Loading...
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