has awarded continuing incentive awards totaling $24,000 to eligible recipients; and WHEREAS, two (2) Roanoke County teachers who received the initial award in 2012-2013 school year have been selected to receive the retention bonus in 2014-2015 school year; and WHEREAS, twelve (12) Roanoke County teachers who received the initial award in the 2013-2014 school year have been selected to receive the continuing incentive in 2014-2015 school year; and WHEREAS, two (2) Roanoke County teachers were selected to receive the initial award in 2014-2015 school year; and WHEREAS, The Virginia Department of Education recognizes that the teacher will be eligible to receive the award after completing a second year of teaching in an assigned qualifying STEM subject and receive a satisfactory performance evaluation-, and WHEREAS, Section 18.04 of the Roanoke County Charter provides that funds be appropriated by ordinance- and WHEREAS, first re�ding of this ordinance was held on April 28, 2015, and the second reading was held on May 12, 2015. BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows - 1 . That the sum of $24,000 is hereby accepted and appropriated to the Roanoke County School Board for the continuing incentive from the Virginia Department of Education. 2. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption. On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the ordinance, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA RESOLUTION 051215-6 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM K- CONSENT AGENDA May 12, 2015 239 BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows - That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for May 12, 2015, designated as Item K - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 2 inclusive, as follows - 1. Approval of minutes —April 14, 2015; April 21, 2015 2. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Charles M. Wilson, Firefighter/EMT, upon his retirement after more than thirty (30) years of service On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None RESOLUTION 051215-6.a EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO CHARLES M. WILSON, FIREFIGHTER/EMT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTY (30) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Charles M. Wilson was employed by Roanoke County Fire and Rescue as a Firefighter on September 17, 1984; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wilson retired on May 1, 2015, after thirty (30) years and five (5) months of devoted, faithful and expert service to Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wilson throughout his employment with Roanoke County, has been instrumental in improving the quality of life and providing services to the citizens of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wilson's was highly respected amongst his peers and provided countless hours of mentoring new employees; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wilson used his knowledge of small engine mechanics to help maintain Department equipment at a huge savings and was one of the first in-house maintenance programs created; and WHEREAS, Mr. Wilson was a caring individual to both citizens and fellow employees by providing compassion and support above the normal expectations of his job-, 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 CHARLES M. WILSON for more than thirty (30) years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and 240 May 12, 2015 FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, and carried by the following roll call and recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS Mr. Noah Tickle of Catawba Magisterial District and representative of Common Sense. About the taxes, sooner we are going to have to stop these increases, no matter how they are done. We are going to have to be financially responsible. Stop the credit card mentality and become physically and morally responsible. Governance does need to be financed, but not the way it is continuing to go off the rails and into an entertainment industrial complex. Landowners, taxpayers do not deserve that. Our forbearers came here to get away from those kingdoms in their homeland European Communities. Now look and see what we have; the same thing that started the American Revolution. Taxed to death. In fact, he thinks he will ask his family to let that be his epitaph. It not quite like that now, but it needs to stop right now. He is serious; we need to think about this real hard. This is serious for the state of our republic. Natives to this area are leaving and moving elsewhere trying to get some relief. At every turn, governance "tax punishes" everything we do. He got an email the other day and take out less than two "Jacksons", near $5.00 in tax. Put a new roof on your house and you are assessed more. You own an old lovely farm and put vinyl siding on; you are taxed hundreds more because you avoid painting. Add a little asphalt slab for your car, now you have won the new "rain" tax. Tax punished on every turn. Stop and think about what we are doing and do not tax salivate on every turn. All of this mentality is anti -growth. While governance sits and whines about no growth. Does not the left hand know what the right hand is doing any longer? Are we now just a bunch of spoiled rotten brats and do not know when to cut the credit card up. He will just go and throw himself into the area here. He does not intend to live anywhere else and that is why he is here. I am on family land now owned since 1956 standing with banana peels under each foot. If real estate never increased again and he is still breathing twenty (20) years from now. If possible, he will have paid Roanoke County governance taxes another $120,000 just to be allowed to live here. It is just "ole mountain land" as they say. I say, when I cross my bridge it is like going into another world to him. May 12, 2015 241 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, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None 1. General Fund Unappropriated Balance 2. Capital Reserves 3. Reserve for Board Contingency 4. Outstanding Debt Report 5. Proclamation proclaiming the month of May 2015 to be Guillain- Barre Syndrome (GBS) and Chronic Inflammatory Demyelinating Polyneuropathy (CIDP) Awareness Month IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Moore congratulated Don Reid, one of our Parks and Recreation employees. He was given an award this morning from the Regional Commission because of his leadership in alternative transportation. He rides his bicycle to work every day, fourteen (14) miles even in the winter time and bad weather. She then reminded everyone of the Rally for Road Safety this weekend at Tanglewood Mall. It will be in the parking lot beside Firestone from 10-3. There will be lots of events for the entire family. There will be helmet give a ways for the children, while they last. If you have children bring your children and their bikes and their helmets will be fitted. There will be a rodeo for the kids so they can be taught safe practice in riding on the street. Supervisor Bedrosian stated the big thing on his mind is the budget that we will be voting on in two weeks. Tonight we voted on the first reading of it. He is very opposed, had press conferences and talked to everyone he can because he is very opposed to it because of the size of it. Every year it gets bigger and bigger. There comes a time when your budgets get bigger and bigger and taxes are paying for this. We do not make money on our own- it has to come from somewhere. It is an interesting reality check to see Roanoke City �aised their real estate tax rates, its meal tax rates-, we are heading in the same direction. We are going a little slower behind them, but one day we are going to have to do that. It is just the reality of things and he has always thought it is better to catch this issues before they become a major problem and you have to start doing things like that. Our form of government is the best government in the world, representative republic. So, the will of the five people on this Board is what the vote is. The people in Roanoke County vote for the five Board members. So, how the five people on this Board vote is supposedly the will of Roanoke County and if the 242 May 12, 2015 people of Roanoke County say nothing, then the five on this Board vote a certain way. He will not be able to vote for this budget because it goes against everything he believes in in terms of a fiscal putting your house in order way. We talk a lot about that on this Board. We talk about how we are going to make cuts and every year we just keep moving up, up and up. We also had a plan to cut debt and we saw two weeks ago at the Board meeting that we are not really cutting the debt- we are postponing the debt. So, we don't really have a plan to do away with debt in lioanoke County. So, he just wants the people of Roanoke County to realize that is a reality. It is a reality he is very uncomfortable with and that is why it may seem he is always at odds with our Board. He does not believe in that reality. He thinks it is a dangerous reality. He does not live in that reality in his home and that is why the light is shown on him and he sees thinks very differently and getting totally out of debt is the way to do it. Living within our fiscal means is the way to do it. Actually living under what you can afford is the best way- not always up to the edge. Two weeks and the final vote is made. The question is d� the Roanoke County citizens really care and this is one thing that really does affect your life and he has mentioned it before that he always tries to break things down to a very basic level because he is a simple person and if all the money that we spend in Roanoke County is really from the citizens, whether it is residential or business. It is really all the same. If you tax a business they pass on that cost, so the bottom line is that it does not matter whether it is a business tax or whatever, it is the citizen of Roanoke County who pays for it, pretty much the case. All taxes really boil down or pushed down to the citizens. Every million dollar that we spend on this Board is like removing $50 from an average family of four (4). It does not sound like a lot of money, $50, but multiple that by $180 million, and it does become a big deal after a while. It is a lot of money. We in the County and the citizens need to think whether it is the right amount of money and that is why he goes back to the point that he has his point of view, but it is the will of this Board based on how citizens vote that is going to make that determination. In two weeks, we will make that determination. He is just trying to warn the citizens. You cannot keep growing, growing and do not think it will affect you. We are growing the budget this year by $5 million. The average family will see about $250 less of purchasing power in their own wallets because we are increasing our spending by $5 million. Every million is like $50 from a family of five. The family of five that is watching him right now will feel that there is a little less money in their pocket. It is true because we have taken it with the increase in our budget. He thinks it is the most important thing that this Board does is doing the budget and in two weeks we will vote on it and please voice your concerns to your Supervisors. This is the way we run our government. The majority wins. If you do not get yourself engaged and you feel like you are part of the minority, then you need to voice your opinion. Supervisor Church asked Mr. Gates and Mr. Caywood in his travels in every corner of his district, the same question comes up about this proposed Mountain Valley Pipeline. The question is that no one seems to have an answer for is can our real estate assessor's office or something in that direction determine the taxable May 12, 2015 243 revenue on the physical pipe. The gas is not ours. The question is out there and the MVP organization will tell you economic benefit, tax revenue. Well he is not ready to just accept it as fact just because they say it. So, is it possible to take a look? Mr. Gates stated in order to be clear is he asking about whether or not we can determine the taxes on the pipe. Supervisor Church asked Mr. Mahoney if that is the only thing we can tax. Mr. Mahoney responded our understanding at this point is that the local real estate assessors do not have a role in allocating the value. It is our understanding that the State Corporation Commission does that kind of assessment and based on that assessment, some dollars will go back to the locality. This is similar to what the State Corporation Commission does for example with electric utility assets. The same with the railroad assets. He indicated that is staffs belief and they are still trying to pursue that to get certainty, but they are about eight percent (80%) certain right now. Supervisor Church asked staff to keep chasing that elusive target because it is a question on a lot of people's minds as to an estimation, an approximation of what could be any possible tax revenues or generation that would leave the footprint on the pipeline in Roanoke County. Please put your heads together because he promised to ask the question. Supervisor McNamara stated he had one quick statement. We talk about the budget- it is an exciting time of year because it lays out our blueprint for the coming year and �hat our priorities are. It is the collective best guess of the elected leaders that are the priorities of our citizens. We do that and establish our budget with many, many dedicated people from the County. Many who have expertise in the finance and budgeting far beyond our levels of expertise. He takes exception to Roanoke City's raising their tax rates and we are right behind them raising rates. The best he can figure is the budget we are going to adopt lowers tax rates; it does not raise the tax rate, it lowers the tax rate. To the best of his knowledge and he is real familiar with the Board for the last sixteen years we have not raised the real estate tax rate. We have lowered it three times in that period that he is aware of. We can talk about that there is more money this year than last year. He would take exception to the $5 million quote. There is more money than last year, but that is not raising the taxes. Without getting into a long economics discussion on the real value of money, inflation and purchasing power. To say we are raising the tax rate because our real estate tax rate valuations are going up one point for six percent (1.46%) compared to last year on existing property when the cost of living index is up two point two percent (2.2%), he has a hard time agreeing with that statement. Similarly, for three or four out of the past seven years when the real estate assessments went down, he did not hear anyone saying we were cutting their taxes. If we are raising taxes now, we evidently have been cutting taxes in the declining market and if you look at it from a real perspective and take the cost level out of the equation, real estate tax rates are about the same or below where they were six or seven (6 or 7) years ago. Actually, he thinks the nominal rate is below where it was six or seven (6 or 7) years ago and when factored in for inflation it is probably eight or nine percent (8 or 9%) below where it was six (6) years ago. So, there are a lot of 244 May 12, 2015 numbers being thrown around. He would suggest that we rely on experts and experts are your Fitch's of the world, Standard and Poor's and some of your different rating agencies, i.e. Moody's. With that in mind, he would be interested if it is something the finance staff can do without a tremendous work ethic, if they can, if there is a chart fairly accessible from Fitch's, Moody's, one of them, he would be interested in knowing the number of counties in Virginia, the number of cities in Virginia or localities. So whatever it is between cities and counties, he would be interested to know how many have a higher financial rating than the County. His guess is that the County would be rated very, very high. He also does know that about a year ago when there was an analysis of the ten (10) fastest growing counties, which are some of the stronger financial counties, we had a lower per capita debt and we also had a lower debt based on percentage of assessed value. So, if we compared the ten slowest growing and declining counties, they had lower debt. So, he is not making a correlation, but the correlation that we have debt is negative. On the surface it is negative, but under further evaluation and intense inspection, it does not reveal a problem in Roanoke County in his opinion. Supervisor Peters stated we need a reality check. He has listened to pieces of things that have been said. No matter who you are, if you are in Roanoke County, you are enjoying the amenities of Roanoke County. He keeps hearing, if taxes were lower, business would be booming. He cannot help but think that his home is about three (3) miles from the Bedford County line; their tax rate is $0.53 per hundred and if that correlation is true, he should not be able to get into Bedford County because it would be so jam packed with businesses he would not know what to do. But it is obvious that the people in Roanoke County, who work here, they live here, they shop here, they enjoy having their trash picked up, they enjoy having our Police Department, they enjoy living in a safe community and he says that because there has been a lot of talk about what can we do to cut. One of the things that has been said would be to cut the Police Department. He made this statement last time and he thought it was very interesting as we have all sat and watched the dynamics of the last few weeks with Baltimore. The only way that you can say you are willing to get rid of the Police Department, is that you feel safe. He guarantees you would not ask for it to go away because you feel safe. He takes exception and if Board members are reading their emails, it came out yesterday that the budget is $2.5 million more than it was last year. He has said this before and will continue to say it, he does not care what you are buying- he does not care if you are buying a police car, a fire truck, you cannot buy sometking for the same price that you bought it five (5) years ago. Try it in your own life; he encourages you to do and if you put it off let me know. The cost of doing what we do will continue to go up. There is a lot of discussion about the new positions in our budget. He stated he is not for all of them, but one that he takes exception to and he sat in that chair last year and said he wants to see it and he still wants to see it is an internal auditor. He thinks it is desperately needed in this County. He fully supports it because that will keep us from getting into situations that may become sticky and it May 12, 2015 245 blows his mind and does not mind saying it publically that it blows his mind that we do not have one. As far as the debt issue, he hates to sound like a broken record, but he is going to say it again. The proposal that was made to cut our debt over the next two years, we have asked our County Administrator to put forth a ten-year plan. We, as a Board, asked him to do that and he did. There is nothing beyond the two -years that we are obligated to fund. We are not obligated to fund any of that, it is up to this Board to decide. This Board is serious about debt. We have the full authority to do that, but he wanted to begin the ball rolling. When we did that, it was to put the brakes on for the first two (2) years and show it can be managed. To take a step further, anyone that takes the Capital Improvement Plan as a bible blows his mind. The County Administrator is doing what this Board requested him to do. He does want to echo what Supervisor McNamara said that is was a small decrease in taxes, but we had put forth a decrease this for our businesses and he made mention of it then that it is something that the County can continue in years ahead because he does believe in our businesses. He will support our businesses and whatever we can do to lift the burden from those businesses, he wants to continue to do that. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 4-25 p.m., Supervisor Peters moved to go into closed meeting following the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A 1, personnel, namely discussion concerning an appointment to the Western Virginia Water Authority. The motion carried by the following recorded vote- AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters NAYS- None The closed session was held from 5-50 p.m. until 6-05 p.m. IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to discuss proposed Operating and Capital budgets for fiscal year 2015-2016 and fiscal year 2016-2025 Capital Improvement Plan (Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator; W. Brent Robertson, Director of Management and Budget) Mr. Gates went through proposed budget amendments. He advised that he did not include any supplemental funding for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Supervisor McNamara questioned the additional clerk's position. Mr. Gates advised this was not an additional position as it has already been there, however the funds were removed. Mr. Gates also advised that he felt the need for an additional clerk because there is only one person to handle the Clerk's responsibilities. 246 May 12, 2015 Supervisor Peters questioned the additional Economic Development position. Mr. Gates advised that the funds were there, but the position was not. This would be for existing business outreach. Supervisor Peters advised he was not in agreement with the Commission of the Revenue's and Treasurer addition staff. He asked if resources could be reallocated. Supervisor McNamara stated with regard to the Treasurer's position, we should hire outside on a fee basis on collected funds. He advised these positions do not need to be County employees. He further added that some of these funds were just not collectible and does not see the need for these positions to be added. Supervisor Peters also advised that more public safety personnel are needed and will be needed. Supervisor Church inquired about the contribution list and asked if there were duplications. Mr. Gates asked that the Board give him time to reshape the process. He indicated that staff does not have a comprehensive idea of what they are doing and have not asked them to identify the ways their operations are supporting the County. He advised he would like to spend time with the City of Roanoke and City of Salem and do a comprehensive approach. Supervisor Church advised he has not been here long enough, but they do come and explain. Supervisor Bedrosian questioned the ethics parameters of doing business in the County. Are there ethical issues with having business relationships with any of these agencies if we give them money? The question was brought up to him about Virginia Western Community College, where someone from the County government will teach a class and make money from teaching and we give them money. His question is if everything is in place that would make it so we don't do that for those of us in business, i.e. banking, restaurant, grounds keeping that we are not having any relationships businesswise with these agencies we give money to and does not become an issue. Supervisor Peters commented with regard to Virginia Western, we give to CCAP, which is tuition. Supervisor Bedrosian is talking about the non -contractual amount. Mr. Gates stated he believes Supervisor Bedrosian is drawing the line with what is legal and what is ethical. It has more to do with the individuals having the ability to influence the amount of money that one of these organizations receive is also deriving some benefit of that organization. He does not know of any examples. Supervisor Bedrosian stated so the Board should not be voting on any of these agencies that we do any kind of business with. Mr. Gates advised legally there is not a problem. Supervisor Bedrosian stated the Commonwealth Games is one, should any of us do anything for them, i.e. landscaping, selling at the Games. Ruth Ellen Kuhenel, Assistant Senior County Attorney advised this is governed with the Conflict of Interest statutes. Mr. Gates advised staff is looking at providing ethical training for employees as a whole and he would be happy to do so for the Board. May 12, 2015 247 Supervisor McNamara advised if cash is freed up from the elimination of positions, the legislative liaison should be within the County Attorney's budget. Mr. Gates advised that some additional charges were to reduce Board Contingency to $50,000 and he has added $20,000 to Voter Registration for primaries. It was consensus of the Board to remove the additional Commissioner of the Revenue and Treasurer positions and amend the budget accordingly. The work session was held from 4A2 p.m. until 5-11 p.m. 2. Work session to discuss debt refunding opportunity (Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance) Ms. Owens went through a PowerPoint presentation explaining the debt refunding opportunity and the alternatives. VRA, which would be level savings annually - fifty percent will go to the schools. General Obligation Refunding would generate th� most savings. And take advantage of our bond ratings. Would require a public referendum and significant staff time. Supervisor McNamara commented he felt this was a bad idea and there is no understanding in the marketplace. The final option, which staff is recommending would be Lease Revenue Bonds. Chairman Peters asked if instead of the years remaining could it be shortened, which would be no savings but reduce the debt quicker. It was the consensus of the Board to go forward with the lease revenue bonds, but requested that Ms. Owens look into shortening the term. Work session was held from 5:12 pm until 5-32 pm IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION At 6.-05 p.m., Supervisor Peters moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution. IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Peters adjourned the meeting at 6:06 p.m. m mifted by: Approved by: i ed b ' Y* orah C. J c P. Ja on Peters Deputy kClerk to the Board Chairman May 12, 2015 PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY