HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/28/2015 - RegularJuly 28, 2015 363
Roanoke County Administration Center
5204 Bernard Drive
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day at the
Roanoke County Administration Center, this being the fourth Tuesday and the second
regularly scheduled meeting of the month of July 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, a moment of silence was
observed. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present.
IN RE: CALL TO ORDER
Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 3-01 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: REQUESTS TO POSTPONE, ADD TO, OR CHANGE THE ORDER OF
AGENDA ITEMS
Paul Mahoney, County Attorney, removed agenda item E-2, Ordinance
declaring a parcel of real estate to be surplus and accepting an offer for the sale of
same, namely 2.6 acres located off Oakland Boulevard, Tap May #38.07-02.56.000,
Hollins Magisterial District due to environmental issues.
364 July 28, 2015
IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS
Chairman Peters made the announcement of Steve Simon as the new
Chief of Fire and Rescue and thanked Acting Chief Stump.
IN RE: BRIEFINGS
1. Briefing to the Board of Supervisors on illegal immigration in
Roanoke County (Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator)
Mr. Gates provided the briefing to the Board. He also had provided a
memo to the Board and it will be placed online.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he wanted to set the tone as to why he
requested this. He always makes a point to say that he is the only one on this Board
that lived overseas until his was sixteen (16) years old. He wanted to make sure that
we are zeroing in on illegal immigration. He is all for immigration. His issue is with illegal
immigration and we tend to mesh those two together until it is so confusing. It can
create a lot of animosity, but it really should not. He is talking about criminal behavior
versus someone who is an immigrant. When he googled this he came across under
Title XIII, Section 13-25 of the United State Code — improper entry by an alien, any
citizen of any country other than the United States who enters or attempts to enter the
United States at any time at any place other than designated by immigration officers or
alludes examination. At the very end, it says, "he or she has committed a Federal
crime." This is a criminal act, so it should be important and interestingly enough too,
one of the biggest transformations in the Country is going on in the Commonwealth of
Virginia and most of the emphasis is in Northern Virginia. It would probably have a lot
to do with our nation's capital being in Northern Virginia or that area and that is where a
lot of the focus is. He feels this is a pertinent issue to the people in Virginia to know
about how we deal with these kinds of issues. As he read through the report, it seems
like we, on this issue, shy away from asking the question, to investigating it more and it
kind of made him wonder. The Police Department does not take your word for it when
pulled over. They ask to see a driver's license and in some cases take a blood test.
But, on this issue of immigration, he does not know what it is, we just don't want to ask
a question, we don't want to document it and he is talking about criminal behavior. It is
not about what someone looks like; it is not about the color of their skin; it is immaterial
and if you think that way then he would ask what you think about people from other
countries. He is talking about a criminal act; illegal immigration. So, when he goes
through all the points, 4,000 arrests, and he is was confused because it says that we
only act when it is pertinent to the case. Mr. Gates advised the Police Department does
ask if they are a United States citizen; but they can refuse to answer the question or
sometimes they are not capable of answering the question. About 1/5 of the arrests
have no response to the question and about 1/5 respond they are non US Citizens.
July 28, 2015 365
When they are incarcerated and taken to the jail and processed in, the question about
citizenship and foreign birth is asked again. At that point, if they advise they are a non
US citizen or born of foreign birth, then there is an inquiry that is submitted into the
State and National criminal databases that they are required to do and the result of that
is forwarded on to immigration and customs enforcement. We are required by Federal
regulation to destroy the information. We cannot and do not retain that information.
Supervisor Bedrosian then asked what happens when someone is identified as a
criminal. Mr. Gates stated if there is an outstanding warrant, the warrants have to be
resolved before they can be released. If the only reason they are not being released
from jail is because of their immigration status, the Sheriff has no legal authority to hold
them any longer. Supervisor Bedrosian to clarify, if somebody is an illegal immigrant
and has committed a criminal act by being an illegal immigrant. We cannot hold
somebody for breaking the law. Mr. Gates stated it is not sufficient authority for us to
retain someone in jail if they are otherwise free to go, which is an Attorney General's
opinion from the State. This is what we follow. Supervisor Bedrosian asked if that was
a current thing or has it been around forever. Mr. Gates advised he believes it is a
current policy, but will check and advise. Mr. Mahoney advised the opinion is fairly
recent and was based upon some litigation that was brought by individuals who were
being held in local jails and there was no arrest warrant from the Federal government.
Until the Federal government gives us an arrest warrant, there is no basis to hold
somebody in jail. Supervisor Bedrosian stated but it is illegal and is a Federal crime.
Mr. Mahoney advised "allegedly", but the Federal government has not issued an arrest
warrant for that crime. Until an arrest warrant has been issued, there is no basis to hold
an individual. Supervisor Bedrosian stated that every local government is powerless
against really dealing with the issue at all. This has become a national issue, but every
issue is local because they go to towns, cities and counties to live. So, all these issues
become local issues and it is a financial burden on all of us to just continue in this kind
of "not noticing anything" when it is stated it is a criminal activity by coming into our
country illegally. So, could you do anything or are we powerless. Mr. Mahoney advised
we need an arrest warrant to hold somebody in jail or a conviction. Government cannot
hold you in jail because you think they may have committed a crime. You are held in jail
because the judge or jury has found you guilty of an offense or they can be held in jail
because there is an outstanding arrest warrant for someplace else. Supervisor
Bedrosian stated if the Federal government never wanted to do anything about this
issue, they pretty much win. Supervisor Bedrosian stated with regard to the schools,
the school systems are specifically prohibited from inquiring about the immigration
status of any child or parent. Again, the reality is that our hands are tied into doing
anything about something like this even in our school system.
Chairman Peters remarked that until the Federal government takes control
of our borders, and they are not enforcing it, how can we.
Supervisor McNamara stated he just wanted to point out a couple of quick
facts relative to immigration. In the jails, it is .02 percent of our incarcerated public and
366 July 28, 2015
in our social services it is .005 of all cases. So, he does not think we should leave with
the impression that we have a huge immigration problem in Roanoke County that it is
out of control and our hands are tied. Those numbers suggest to him that the illegal
immigration problem, while it may be a significant problem in some areas of the country
and the Commonwealth of Virginia, it does not appear to be a huge issue in Roanoke
County.
Chairman Peters asked that Mr. Gates document be placed on the County
website as a live document.
IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance amending Chapter 10. — Licenses of the Roanoke
County Code by the addition of a new Section 10-59. -
Pawnbrokers and will include a license tax as provided in Sec. 10-
36 and an application fee of two hundred dollars ($200) (Paul M.
Mahoney, County Attorney)
Mr. Mahoney outlined the request for the ordinance and advised the
ordinance mimics the State enabling action. He stated the State Code is contradictory-,
on the one hand the State Code talks about "no person shall be engaged in this
business unless he or she has received a license from the local county, city or town.
The next section of the State Code then says the Circuit Court of that County or City
can authorize a local government to issue those licenses. His recommendation to the
Board is to submit the ordinance for consideration. If the Board is comfortable with this
direction and adopt at first reading, he has scheduled a meeting with Judge Swanson
for Thursday to harmonize and coordinate the contradictory issues. This is also very
similar to what other local jurisdictions have. He then explained the $200 application
fee is similar to what we already have in County Code with respect to those individuals
who are seeking a precious metals license. The $200 is designed to recapture the
administrative cost and expense for the Police Department to do the necessary
background checks. The Roanoke County zoning ordinance has a provision that
recognizes this kind of use, permitted by right in a C-2 Zoning District. Additionally, the
Planning Commission should look at this because there are some issues with respect to
the appropriate zoning classification for this kind of activity.
Supervisor Church inquired about the number of current pawnshops with
Mr. Mahoney responding in the negative. He then asked Mr. Mahoney if we should limit
and Mr. Mahoney suggested that the Planning Commission to take a look at.
Supervisor McNamara inquired if a jeweler sells precious metals, do they
have to pay a $200 fee every year. Mr. Mahoney advised that is one of the issues that
would have to be resolved as to whether they want a license as a pawn broker or a
precious metals. Supervisor McNamara asked if they are paying $200 with Mr.
Mahoney responding in the affirmative. Several of our local jewelers have come
July 28, 2015 367
forward and have done that. From the Police Department perspective, that is welcome.
The problem that the Police Department has looked at are the people that come to town
and rent a room at the Holiday Inn or another of the local motels and set up a previous
metals deal for that week -end. Those are the ones that cause the bigger concerns.
Supervisor McNamara stated the reason he asked is that we already have a business
license tax and $200 a year seems to be an additional tax on the business. It certainly
does not take $200 for the Police to run a background check as to whether someone
has been in trouble in the last year. Before the second reading, he would like to see
some summary as to why we should be charging this particular business an additional
$200 fee. It does not cost $200 to run a background check on somebody. The second
question is that he would assume that the jeweler is at .20 business license tax rate.
Mr. Mahoney responded .36. So, they are not considered retail and is that because of
the State. Mr. Mahoney responded he was not sure; his understanding from the
Commissioner was .36 for all. Supervisor McNamara stated he thinks today's pawn
shop is no longer a place where someone gets rid of stolen goods. He does not believe
that because you go to a pawn shop, actually he has never been to a pawnshop, as he
understands it if you pawn something they take a picture of you, you have to have a
driver's license and they take a picture of what you gave them. So, if you are pawning
something you stole, you are very, very dumb. He is going to assume the pawnshops
of days gone by, it is now a retail place in which case they are buying equipment
whether from a distributor or someone else selling it and then turning around and selling
it. It sounds to him like retail and should be a .20 business license tax.
Supervisor Bedrosian stated just to clarify the license tax is $200 and
every year. The difference going back to the jeweler or any other business pays a
license tax. Mr. Mahoney stated there are two different issues. Number one is the
business and professional occupation license tax, a certain percentage is paid on gross
income. In addition, this business in order to do the background check, a $200 fee is
imposed. Supervisor Bedrosian inquired if that was a one-time fee. Mr. Mahoney
stated it would be repetitive every year. In the past, precious metal does not seem to be
an ongoing operation; it usually seems to be a week -end or week -only event. He is
recommending a similar approach that each time you come in and want to be a pawn
broker, we are going to do that background check and the fee is designed to cover the
cost of the expenses for that background check. Supervisor Bedrosian stated so every
year there would be a background check. If you are a jeweler, like Fink's, do they pay
this? Fink's does not pay that unless they want to be a pawnbroker in addition to being
a jeweler or if they want to secure a precious metal license. Supervisor Bedrosian
asked if consignment shops have to do this, with Mr. Mahoney responding in the
negative. Supervisor Bedrosian asked what Roanoke City does with Mr. Mahoney
responding that is one of the reasons he wants to speak to Judge Swanson. When we
had checked with Roanoke City, it appears that if you want to be a pawnbroker, you
would come in and file a legal pleading with the Circuit Court and have the Court issue
an order authorizing the issuance of a license to you. He stated it was his opinion that
368 July 28, 2015
the Courts ought to be involved in other stuff and the Courts can delegate to the locality.
In Roanoke City, the Chief of Police is still doing the background check.
Supervisor Church asked for clarification when Mr. Mahoney stated the
rate was based on gross income or gross receipts. Mr. Mahoney responded gross
receipts.
Supervisor McNamara stated before the next meeting, he would like more
clarification with regard to where the rate came from. If it is based on a classification,
he understands that, but is the classification defined by the State? What is the
difference between a repair and a personal service relative to retail? If a jeweler is in
that category, then he would say it is right because it is pretty close to a jeweler. To
him, a jeweler seems to be retail, not personal services, but all these things may be laid
out in the State Code. He would also like some justification why we would pick this
group of businesses to charge them $200, when other businesses or personal service
business does not pay $200 in addition to their business license. Mr. Mahoney stated
the justification is that the State Code talks about a background check. It does not set
out a fee, it is left up to the locality. It leaves open the question of how often do you
perform the background check. He stated if we do a background check every year and
some fee, he could live with some fee, but does not think it costs us $200 to do a
background check.
Supervisor Moore asked how are the occasional gem dealers who go to
the hotels, etc. regulated. Mr. Mahoney responded typically we treat them as iterant
merchants, through the Commission of Revenue's office or if they are buying and selling
gold, i.e. buying wedding rings and melting them down, they then have to apply for and
secure a precious metals license. A lot of the information in this ordinance is similar to
what is in the precious metals ordinance. Do we actually go and check their permits?
Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative.
Supervisor Bedrosian asked if we background check any other business.
Mr. Mahoney responded in the affirmative with different fees. Why would this be
different, because of the precious metals permit? Would a store that carries guns have
a background check? Mr. Mahoney responded he did not know.
Supervisor Peter's motion to approve the first reading and to establish the
second reading and public hearing for August 11, 2015, was approved by the following
vote -
AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters
NAYS- None
IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1. Ordinance appropriating funds in the amount of $384,000 to
purchase voting machines and equipment (Rebecca Owens,
Director of Finance)
July 28, 2015 369
Ms. Owens advised there were no changes from the first reading. There
was no discussion.
ORDINANCE 072814-1 APPROPRIATING FUNDS IN THE
AMOUNT OF $384,000 TO PURCHASE VOTING MACHINES
AND EQUIPMENT
WHEREAS, On April 14, 2015, the State Board of Elections decertified the AVS
WINVote equipment previously used by Roanoke County; and
WHEREAS, Roanoke County must acquire voting machines and equipment that
are capable of scanning paper ballots; and
WHEREAS, the equipment selected by the Roanoke County Board of Elections
is known as OpenElect Voting Optical Scan- and
WHEREAS, new voting machines ihat comply with State Board of Elections
standards must be acquired before November 2015 elections; and
WHEREAS, the acquisition of these machines includes one-time and recurring
costs totalling $384,000; and
WHEREAS, the State is not providing any funding for the purchase of this new
equipment; and
WHEREAS, funding is available in the County Minor Capital Fund for this
purchase; and
WHEREAS, first reading of this ordinance was held on July 14, 2015, and the
second reading was held on July 28, 2015.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows -
1 . That the sum of $384,000 is hereby appropriated from the Minor County
Capital Fund to the Department of Elections for the purchase of voting machines and
equipment.
2. That this ordinance shall take effect from and after the date of adoption.
On motion of Supervisor Church to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote-
AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters
NAYS- None
370 July 28, 2015
IN RE: PUBLIC HEARING AND SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES
1 . Bergmann Associates, D.P.C, Inc. to obtain a special use permit
for a convenience store in the CVOD, Clearbrook Village Overlay
District, on approximately 29.965 acres, located at the Clearbrook
Walmart, 5350 Clearbrook Village Lane, Cave Spring Magisterial
District - THIS PETITION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN AT THE
REQUEST OF THE PETITIONER
IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA
RESOLUTION 072815-2 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN
CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF
SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS
ITEM J - CONSENT AGENDA
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as
follows -
That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for July 28,
2015, designated as Item J - 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 . Approval of minutes — June 23, 2015
2. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County to Bonnie B. Campbell, Treasurer Clerk 111, upon her
retirement after more than seventeen (17) years of service
3. Resolution requesting acceptance of Green Tree Lane into the Virginia
Department of Transportation Secondary System
4. Request to autherize the County Administrator to exeGute an agreement
the SpeGial Assistant fer Legislative Relations
On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the resolution, with the exception of
Item JA which was removed for separate consideration and carried by the following
recorded vote-
AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters
NAYS- None
July 28, 2015 371
RESOLUTION 072815-2.b REQUESTING ACCEPTANCE OF
GREEN TREE LANE INTO THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF
TRANSPORTATION SECONDARY SYSTEM
WHEREAS, the streets described on the attached VDOT Form AM -4.3, fully
incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court of Roanoke County; 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 §33.2-705, 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.
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 Peters to adopt the resolution, and carried by the
following roll call and recorded vote-
AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters
NAYS- None
Request to authorize the County Administrator to execute an
agreement for the Special Assistant for Legislative Relations
A-072815-3
Supervisor Church asked if this was out of the ordinary that we have done
in the past. Mr. Gates responded this is the same contract.
Supervisor McNamara stated since this was pulled for comment, he was
going to make a comment during Board Member Comments, but will make it now. The
agreement for Special Assistant is now out of the County Attorney's budget and he
thinks it is appropriate instead of Board Contingency as it has for the last fifteen (15)
years. He appreciates it being moved to where it appropriately should be.
372 July 28, 2015
On motion of Supervisor McNamara to approve the staff recommendation, this
item was carried by the following roll call and recorded vote-
AYES- Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters
NAYS- None
IN RE: CITIZENS' COMMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS
Roberta Bondurant stated this is not an agenda item that she is speaking
to. She stated she would like to briefly bring the Board up-to-date on the concerns and
accounts of surveying activity on Bent Mountain. In particular, she wanted to let
everyone know that Mr. McNamara will be attending a Community Meeting tonight at
the Bent Mountain Civic Center and she would encourage all of you attend if you are
interest in joining us. As you are aware of the trespass statute and the survey statute
that are in contact in motion in litigant in Federal Court. In Northern Virginia, you
understand the trespass statute and the survey statute that gives carte blanche written
likely by gas lobbyist that allow such activity. You are also aware through County
Administration that there was a conference call wherein attorneys from the MVP agreed
not necessarily a generous agreement, but agreed if landowners were on their property
in the months of July and August, they would agree to go away and seek the court
order. This is different than the activity that has occurred on the Atlantic Coast Pipeline,
where Dominion has gone ahead with the rejection letters that they received and sought
court orders ahead of time before entering landowners' property. The dynamic of that is
that it requires landowners essentially for two months, if that is what it takes, if not more
to be on their property, to baby sit their property. Let me explain to you some of the
hardships that Mr. McNamara will hear tonight. She has neighbors that most of you
have heard well. He has appeared several times. He is suffering seriously from cancer.
His wife is homebound and suffers from MS and they have to sit and wait for surveyors
to come to their property and may or may not honor their rejection. They sent two (2)
certified letters already. She has another neighbor whom Mr. McNamara will hear from,
an eighty-three (83) year old woman who was told by surveyors several week ago when
she explained what she understood to be the dynamic involvement if the Police were
called that the surveyors knew all the cops. This is not about our strong and well
intentioned Police force, it speaks strongly to the behavior of the surveyors who are the
responsibility of MVP. She has another neighbor who is planning a vacation with his
grandson. He owns several hundred acres on Bent Mountain and called the surveyor
company. Ms. Bondurant then asked if she could have a little more time. He called the
surveyor and let them know he would out of town with this grandson on a long, planned
trip and tried to set an appointment to meet them at the property and turn them away.
They agreed to that; according to him. The day after he left, they showed up at the
property. The only thing stopping them were the dogs and a son-in-law, who happens
July 28, 2015 373
to live on the property approached them with the authority to turn them away and they
were told that plans have changed and they would not honor what his father-in-law said.
Things like that are happening; that cannot be good business. We would ask you to
revisit the Chamber of Commerce's decision. The buck actually does stop with MVP
and they are responsible for the contracted surveyors they send out. I would also say
that we have encountered on the mountain many, many surveyors. It is not an easy
situation and there are surveyors who are entirely professional, people who love their
work, they love digging for artifacts. They love digging for turtles. They are out there
trying to get a job done. We certainly understand that. It is unfortunate that they are in
the middle of these, in the mix of these conflicting laws. We would ask you to consider
in researching and doing your homework where it turns out to be there is a strong
perspective of the moral repulsiveness of the survey statute. She is asking the Board to
do that homework because while this effects Windsor Hills and the Catawba Districts, it
also affects the other districts. We are at the top of the watershed. It is all of Roanoke
County, and in fact it is not just Roanoke County. It is the air. It is the noise, the gases
that will come from a potential compressor station whether it be in Roanoke County or
Montgomery County. Richard Caywood was great enough to explain to us. Her last
comment would be this is going to be essentially a 9,522 horsepower jet engine. The
power of that jet engine would be essentially 95 car engines, 100 horsepower each.
IN RE: REPORTS
Supervisor Peters 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
5. Treasurer's Statement of Accountability per Investment and
Portfolio Policy as of June 30, 2015
6. Accounts Paid — June 30, 2015
IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he just had one thing to bring up. He
provided a group of pictures. Many have heard him gripe about VDOT and the cleaning
and taking care of our median strips. It is a little pet peeve of his- it will be here for the
whole four (4) years but he just feels like we need to keep our �edian strips and our
374 July 28, 2015
streets looking beautiful. He lives right off of Peters Creek Road. So, what he decided
to do two weeks ago was to stop gripping and just go to VDOT and get a license or
whatever he needed and actually get out there and do the work himself. He just wanted
to show everyone what a little bit of work can do. Waiting on VDOT is the picture on the
left and it will get worse and worse, but he took two (2) median strips himself. So, if you
drive on Peters Creek Road, you will notice a guy with a little push mover. He is out
there with an edger and a little sweeper and keeping those two median strips looking
good. He will come back in a couple of weeks and keep showing you the difference
between the two. He would urge the citizens and thinks we do it here in Cave Spring,
there is a gentleman that goes out there and mows. He gave him the inspiration. He is
not going to wait on anybody else, he is going to do it because he did two median strips,
which is where he basically enters Peters Creek Road when he wakes up in the
morning and goes to work- do the things he does and he just wanted to feel good about
Peters Creek Road. Wheiher he takes a left turn or a right turn on Peters Creek Road,
at least the first two median strips will be nice and cleared and when he comes home
the last thing he sees on Peters Creek Road is a nice -looking median strip. These
pictures were taken today, they are not the same median strips because he is not taking
care of all of them. The one on the left is how it looks today. There is trash and
growing and too much. The one of the right you can actually see the curbing, it has
been edged and it looks gorgeous. Thanks to the gentlemen in Cave Spring who gave
him the inspiration and would urge citizens if you cannot wait get out and do it
yourselves.
Supervisor Church stated he has about 125 square miles in his area and
would have to hire three companies to help him so it cannot be done in the Catawba
District. On a more serious note, he thanked Ms. Bondurant for coming today to bring
up the points that she brought out. As you well know, he has received countless (lost
count a long time ago) regarding antics and/or behavior and/or lack of respect and all of
the above regarding entry into property. Each one seems to have left a lot to be
desired. He sees where they are coming from. He has always felt that the citizens of
Roanoke County deserve much better.
Supervisor McNamara asked Mr. Caywood if he knew what our police
presence, we have had a police presentation on what the police were going to do if
surveyors entered the property and were turned away. Could he summarize in a minute
or two, he thinks it would be of interest to people. Mr. Caywood stated in general
maybe the most important point with that is that if there are issues, we want people to
call the police, first and foremost so that we can actually respond. So far, on the
existing phone calls by the time they arrive, everybody has already left, but in general
what we are trying to do is prevent any conflicts for the police, ask the surveyors to
leave, ask the landowners to go back to their homes just to prevent any escalation of an
issue and particularly if the owner is there, we are asking the surveyors to honor what
MVP had told us, which was they would leave upon challenge. It is a more difficult
situation if it is the neighbor or someone else asking the surveyors to leave. So far, we
July 28, 2015 375
have not actually encountered that in the field. We have only received a very few calls,
police calls, and when the police arrived everybody is already gone. He would also like
to point out and just forwarded to the Board, he sent an email detailing some of the
surveyor concerns yesterday and received a very cursorily response this morning. He
will keep the Board apprised. What staff is hearing is very similar to what Ms.
Bondurant relayed and what response we get from the company.
Supervisor Moore stated she would like to take a moment and talk about
moving our valley forward. We often talk about the economy, education, high paying
jobs and how we are going to keep our youth here in the Roanoke Valley to work after
they graduate. Technology is in the forefront of all of these things. We need to
continue having conversations about Broadband. In order for us to achieve all of these
goals, everyone in Roanoke County needs to have a high-speed internet. She thinks
we need to continue to communicate with our local and even federal governments so
when they are doing construction projects we need to ask them about installing the
conduit for the broadband. She has had some conversations recently with the leaders
who are helping to connect our greenways. They also were very positive about the idea
of laying the broadband conduit when they are connecting greenways. Sidewalks are
being installed and utility lines are being put in, can we ask that conduit for broadband
be put in? We could blow the fiber in later. She stated she would like to challenge
everyone who is listening and everyone in the audience today when you go home
tonight, turn off your computer, and turn off your cellphones. How would you be
effected if you were completely out of touch with the rest of the world? Texting, twitter,
Facebook emails, talking on your cellphone, GPS, doing homework, googling and
anything else you do with these devices. Just imagine if you were never able to answer
your phone, text, email your loved ones or do your homework as the students are
required to do when they take their laptops home. How would that change your
lifestyle? High-speed internet is critical for moving our valley forward. Let's continue to
have these conversations about how we are going to move forward. She stated she
would also like to thank Doug Blount, Mark Courtwright and Fred Corbett for the many,
positive National Little League playoff successes at Starkey baseball field last week. It
was an incredible event. Everyone had a good time and she heard many comments
from "out-of-towners" on what a wonderful place the Roanoke Valley was. She ended
by thanking Mike Roop, whom Mr. Bedrosian has mentioned. He continually, every
Saturday and every Sunday morning, in shorts and flip flops, with his helmet and his
vest goes out and mows all the way from Tanglewood Mall all the way to the Salem line.
Thank you Mike.
Supervisor Peters stated his comments would be brief. He too believes
that a conversation needs to continue about broadband, but also believes it needs to be
focused on where it is beneficial; focused on economic development, where it will be
most meaningful to citizens of this valley. He has often said that he is not in favor of
having a big donut out there. He thinks if we are going to place that type of broadband
material, it needs to be placed where we are going to get the economic drivers out of it
376 July 28, 2015
to help move our County forward. Lastly, again, after the announcement of our new
Fire Chief, he went over to the Public Safety building and spent some time with those
folks over there and one of the areas our County that continues to blow his mind is our
Dispatch Center. He admires those folks with what they do over there. It is one heck of
an operation. Again, as he finishes many of his meetings he wants to sincerely thank all
of our employees, because you are the ones that keeps the County going, whether in
public safety, dispatch office to helping keep us straight, we appreciate everything that
you are doing.
At 4-10 p.m., Chairman Peters recessed to the fourth floor for work
sessions and closed session.
IN RE: WORK SESSIONS
1 . Work session to discuss the South Peak Community
Development Authority (CDA) with the Board of Supervisors (Paul
M. Mahoney, County Attorney; Richard L. Caywood, Assistant
County Administrator; Rebecca Owens, Director of Finance;
William M. Holmes, Executive Vice President Development &
Construction, Smith Packet Med-Com, ILILC)
In attendance were- Arnold Covey, Director of Community Development,
William M. Holmes, Executive Vice President Development & Construction, Smith
Packet Med-Com, LLC, Hunter Smith, President of Smith Packett and Michael R.
Circeo, P.E., President, Circeo Geotechnical Engineering, P.C., Thomas C. Gates,
County Administrator, Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney and Daniel R. O'Donnell,
Assistant County Administrator.
Mr. Holmes gave a brief update on the walls. He advised they have hired
Mike Simak, who is a segmented wall specialist from Ft. Hill South Carolina as an
independent, third -party advisor. We continue to use Mike Circeo and Mike Sampson,
wall contractor. In addition, Mr. Simak reviews plans and any work done. At Mr. Simak's
direction, had Mattern and Craig locate markers on all of the walls and then surveyed,
which enabled a base line to measure the walls in the future when they are again
surveyed. Secondly, they have installed monitoring wells for soil or water movement. On
June 18, 2015, we advised the County they would do maintenance. Maintenance
commenced on June 29, 2015, and on June 30, 2015, the wall displacement fell. The
block on the wall is a facade. Both Mike Simak and Mike Circeo came out and
inspected. The wall is sound. They indicated it was a geogrid system, done in layers,
i.e. vinyl siding, if it comes off it does not affect the house. Plans were presented for
wall repair that the County approved; hiring was done and completed in seven (7)
working days. Mr. Simak, Mr. Circeo and Mr. Holmes met with the County. Froeling and
Robertson were there as well and engineering reports provided. Mr. Holmes indicated
he appreciated the County's support and they remain committed.
July 28, 2015 377
Supervisor Bedrosian stated he understands it is a facade, but is that just
a symptom of what happened. Mr. Holmes responded it was maintenance work with a
backhoe that was digging out and regarding that caused the collapse. Additionally, this
was a direct result of someone being up there doing the maintenance work. The area in
question was a low spot that they were attempting to be proactive on. Supervisor
Bedrosian remarked that he was amazed at building a wall that high. Mr. Holmes
indicated the block is only twelve (12) inches deep. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked if
there are any limits, which Mr. Holmes responded yes, with proper spacing and geogrid
layers approximately fifty feet (50') would be the highest. Some examples of other high
walls are the one behind Lowe's, Home Depot, Chick-fil-A, Bojangles and the mall
where Fink's Jewelers is. Supervisor Bedrosian then asked if they design to anticipate
these problems with Mr. Holmes responding in the affirmative stating yes and has taken
care of storm drainage problems.
Supervisor McNamara stated he understands the structure of the wall is
sound, but have we done or plan to do some sort of evaluation of the structural integrity
of the facade? Mr. Holmes responded that all of the walls have been inspected with a
clean bill of health. The monitoring wells mentioned earlier enable the engineer to get a
reading. Technology and eye monitoring is done as well as measuring top and bottom
to see if moving.
Supervisor Peters stated that he appreciates the individuals from Smith
Packett being here. There were a lot of questions. He noted that it appears from a
structural viewpoint, nothing else seems to be affected and anything being built upon is
permanent. Mr. Holmes indicated some areas have been filled, where the geogrids
are. Supervisor Peters asked about the building sites. Mr. Holmes advised retail area
is virgin ground- some areas have compacted fill. Supervisor Peters inquired how
closed to the wails is the compacted fill. Mr. Holmes responded South Peak Blvd is ten
(10) feet from the wall. He indicated while all of this was happening, the road was open.
Mr. Holmes indicated that the geogrids are running approximately forty (40) feet and the
fill and roadway stayed intact. He indicated they wanted to reassure the public geogrids
are running horizontally about 40 feet. Fill and roadway stayed intact. Supervisor Peters
stated we want to reassure the public.
Mr. Bedrosian asked what relationship does the County have to this wall.
Mr. Gates advised they inspect the wall after it has been repaired. We hired an
independent contractor to make sure everything was correct.
Daniel O'Donnell advised a third -party inspector has to inspect the
finished product before Roanoke County signs off.
Next, Rebecca Owens went through the PowerPoint presentation, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board. This presentation provides a
historical perspective for those Board members who were not here when the Authority
was approved.
Supervisor Bedrosian asked who would have initiated this whole process
a CDA. Twenty years ago, it was just a hillside and then owned it. How was this
378 July 28, 2015
initiated? The developer, Smith Packett, initiated this process. Mr. Mahoney advised
there are twenty to thirty (20 to 30) CIDA's around the Commonwealth. The Authority is
designed to issue a limited form of public debt, attached to the Authority itself. The debt
is used to pay for certain public improvement- not the private stuff that a developer will
build. The advantage of this process is tkat if the new local tax revenue that is
generated by that developer is insufficient to pay off the debt, or borrowing, then the
property that is within the geographic boundaries of that created authority would have a
special assessment (add-on tax). Therefore, not a burden on the entire locality. It is an
alternative economic tool for a fairly large development.
Supervisor Peters asked if the borrowing of $7 million in revenue bonds is
a one-time instance or can they come back. Ms. Owens responded in the original
ordinance that the Board approved in August of 2010, it laid out the potential of up to
$16 million; the first phase was $7 million. They would need to come back to Roanoke
County for additional authorization. Supervisor Peters then asked why would we not do
more of these; what is the advantage. Mr. Mahoney responded the advantage is that
you are able to target a very specific area and you can use that as an economic
development tool to help pay for public improvements. There is a very strict definition in
State and Federal tax laws.
Supervisor McNamara commented this was approved in February 2010
The reason it was approved in 2010 and not in 2009 because he was on the Board in
2009 and there wasn't three votes and everybody knows that. The drawback is you are
foregoing revenue structure from a given piece of property. While you have created this
development authority, he would suggest that if the underlying assets and land, etc. for
whatever reason is not there to go back on the taxes, he would suggest that it come
back to the County. How is the County going to approve a CIDA if the CIDA is not
developed and does not generate the tax revenue to pay for the bonds, which is
foregoing the County revenue because it is essentially a tax incentive. How are those
bonds going to get paid? Are you going to let a CIDA bond in Roanoke County go
defunk? He does not think he wants to be sitting on the Board for that. There are
advantages, but it is not a solution for all things. Generally speaking this is a unique
use for this CIDA. It usually for parking garages or a big mall.
Supervisor Moore stated the CIDA has to use a unique property. It cannot
be one that can go out and get funding.
Supervisor Church stated Mr. Mahoney mentioned a specific site. Just
think about Slate Hill; straight up and down. He has asked himself as well as many
citizens, who would be interested in that land. He asked Ms. Owens if the tax revenue
on that empty land was around $22,000, which Ms. Owens responded in the affirmative.
Our taxpayers are not on the hook for anything coming back to Roanoke County and
asked Mr. Mahoney to confirm. Mr. Mahoney responded legally that is correct, but as
Mr. McNamara points out, if it fails then it could have a negative impact on the County
because Roanoke County Board of Supervisors created it and from the citizens
perspective they may not draw the legal distinctions that the Authority is a separate
July 28, 2015 379
legal entity.
Supervisor Bedrosian asked if the ultimate responsibility would not be the
citizens of Roanoke County with Mr. Mahoney advising it would be the property owners.
Right now that would be the developer, but if the developer sells parcels then you are
one of the property owners in that district. Is this the same revenue bonds as used for
Green Ridge. Mr. Mahoney advised the County incurred the debt with those revenue
bonds.
Work session was held from 4-22 p.m. until 5-23 p.m.
2. Work session to introduce the Crash Reporting Center concept to
the Board of Supervisors (Howard B. Hall, Chief of Police)
In attendance for this work session was Howard B. Hall, Chief of Police,
and Mr. Sanderson, CEO of Accident Support Services.
Chief Hall outlined the concept to the Board with a PowerPoint
presentation, a copy of which is on file in the office of the Clerk to the Board of
Supervisors. He indicated this type of call was the second most common. He is
working on making this a regional effort. There is no competitor in the United States. It
was the consensus of the Board for the Chief to move forward on designing a pilot
program to bring back to the Board for further consideration.
Work session was held from 5-24 p.m. until 6-06 p.m.
IN RE: CLOSED MEETING
At 4-09 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 3 To discuss or
consider the acquisition of real property for economic development purposes where the
discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or
negotiating strategy of the County; Section 2.2-371 1.A.29.To discuss the terms or
scope of public contracts involving the discussion of the terms or scope of such
contracts, where discussion in open session would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the County, namely, the performance agreements for
the sale of old William Byrd High School and the Roland Cook Elementary School-,
Section 2.2-3711.A.l. To discuss and consider the employment, appointment and
resignation of specific public officers, appointees, or employees; namely the County
Attorney
The motion carried by the following recorded vote-
380 July 28, 2015
AYES: Supervisors Moore, Bedrosian, Church, McNamara, Peters
NAYS: None
The closed session was held from 6:18 p.m. until 7:15 p.m.
IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION 072815-4 CERTIFYING THE CLOSED MEETING
WAS HELD IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CODE OF VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia has convened
a closed meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded vote and in
accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.2-3712 of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by
the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, that such closed meeting was
conducted in conformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia, hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's
knowledge:
1 . Only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting
requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the closed meeting which this
certification resolution applies; and
2. Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion convening
the closed meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Board of Supervisors of
Roanoke County, Virginia.
On motion of Supervisor 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: ADJOURNMENT
Chairman Peters adjourned the meeting at 7:15 p.m.
itted by:
Deputy Clerk
Approved by:
P. Ja-An Peters
Che Zan