Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/17/2015 - Special November 17, 2015 537 Roanoke County Administration Center 5204 Bernard Drive Roanoke, Virginia 24018 The Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia met this day atthe Roanoke County Administration Center, this being a special meeting to hold several work sessions. Audio 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: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Chairman P. Jason Peters,Supervisors Al Bedrosian, Joseph P. McNamara and Charlotte A. Moore Also present was Supervisor Elect Martha B. Hooker MEMBERS ABSENT: Supervisor Joseph B. “Butch” Church STAFF PRESENT: Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator; Daniel R. O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator; and Deborah C. Jacks, Chief Deputy Clerk to the Board IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to discuss with the Board of Supervisors the Capital Improvement Program (CIP) by Functional Team (Jimmy Lyon, Budget Manager) Mr. Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator, introduced the new Budget Director, Christopher R. Bever. Jimmy Lyon provided a PowerPoint presentation. Supervisor McNamara asked Mr. Gates what he considers as the CIP role. Mr. Gates explained they have been trying to schedule a meeting, but could not get everybody together. He advised that he will bring a recommendation to restructure the role of the CIP Committee. He indicated there is a shortage of people willing to volunteer. The amount of time to be cognizant of the budget is significant. Supervisor McNamara asked what Mr. Gates felt was the reason for the lack of volunteers with Chairman Peters responding because they did not feel connected to the process. He felt the projects were rated by how good a sales job was done. Ms. Martha Hooker, November 17, 2015 538 Supervisor-elect, stated she enjoyed the time spent on this Committee advising it was a great process and she liked hearing from the various departments. She added that she did not feel there was a sales pitch ranking. Supervisor Bedrosian asked why does staff think is it broken with Mr. Gates responding they are asked to prioritize without an understanding of the project other than the scope of work. He added when you prioritize projects is it helpful to know how much it costs, how it plays into the fiscal policy, etc. He added that we need to support the education process. Lastly, he stated disassociating the CIP from the operating budget does not make sense to him. He feels this is an opportunity to make it a better process and educate our citizens on what can be a challenging discussion. Supervisor McNamara asked what was the problem with members wanting to join the CIP Committee. Supervisor Peters advised it should be a more complete process and how it effects the whole budget. They should get all the needed information. He added that on the Planning Commission you get a feeling that you are making a difference, not necessarily so with the CIP. Ms. Hooker commented that she enjoyed her time on the CIP, with Chairman Peters advising he did as well. It was a good process and she enjoyed hearing form all the departments. She thinks it is a judgment being made, but does not think it is tied to the sales pitch as you are ranking needs and how you perceive those needs and there is something intrinsically healthy with getting that feedback from the citizen. Finding people to do this is an ongoing challenge. Supervisor Bedrosian inquired why Mr. Gates thought it was broken, Mr. Gates advised his observation of the CIP Committee was they were asked to prioritize projects for consideration without not really having an understanding of the project beyond just what the specific scope of work was set to be. They did not understand how much things cost, where the money comes from, what you can afford or what you think you can afford over time, how those project play into your fiscal policies. These are all important things for someone to understand when they are trying to provide input of priorities of projects and until we have a process whereby we can help our citizens understand that, he would suggest that their input is not at the level it could be. We need to support the education process in order to allow for the quality of the input to improve. The second point is that disassociating the CIP from the operating budget just does not make sense. What you spend on the CIP has an absolute effect on what you spend on the operating side. This is a change to make it a better process. Supervisor Peters commented he thinks putting the responsibility on citizens who really do not understand the severity of what they are judging is incorrect. It needs to be a more complete process so they understand what is going on and how it effects the whole budget and get all the information and he thinks that is the difference between the CIP and the Planning Commission. When on the Planning Commission, you are given much more information. You feel like you make a difference. November 17, 2015 539 Supervisor Bedrosian commented that the Planning Commission is a paid Committee and the CIP is not. He advised he did not know if that had an impact. Supervisor McNamara reminded everyone that the Board has a final say. Mr. Gates advised they have produced a tiered list and did not involve a multi-year look. Supervisor Peters remarked staff had asked citizens to put forth a lot of time and effort and then told there were no funds. Supervisor McNamara asked if we already had a continuing revenue stream for stormwater with Mr. Gates responding in the affirmative. He then asked how many of the projects listed already had a revenue stream in dollar funds. Mr. Lyons advised from the General Fund, approximately $12 million over ten (10) years, outside of grants and outside funds. Supervisor McNamara stated he was confused because he thought we were allocating two (2) work crews that have six (6) people and expenses. Mr. Gates stated they carried that on the operating side, approximately $700,000 of operating expense. These are project expenses for building the stormwater management project; we are splitting between the capital and the operating $1.4 million annually that we provide for stormwater. The $98 million is the total request. So, if you have $500,000 for VDOT for ten (10) years is $5 million. Mr. Gates responded in the affirmative. Supervisor McNamara asked if we need a placeholder for combined Economic Development and for the airport. Mr. Gates advised funds would be allocated for economic development on the operating side. There is nothing in the operating or capital budget that pertains to support for the airport. Supervisor McNamara said but if you are looking to have a combined economic development project with multiple jurisdictions, it would seem to him that it would send the right message to have as a placeholder. Mr. Gates advised they are all requests and may not ultimately make it into the CIP. Staff will come back when they have the operating discussion if there will be anything for the airport or a regional economic development project. Doug Blount, Director of Parks, Recreation and Tourism spoke about the greenway grant (Roanoke River) and that staff should hear within the next ninety days if we received the $1.74 million grant, with the Roanoke County match being $340,000. The interior trails project has been around since 2007 from the 2007 master plan, for Greenhill Park, Vineyard Park, Backcreek along Rt. 221, Walter Park, Glade Creek. Although it is a $1.3 million request, staff feels there will be grant funding. Supervisor McNamara commented once upon a time we used to have a matching program. Do we still have, with Mr. Blount advised up to $25,000. Why is that number not $250,000 and push on the rec. clubs to come up with half. Mr. Blount advised one of the challenges they have had is that up until this past year, the Parks budget had been reduced. Supervisor McNamara stated it would be a capital budget not operating budget. He thinks most places that we have lights is where we have been working with the rec. clubs. Mr. Blount advised the challenge is the cost of the lights has gone up a great deal. Hollins was one of the last soccer clubs to light the fields and 540 November 17, 2015 it was $75,000 and now it is $300,000. It would be very challenging for many of our rec. clubs to be able to have the funds available. Work session was held from 6:04 p.m. until 7:09 p.m. 2. Work session to discuss the changes in the Insurance Services Office (ISO) rating in Roanoke County (Stephen G. Simon, Chief of Fire and Rescue) In attendance with Chief Simon was Battalion Chief Travis Griffin and Deputy Chief Joey Stump. A presentation was given to discuss the changes in the ISO rating. Work session was held from 7:09 p.m. until 7:32 pm IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman Peters adjourned the meeting at 7:33 p.m. to the regularly scheduled meeting on December 8, 2015, at 3:00 p.m. ii,, emitted by: Approved by: cam, •eborah C. J i� P. Ja •n Peters Chief Deputy lerk to the Board Chairman