Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1/10/2017 - Regular January 10, 2017 1 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 the second Tuesday and the first regularly scheduled meeting of the month of January 2017. 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: CALL TO ORDER Chairman Peters called the meeting to order at 2:01 p.m. The roll call was taken. MEMBERS PRESENT: Supervisors George G. Assaid, Al Bedrosian, Martha B. Hooker, Joseph P. McNamara and P. Jason Peters MEMBERS ABSENT: None STAFF PRESENT: Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator; Daniel R. O’Donnell, Assistant County Administrator; Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator; Amy Whittaker, Public Information Officer, Ruth Ellen Kuhnel, County Attorney; and Deborah C. Jacks, Chief Deputy Clerk to the Board IN RE: ORGANIZATION OF COUNTY BOARD 1. Election of Officers a. Chairman Supervisor Assaid nominated Supervisor McNamara to serve as Chairman. Supervisor Hooker seconded the nomination. Supervisor Bedrosian nominated Supervisor Assaid to serve as Chairman, . which nomination Supervisor Assaid declined Supervisor McNamara was elected by the following recorded vote: January 10, 2017 2 AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Hooker, Peters NAYS: Supervisor Bedrosian ABSTAIN: Supervisor McNamara b. Vice Chairman Supervisor Assaid nominated Supervisor Hooker to serve as Vice Chairman. Supervisor McNamara seconded the nomination. Supervisor Hooker was elected by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, McNamara, Peters NAYS: Supervisor Bedrosian ABSTAIN: Supervisor Hooker Chairman McNamara recessed the meeting at 2:04 P.M. IN RE: OPENING CEREMONIES Before the meeting was called to order an invocation was given by Pastor Greg Irby of Temple Baptist Church. The Pledge of Allegiance was recited by all present. Chairman McNamara called the meeting back into session at 3:03 p.m. IN RE: PROCLAMATIONS, RESOLUTIONS, RECOGNITIONS AND AWARDS 1. Resolution of appreciation to P. Jason Peters for his service as Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors in 2016 RESOLUTION 011017-1 OF APPRECIATION TO P. JASON PETERS FOR HIS SERVICE AS CHAIRMAN OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS IN 2016 WHEREAS, P. Jason Peters served as Chairman of the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors during 2016; and WHEREAS, during Mr. Peters’ term as Chairman, the County achieved a variety of accomplishments, including: Sale of the 419 Library to Heritage Roanoke, LLC for the redevelopment  of the property into corporate offices for American Healthcare Sale of the former Roland E, Cook School to Old School for the  January 10, 2017 3 redevelopment of the property into 16 loft apartments Sale of the former William Byrd High School to Waukeshaw Development,  Inc. for the redevelopment of the property into 80 market rate apartments Sale of the former Vinton Library for a full-service Macado’s restaurant  Sale of Tanglewood Mall to Blackwater Resources  Acquisition of the 106 acre Woodhaven Road properties through the  Western Virginia Industrial Facilities Authority Launching the Reimagine 419 Town Center Study and community  visioning process Completion of Roanoke County’s first-ever Community Strategic Plan  Completion of the Explore Park Master Plan  Expansion of the broadband network into Roanoke County, adding 25  miles of open-access fiber to primary commercial corridors New construction, renovation and expansion projects representing more  than $20 million in new investment, and the creation and retention of more than 400 jobs WHEREAS, Chairman Peters chose a positive approach to governing by encouraging transparency and prompt responses to citizens; and WHEREAS, Chairman Peters worked diligently throughout the year to represent the citizens of Roanoke County by emphasizing sound financial strategies and practices and promoting regional economic development and initiatives to benefit all the residents of the Roanoke Valley. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, does hereby extend its deepest appreciation to P. Jason Peters for his service as Chairman during 2016 and for his belief in democracy and championing of citizen participation in local government. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Hooker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None IN RE: BRIEFINGS 1. Briefing to update the Board of Supervisors on the progress of the I-73 Corridor (Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator; John T. Stirrup, Alcalde & Fay) Briefing was given by Mr. Stirrup with a PowerPoint presentation. 4 January 10, 2017 IN RE: NEW BUSINESS 1. Request to approve an extension of a contract among the Counties of Franklin, Henry and Roanoke and the Cities of Martinsville and Roanoke and the Interstate 73 Coalition,LLC for pursuit of construction of Interstate 73 in the Commonwealth of Virginia (Thomas C. Gates, County Administrator) A-011017-2 Mr. Gates presented the request. There was no discussion. The motion of Supervisor Assaid to approve an extension of a contract for the pursuit of construction of Interstate 73 was seconded by Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters NAYS: Supervisor McNamara IN RE: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance accepting and appropriating funds in the amount of $921,970 for the Plantation Road Bicycle, Pedestrian and Streetscape Improvement Project (Richard Caywood, Assistant County Administrator) Mr. Caywood outlined the request for this ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor Bedrosian's motion to approve the first reading and set the second reading for January 24, 2017 was seconded by Supervisor Peters and approved by the following vote: AYES: Supervisor Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters NAYS: None 1. Ordinance to accept and appropriate $29,680 from Franklin County for the reimbursement for logging recorder services and site use at Crowell's Gap (Susan Slough, Assistant Director for Communications) January 10, 2017 5 Ms. Slough outlined the request for ordinance. There was no discussion. Supervisor Peters’ motion to approve the first reading and set the second reading for January 24, 2017, was seconded by Supervisor Assaid and approved by the following vote: AYES: Supervisor Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, McNamara, Peters NAYS: None IN RE: SECOND READING OF ORDINANCES 1. Ordinance amending Chapter 21, Article III, Section 21-39 of the Roanoke County Code, requiring tax exempt entities to reestablish eligibility for tax exempt status of real property on a triennial basis; and enacting a new Chapter 21, Article II, Section 21-23, requiring tax exempt entities to reestablish eligibility for tax exempt status of personal property on a triennial basis (Peter Lubeck, Senior Assistant County Attorney) Mr. Lubeck outlined the history of this ordinance and advised there were no changes since the reading on December 20, 2017. Supervisor Bedrosian inquired concerning the letter that was sent to the Board clarifying some things. It is true that what we have on our books does not match what the State Code has, however, nothing says that we have to match, we just cannot be stricter, is that correct. Mr. Lubeck responded in the affirmative. Chairman McNamara advised the Board there were two speakers on this issue. Pastor Irby stated his concern is not with the leadership he sees in front of him. He knows most of the Board and that is not his concern. His concern is the future and some of the things that concern him about this is what about people outside our churches that want to rent the church for a wedding; how does that fall under this? What about someone who wants to use the facility for a funeral? That is one concern he thought as he was sitting there. He does not mean any disrespect. He thinks those of you that know him understand that, but he will be honest in saying he does not think we need more government involvement, we need less government involvement, especially in churches. When he first moved here fourteen years ago, he learned some things that he was not aware of. It was a bookkeeping nightmare. When he first moved here, he learned that any paper used inside the building was tax-exempt; any paper that he sent outside his building, i.e. bulletin to a church member outside our building, January 10, 2017 6 he had to pay tax on that paper; it is a bookkeeping nightmare. He also learned when he had to buy tires for the bus that they pick children up in each week that he had to pay tax on his tired because the bus sits outside the building. Again, his concerns are not this group, his concerns are who follows. If we open a door, it could create some issues. Again, he learned something else; they do not have a church sign right now and part of the reason is the County charges $50 to put a sign up and he said to the County and he did not say it disrespectfully, it may appear that way, but he said to them, “until you start charging political candidates who put up signs, why do we have to pay $50 to put a sign up.” Ms. Hooker knows where we are; we are not visible and he tells folks all the time, if you are in our church you are either here on purpose or severely lost. We have not way of letting people know where we are unless we pay a $50 signage fee. Again, he does not know where this is going to go; if we open a door, his recommendation would be to table it and maybe talk to some of the local churches in the County, the pastors. Again, he does not distrust any of the Board, but he doesn’t know who is coming behind them. Who is to say that someone does not take this and run with it? He talked to an attorney today, a Christian attorney, and she made the statement to him that it could become our worst enemy. He agreed with her, some of the things we do as churches are stupid and certainly he does not endorse any of that. Churches that function as a church, he would like to see some caution. Daniel Palmer stated he is the Pastor of North Roanoke Baptist Church; you can find them as they are located at 6402 Peters Creek Road in North County. He is a new Pastor there; has been there about thirteen months. It has been a great year. He has taken a particular interest in the issues of governance and its relationship to churches, in part because he is a Baptist and our Country owes its religious liberty to Baptists, in particular John LeLand who was a Virginian and Issac Backus who was from Massachusetts and was ordered to be a Congregationalist, but came to saving faith in Christ in a cow pasture and gave his life to the Lord and understood that you do not baptise people just because, you do it for authentic faith in Christ. He wanted to be a Baptist, but he was made to be a Congregationalist. He came down to Virginia to meet a man named James Madison and shared his story with him and that is how we got the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. So, he is an heir of that heritage and for that reason he is here today. Really, he has come questions for the Board and for the County Attorney. He appreciates the Board coming into alignment with the State and being less strict on the timing, three years versus two, but he does want to clarify what will be intended or meant by personal property in terms of our requirement to document what we own as a church. Could someone speak to that, please? Supervisor McNamara stated generally speaking the Board does not have interaction with the speakers during the actual speaking. Pastor Palmer then asked if he could state his questions and then be allowed to have a follow-up. Chairman McNamara stated, “No, but you can certainly state your questions and we can respond January 10, 2017 7 to them after.” Pastor Palmer stated assuming that it is comprehensive, how would you then determine what purposes are religious and which are business because the scriptures tell us, “To do all things for the glory of God,” in First Corinthians 10:31 and is the County prepared to become an arbiter of what is a substantial business purpose versus a religious purpose? Are you prepared to tell him that selling a hot latte at cost and compensating a student worker who does that but makes no profit on that does not facilitate fellowship and worship in our congregation and are you prepared to defend that in a Court of law? Are you saying that all nonprofit assemblies that met in Roanoke County must provide an itemized list of their property and its purpose to gather and worship as they choose in Roanoke County and are you prepared to defend that statement in a Court of law? These are important questions because we sell t-shirts at North Roanoke Baptist Church, the proceeds of which go to underwrite mission trips right here in the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke and around the world. Every dollar that we generate at North Roanoke, we generate for the purpose of blessing others in Jesus’ name. We do it to serve meals at no charge to teachers at Burlington Elementary School. We do it to do backpack buddy programs. We do it to be a blessing to our neighbors and we are convinced that giving a cup of cold water in Jesus’ name is what we have been commanded to do and he does not know what all that entails but he does know that providing an itemized list to the County of what we own and what we do with it is not the County’s purview and not the County’s business and it will provide substantial limitations on our ability to fulfill our God-given mandate and mission and he knows that to the extent that he knows what property means, which is why he would love to be able to respond. He urged the Board to not only if the answers to these questions are as he suspects them to be, he urges the Board to not only to table this, but to dismiss it and to vote in the portion that brings in your policy in alignment with the State on the timetable, but to get out of the business of knowing how many t-shirts we own and how many reams of paper and how many computers we have and how many church buses we have to go visit the nursing homes and sing Christmas carols. It does the County no benefit and it certainly does not benefit your churches, which are trying to do their best to serve this community the best they can and to raise the flag and banner of our Lord Jesus Christ. Supervisor Hooker stated she thought there were some good questions raised there and she guesses what she wants to know is have there been any substantial changes in that portion of this documents that says itemizing what is a business and what is a non-profit. Has any of that really changed through this process or is it just the timeline that has changed? Mr. Lubeck advised that there is a change in that the prior ordinance that allowed the County to give taxpayers notice, an opportunity to fill out the application was only going to address real property it did not address personal property. So, the changes do encompass the taxpayer needing to fill out information about all personal property as well. Supervisor Hooker stated that is not January 10, 2017 8 getting in line with the State and is something that we make a decision on at the County level. Mr. Lubeck responded affirmatively and added the State Code also provides for the County to do that. Supervisor Bedrosian asked for clarification when we are saying the taxpayer, we are saying for tax-exempt entities. The language is pretty specific. How is it determined what is religious and what is not, how would we determine? Mr. Lubeck responded that is governed by the Code of Virginia, Section 58.1-3606, which is a long statute that details what is exempt by classification by the General Assembly, i.e. churches and property exclusively owned by churches for religious purposes is tax exempt by classification. The issue is when churches get into the other businesses by doing things for profit. From time to time, we understand that churches are beginning to do that. In speaking with the Commissioner of Revenue, after the last hearing with the Board of Supervisors, he spoke with the Commissioner about her intentions with regard to this new ordinance if adopted by the Board. The Commissioner is of the opinion that she would not send this out to any churches. This application renewal would be sent out only to churches that she has received information that would justify sending out this notification. Supervisor Bedrosian stated you mentioned the State has definitions for what is tax-exempt. Churches are classified as tax-exempt, correct. Mr. Lubeck responded in the affirmative. Supervisor Bedrosian stated so if they are classified as tax-exempt why are we going into a tax-exempt entity and now saying you are tax- exempt, but we need a list of all your personal property and give us your specific use. The push back he would get is that we do not intend to do that. It is his contention that it needs to be stated exactly. He is looking at the verbiage right now and again we go back to the same thing that we are giving the authority “may or shall” for the Commissioner of Revenue to ask for an application on personal property. We are saying that the Commissioner has the authority to do this, no matter what we intend. He stated he thinks that is a very good discussion about churches opening up café bars, gymnasiums and charging, he gets it and one of the speakers said we need to talk about it. He thinks that is a great discussion. We should talk about it. We should bring pastors and churches in and talk about this before we put something on the books in Roanoke County. He could see a very good discussion on should you really be operating a gym and charging and competing as a private sector. The other side could say that is how they outreach to the community. He understands both those arguments. Supervisor McNamara requested that a motion be on the table before discussion and concentrate on any questions about understanding the ordinance at this point. Supervisor Bedrosian stated that is what we are doing. Why are we doing this? They are classified as tax-exempt. Mr. Lubeck stated they are tax-exempt when January 10, 2017 9 they use the property as allowed. Supervisor Bedrosian stated no one has a problem with real estate and the problem we are now having is why are we taking it to the second level asking “may or shall” to itemize personal property. Chairman McNamara stated we are asking the County Attorney why we are doing this when it is the Board that decides and asked for a motion. Supervisor Assaid moved approval of the ordinance; Supervisor McNamara seconded the motion and opened the floor for discussion. Supervisor Bedrosian stated you are correct the County Attorney does not state what we can or cannot do, it is true that it is our business. We need to have a very good discussion here because what in front of us today has been put together without our input. It was just presented and is not sure who on this Board initiated the fact that we should now ask churches and tax-exempt organizations for their personal property. He did not bring it up and does not know of who on this Board brought it up. If we are saying we are the body that makes these decisions, why were not involved in this decision? Why did we not round table this discussion before it is in front of us to vote on/ Supervisor McNamara stated we have turned this into something that it is not. This is not a witch hunt to go after churches that are selling t-shirts for $10 to go on mission trips; that is not what this is all about. It is really about bringing Roanoke County in line with the State of Virginia. Why was this not discussed before? We oftentimes have items that he would consider as housekeeping issues that bring our ordinances in line with the Commonwealth of Virginia. He does not view this as anti- church. Why personal property? We want to be fair to all taxpayers. So, as an example, we have quickly turned this into a church issue, but it is also any type of entity that the State or the Board of Supervisors has granted they can be tax exempt. As an example, what if there is a nursing home that is by statute of the State tax-exempt gets into and there is talk of this, the pharmacy business because one they can supply their existing residents, but also make it available to the community. Should we not have tools to identify what properties that are being used for a pharmacy/for profit business as opposed to what tools and products that are being used for the nonprofit business, which are appropriately tax exempt as based on the Commonwealth of Virginia. He thinks this is turning into something that it is not. By the way, the Commissioner of the Revenue is also an elected position and is not a bureaucrat per say, but one that answers to the people every four years. He thinks there is plenty of protection there that this is not all about a witch hunt. He thinks it is about having the tools to effectively and fairly leave tax-exempt property, which should be tax-exempt personal property that should not be tax exempt because it is being used for profit and is being taxed appropriately. Supervisor Peters commented he understands that this is trying to bring us back into State Code and appreciates Mr. Lubeck’s work, but he has a problem January 10, 2017 10 moving to a three-year for the real estate, but he shares some concerns over what is the personal property and how is that laid out. He does not believe that just because the State does it does not mean we have to. There are two different issues to be discussed: first, the timeline which would bring us in line and secondly as we examine the personal property there needs to be a greater discussion. Supervisor Hooker stated she thinks another stumbling point is the word “profit.” So, when churches get into the business of trying to turn a profit, they may be turning a profit by selling t-shirts for another mission or something, but is that really for a business or is that to further the mission of that church. She feels that is where it gets tricky because she understands and appreciates what Mr. McNamara saying regarding making it a level is playing field for businesses and churches. Somehow they are competing with gyms use, etc. She does struggle with that word “profit” because they may be making money on an item and at the same time going for furthering the mission of the church. She is struggling with that. Chairman McNamara asked Supervisor Assaid if he wished to modify his motion to require the triennial application of real property without including the personal property. Supervisor Assaid responded in the negative. Supervisor Bedrosian stated he thinks that is good point when bringing up what these entities are selling and could it be construed as personal property. Under a church, there are a lot of things they sell and do go back into the church for the furtherance of the church rules and becomes a very sticky issue. He has heard the folks that have spoken today and has not heard anybody say let’s not discuss this further, which he thinks is a good thing. We are representatives of the people and he would like at a further time for us to really discuss this issue, because he thinks there are some legitimate things. He is very open to having a work session and bring in people from our community, hear what they have to say and let them tell us. Also as you look through some of this stuff we are proposing to say yes to, there are three items, A,B,C and basically A & B talk about what we are trying to do here, but C says that any entity failing to comply with all and singular terms and provisions of this section shall lose his entitlement to personal property tax exemption. We are a government trying to govern and that kind of language that would punish people for not complying with one or all of these things, right away they lose their tax exempt status. He thinks this needs a lot of work to make it something that is fair and equitable and something that is reasonable and thinks that we ought to concentrate on. He could offer a motion that we table it and have a work session. Supervisor McNamara removed his second thereby removing the motion from the floor. Supervisor Peters stated this is not just a conversation about churches, but about all nonprofits and how this will affect everyone. A great conversation would January 10, 2017 11 be warranted. He does support bringing the real estate into the triennial cycle and moved to adopt the ordinance with only the triennial information. ORDINANCE 011017-3 AMENDING CHAPTER 21, ARTICLE III, SECTION 21-39 OF THE ROANOKE COUNTY CODE, REQUIRING TAX EXEMPT ENTITIES TO REESTABLISH ELIGIBILITY FOR TAX EXEMPT STATUS OF REAL PROPERTY ON A TRIENNIAL BASIS WHEREAS, Section 58.1-3605 of the Code of Virginia, which was last updated in 1995, authorizes a locality to adopt an ordinance requiring tax exempt entities to file applications, triennially, to reestablish their eligibility for tax exempt status for real property; and WHEREAS, the Roanoke County Code, which was enacted in 1983, is inconsistent with the Code of Virginia because it requires tax exempt entities to file applications, biennially, to reestablish their eligibility for tax exempt status for real property; and WHEREAS, the first reading of this ordinance was held on December 6, 2016; and the second reading was held on December 20, 2016 and on January 10, 2017. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: 1. That Section 21-39 of Chapter 21, Article III of the County Code is hereby amended as follows: Triennial reestablishment of exempt status. Sec. 21-39 (a) Any person, firm, corporation or other legal entity, except the commonwealth, any political subdivision thereof or the United States, owning real estate situate, lying and being in the county, which real estate is exempt from local taxation pursuant to chapter 36, title 58.1 (§ 58.1-3600 et seq.), of the Code of Virginia, shall file triennially an application with the commissioner of revenue as a requirement for retention of the exempt status of the property. . (b) Each person, firm, corporation or other legal entity subject to subsection (a) above shall be given sixty (60) days' written notice, by the office of the commissioner of the revenue, of the requirement to reestablish exempt status, and thereafter shall file an application, on a form obtained from the office of the commissioner of the revenue, listing each piece or parcel of real estate claimed to be exempt. Such application shall contain, among other information, the exact legal name of the owner of such property and the precise usage of the pieces or parcels of real estate claimed to be exempt. The application shall be January 10, 2017 12 filed on or before December 31 of the year immediately preceding the triennial period for which such exemption is sought to be reestablished. (c) Any person, firm, corporation or other legal entity failing to comply with all and singular the terms and provisions of this section shall lose his or its entitlement to real estate tax exempt status for the triennial period for which such reestablishment does not occur as herein provided. (Ord. No. 83-83, § 1,5-12-83; Ord. No. 011017-3, 1-10-2017) State Law reference – Authority for above section, Code of Virginia, § 58.1-3605. 2. That any provision of the Roanoke County Code not specifically amended above shall remain in full force and effect as adopted. 3. That this ordinance shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage. On motion of Supervisor Peters to adopt the ordinance, seconded by Supervisor Hooker and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: Supervisor Assaid IN RE: CONSENT AGENDA RESOLUTION 011017-4 APPROVING AND CONCURRING IN CERTAIN ITEMS SET FORTH ON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AGENDA FOR THIS DATE DESIGNATED AS ITEM I- CONSENT AGENDA BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County, Virginia, as follows: That the certain section of the agenda of the Board of Supervisors for January 10, 2017, designated as Item I - Consent Agenda be, and hereby is, approved and concurred in as to each item separately set forth in said section designated Items 1 through 8 inclusive, as follows: 1. Approval of minutes – December 6, 2016 2. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to James E. Bowles, Combination Code Compliance Inspector, upon his retirement after over thirty-one (31) years of service 3. Resolution expressing the appreciation of the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County to Victoria A. Webb, Security Specialist, upon her retirement after over forty-three (43) years of service 4. Request to accept donation of Ballistic Vest for Police Department K9 January 10, 2017 13 5. Request to accept donation of Ballistic Vest for Police Department K9 6. Request to accept and allocate grant funds in the amount of $5,000 from the Virginia Commission for the Arts (VCA) for the Local Government Challenge Grant for fiscal year 2016-2017 7. Confirmation of appointment terms on the Western Virginia Regional Industrial Facility Authority 8. Confirmation of appointment to the Planning Commission (District) On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 011017-4.a EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO JAMES E. BOWLES, COMBINATION CODE COMPLIANCE INSPECTOR, UPON HIS RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN THIRTY-ONE (31) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, James E. Bowles was employed by Roanoke County on February 10, 1985; and WHEREAS, Mr. Bowles retired on January 1, 2017, after thirty-one years and eleven months of devoted, faithful and expert service to Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, during Mr. Bowles tenure in the Community Development, he has served as Building Inspector-Engineering & Inspections; Assistant Building Official; Building Inspector-Construction; Combination Code Compliance Inspector; and as Acting Building Commissioner with professionalism and dedication in providing services to the citizens of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, during Mr. Bowles time with Roanoke County, he was certified by the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development as a building official; and certified by the Department of Conservation and Recreation as an Erosion and Sediment Control Inspector. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the appreciation of the citizens JAMES E. BOWLES of Roanoke County to for more than thirty-one (31)years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote: January 10, 2017 14 AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None RESOLUTION 011017-4.b EXPRESSING THE APPRECIATION OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ROANOKE COUNTY TO VICTORIA A. WEBB, SECURITY SPECIALIST, UPON HER RETIREMENT AFTER MORE THAN FORTY-THREE (43) YEARS OF SERVICE WHEREAS, Victoria A. Webb was employed by Roanoke County on June 11, 1973; and WHEREAS, Ms. Webb will retire on January 1, 2017, after forty-three years and seven months of devoted, faithful and expert service to Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, during Ms. Webb’s tenure with the County, which began with the School Board, then moved to the then Data Processing Department as County staff. Over the course of her distinguished career she has served as a Key Punch Operator, Computer Operator, Computer Operations Supervisor, and Security Specialist with professionalism and dedication in providing services to the citizens of Roanoke County; and WHEREAS, during Ms. Webb’s time with Roanoke County she served in two major areas in Information Technology - Computer Operations and User Security. Managing both a daylight and evening shift, she supervised the efficient processing of all printing of products for the critical business systems such as staff payrolls, and citizen Personal Property and Real Estate tax statements. Serving as the System Administrator for the County mainframe computer she was responsible for all data backup and recovery. As technology advanced she was instrumental in the establishment of the County Technical Contact Program, putting power into the user’s hands and preventing the need for additional staff on a traditional Help Desk. She managed the County’s work order system for tracking computer issues and assets, providing positive control on approximately a million dollars in assets. Ms. Webb was key to the successful migration of the legacy mainframe to client-server computing. As the County’s first IT Security Specialist she implemented the County's first security awareness program, critical to the prevention of cyberattacks. She also established processes, policies and guidelines to improve efficiencies and enhance many of the County's security processes. WHEREAS, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Roanoke County expresses its deepest appreciation and the VICTORIA A. WEBB appreciation of the citizens of Roanoke County to for more than forty-three (43) years of capable, loyal and dedicated service to Roanoke County; and January 10, 2017 15 FURTHER, the Board of Supervisors does express its best wishes for a happy and productive retirement. On motion of Supervisor McNamara to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None A-011017-4.c A-011017-4.d A-011017-4.e A-011017-4.f A-011017-4.g IN RE: REPORTS Supervisor McNamara moved to receive and file the following reports. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None 1. Unappropriated, Board Contingency and Capital Reserves Report 2. Outstanding Debt IN RE: REPORTS AND INQUIRIES OF BOARD MEMBERS Supervisor Bedrosian stated he appreciates when we have folks come to speak on issues. We are not a democracy and we need to discuss and talk about these things. He looks forward to the New Year. For those that may be watching on television or here for the first time, it is so important to him that everybody make it a new year’s resolution that you at least attend once a year. If everybody in Roanoke County attended one time a year, we would have the place filled every time. We have 95,000 citizens; bring your children and just come one time. Make that your obligation and it will be a wonderful thing as hearing from people is awesome. Finally, as he always does, he would like to strongly urge the United Way to stop funding Planned Parenthood. He hears this a lot from citizens with whom he interacts with because he is strong pro-life. As a government we help support United Way, which in turn helps and supports Planned January 10, 2017 16 Parenthood and the only way that will stop is if the people of Roanoke County and us, government, put a little pressure on. Do all the wonderful other things that you do, but stop giving money to Planned Parenthood. Supervisor Hooker noted appreciation to Mr. Peters for a good year, thanking him for his work. Supervisor Peters expressed his appreciation to the Board for their support this past year as they accomplished many things. His wife and two children were here earlier and he failed to recognize them when the resolution was being presented. When you are in the position and have a lot going on and a lot of events to attend, they are the ones that are left behind. He appreciates their support actually the last two years. Also, as he ended most of his meetings and cannot help but look at the consent agenda where we have two people retiring from the County and those two people alone have 74 years of service and thinks that is wonderful. We had a long weekend, a lot of snow and ice and there is a lot still out there, but appreciates all of our public safety, sheriff’s department, parks and recreation. Thanks to all of our employees for everything they do. He is looking forward to a great year. Supervisor McNamara apologized for not noticing Mr. Peters’ wife and children because he would have definitely welcomed them up at the podium and the picture would have been far better with them in it. IN RE: CLOSED MEETING At 4:07 p.m., Supervisor McNamara moved to go into closed meeting following the work sessions pursuant to the Code of Virginia Section 2.2-3711 A .3. To discuss the acquisition of real property for a public purpose, where discussion in an open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body and Section 2.2-3711.A.1. To discuss and consider the performance of specific public officers or employees, namely the County Administrator and Section 2.2-3711.A.1. To discuss and consider the performance of specific public officers or employees, namely the County Attorney. The motion was seconded by Supervisor Assaid and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara NAYS: None The closed session was held from 5:28 p.m. until 8:22 p.m. January 10, 2017 17 Chairman McNamara recessed to the fourth floor for work session and closed meeting at 4:08 p.m. IN RE: WORK SESSIONS 1. Work session to discuss transportation funding issues with the Board of Supervisors (Tori Williams, Planner II) The work session was held from 4:27 pm until 5:13 p.m. Mr. Thomas Gates, County Administrator gave a brief introduction and turned the meeting over to Mr. Williams who provided a PowerPoint presentation. Mr. Gates gave a wrap-up and called attention to page 43, with regard to the Woodhaven property and 419 that will require new investment. These are long- term funding efforts. He asked the Board to keep that in mind as they talk about transportation funding and transportation needs. Transportation dollars are limited, it becomes the case of who can best position themselves. Important to understand the complexity and associate that with the needs that we expect to have to sustain and grow our economic base. Supervisor Assaid inquired as to the threshold for our own Transportation Authority. Mr. Williams advised it is based on population, DMV numbers and transit ridership numbers, however, even combined with the New River Valley and Martinsville, we are nowhere close to meeting the threshold and the Code section would need to be changed. IN RE: CERTIFICATION RESOLUTION At 8:22 p.m., Chairman McNamara moved to return to open session and adopt the certification resolution and was seconded by Supervisor Peters. RESOLUTION 011017-5 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. 18 January 10, 2017 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 McNamara to adopt the resolution, seconded by Supervisor Peters and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Supervisors Assaid, Bedrosian, Hooker, Peters, McNamara ,, NAYS: None IN RE: ADJOURNMENT Chairman McNamara adjourned the meeting at 8:23 p.m. ubmitted by: Approved by: i , ,1144 , ,or),c,,o„_.____ ,... Ieborah C. 1 . - Fph P. McNamara Chief Depu erk to the Board rman