HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 06-03-02 HUDSON
35888-060302
R O,4NOKE CITY CO UNCIL
RE G UL,4R SESSION
JUNE 3, 2002
12:lS P. M.
CITY COUNCIL CH,4MBER
,4 GEND,4 FOR THE COUNCIL
1. Call to Order--Roll Call.
A communication from Council Member C. Nelson Harris, Chair, City
Council's Personnel Committee, requesting that Council meet in Closed
Meeting to discuss the performance of five Council-Appointed Officers,
pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)( 1 ), Code of Virginia ( 1950), as amended.
(Approved 7-0)
File #110-132
THE MEETING WAS DECLARED IN RECESS TO BE
IMMEDIATELY RECONVENED IN THE COUNCIL'S CONFERENCE
ROOM FOR ONE CLOSED SESSION.
ROANOKE CITY CO UNCIL
REGULAR SESSION
JUNE 3, 2002
2:00P. M.
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL
Call to Order--Roll Call.
The Invocation was delivered by The Reverend Fred Fryar, Pastor,
Grace and Truth Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America
was led by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
Welcome. Mayor Smith.
NOTICE:
Meetings of Roanoke City Council are televised live on RVTV Channel 3.
Today's meeting will be replayed on Channel 3 on Thursday, June 6, 2002, at
7:00 p.m., and Saturday, June 8, 2002, at 4:00 p.m. Council meetings are now
being offered with closed captioning for the hearing impaired.
2
ANNOUNCEMENTS:
THE PUBLIC IS ADVISED THAT MEMBERS OF COUNCIL RECEIVE
THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA AND RELATED
COMMUNICATIONS, REPORTS, ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS, ETC., ON THE THURSDAY PRIOR TO THE
COUNCIL MEETING TO PROVIDE SUFFICIENT TIME FOR
REVIEW OF INFORMATION. CITIZENS WHO ARE INTERESTED
IN OBTAINING A COPY OF ANY ITEM LISTED ON THE AGENDA
MAY CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE, ROOM 456, NOEL C.
TAYLOR MUNICIPAL BUILDING, 215 CHURCH AVENUE, S. W., OR
CALL 853-2541.
THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE NOW PROVIDES THE MAJORITY OF
THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA ON THE INTERNET FOR VIEWING
AND RESEARCH PURPOSES. TO ACCESS AGENDA MATERIAL,
GO TO THE CITY'S HOMEPAGE AT WWW.ROANOKEGOV.COM,
CLICK ON THE ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL ICON, CLICK ON
MEETINGS AND AGENDAS, AND DOWNLOAD THE ADOBE
ACROBAT SOFTWARE TO ACCESS THE AGENDA.
ALL PERSONS WISHING TO ADDRESS COUNCIL ARE
REQUESTED TO REGISTER WITH THE STAFF ASSISTANT WHO
IS LOCATED AT THE ENTRANCE TO THE COUNCIL CHAMBER.
ON THE SAME AGENDA ITEM, ONE TO FOUR SPEAKERS WILL BE
ALLOTTED FIVE MINUTES EACH, HOWEVER, IF THERE ARE
MORE THAN FOUR SPEAKERS, EACH SPEAKER WILL BE
ALLOTTED THREE MINUTES.
ANY PERSON WHO IS INTERESTED IN SERVING ON A CITY
COUNCIL APPOINTED AUTHORITY, BOARD, COMMISSION OR
COMMITTEE IS REQUESTED TO CONTACT THE CITY CLERK'S
OFFICE AT 853-2541 TO OBTAIN AN APPLICATION.
2. PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
None.
3
e
CONSENT AGENDA
C-1
C-2
(APPROVED 7-0)
ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE
CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE MEMBERS OF CITY
COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION. THERE
WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THE ITEMS. IF
DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THE ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM
THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
Minutes of the regular meeting of City Council held on Monday,
April 15, 2002, and recessed until Thursday, April 18, 2002; and a special
meeting of City Council held on Monday, April 29, 2002.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Dispense with the reading thereof and
approve as recorded.
A communication from the City Manager recommending that a public
hearing be advertised for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, in connection with a lease agreement
with Orvis Roanoke, Inc., for City-owned property located at 11 Campbell
Avenue, S. E., commonly known as the Market Square Parking Garage.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Concur in recommendation.
File #166-373-516-553
C-3
A communication from Gilbert E. Butler, Jr., Secretary, Roanoke City
Electoral Board, transmitting an Abstract of Votes cast in the General Election
held in the City of Roanoke on May 7, 2002.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
File #40-132
C-4
A communication from Mayor Ralph K. Smith requesting a Closed
Meeting to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and
committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Concur in request.
File #110-132
4
C-5
A communication from the City Manager requesting a Closed Meeting
to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, pursuant to Section 2.2-
3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Concur in request.
File #2-166
C-6
Qualification of the following persons:
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., as a Commissioner of the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to fill the
unexpired term of Willis M. Anderson, deceased, ending
August 31, 2002; and
James H. Smith as a member of the Youth Services Citizen
Board for a term ending May 31, 2005.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
File #15-110-178-304
REGULAR AGENDA
4. PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
5. PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
A communication from Council Member William D. Bestpitch in
connection with amendments and an addition to the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, with regard to the Budget and Planning
Committee, the Personnel Committee and the Legislative Committee.
Adopted Ordinance No. 35888-060302. (7-0.)
File #24-60-110-132-137
6. REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
a. CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
A communication in connection with funding for the Fifth
District Employment and Training Consortium.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 35889-060302. (7-0.)
File//60-246
A communication recommending acceptance of a bid submitted
by Adams Construction Co., for paving various streets and raising
manholes, in the amount of $2,034,202.55; rejecting all other bids
received by the City; and appropriation of funds in connection
therewith.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 35890-060302 and Ordinance
No. 35891-060302. (7-0.)
File//60-514
o
A communication recommending acceptance of a bid submitted
by Griffin Pipe Products for purchase of ductile iron water pipe,
in an amount not to exceed $148,688.50; and rejecting all other
bids received by the City.
Adopted Resolution No. 35892-060302. (7-0.)
File//468-472
A communication with regard to bids received by the City for
water and wastewater treatment chemicals.
Adopted Resolution No. 35893-060302. (7-0.)
File//468
6
o
A communication recommending acceptance of a bid submitted
by Smith Turf and Irrigation Co., for one 16-foot rotary mower to
be used in the Parks and Recreation Department, in the amount of
$68,107.00; rejecting a bid submitted by Boone and Becker
Implement, Inc., for a tractor and articulated boom mower, in the
amount of $95,867.33; and rejecting all other bids received by the
City on the abovedescribed equipment.
Adopted Resolution No. 35894-060302. (7-0.)
File//67-472
A communication recommending execution of a grant agreement
with the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles for a
Driver/Occupant Awareness Grant, in the amount of$ ! 5,000.00;
and appropriation of funds in connection therewith.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 35895-060302 and Resolution
No. 35896-060302. (7-0.)
File//5-20-60-236
A communication recommending approval of the Hotel Roanoke
Conference Center Commission annual budget for fiscal year
2002-03, totaling $250,000.00; and appropriation of funds, in
connection therewith.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 35897-060302 and Resolution
No. 35898-060302. (7-0.)
File//60-110-247
o
A joint communication from the City Manager and the Director
of Finance recommending transfer of funds between various
accounts within the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Projects and
Series 2002 Public Improvements Bond Reserve Account.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 35899-060302. (6-0, Mayor
Smith abstained from voting.)
File//60-237
7
A communication recommending execution of an amendment to
an agreement with the Art Museum of Westem Virginia to
provide for an extension of time for performance of certain
actions to be taken.
Adopted Resolution No. 35900-060302. (7-0.)
File #416
b. DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
Financial report for the month of April 2002.
Received and filed.
File #1-10
Council Member White offered a recommendation that the
Mayor's Office schedule informal meetings with the City's
delegation to the General Assembly and Council Members to
discuss revenue/funding issues.
File #60-132-137
A report recommending appropriation of funds, in connection
with CDBG/HOME program income from the Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority and CDBG miscellaneous
program income.
Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 35901-060302. (6-0, Council
Member Wyatt was out of the Council Chamber when the
vote was recorded.)
File #60-178-200
7. REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
8. UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
9.INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF
ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
8
10. MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor, Vice-Mayor and Members of
City Council.
Council Member White called attention to inquiries regarding the
issue of screen doors at the Lincoln Terrace Housing Development;
whereupon, David E. Baldwin, Director of Special Projects,
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, advised that an
agreement has been reached with the Resident Council that the
Housing Authority will install initially, as funding is available,
screen doors on the back doors of apartments, and if funds become
available in the future, consideration will be given to installing
screen doors on the front of apartments. He stated that the Housing
Authority has also concurred in a recommendation of the Resident
Council to provide preference initially to senior citizens residing at
Lincoln Terrace.
File #66-178
Council Member Hudson referred to the loss of water pressure in
the northwest area of the City over the weekend as a result of the
storm that occurred on Saturday, June 1. He called attention to a
report that the City's one and only tanker was out of service, and
inquired as to the status of the tanker. The City Manager explained
that the water pressure problem was the result of an air leak at one
of the pumping stations which was caused by a valve that did not
automatically open. She advised that she would respond at a later
time to Mr. Hudson's inquiry regarding the status of the tanker.
File #65-66-70-468
Vice-Mayor Carder addressed the issue of cellular telephones and
requested that the matter of prohibiting the use of cellular
telephones while operating a motor vehicle in the City of Roanoke,
be referred to the City's Legislative Committee for study, report
and recommendation.
File #20-137-383
Mr. Carder spoke as a citizen and business person working in the
downtown Roanoke area. He referred to instances during the past
four years when the streets surrounding the Patrick Henry Hotel
have been barricaded for Festival in the Park activities, resulting in
inconvenience to hotel staff and patrons and loss of revenue to the
hotel. He stated that by discussing the matter publicly, it is hoped
that the City will review parade permits, city wide, to ensure that
area businesses are properly and timely notified of street closings.
File #66-169-277-352-514
Council Member Wyatt referred to an article in The Roanoke Times
on Monday, June 3, 2002, comparing, among other things, Roanoke
City and Roanoke County with regard to education expenditures.
She explained that the newspaper article reports a disparity
between the amount of funds that Roanoke City spends for
education (24 per cent), as opposed to Roanoke County (49 per cent)
of the budget. She explained that Roanoke County receives state
subsidized road, street maintenance and snow removal funds, as
compared to the City of Roanoke which fully funds such services.
Also, she stated that the City of Roanoke funds a full-time Fire
Department, compared to a large percentage of the County's Fire
Department being staffed by volunteers, all of which points out that
there is a disparity in funding.
File #60-70-410-467-514
Council Member Wyatt called attention to concerns expressed by
parents with regard to City of Roanoke high school graduation
ceremonies being held in the Auditorium at the Roanoke Civic
Center, which limits the number of guests per graduate. She
suggested that the matter be referred to the next joint meeting of
Council and the Roanoke City School Board for discussion.
File #110-192-467
Council Member Wyatt requested a report on the City's Pay for
Performance Program, i.e.; a comparison between 2001-02 of
percentages within departments, number of persons in departments,
and changes in ratings, etc.
File #18-184
l0
Council Member Wyatt requested that Council approve
July 5, 2002, as a floating holiday for City employees. It was the
consensus of Council to refer the matter to the City Manager for
report and preparation of the proper measure for consideration by
Council at its next regular meeting on Monday, June 17, 2001.
File #184
Council Member Wyatt referred to a communication from a County
resident forwarding copy of a newspaper article from The Sunday
Gazette, Schenectady, New York, regarding the assets of the
Roanoke City Market.
File #42
Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees
appointed by Council.
11. CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
The City Manager presented copy of a publication entitled, "Every Drop
Counts," which was included in a recent edition of The Roanoke Times,
and sponsored by The Roanoke Times, True Value Hardware, and the
City of Roanoke. She advised that the publication was given to every child
in the Roanoke City School system, encouraging them to participate in a
contest and to learn at an early age the importance of water as a natural
resource.
File #467-468
The City Manager referred to the remarks of Council Member Wyatt
concerning the newspaper article comparing Roanoke City and Roanoke
County in regard to disparity in funding. She advised that in addition to
the percentages of funding and differences in services, it should be noted
that the City of Roanoke's minimum hourly rate for employees has been
increased and represents a higher entry level hourly rate than Roanoke
County offers to its employees.
File #60-184-467
The City Manager advised that several years ago, the State initiated law
enforcement funding in exchange for a decision that cities would no longer
annex properties, which limited the City of Roanoke's ability to secure
land for additional economic development purposes. She stated that
although the State has not kept pace with educational funding and other
types of funding, it has provided funds for law enforcement.
File #5-60-450-467
The City Manager referred to remarks of Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel with
regard to the stadium/amphitheater project, and clarified that of the
$9 million referenced in a recent newspaper article, only a small portion
is directly related to the stadium/amphitheater project, and the $9 million
refers to all projects included in the City's approved Capital
Improvements Program.
File #122-192
12. HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS:
CITY COUNCIL SETS THIS TIME AS A PRIORITY FOR CITIZENS
TO BE HEARD. IT IS ALSO A TIME FOR INFORMAL DIALOGUE
BETWEEN COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITIZENS. MATTERS
REQUIRING REFERRAL TO THE CITY MANAGER WILL BE
REFERRED IMMEDIATELY FOR ANY NECESSARY AND
APPROPRIATE RESPONSE, RECOMMENDATION OR REPORT TO
COUNCIL.
Mr. Robert D. Gravely, 619 Hanover Avenue, N. W., addressed Council
with regard to lack of funding for City services/programs, cleanliness of
the City, the City's high crime rate, and the need for more jobs for young
people.
File #66
Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., addressed Council with
regard to respect for each other and for the citizens of the City of
Roanoke. She advised that the refuse collection issue has not been
resolved, and the new refuse collection program is not working in the
northwest section of the City. She asked that Council help citizens,
specifically, Mr. Michael Wells who is a small businessman, and if there
are issues of concern in connection with his business, they should be
addressed with the appropriate persons.
File #51-66-144
Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., expressed concern that the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority received over $20 million
for rehabilitation of Lincoln Terrace apartments; however, the Housing
Authority advises that there are not sufficient funds to provide screen
doors for both the front and back doors of Lincoln Terrace apartments.
She stated that screen doors are a necessity for health and safety purposes,
and spoke in support of the City intervening by providing screen doors for
Lincoln Terrace residents. She referred to a recent newspaper article
advising that over $9 million will be expended for consulting fees for a
stadium/amphitheater project; and inquired if citizens have been properly
notified of informal meetings to receive input regarding the issue. She
requested that the $9 million be withdrawn and that plans for the
stadium/amphitheater project also be withdrawn until meetings are held
to properly inform citizens.
File #66-122-178-192
M. Rupert Cutler, Council Member-Elect, addressed Council in
connection with a communication from the City Manager and the Director
of Finance recommending the transfer of funds between various accounts
within the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Projects and Series 2002
Public Improvements Bond Reserve Account. He expressed concern
regarding the environmental impact of the Roanoke River Flood
Reduction Project, and asked that before Council makes an irreversible
commitment to the U. S. Army Corp of Engineers' structural approach to
reducing future flood peaks on the Roanoke River and its tributaries in
Roanoke, that Council again review non-structural alternatives that would
save the River's beauty and recreation value, including its value for
canoeing and fishing. He advised that the City is discussing the issue of
creating a Regional Water Authority, and asked that regional flood
reduction planning be included, within the purview of the authority, to
provide citizens with the most efficient, least environmentally damaging
means of addressing all of the City's water related responsibilities.
File #53-60-237-468
The meeting was declared in recess for continuation of the Closed Session.
CERTIFICATION OF CLOSED SESSION. (Approved 5-0, Council
Members Harris and White were absent.)
The following persons were appointed/reappointed to various boards,
commissions and committees:
Fair Housing Board
File g110-178
Sherman V. Burroughs, 1V, for a
term ending March 31, 2003.
Personnel and Employment
Practices Commission
File gl 10-202
I. B. Heinemann and Lylburn D.
Moore, Jr., for terms ending June 30,
2005.
Roanoke Arts Commission
File gl 10-230
Frank J. Eastburn, Anna S.
Wentworth, and Mary S. Neal for
terms ending June 30, 2005.
Virginia Western Community
College, Board of Directors
File gl 10-467
Harriet S. Lewis for a term ending
June 30, 2006.
Towing Advisory Board
File g5-110-530
Robert R. Young and Christine
Proffitt for terms ending June 30,
2005.
City of Roanoke Pension
Plan, Board of Trustees
File gl 10-429
David C. Key for a term ending June
30, 2006, D. Duane Dixon and Cyril
J. Goens for terms ending June 30,
2004.
Board of Fire Appeals
File g70-110
Harry F. Collins, Sr., and John C.
Moody, Jr., for terms ending June,
30, 2006.
Roanoke Valley Greenway
Commission
File gl 10-379
Barry W. Baird for a term ending
June 30, 2005.
14
Roanoke Public Library Board
File gl 10-323
Roland H. Macher and Stanley G.
Breakell for terms ending June 30,
2005.
Human Services Committee
File g72-110
Margaret C. Thompson, Evelyn F.
Board, Judy O. Jackson, Cynthia S.
Bryant, and Glenn D. Radcliffe for
terms ending June 30, 2003.
Flood Plain Committee
File gl 10-237
Lucian Y. Grove, Kathy S. Hill,
Mack D. Cooper, II, E. L. Noell,
Dennis Tinsley, Read A. Lunsford,
Edgar V. Wheeler, and Sandra B.
Kelly for terms ending June 30, 2003.
War Memorial Committee
File gl 10-518
Alfred C. Moore for a term ending
June 30, 2003.
Mill Mountain Advisory
Committee
File g67-110
Steven Higgs, Richard Clark, Eddie
Wallace, Jr., Betty Field and Michael
A. Loveman for terms ending
June 30, 2003.
Special Events Committee
File gl 10-317
Estelle H. McCadden, David W.
Davis, III, William X Parsons,
Dorothy L. Bull, Rodney E. Lewis,
Amy W. Peck, Linda Gravely,
Sherley E. Stuart, Kathy Wilson,
Sabrina T. Law, H. Marie
Muddiman, Cynthia D. Jennings,
and Gloria Elliot for terms ending
June 30, 2003.
Roanoke Valley Area
Metropolitan Planning
Organization
File #110-407
William D. Bestpitch and Sherman
A. Holland for terms ending June 30,
2005.
Council voted to waive the City residency requirement for Harry F.
Collins, Sr., as a member of the Board of Fire Appeals; and Gloria Elliot
as a member of the Special Events Committee.
File #70-110-317
Mayor
CITY OF ROANOKE
CITY COUNCIL
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
June 3,2002
Council Members:
William D. Bestpitch
William H. Carder
C. Nelson Harris
W. Alvin Hudson, Jr.
William White, Sr.
Linda F. Wyatt
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of Council:
I wish to request a Closed Meeting to discuss the performance of five Council-Appointed
Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
Sincerely,
C. Nelson Harris, Chair
City Council Personnel Committee
CNH:sm
N:\cksml~Agenda.O2\Closed Session on Performance Evaluations.wpd
C-1
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 15, 2002
12:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
April 15, 2002 at 12:00 p.m., in the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibition Hall, City of
Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor Ralph K. Smith presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2,
Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1,
Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Resolution
No. 35798-040101 adopted by the Council on April 1, 2002.
PRESENT: Council Members W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., William D. Bestpitch,
William H. Carder, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith .................................. 5.
ABSENT: Council Members William White, Sr., and C. Nelson Harris ............ -2.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk.
The meeting was opened with a prayer by Sherman P. Lea, Chair, Roanoke
City School Board.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
YOUTH: The Members of Council participated in a luncheon recognizing all
participants in the year 2002 Student Government Day activities.
Students from the Roanoke City Public Schools and Roanoke Catholic High
School spent the day with City Council Members and City staff to learn more about
the operation of City government.
At 1:20 p.m. the meeting of Roanoke City Council was declared in recess to
be reconvened at 2:00 p.m., in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia.
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, April 15, 2002, the regular meeting of City Council
reconvened in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with the following
Council Members in attendance, Mayor Smith presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, William D.
Bestpitch, William H. Carder, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ................. 6.
ABSENT: Council MemberWilliam White, Sr.- ............................................. 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk.
The reconvened meeting was opened with a prayer by Claudia A. Whitworth,
Secretary of the Local Spiritual Assembly of Bahai of Roanoke.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
PROCLAMATIONS-YOUTH: The Mayor presented a proclamation declaring
Monday, April 15, 2002, as Student Government Day 2002.
PROCLAMATIONS-COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT: The Mayor presented
a proclamation declaring the week of April 14 - 20, 2002, as National
Telecommunicator's Week.
Ms. Wyatt offered the following resolution:
(#35799-041502) A RESOLUTION recognizing all of the City's E-911 Center
personnel as Roanoke Public Safety Telecommunicators of the year 2002.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 511.)
Mr. Wyatt moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35799-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent)
On behalf of the Members of Council and the citizens of the City of Roanoke,
the Mayor presented the Proclamation and a ceremonial copy of Resolution No.
35799-041592 to Ronald L. Wade, Communications Superintendent. He commended
and recognized the staff of the City's E-911 Center who have demonstrated their
ability to perform by providing outstanding emergency responses to citizens of
Roanoke even while short staffed and responding to a flood of calls which were
triggered by the September 11,2001 tragedy at the World Trade Center in New York
and the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia.
PROCLAMATIONS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor presented
proclamation declaring the month of April 2002 as Fair Housing Month.
a
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one
motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was
desired, that item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. He call specific attention to two requests for Closed Session.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday,
March 18, 2002, were before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that the reading of the Minutes be dispensed with and that
the Minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch
and adopted by the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the Mayor requesting
a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on various authorities boards, commissions
and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1),Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
3
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene
in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards,
commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711
(A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................. 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
POLICE DEPARTMENT-OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-TOWING
CONTRACT: A report of qualification of William F. Clark as a member of the Towing
Advisory Board, for a term ending June 30, 2004, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS:NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY: A communication from
John R. Hubbard, Chief Executive Officer, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority,
advising that in accordance with the Member Use Agreement, the Resource
Authority is submitting its proposed 2002-2003 Annual Budget, in the amount of
$8,269,925.00, to Council for approval, was before the body.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35801-041502) A RESOLUTION approving the annual budget of the Roanoke
Valley Resource Authority for Fiscal Year 2002-2003, upon certain terms and
conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 514.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35801-041502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS:
CITY EMPLOYEES- PARKS AND RECREATION: The City Manager introduced
Steven Buschor, Director, Department of Parks and Recreation, who assumed his
position on April 2, 2002.
BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY:The City Manager introduced a briefing with
regard to the proposed fiscal year 2003 budget, which will be presented by Barry L.
Key, Director, Management and Budget. She advised that fiscal year 2003 has been
a challenging budget which was balanced on several occasions with information
that was received from the State regarding budget reductions at that level; however,
the budget continues to change. She stated that it is anticipated that more surprises
may be in store throughout the balance of this fiscal year and into the next fiscal
year. She called attention to outstanding cooperation from the various City
departments, agencies and organizations; and advised that today begins the public
process of the City Manager's recommended budget, with a public hearing to be
held on Monday, April 29, 2002 at 7:00 p.m., in the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibit Hall,
budget work sessions are scheduled for May 9 and 10, and adoption of the 2003
fiscal year budget is scheduled for Monday, May 13, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., in the City
Council Chamber.
Mr. Key advised that the recommended budget for fiscal year 2003 was far
from a typical budget in the sense that if the City's local revenues were expected to
grow at a typical rate of 4.1 per cent, and if revenues received by the City from the
State were expected to grow at a typical rate of 5.5 per cent, the City would have $4.9
million in additional revenue to allocate for community needs. However, he stated
that General Fund revenues for fiscal year 2003 are expected to grow only $3.6
million to a total of $194.9 million, or an increase of 1.9 per cent. He noted that in the
25 years that he has worked with the City's budget, only one other fiscal year
experienced a smaller percentage growth rate - the fiscal year 1992 budget which
increased only 0.04 per cent during the last major economic recession; and local
revenues for fiscal year 2003 are expected to increase $3.5 million, or only 2.4 per
cent.
He presented the following budget highlights:
The real estate tax is the City's single largest source of local revenue
and is predicted to grow $2.5 million, or 5.3 per cent. 2.1 per cent of the
total 5.3 per cent in growth comes from new construction activity,
indicating a continuing positive trend in this area, while 3.2 per cent of
the total 5.3 per cent expected growth comes from increased property
values.
Personal property tax is the City's second largest source of local
revenue and the rate of growth is expected to decease 1.8 per cent due
to an anticipated slow down in new vehicle sales.
Sales tax, the City's largest local tax source, is expected to increase
minimally by 0.5 per cent due to the slowed economy and growing
regional competition for the sales tax dollar.
Utility tax is the City's fourth largest local tax source, and is expected
to grow 5.4 per cent due to continued growth and expansion in the
telecommunications industry and implementation of the water and
sewer rate restructuring plan this past fiscal year.
All other local revenue sources should increase only 1.6 per cent.
The revenue estimate for State aid is based on the budget approved by
the General Assembly and does not anticipate any changes that may be
forthcoming from the final session of the General Assembly this week
or from the Governor's proposed budget amendments.
The Governor recently proposed one unanticipated initiative that may
affect the expenditure side of the budget - a $5.00 landfill tipping fee
increase to generate new funds for open space preservation, water
quality improvement, and other environmental initiatives, will result in
a $258,000.00 annual increase in Roanoke's landfill tipping fee
expenditures. It is unclear how much of this new funding may be
returned to localities in the form of grants as part of the Governor's
program; therefore, additional revenue or expenditure adjustments may
be necessary during the coming months as the full impact of State
budget reductions becomes more evident.
State aid reductions fall into the following categories:
Alcoholic Beverage Control Tax
Constitutional Officers
Law Enforcement - HB 599 Funds
VJCCCA Programs
TOTAL
($103,716.00)
(286,506.00)
(331,256.00)
(571,496.00)
(1,292,974.00)
While State aid in these categories will decease almost $1.3 million,
State aid received by the City in support of its street maintenance
activities will increase $284,000.00 for a net reduction of approximately
$1.0 million, or 2.2 per cent.
The City will also lose $46,705.00 annually in State grant funding for the
Office on Youth.
The budget proposes a number of revenue initiatives in the following
categories which will offset the City's expected State aid reduction by
generating $1.1 million in new local revenue; and the CityTreasurer and
the Manager of Billings and Collections, two departments that are
directly responsible for collecting City revenues, have recommended
several of these initiatives.
Elimination of Tax Discounts
New Fees Authorized by State
Fee Increases
Enhanced Collection Strategies
Increased Admissions Tax Rate
Revenue initiatives proposed in the 2003 budget include:
Elimination of the seller's discount for collection of the Cigarette Tax
and Prepared Food and Beverage Tax;
Addition of new fees authorized by the 2002 General Assembly,
7
including a Courthouse Security Fee, Jail Inmate Processing Fee, and
DNA Sample Fee for Jail Inmates;
Adoption of fees authorized by the Code of Virginia to recover debt
collection costs;
Encourage more timely payment of delinquent taxes and fees;
Increase in current fees for various departmental services, including
Fire-EMS and Planning and Building Services, to recover the costs of
providing services.
Increase in Commercial and Central Business District solid waste
collection fees to recover the supplemental cost of providing more than
one free collection per week, as provided with residential collection
service.
Change in the interest accrual date for delinquent real estate tax
payments to the first of the following month to be consistent with
personal property tax.
Increase in the fine for late payment of parking tickets from $10.00 to
$15.00.
Increase in the Admissions Tax rate to 6.5 per cent City-wide to partially
fund Phase II of improvements to the Civic Center. The administration
recommends that Council seek the General Assembly's approval in
2003 to levy a higher admissions tax rate for ticket sales at Roanoke's
civic facilities only. The City-wide rate of 6.5 per cent could then be
rescinded if this effort is successful.
With regard to the expenditure side of the General Fund budget, a
number of high quality budgetary commitments have been funded with
the $3.6 million dollars of revenue:
Roanoke's School system will receive almost $1.4 million in additional
local funding as its share of local tax revenues per the existing revenue
sharing formula, allowing the School Board adequate funding to
increase the level of teacher raises to 3.25 per cent. The total school
budget will increase $1.9 million, or 1.9 per cent.
$2.4 million in funding is recommended to keep City employees'
compensation and benefits competitive - a 3.0 per cent of base pay
merit increase is recommended and additional funding is provided to
help offset anticipated increases in the cost of employee health care
and dental insurance.
A 2.6 per cent cost of living adjustment for retirees is proposed,
consistent with the recent increase in Social Security benefits and
adjustments being made by other local government retirement systems.
$1.5 million in additional funding for capital and debt service
requirements is recommended to:
Continue providing additional debt service funding as part of the six-
year plan approved by Council to budget an additional $570,000.00 each
fiscal year to build future debt capacity for bonds to support the Capital
Improvement Program;
Purchase $1.2 million in vehicular equipment through a capital lease
recently approved by Council. Due to a one-time reduction in State
funding requirements, the City will be able to purchase new leaf
collection and pothole-patching equipment to enhance the efficiency
and effectiveness of these important services, and acquire new
technologies for improving the efficiency of administrative operation;
and
Provide cash funding for:
Site acquisition and design expenses for the first of three replacement
stations planned in the Fire-EMS Facility Improvement Program;
Startup costs for Phase II of improvements to the Civic Center; and
Stormwater management efforts to comply with National Pollution
Discharge Elimination System - Phase II requirements.
$565,000.00 is budgeted for non-discretionary expenditure increases in
insurance premiums, electricity and street lighting. This total also
funds the employee parking shuttle due to expiration of the startup
grant received in fiscal year 2001, and parking spaces in the Gainsboro
Parking Garage due to a contractual obligation.
Also included in the $565,000.00 total is funding for a recommended
two per cent increase in the budgeted amounts for Blue Ridge
Behavioral Healthcare, Total Action Against Poverty and Virginia
Cooperative Extension Service, and for Cultural Services and Human
Services Committees as well.
Additional funding has been provided for solid waste management
collection activities now that the service transition process is complete.
Collection costs are not anticipated to be as high as the current fiscal
year because of the acquisition of new collection equipment and
reduced reliance on contract labor, even though the volume of waste
collected has grown significantly.
$485,000.00 is budgeted for the following service initiatives that should
directly benefit Roanoke citizens:
The State has eliminated all funding for the Office on Youth program
state-wide and several steps are being taken in this budget to partially
offset this loss of State dollars. For fiscal year 2003, the Office on Youth
will become a part of the Department of Parks and Recreation to allow
sharing of administrative resources in an environment that has the
shared mission of working with youth. Additionally $150,000.00 in
additional funding is recommended for an expanded slate of youth
programs currently under development by the newly hired Director of
Parks and Recreation.
A change in the manner in which special events are managed is also
recommended, along with startup funding to help insure a successful
transition process for this important piece of the City's overall tourism
development strategy. The new special events strategy seeks to
develop an improved package of special events and an improved
process for managing and coordinating special events by more fully
utilizing the Roanoke Special Events Committee as a "gatekeeping", or
coordinating body.
One of Council's short-term action items is anti-lifter education and
enforcement. To help address the overall problem of litter, an expanded
litter cleanup initiative is proposed in the budget, including
neighborhood cleanup days on select Saturdays, support by City staff
and equipment, and a 50 per cent increase in funding and effort to pick
up litter along streets and rights-of-way.
]0
The budget recommends $25,000.00 in financial support for the
Roanoke Adolescent Health Partnership - funds that likely will be used
to hire a much needed part-time program developer or fund raiser to
ensure the organization's long-term sustainability. These funds will be
appropriated to the Roanoke Public Schools budget to allocate to this
important community program.
Six staff positions are recommended to help develop new revenue
steams in support of expanded recreational and human service
programs, effectively manage human service programs, and bring in-
house previously contracted services for the Law Library and
Comprehensive Services Act programs to improve cost-effectiveness.
In order to balance the fiscal year 2003 budget, $2.7 million in budget
reductions were made, as follows:
The elimination of 24 positions and unfunding of an additional 11
positions in 18 separate departments or divisions of City government;
Adjustments to Recovered Costs accounts to more accurately
anticipate revenues to be received in support of program costs;
Adjustments to Internal Service accounts based on five per cent
reductions in Internal Fund departmental budgets; and
The anticipation of cost savings to be realized with the replacement of
the City's telephone system, estimated to be $200,000.00 annually, an
example of how recent investments in new technology are beginning
to produce dividends.
The Housing and Urban Development, or HUD, budget has been
prepared consistent with the new funding policy recently adopted by
Council. 85 per cent of the $4.5 million budget is proposed to be spent
on 17 community development programs or projects, evenly split
between housing and other neighborhood, community and economic
development activities.
15 per cent of the budget would be spent on 16 human and homeless
services programs.
The following three new projects are being recommended for inclusion
in the Capital Improvement Program:
ll
Phase II of improvements to the Civic Center requiring a future bond
issue of $14.3 million, to be partially funded from the recommended 1.5
per cent increase in the Admissions Tax;
The initial phase of the Fire-EMS Facility Improvement project funded
from existing cash funding and additional revenue from increases in
EMS fees.
Improvements to the Water Pollution Control Plant to improve wet
weather capacity - Roanoke's share of the estimated $35 million cost
would be approximately $17.5 million. A sewer rate increase would be
required in fiscal year 2004.
In closing, Mr. Key advised that the fiscal year 2003 budget has been a
challenge to prepare; the City administration has strived to avoid reductions in
service levels, continue to fairly compensate City employees, and move the
community forward with critical capital improvements within the limited resources
available.
The City Manager presented additional information on revenue initiatives
containing charts and comparisons with other localities.
Mr. Harris noted a concern with regard to the proposed cuts in the area of
public safety which he would further address with the City Manager and as a part of
budget study deliberations. He advised that his concern is also reflective of
community concern relative to budget cuts in public safety.
Ms. Wyatt reiterated the remarks of Council Member Harris and asked that the
record reflect her concern. She added that many City employees have stated that
they would prefer to retain the positions which are proposed to be cut and take a
smaller increase in pay, because City employees value their positions and the ability
to adequately perform their jobs.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the budget briefing
would be received and filed.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the need for the procurement of a new
Risk Management Information System was identified by the City's Department of
Technology; after proper advertisemnt, three bids were received and evaluated; all
bids received were for systems which cost much more than available funding; and
all systems included components and modules which were in addition to those
required to fulfill the City's needs, thus, bids that were received should be rejected.
]2
It was further advised that although the sealed bid method of procurement
would normally be used, it is not practicable or fiscally advantageous to the public
in this particular case; the Code of the City of Roanoke provides, as an alternate
method of procurement to using the bid process, a process identified as competitive
negotiation; prior approval by Council is necessary before the alternate method may
be used, which method will allow for competitive negotiations with two or more
providers to determine the best qualified at the most competitive price; and the
experience, qualifications and references of firms that can provide the system are
of equal, if not greater, importance as the cost.
The City Manager recommended that Council reject all bids and authorize the
use of competitive negotiation to secure vendors to provide the City's new Risk
Management Information System.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35802-041502) A RESOLUTION rejecting all proposals for the purchase of
a new Risk Management Information System for the City of Roanoke and designating
the procurement method known as competitive negotiation, rather than the
procurement method known as competitive sealed bidding, to be used in procuring
the Risk Management Information System.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 514.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35802-041502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder.
Ms. Wyatt called attention to the need for a written policy when purchasing
technology systems for the City to ensure compatibility of the systems. She spoke
to the importance of implementing a technology master plan which will govern all
technology purchases.
Mr. Bestpitch concurred in the remarks of Ms. Wyatt and inquired if a
competitive negotiation process will ensure that the concern of Ms. Wyatt is
addressed.
The City Manager spoke to the advantage of negotiating the precise elements
needed by the City, as opposed to modifying an existing program. She advised that
during the past year a committee of appointed, elected and City department
Managers have served on a master committee for technology, the purpose of which
is to guide the purchase of future systems to ensure integration of systems and
support by central technology staff; and the City organization, as a whole, will
prioritize which departments should be addressed initially in order to build a
foundation for additional systems. If Council desires, she advised that the
Technology Committee could present a briefing on accomplishments to date.
The Mayor inquired about the number of bids that were rejected for the risk
management program and the dollar amounts; whereupon, the City Manger advised
that all bids exceeded the City's appropriation. She stated that three bids were
rejected; however, the three bidders would be sent the same information if staff is
permitted to proceed through a competitive bidding process, and stressed that
simply because the bids are proposed to be rejected through this form of
procurement does not rule out the three bidders if the City goes through competitive
negotiations.
The Mayor noted that the program should not have to be reinvented because
other cities have police, fire, real estate, and various taxing agencies and should
have technology currently in place that could be used or modified by comparable
localities.
The City Manager advised that the matter is more involved than the specific
item before Council which deals with a particular software for the risk management
system. She stated that having worked in local government for many years and
having reviewed other systems, it is not as easy as lifting one system from one
community and transplanting that system into another community. She advised
that the City organization has, in the last 18 months, tried to approach the issue in
an integrated fashion and there are some basic platforms that are necessary before
the City can move completely in that direction.
The Mayor advised that it has been recently stated that some departments in
the City are not interfacing their computer systems in order to achieve maximum
efficiencies, and inquired if there is a major software that applies to specific City
applications.
The City Manager responded that she was unaware of a specific program. The
Director of Finance reviewed the types of programs that are used in the Finance
Department and advised that it is a matter of identifying a company that offers a
broad range of modules with a system that accommodates the transaction of
business by specific City departments. In general, he stated that appropriate
software is available.
The City Manager called attention to certain professional services as identified
in the City Code that may be served through competitive negotiation rather than
standard procurement, and spoke in support of adding this type of procurement to
the competitive negotiation list which will provide an opportunity to acquire q,.'ality
programs that are needed by the City.
It was the consensus of Council to table the matter pending further
information by the City Manager with regard to the number of bidders and dollar
amounts in connection with the risk management information system.
]4
Later during the meeting, the City Manager advised that $30,000.00 was
allocated for the risk management information system, the Iow bid was $66,975.00
and the high bid was $79,000.00.
The Mayor requested information with regard to the type of systems used by
other localities; whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would report to
Council within 30 days.
Resolution No. 35802-041502 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-SIDEWALK/CURB AND GUTTER-BUDGET: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that H. & S. Construction Co. was
awarded a contract, in the amount of $644,350.00 on a unit price basis at the
June 19, 2000 meeting of Council to provide new sidewalk and curbs on various
streets to be designated within the City of Roanoke; at the May 21, 2001 meeting of
Council, Change Order No. 1 was added to the contract to complete the curb and
sidewalk on Cove Road from Abbott Street to Hersberger Road; within this area,
there has been a long standing drainage problem at the intersection of Cove Road
and Guildhall Avenue; this intersection and the adjacent home of a property owner
at 1541 Guildhall Avenue have frequently flooded for many years; concurrent with
the curb and sidewalk construction, a window of opportunity exists to install the
necessary storm drain to solve the flooding problem; and funding is available in the
Capital Projects Fund, Account No. 008-530-9734-9003, Miscellaneous Storm Drains
Part 2.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute Change
Order No. 3, in the amount of $37,500.00 and 30 additional days of contract time, with
H. & S. Construction Co. for construction of storm drain improvements at Guildhall
Avenue and Cove Road; and that Council approve transfer of $37,500.00 to Account
No. 008-052-9608, New Concrete Sidewalks, Entrances and Curb-Phase V-A.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35803-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 516.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35803-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35804-041502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager's issuance of
Change Order No. 3 to the City's contract with H. & S. Construction Co. for the
construction of storm drain improvements at Guildhall Avenue and Cove Road in
relation to the New Concrete Sidewalks, Entrances and Curb-Phase V-A Project; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 517.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35804-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that T. P. Parker & Son, Engineers & Surveyors, LTD., was awarded a
contract in 1988 to provide surveying services for acquisition of right-of-way for the
U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project; over the
course of the contract, design changes by the Corp of Engineers, modifications
requested by property owners, additional subdivision and subordination plats, field
stakeouts for utility relocations, and other items, have required significant additional
surveying services; and previous Change Orders 1 through 7 have been approved
increasing the current contract amount to $454,452.41.
It was further advised that Change Order No. 8 will provide all surveying and
mapping services needed to complete the first phase of the project, including setting
additional monuments along the project right-of-way, preparation of subordination
plats, boundary survey plats, revisions to plats previously prepared, title report
reconciliation, revisions to base map and key map, preparation of legal descriptions
and coordination and review of Corp of Engineers construction plans to confirm
acquisition lines and that monumentation conforms to land acquisition plats; and
funding is available in Capital Projects Fund Account No. 008-056-9620, Roanoke
River Flood Reduction.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute Change
Order No. 8, in the amount of $33,990.00, and an extension of contract time through
December 31, 2002, with T. P. Parker & Son, Engineers & Surveyors, LTD., for
surveying and mapping services on the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35805-041502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute
Change Order No. 8 to the City's contract with T. P. Parker & Son, Engineers &
Surveyors, LTD., for surveying and mapping services in connection with the
Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project; authorizing an extension of the contract
through December 31, 2002; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 518.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35805-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, and Wyatt ......... 5.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith abstained from voting inasmuch as T. P. Parker and Sons,
Engineers and Surveyors, rents space from a company in which he owns interest.)
(Council Member White was absent.)
]7
APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL-
AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers Roanoke River
Flood Reduction Project contains channel widening and a greenway trail between
Jefferson Street and Walnut Street; this area is located directly across the Roanoke
River from Phase lA of the South Jefferson Redevelopment Area; in this area and
located on City property, Appalachian Power Company, d/b/a American Electric
Power (AEP), has an easement and an existing 69KV overhead electrical
transmission line located in the path of the project; and the line also has Iow-
hanging wires that do not allow adequate clearance for the designed greenway trail.
It was further advised that the preferred option for relocating the line is to
place the line underground between South Roanoke Park and the Walnut Street
Substation; since AEP requires its own design, bidding and construction
administration for all lines within its system, it is a sole source for the work; AEP
has agreed to a contract for the relocation, in an amount not to exceed
$2,060,384.00, to be completed by February 1, 2003; this amount also includes
relocating one transmission tower in Wasena Park and completion of the work is
critical to the construction schedule for the flood reduction project; no easements
are needed from third parties inasmuch as the alignment crosses only City owned
properties and right-of-way; and funding is available in Capital Projects Fund,
Account No. 008-056-9620, Roanoke River Flood Reduction.
The City Manager recommended that Council determine that AEP is the only
source practicably available to provide for relocation of the transmission line as
above described; and authorize the City Manager to execute a contract with
Appalachian Power Company, d/b/a American Electric Power (AEP), in an amount
not to exceed $2,060,384.00 for relocation of the transmission line as required for the
Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project, said work to be completed by February 1,
2003.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35800-041502) AN ORDINANCE determining that Appalachian Power
Company, d/b/a American Electric Power (AEP), is the only source practicably
available to provide for the relocation of AEP's existing 69KV overhead electrical
transmission line located in the area between Jefferson Street and Walnut Street
across the Roanoke River from Phase lA of the South Jefferson Redevelopment
Area; authorizing and awarding a contract for such work, upon certain terms and
conditions; authorizing the proper City officials to execute the requisite contract for
such work; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 512.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35800-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
BUDGET-CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager
submitted a communication in connection with an emergency generator, new
uninterruptible power system, automatic transfer switch and re-work of the present
battery back-up for the Department of Technology, advising that the battery back-up
provides from 20 to 30 minutes in which to shut down the City's computer system
without losing data; storage of data has grown such that it requires more than 30
minutes to shut down the computer, which could result in the loss of valuable data;
and the generator will eliminate the need to shut down the computer.
It was further advised that after proper advertisement, seven bids were
received, with Sheldon C. Nichols Construction Corporation submitting the Iow bid,
in the amount of $97,000.00, with 90 consecutive calendar days construction time;
funding in the amount of $105,000.00 is needed for the project; additional funds that
exceed the contract amount will be used for miscellaneous project expenses,
including advertising, printing, test services, minor variations in bid quantities, and
unforeseen project expenses; and funding is available in Account No. 013-052-9811-
9015, Wide Area Network Expansion.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of Sheldon C.
Nichols Construction Corporation, in the amount of $97,000.00 with 90 consecutive
calendar days of contract time; that all other bids be rejected; and transfer
$105,000.00 from Account No. 013-052-9811-9015, to a new capital account entitled,
"Emergency Generator for Department of Technology".
Mr. Hudson offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35806-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Department of Technology Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 519.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35806-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35807-041502) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Sheldon C. Nichols
Construction Corporation for the new emergency generator for the Department of
Technology, including a new uninterruptible power system, automatic transfer
switch, and re-working the present battery back-up, awarding a contract therefor;
upon certain terms and conditions; authorizing the proper City officials to execute
the requisite contract for such work; rejecting all other bids made to the City for the
work; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 520 .)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35807-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
REFUSE COLLECTION-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement
Program (CMERP) has identified the need to replace two 11 cubic yard rear loading
refuse trucks for Solid Waste Management; specifications were developed and,
along with an Invitation for Bid, were sent to 26 providers; the lowest bid for two
cab/chassis for the refuse truck, was submitted by Magic City Motor Corporation,
which took exceptions to front mounted tow hooks, at a price of $41,070.00 each;
the exception is not substantial and can be waived as an informality; the lowest bid
for two 11 cubic yard rear loading refuse bodies was submitted by Mid-State
Equipment Co., Inc., which bid met all specifications, at a price of $27,275.00 each;
and funding is available from the Lease of Vehicle Account No. 017-440-9852-9015.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of Magic City
Motor Corporation for two cab/chassis, at a total cost of $82,140.00; and the bid of
Mid-State Equipment Co., Inc., for two 11 cubic yard bodies, at a total cost of
$54,550.00; and reject all other bids received by the City.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35808-041502) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Magic City Motor
Corporation, for the purchase of two new refuse cab/chassis and the bid of Mid -
State Equipment Co., Inc. for the purchase of two new refuse rear loading bodies,
upon certain terms and conditions; and rejecting all other bids made for such items.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 521.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35808-041502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, and Mayor
Smith ........................................................................................................... 5.
NAYS: Council MemberWyatt .................................................................... 1.
(Council Member White was absent.)
BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-LEASES: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Municipal Building Snack
Bar has been operated under the direction of the Virginia Department of Visually
Handicapped since 1941, at which time a request was made of Council that a food
stand be placed in the Municipal Building free of charge; the request was granted,
and a food stand was placed in the corridor on the first floor of the Municipal
Building (now known as Municipal North), and when Municipal South was
completed, the snack bar was moved into its present location without a written
agreement; and current operator of the snack bar is the Department for the Blind and
Vision Impaired, a division of the Virginia Department of Visually Handicapped,
which has requested a written agreement, pursuant to the following terms:
Number of Square Feet:
Term of the Agreement:
Lease Rate:
Utilities:
Janitorial and Maintenance:
998.25 s.f. plus an 18.5 s.f. alcove outside the
dining facility
One year, with four additional one year
renewal options
No Charge
Provided by City
Provided by Lessee
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a Lease
Agreement with the Commonwealth of Virginia Department for the Blind and Vision
Impaired, as set forth above.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35809-041502) AN ORDINANCE authoring the use of certain City-owned
property by the Commonwealth of Virginia Department for the Blind and Vision
Impaired, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second
reading of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 522.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35809-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
TRAFFIC- BUDGET- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that Advance Stores Co., Inc.,
headquartered in Roanoke County on Airport Road, previously announced an
expansion to take place at its headquarters site; as a condition of the expansion,
Advance requested a Governor's Opportunity Fund (GOF) grant of $500,000.00 and
certain infrastructure improvements, including two new traffic signals, to be
installed on Airport Road; at that time, the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County
entered into a "Traffic Signals Agreement", dated April 13, 2000; however, that
specific expansion project did not take place and as Advance Stores expanded its
business, it contemplated relocating facilities to another state; on November 28,
2001, Advance stores announced that an expansion would occur, with a significant
portion of the new investment to take place in the City of Roanoke at the former
Crossroads Mall site; Advance stores insists that traffic improvements are still
needed on Airport Road, however, Roanoke County no longer wants to participate
in the Traffic Signals Agreement since Roanoke County will not benefit from the
increased investment, as originally anticipated; and a Termination Agreement is
needed in order for Roanoke County to release the first $500,000.00 of funds from
the prior GOF grant.
It was further advised that as a condition of the expansion decision, the State
of Virginia has awarded a new GOF grant of $670,000.00, based on the City
contributing at least that amount as a match; expansion at Crossroads Mall will
allow Advance Stores to create 168 new jobs in the City of Roanoke and invest $6.7
million in new equipment and renovations; conditions have been agreed to and are
delineated in a Performance Agreement with the City's local match consisting of
installation of two traffic signals on Airport Road; while the local match requirement
is $690,000.00, the City will spend more than $1.1 million in constructing two
signals; funding for the traffic signals is available in Account No. 008-052-9577; and
action by Council on January 22, 2002, awarded a contract for the work and provided
the necessary funds.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to enter into a
Performance Agreement with Advance Stores Co., Inc., and the Industrial
Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia; that she be further
authorized to take such actions and to execute such documents as necessary to
implement and administer the Performance Agreement; to enter into a Termination
Agreement with Roanoke County canceling the City's and the County's previous
obligations under the "Traffic Signals Agreement"; and that Council approve
appropriation of $670,000.00 received from the GOF grant and Roanoke County to
an account to be established by the Director of Finance, establish an account
receivable of the same, de-appropriate the $175,000.00 originally expected to be paid
by Roanoke County relating to the traffic signal project, and reduce account
receivable by that amount.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35810-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 523.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35810-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35811-041502) A RESOLUTION authoring the proper City Officials to execute
a Termination Agreement between the City of Roanoke, Virginia (City), and the
County of Roanoke, Virginia (County), terminating a Re-Executed Agreement
between the City and the County dated April 13, 2000, pertaining to their respective
commitments in connection with the installation of traffic signals and related traffic
improvements on Airport Road, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 524.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35811-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35812-041502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to
execute a Performance Agreement among the City of Roanoke (City), the Industrial
Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia (IDA), and Advance Stores
Co., Inc., (Advance) that provides for certain undertakings by the parties in
connection with a certain investment by Advance to take place at the former
Crossroads Mall site as well as other investments and the creation of job positions
at that site as well as other locations in the Roanoke Valley in return for Advance
receiving grant funds from the Governor's Opportunity Fund (GOF) through the City
and the IDA, all for the purpose of promoting and enhancing economic development
within the City and the Roanoke Valley; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 526.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35812-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
24
ROANOKE CiViC CENTER: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that at its meeting on May 7, 2001, Council authorized the City Manager to
enter into a License Agreement between the City and Arena Ventures, LLC, to
provide a certain number of National Basketball Development League (NBDL) games
and a certain number of events produced by SFX Concerts, Inc., in the Civic Center
Coliseum over a five-year period; the agreement mandated that the City provide
locker rooms, office space and other associated improvements to the infrastructure
for use of Arena Ventures during the term of the License Agreement; and at a
meeting on September 4, 2001, Council authorized the City Manager to execute a
Contract for Consultant Services with Rosser International, Inc., to provide design
services and to prepare the required bid and construction documents for the
proposed project.
It was further advised that following advertisement, five bids were received
with Martin Bros. Contractors, Inc., submitting the Iow base bid in the amount of
$2,252,600.00; costs for two desired Additive Bid Items were also submitted; the
first, Additive Bid Item No. 5, in the amount of $67,000.00, to provide a weight
training facility; and the second, Additive Bid Item No. 6, in the amount of $30,000.00,
to provide a sunscreen to shade the building's west fa(~ade, which will bring the total
contract price to $2,349,600.00, with all construction work required for the new
locker and training room facilities to be substantially completed by August 15, 2002,
and all work required to substantially complete the new office facilities to be
completed by December 20, 2002; the five bids were evaluated by the City's
consultant, Rosser International, who recommends that a contract be awarded to
Martin Bros. Contractors, Inc., to include Additive Bid Item No. 5 and Additive Bid
Item No. 6; funding in the total amount of $2,738,297.00 is needed for the project,
with additional funds that exceed the contract amount to be used for miscellaneous
project expenses, including advertising, printing, test services, minor variations in
bid quantities and unforeseen project expenses.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of Martin Bros.
Contractors, Inc., in the amount of $2,349,600.00, (which includes $2,252,600.00 for
the Base Bid, $67,000.00 for Additive Bid Item No. 5 and $30,000.00 for Additive Bid
Item No. 6), with dates for completion of the respective portions of the project to be
as above set forth; and that all other bids received by the City be rejected.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35813-041502) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Martin Bros.
Contractors, Inc., for the renovation of existing spaces within the Civic Center
Coliseum building to provide new locker rooms, office space and other associated
improvements to the infrastructure in relation to the Roanoke Civic Center
Expansion and Renovation Phase I Project, upon certain terms and conditions and
awarding a contract therefor; authorizing the proper City officials to execute the
requisite contract for such work; rejecting all other bids made to the City for the
work; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 528.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35813-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that on February 4, 2002, Council declared that a water supply emergency
existed and instituted water conservation measures, which continue as of this date;
City staff have conducted studies to determine if there are available projects to
provide additional sources of water to try and increase the City's water supply
during the water supply emergency; and staff has determined that three specific
projects might accomplish this purpose, but to do so, it is imperative that the
projects be expedited, which may not allow for the normal procurement methods
to be utilized, thus, there is an emergency need to proceed with the projects as soon
as possible.
It was further advised that the Utility Department, in conjunction with the City
Engineering Office, has been studying various water supply projects to increase the
resources available to the City; and three projects have emerged as being
technically feasible, with a reasonable chance of being permitted, and can be
completed through use of Water Fund retained earnings, as follows:
Completion of the Muse Spring well
Installation of ultraviolet (UV) treatment equipment at Crystal Spring
Construction of a well(s) near Crystal Spring
Completion of the Muse Spring Well. The Virginia Department of Health
(Health Department) has given its approval to place the Muse Spring
well into service through use of temporary equipment pending
certification of final construction plans; the original design for the Muse
Spring facility envisioned a more extensive operating plant with a
storage tank; the modified design will only install a pump, disinfection
equipment, and the piping necessary to deliver the water; estimated
cost for this project is $125,000.00, and it is expected that the project
will deliver one million gallons of water a day (mgd), which will help
lessen the amount of water taken from Carvins Cove.
Ultraviolet Treatment at Crystal Sprin~l - A preliminary engineering
report (PER) has been delivered to the Health Department for use of
ultraviolet (UV) treatment as a supplement for parasite inactivation until
the microfiltration plant is complete; it is anticipated that the Health
Department will permit the use of UV treatment, although not until the
level in the Carvins Cove Reservoir reaches 30 feet below spillway; the
cost is estimated at $250,000.00; however, by comparison, the cost of
buying a combination of water equivalent to four mgd from the City of
Salem and Roanoke County is $230,000.00 per month; and the cost of
buying four mgd from Roanoke County, exclusively, is $330,000.00 per
month.
An important consideration with this project is the construction
timeline in relation to the installation of the microfiltration plant.
Equipment delivery for the UV system is 12 weeks. The microfiltration
plant will be operational by December of this year, and could be
operational as soon as mid-October. If the Health Department cannot
be persuaded to modify its position soon, there will be no reason to
install the UV equipment. Quick procurement of the equipment is
critical. The Health Department has only approved two vendors to
supply this equipment. The authority to negotiate directly with these
two vendors is requested in lieu of regular procurement procedures.
An early deliver incentive may also be offered to reduce delivery time.
Well(s) to Supplement Crystal Sprin~l - After reviewing the geologic
survey undertaken by the City in 2000, there is a reasonable possibility
that a well (or wells) can be drilled near Crystal Spring in hydrologic
zones different from the spring. Crystal Spring delivers between 3.5
and four mgd; however, the existing pumping facility and the
microfiltration plant currently being constructed both have the ability
to treat and deliver five mgd. The geologic survey work suggests that
groundwater resources in the immediate area are sufficient to provide
another one mgd. This well water would most likely be classified as
"under the influence of surface water" and would require treatment.
However, the water could be introduced with the Crystal Spring water
for filtration, increasing the plant's output by 20%. Estimated costs for
this option vary with the length of piping needed from the well to the
Crystal Spring site, but are not anticipated to exceed $125,000.00 if
existing City-owned property could be used.
27
If the well water quality is as good as Crystal Spring, this water may
also be suitable for UV treatment under the temporary treatment system
proposed for Crystal Spring, assuming approval can be obtained to
place such a system into operation. It is important to note that wells to
supplement the natural flow from Crystal Spring have been tried in the
past. Flows from these wells were small with high iron content, making
them impractical for use without additional treatment. The geologic
survey suggests that deeper wells would yield better quality water, but
exploratory drilling is needed for confirmation. Authorization is
requested to negotiate directly with the hydrogeologist that completed
the previous groundwater survey work for the City for additional
consulting and well drilling services.
The City Manager recommended that the Water Fund FY 2001/2002 budget
be amended and that Council approve appropriation of $500,000.00 from the Water
Fund Prior Year Retained Earnings into three separate accounts to be established
by the Director of Finance to provide design and construction of the three projects;
that Council declare that an emergency exists within the meaning of §41 of the City
Charter and allow the City Manager to make emergency improvements without
following the normal procurement methods to the extent reasonably necessary for
the above projects; authorize the City Manager to negotiate directly with the two
vendors approved by the Health Department to supply the UV Treatment equipment
and to take such further action or to execute such documents as may be necessary
to implement and administer the UV Treatment project; authorize the City Manager
to negotiate directly with Golder Associates of Richmond, Virginia, to provide
consulting and well drilling services and to take such further action, or to execute
such documents as may be necessary to implement and to administer the Crystal
Spring Supplemental Well project; and authorize the City Manager to take such
further action, or to execute such documents as may be necessary, to implement
and administer the Muse Spring Well project.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35814-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Water Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 529.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35814-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35815-041502) AN ORDINANCE declaring the existence of an emergency in
connection with obtaining certain design services and construction work for certain
projects to try to obtain additional sources of water to try to increase the City's water
supply to help with the City's water supply emergency that was declared on
February 4, 2002, Ordinance No. 35741-020402; providing that due to the need to
expedite such projects, the normal procurement method of advertising, conducting
competitive negotiations, and/or competitive sealed bidding be dispensed with to
the extent reasonably necessary; authorizing the City Manager to take such further
action or to execute such documents as may be necessary to implement and
administer such projects; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 530.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35815-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS:
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
BUDGET-REFUSE COLLECTION-EQUIPMENT: Ordinance No. 35791, providing
for appropriation of additional funds in connection with refuse collection, having
previously been before the Council for its first reading on Monday, April 1, 2002,
read and adopted on its first reading and laid over, was again before the body, Mr.
Bestpitch offering the following for its second reading and final adoption:
(#35791-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 General Fund Appropriations.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 510.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35791-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
BUDGET-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Carder offered the following resolution
establishing Monday, April 29, 2002 at 2:00 p.m., as a Special meeting of the Council
of the City of Roanoke for the purpose of holding public hearings on the General
Fund Budget for Fiscal Year 2002-2003, HUD funds, and effective tax increases:
(#35816-041502) A RESOLUTION establishing the date of a Special Meeting of
the Council of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 532 .)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35816-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
BUSES-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: Council Member Hudson reiterated
previous remarks with regard to using a smaller bus for the employee shuttle from
the Roanoke Civic Center to downtown Roanoke.
The Mayor inquired as to the status of a briefing with regard to the transit
system; whereupon, it was the consensus of Council that a special meeting of the
GRTC Board of Directors will be held on Monday, April 29, 2002, immediately
following the Council's work session, which is scheduled to convene at 12:15 p.m.,
in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, to discuss transit operations.
3O
TRAFFIC-COMPLAINTS-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-YOUTH-SCHOOLS:
Council Member Wyatt commended the City Manager for her prompt response to
certain questions regarding tattoo parlors in the Williamson Road area. She
expressed appreciation to Ms. Marion Vaughn-Howard, Youth Planner, for including
students from Westside Elementary School in the Student Government Day
Luncheon which was held earlier in the day. She called attention to concerns
expressed by owners of businesses located in the Williamson Road area in regard
to teenagers congregating at the intersection of Williamson Road and Trinkle
Avenue, N. W.
The Mayor expressed concern with regard to teenagers also congregating at
Trinkle Avenue and Winsloe Drive, N. W.
BUDGET-HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER: Vice-Mayor Carder expressed
concern with regard to a decrease in State funding of the Higher Education Center,
and that the Senate Finance and House Appropriations Committee has encouraged
the Higher Education Center to seek funding from the local governments in its
primary service area to complement State funding.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
WATER RESOURCES: As a water conservation tip, the City Manager
presented a card that will be supplied to local restaurants for display asking that
water be served by request only with meals, and an additional card that hotels are
requested to display in hotel rooms in regard to laundering linens and towels.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard; it is also a time for
informal dialogue between Council Members and citizens and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
COMPLAINTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue,
N. E., advised that residents of Lincoln Terrace appeared before Council in
December 2001 and presented their concerns with regard to a request that screen
doors be installed on both the front and back doors of their residence. She further
advised that a statement was made at the last meeting of Council by a Member of
Council that a resolution had been accepted by Lincoln Terrace residents; however,
the Council Member is now aware that he was misinformed by the Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority. She stated that Council and the City
administration has a serious problem if they can not, or will not, hold the Housing
Authority accountable for spending Hope VI funds without the provision of screen
doors for each residence. She questioned the effectiveness of the Hope VI project
for Lincoln Terrace residents if it does not provide freedom of mind from intruders
and insects.
At 4:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for one Closed
Session.
At 4:55 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber
with all Members of the Council in attendance except Mr. White, Mayor Smith
presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Mr. Carder
moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or her knowledge
that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open meeting
requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only such
public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed
Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, and Mayor
Smith ............................................................................................................. 5.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was out of the Council Chamber when the vote was
recorded.) (Council Member White was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES- HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE: The
Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Advisory Board of Human Development
created by the ineligibility of Bernice F. Jones to serve another term; whereupon, he
called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Kirk A. Ludwig.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Ludwig was appointed as a member
of the Advisory Board of Human Development, for a term ending November 30, 2005,
by the following vote:
FOR MR. LUDWIG: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
(Council Member White was absent.)
At 4:57 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be immediately
reconvened in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia.
At 5:00 p.m., the Mayor called the meeting to order for a joint session of City
Council and the Board of Zoning Appeals, with Mayor Ralph K. Smith and Chairman
Kenneth L. Motley presiding.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
C. Nelson Harris, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Linda F. Wyatt, and Mayor Ralph K. Smith---6.
ABSENT: Council MemberWilliam White, Sr., ............................................. 1.
BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEMBERS PRESENT: William D. Poe, Philip H.
Lemon, Kermit E. Hale and Chairman Benjamin S. Motley ...................................... 5.
ABSENT: Board Member Joel M. Richert ..................................................... 1.
STAFF PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham; City Manager; William M. Hackworth,
City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; Steven J.
Talevi, Assistant City Attorney and Counsel to the Board of Zoning Appeals;
Evelyn D. Dorsey, Zoning Administrator; and Linda R. Leedy, Secretary, Board of
Zoning Appeals.
At 5:30 p.m., following dinner, the business session was called to order.
ZONING:
UPDATE ON TRAINING FOR BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS MEMBERS:
Mr. Motley advised that jointly, City Council and the Board of Zoning Appeals,
have tried to ensure that the Board is composed of representatives who are
motivated and will provide regular attendance. He stated that Board members are
currently undergoing certification and every member is a contributing and active
representative.
He referred to major issues in need of ongoing attention, one of which is the
telecommunications ordinance that continues to be a challenge and does not
currently address the modern needs of telecommunications in the Roanoke Valley.
He stated that the zoning ordinance is currently undergoing a major revision, but in
the meantime City staff believes that steps should be taken to address the
telecommunications ordinance.
The City Manager called attention to the intent to fast track a quick fix to the
telecommunications ordinance so as to provide Council with a better understanding
on the placement of telecommunications towers; however, there is still a need to
follow a more detailed process in connection with zoning. She stated that within the
next 60 days, the City Planning Commission will submit a recommendation to
Council regarding telecommunications towers and the need to limit the area of the
City where they can be located, along with a special exception process.
EFFORTS TO MAKE BOARD OF ZONING APPEALS PROCEDURES MORE
CITIZEN FRIENDLY:
Mr. Motley advised that the application process has recently been refined to
ensure that citizens receive an advance copy of staff remarks pertaining to their
application; the Board has requested that fees associated with advertising be
reviewed; and most importantly, it is the goal of the Board of Zoning Appeals to
ensure that citizens receive a fair hearing by Board members who are attentive,
thoughtful and clear on their questions and concerns.
ZONING ENFORCEMENT:
Mr. Motley stated that it is not difficult to find zoning violations throughout the
City and staff is addressing those concerns. He advised that the Board is serious
in terms of what it can do as a Board, and that actions of the Board of Zoning
Appeals are carried out. To that end, he stated that the City Attorney's Office has
been requested to review certain other issues, one of which is bonding. He stated
that the Board is reviewing the big picture and trying to do its best to make the
zoning process a healthy procedure for the City.
Mr. Lemon spoke in support of the certification program for Board of Zoning
Appeals members.
Mr. Bestpitch referred to a communication from the City Attorney in regard
to questions that came up in a recent meeting of the Audit Committee regarding
zoning, business licenses, etc., and whether or not a business license can be
revoked if there is a zoning violation. He stated that this is another example where
computer systems should be interfaced, and inquired if there are other areas that
should be explored by the Board of Zoning Appeals, the Zoning Administrator, and
the Commissioner of the Revenue to share information and to improve
communications and efficiencies.
Ms. Dorsey advised of a future upcoming meeting with the Department of
Technology staff and the Commissioner of the Revenue to discuss the interfacing
of computer systems; whereupon, and it was suggested that the Director of Real
Estate Valuation and the City Treasurer also be included in the discussions.
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that in July, pursuant to a City Charter
amendment, membership of the Board of Zoning Appeals may increase from six to
seven, following the appropriate amendment of the Zoning Ordinance.
Mr. Harris made the observation that on numerous occasions citizens have
retained the services of an attorney when submitting applications to the City
Planning Commission and to the Board of Zoning Appeals. He stated that a
petitioner should be able to go through the process without having to endure the
expense of an attorney and inquired if the process is so complicated that citizens
believe the services of an attorney are justified.
34
Chairman Motley advised that business entities tend to hire an attorney to
present their issues; however, the average citizen is not represented by an attorney.
He stated that the process is not complicated and the demeanor of the Board of
Zoning Appeals is citizen friendly.
The City Manager called attention to significant improvements in the
processing of requests to the Board of Zoning Appeals over the past year, staff
reports are now provided to the Board and to citizens, and the Zoning Administrator
conducts interviews with petitioners to review the procedure.
There being no further business to be discussed, at 6:10 p.m., the Mayor
declared the Council meeting in recess to be reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City
Council Chamber.
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday April 15, 2002, the regular meeting of City Council
reconvened in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with the following
Council Members in attendance, Mayor Smith presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., C. Nelson Harris,
William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith---6.
ABSENT: Council MemberWilliam White, Sr.- ........................................... 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk.
The reconvened meeting was opened with a prayer by Council Member
C. Nelson Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: Pursuant to Section 9-20.1 Public hearing before
appointment of School Board Members, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 15,
2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the matter was
before the body.
Advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on
Friday, April 5, 2002 and in The Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, April 11, 2002.
On July 1,2002, thers will be two vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board
for terms ending June 30, 2005. At its meeting on April 1,2002, Council selected the
following persons to receive the public interview on Thursday, April 18, 2002,
commencing at 4:30 p.m., in the City Council Chamber:
Carl D. Cooper
Edward Garner
William H. Lindsey
William E. Skeen
Robert J. Sparrow
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
speak to the candidacy of the above listed applicants; whereupon, the following
persons spoke:
Ms. Susan Finney, 2915 Corbieshaw Road, S. W., spoke in support of the
appointment of William H. Lindsey. She advised that she is an active parent in
school activities and a PTA Executive Board Member at Grandin Court Elementary
School where her son attends; she has known Mr. Lindsey for four years and can
attest to the fact that he will be a credible person to assume a position on the School
Board and he will make outstanding contributions to the educational system.
Ms. Annette Lewis, 4606 Casper Drive, N. E., spoke in support of the
appointment of William E. Skeen. She advised that she has known Mr. Skeen for
seven years; they not only work for the same employer, but they share the same
desire for Roanoke City schools to provide a quality education that equips
Roanoke's children with the tools they need to pursue post secondary studies
and/or careers. She stated that while working with Mr. Skeen she has found him to
possess the following qualities: (1) he is well-organized and always mindful of the
need to set priorities in order to accomplish goals; he favors competitive salaries,
parental involvement, teacher education and support, new instructional resources,
maintaining a Iow teacher-student ratio, and attention to school violence concerns
through development of life-skills program priorities for Roanoke City Schools; (2)
he is hard-working and does not shy away from a challenge; when asked what he
would do to ensure that Roanoke City maintains a quality school system in light of
the fact that State financial support for education is decreasing, he has quickly
responded with the need for the School Board to develop and communicate a
position that it would stand on, even if it meant recommending something as
unpopular as a tax increase; and (3) Mr. Skeen has numerous qualities, but most
importantly, he loves and supports his family and speaks with pride about his wife
and children; and he is hard-working, but still spends quality time with his family.
She stated that this particular attribute is important because she would not want
anyone to serve on the School Board who did not know the importance of family and
that children need family support, to be loved and nurtured, and to be encouraged
as they accomplish great and small tasks. She advised that a vote for William Skeen
is a vote for the children of the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Jerry L. Dunnavan, 3734 Renfield Drive, S. W., advised that he has a child
in the Roanoke City Public School System and he is pleased with the quality of
education that his son has received in his first two years of public education. He
endorsed the candidacy of William E. Skeen and advised that his participation on the
School Board will ensure that the Roanoke City Public School System will continue
to provide the best possible educational opportunities and experiences for not only
his child but all other students as well. He stated that he was confident in voicing
his support for Mr. Skeen who is a co-worker, a fellow community service volunteer,
a father, and a friend; his background in banking and finance will be a tremendous
asset for a school system that is consistently faced with difficult budgetary and
fiscal responsibilities; and his many years of helping to start small and mid size
businesses and their efforts to make sound business decisions will be a great
resource for a school system that is attempting to attract the best teachers through
competitive pay scales, a system that is faced with providing refurbished high
school facilities, and a system that is challenged to continually improve. He stated
that Mr. Skeen's devotion to make the community a better place for families to live
and work is reflected by his many volunteer and professional efforts to enhance the
City of Roanoke; and his volunteer efforts are best exemplified by his single handed
and tireless efforts to successfully locate a grocery store in an under served area of
the City. He added that Mr. Skeen is the father of three boys, all of whom have
attended Roanoke City schools; his interest in seeing that each of his sons achlieve
educational success is rooted in his deep founded beliefs that a sound education
is one of the most important keys to success; and having experienced the school
system as a parent, Mr. Skeen's commitment to providing an outstanding school
system for all citizens is unparalleled. He noted that one of Mr. Skeen's greatest
assets is the ability to bring parties with varying interests into a compromise that
best serves the challenges at hand; to have this resource on the School Board
would ensure that the administration, teachers, City Council, parents, and most
importantly the students, would have an advocate who would do what he believes
to be in the best interests of all parties, and would bring a strong business,
community and personal commitment to his interest in serving on the Roanoke City
School Board.
Ms. Brenda Hale, 3595 Parkway Drive, S. W., endorsed the candidacy of Carl D.
Cooper and William E. Skeen, who are qualified and competent, men of integrity,
credibility, and professionalism. She stated that they are devoted family men,
college educated men, devoted to their work, they have made a difference in their
community, and they are innovative thinkers. She advised that the children are our
future, and both Mr. Cooper and Mr. Skeen care passionately about the children of
their community and the school system, and are well-qualified to work diligently to
make Roanoke's school system even better.
37
Ms. Leigh Mason, 2071 Laurel Woods Drive, Salem, Virginia, spoke in support
of the candidacy of Robert J. Sparrow. She called attention to Mr. Sparrow's
involvement in the Blue Ridge Montessori School where he showed an interest in the
educational progress of all children, he was active in PTA activities, field trips and
supported educational goals of the school. She stated that he had a positive attitude
toward his and all children, he was supportive of teachers and the overall mission
of the school. She advised that Mr. Sparrow is an intelligent, caring and witty
individual, who is dedicated to maximizing the educational experience of each child;
he relates well to children and adults, and respects them as individuals; he is
dependable, reliable, and a positive role model; therefore, she highly recommended
Mr. Sparrow without reservation to serve as a member of the Roanoke City School
Board.
Ms. Anita J. Price, 3101 Willow Road, N. W., President, Roanoke Education
Association, which represents 700 members of the Roanoke City Public Schools,
endorsed the candidacy of William E. Skeen and Edward Garner. She advised, that
all five candidates are well qualified and deserving of consideration; the REA based
its decision on written and oral responses supplied by all candidates; and the
interview panel represented a diverse team of educators, including three reading
specialists, a classroom teacher, a guidance counselor, and the Uniserve Director.
She stated that Mr. Skeen and Mr. Garner will be assets to the School Board and
would cooperate with all involved interests of education.
Mr. Mark Petersen, 1210 Penmar Avenue, S. E., spoke in support of the
application of Carl D. Cooper. He advised that he has worked with Mr. Copper on the
Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership Steering Committee and in connection with his
local neighborhood organization, as well as other projects throughout the City, such
as greenways and neighborhood revitalization. He asked that Council give serious
consideration to appointing Mr. Cooper to the School Board.
Ms. Brenda McDaniel, 2037 Carter Road, S. W., endorsed the candidacy of
William E. Skeen. She advised that she has known Mr. Skeen for many years, they
were co-workers at Dominion Bankshares, for the past several years she has known
him as a neighbor, and she has appreciated his service as a volunteer in the Greater
Raleigh Court Civic League. She stated that as a volunteer, Mr. Skeen gives his all;
he is an idea man and a worker bee, which are important attributes to any
organization. She noted that regardless of the assignment, Mr. Skeen is an
interested, engaged, active and effective participant; he has made important
contributions throughout the City for many years; he is dependable, reliable and
effective; he is the father of three sons, and takes an active role in their education
and lives; and he is an asset to any organization on which he serves, and will be an
asset to the Roanoke City School Board, if appointed.
Ms. Darlene Pierce, 721 Staunton Avenue, N. W., endorsed the candidacy of
William H. Lindsey. In his capacity as an attorney, she called attention to the
assistance that Mr. Lindsey provided to her in connection with a family situation. In
addition to being a family man with strong family ties, she stated that he will make
a contribution to the School Board through his legal training. She asked that
Council give serious consideration to Mr. Lindsey's appointment to the School
Board.
Mr. Matt Despard, 1934 Avon Road, S. W., spoke in support of the appointment
of William E. Skeen to the School Board. He advised that Mr. Skeen has a record of
community service which has enabled him to see the community from a wide variety
of perspectives, such as economic development, community development, human
services, and education. He stated from the perspective of the father of a four year
old daughter who will be entering the school system in the near further, in order for
the school system to succeed, it needs to maintain a mutually beneficial relationship
with the community that it serves, and Mr. Skeen would be an asset in that regard.
He added that as the parent of three children who were educated in Roanoke City
schools, current adjunct faculty member at Virginia Western Community College, a
former banker and a current business administrator, Mr. Skeen has the technical
abilities required forthejob; he is understanding and hard working; he understands
the issues facing the School system, and the need to hire and retain the best and
most qualified teachers, while keeping in mind the fiscal issues confronting the City
school system; he is hard working and active in the community, and he has never
backed away from any of his commitments. If appointed to the School Board, he
advised that Mr. Skeen will be knowledgeable about school related issues and he
will be an advocate for quality education.
Mr. Pink Wimbush, 4420 Glen Ridge Road, N. W., endorsed the candidacy of
William E. Skeen. He advised that he has worked with Mr. Skeen on the Total Action
Against Poverty Board of Directors, he is a capable, determined and caring
individual, who is knowledgeable about issues relating to grants, students and City
government. He stated that Mr. Skeen will be an outstanding addition to the School
Board if appointed by Council.
There being no further speakers, without objection by Council, the Mayor
advised that all comments would be received and filed. He noted that Council will
vote to fill the two vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board at its regular
meeting on Monday, May 6, 2002, at 2:00 p.m.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council on Monday,
April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 15,
2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request
of Cesar Dominguez that a tract of land located at 325 Jefferson Street, N. E.,
identified as Official Tax No. 3012801, be rezoned from RM-2, Residential Multi-family
Medium Density District, to C-3 Central Business District, subject to certain
conditions proffered by the petitioner, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 29, 2002 and Friday, April 5, 2002 and in The Roanoke
Tribune on April 4, 2002.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report recommending that
Council approve the request for rezoning, advising that the purpose of the petition
is to renovate a deteriorating commercial building for office space.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35817-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 301, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of
Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, subject to certain conditions
proffered bythe applicant; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 533.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35817-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
Cesar Dominiquez, Petitioner, appeared before Council in support of his
request.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
speak to the matter; whereupon, Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton, Avenue, N. E.,
President, Historic Gainsboro Preservation District, Inc., advised that the land in
question is included in the Gainsboro Historic District, the community supports the
request for rezoning and is pleased that the former "Moses" store will be restored.
She commended the petitioner who has shown respect for the community and for
his willingness to work with residents in retaining the integrity of the neighborhood.
Ordinance No. 35817-041502 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council on Monday,
April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 15,
2002, or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Michael A.
Wells that the rear portion of property located on Virginia Avenue, N. W., designated
as Official Tax No. 2761421, be rezoned from RS-3, Residential Single Family District,
to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the
4O
petitioner; and that proffered conditions on a portion of Official Tax No. 2761409,
located at the corner of Virginia Avenue and Westside Boulevard that was previously
rezoned from RS-3 to C-2 in 1994, pursuant to Ordinance No. 32294-121994, for the
purpose of operating an automobile cleaning facility, be repealed and replaced with
new conditions, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 29, 2002, and Friday, April 5, 2002, and in The Roanoke
Tribune on Thursday, April 4, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission recommending that the request be
denied was before Council.
Mr. Hudson offered the following ordinance:
(#35818) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 276, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke,
in order to amend, repeal or replace certain proffered conditions, accepted by City
Council by Ordinance No. 32294-121994, presently binding upon Official Tax No.
2761409, and rezoning such Official Tax No. 2761409, from RS-3, Residential Single
Family, Low Density District, and C-2, General Commercial District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant; and
rezoning Official Tax No. 2761421 from RS-3, Residential Single Family, Low Density
District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered
by the applicant; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
speak; whereupon, the following persons appeared before Council.
Mr. Jeff Murphy, 538 Stonybrook Road, Wertz, Virginia, advised that his
business is located across the street from Mr. Wells' business; he has known
Mr. Wells for approximately seven years, and he operates his business in a
professional manner. He stated that expansion of the business would be good for
the City, it would provide Mr. Wells with more room to operate his business, he has
made improvements in the appearance of his property, and his business is well
maintained.
4!
Mr. Daniel M. Hale, Jr., 4425 Aleva Street, N. W., spoke in support of the
request of Mr. Wells. *He encouraged Council to approve the request because
Mr. Wells is a small business man and cannot afford to retain the services of an
attorney to present his request to Council. He asked that Council take into
consideration the improvements to the area as a result of Mr. Wells business and
provide him with the opportunity to expand on the rear of the structure that runs
parallel to Melrose Avenue.
Mr. Larry Hubbard, 3905 Virginia Avenue, N. W., spoke on behalf of Mr. Wells
request. He stated that the business is well maintained and is an attribute to the
community.
Mr. Fred Galloway, 3402 Kershaw Road, N. W., spoke in support of the request
of Mr. Wells. He stated that he frequently passes Mr. Wells business; loud noise and
people congregating doe= not appear to be a problem, and the business is well
maintained. He added that it would be an asset to the community for Mr. Wells to
expand his business and instead of boarding up buildings, the City should
encourage continued use of existing buildings.
Mr. Jomoso Worrell, 3818 Virginia Avenue, N. W., advised that Mr. Wells
business is an asset to the community, and spoke in support of the need for the
small businessman to make money.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that the ordinance before Council is not to rezone
Mr. Wells, but it is about a property or parcel of land that will not be owned by Mr.
Wells forever; however, the decision of Council regarding the rezoning will remain
in effect. He stated that there is no known shortage of C-2 property in the area
surrounding Mr. Wells business; and although he supports Mr. Wells as a small
businessman, he cannot support the rezoning as requested.
Mr. Carder advised that expansion by 20 feet will not be an impairment;
therefore, he supports the request for rezoning.
Ms. Wyatt advised that when Mr. Wells initially approached the City to rezone
the property, he was seen as a struggling young businessman. She stated that the
last time Council granted an exception for expansion of Mr. Wells' business, he
made certain promises that that would be the last exception he would request of the
City; however, he has on several occasions returned to the Council with additional
requests to expand his business. She advised that she could not support the
request of Mr. Wells to further expand his business and feels compelled to hold
Mr. Wells to his word.
Mr. Hudson advised that he supports the request of Mr. Wells who is a small
businessman and should be given the 20 feet to expand his business.
42
Mr. Daniel M. Hale, Jr., 4425 Aleva Street, N. W., spoke in support of the
request of Mr. Wells. He encouraged Council to approve the request because
Mr. Wells is a small business man and cannot afford to retain the services of an
attorney to present his request to Council. He asked that Council take into
consideration the improvements to the area as a result of Mr. Wells business and
provide him with the opportunity to expand on the rear of the structure that runs
parallel to Melrose Avenue.
Mr. Larry Hubbard, 3905 Virginia Avenue, N. W., spoke on behalf of Mr. Wells
request. He stated that the business is well maintained and is an attribute to the
community.
Mr. Fred Galloway, 3402 Kershaw Road, N. W., spoke in support of the request
of Mr. Wells. He stated that he frequently passes Mr. Wells business; loud noise and
people congregating does not appear to be a problem, and the business is well
maintained. He added that it would be an asset to the community for Mr. Wells to
expand his business and instead of boarding up buildings, the City should
encourage continued use of existing buildings.
Mr. Jomoso Worrell, 3818 Virginia Avenue, N. W., advised that Mr. Wells
business is an asset to the community, and spoke in support of the need for the
small businessman to make money.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that the ordinance before Council is not to rezone
Mr. Wells, but it is about a property or parcel of land that will not be owned by Mr.
Wells forever; however, the decision of Council regarding the rezoning will remain
in effect. He stated that there is no known shortage of C-2 property in the area
surrounding Mr. Wells business; and although he supports Mr. Wells as a small
businessman, he cannot support the rezoning as requested.
Mr. Carder advised that expansion by 20 feet will not be an impairment;
therefore, he supports the request for rezoning.
Ms. Wyatt advised that when Mr. Wells initially approached the City to rezone
the property, he was seen as a struggling young businessman. She stated that the
last time Council granted an exception for expansion of Mr. Wells' business, he
made certain promises that that would be the last exception he would request of the
City; however, he has on several occasions returned to the Council with additional
requests to expand his business. She advised that she could not support the
request of Mr. Wells to further expand his business and feels compelled to hold
Mr. Wells to his word.
Mr. Hudson advised that he supports the request of Mr. Wells who is a small
businessman and should be given the 20 feet to expand his business.
42
The Mayor advised that Mr. Wells has operated his business for seven plus
years, he has proven his success in a business where there have been failures, and
he respects an individual who can perform accordingly. He stated that he respects
the remarks of Council Member Bestpitch that there is nearby vacant land, however,
if that option were affordable, Mr. Wells would have relocated his business. He
stated that he visited the business establishment and found all aspects to be in
order, which is justification to encourage Mr. Wells to continue the success of his
business.
Inasmuch as five affirmative votes are required to adopt an ordinance
dispensing with the second reading, Ordinance No. 35818 was lost by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, and Mayor Smith ........... -4.
NAYS: Council Members Bestpitch and Wyatt ............................................ 2.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Hudson moved that Ordinance No. 35818 be amended to delete the words
"and dispensing with the second reading of the ordinance." The motion was
seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted, Council Members Wyatt and Bestpitch voting
no.
Mr. Hudson moved that Ordinance No. 35818 be placed upon its first reading:
(#35818) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 276, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of Roanoke,
in order to amend, repeal or replace certain proffered conditions, accepted by City
Council by Ordinance No. 32294-121994, presently binding upon Official Tax No.
2761409, and rezoning such Official Tax No. 2761409, from RS-3, Residential Single
Family, Low Density District, and C-2, General Commercial District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the applicant; and
rezoning Official Tax No. 3761421 from RS-3, Residential Single Family, Low Density
District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered
by the applicant.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, and Mayor Smith ............. -4.
NAYS: Council Members Bestpitch and Wyatt ............................................ -2.
(Council Member White was absent.)
43
ENTERPRISE ZONE: Pursuant to instructions by Council, the City Clerk
having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as
soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to consider amendments to the City's
Enterprise Zone Program, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Sunday, March 31, 2002 and Sunday, April 7, 2002.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City's
Enterprise Zone One (formerly called the Roanoke Urban Enterprise Zone) was
designated by the Commonwealth of Virginia in 1984, with limited local incentives;
enterprise Zone Two and the 581/Hershberger Subzone were established in 1996 and
1998, respectively; by Ordinance No. 33019-070196, Council established certain local
incentives for Enterprise Zone Two, which applied to the Subzone when it was
established in 1998; by Ordinance No. 34412-071999, Council made the local
incentives of each Enterprise Zone applicable to the other Enterprise Zone to the
extent that they were not unique to one Enterprise Zone; and by Ordinance No.
35414-061801, Council extended the availability of such local incentives through
December 31,2003, when Enterprise Zone One will either terminate, or be extended
by the Commonwealth of Virginia.
It was further advised that in 2001, the City Department of Economic
Development completed an evaluation of the Enterprise Zone local incentives; the
Department concluded that amendments to local incentives should be made to
increase effectiveness of the program; and amendments propose to accomplish the
following:
Expand the availability of rebates for water, fire, and sewer hookup fees
and for building permits and comprehensive development plan review
fees to include rehabilitation work in addition to new building
construction;
To extend the availability of the local incentives for the Enterprise
Zones from December 31, 2003 to June 30, 2007;
To add a local incentive to provide limited funds for partial grants for
the cost of certain building facade renovations within Enterprise Zone
One; and
To modify and/or extend certain funding limits in connection with
certain local incentives.
44
It was noted that the amended incentives will be applicable to Enterprise
Zones One and Two (including the Subzone for Two) except as noted above, and
would be effective July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2007, unless extended, and
provided, however, that the local incentives for Enterprise Zone One may terminate
if that Enterprise Zone is not extended by the Commonwealth of Virginia and
terminates on December 31,2003; funding for the incentives will be necessary until
the end of the life of the incentives, July 1, 2007, unless otherwise extended; the
Department of Economic Development has sufficient funds to capitalize the Facade
Grant incentive for at least one year, as well as $15,000.00 for other incentives; and
additional funds may be needed in the future, depending on the demand for the
incentives.
Lacking comments at the public hearing that would require further
consideration, the City Manager recommended that Council amend the appropriate
measures to establish the above-mentioned local incentives, subject to approval by
the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD) with an
effective date of July 1,2002; that Council authorize the City Manager to apply to the
VDHCD for approval of local incentive amendments, to add the local incentive, and
to take such further action and/or execute such additional documents as may be
necessary to obtain or confirm such local incentives and to establish appropriate
rules and regulations to implement and administer such local incentives once
approved; funding of $80,000.00 is currently available in Account No. 008-310-9736-
9132, Enterprise Zone Local Incentives, which account name should be changed to
"Facade Grant Program" to more accurately reflect the planned use of the funds;
that Council approve transfer of $20,000.00 from Account No. 008-310-9735-9132 to
Account No. 008-310-9736-9132 (Facade Grant Program); and transfer $15,000.00
from Account No. 008-310-9735-9132 to an account to be established by the Director
of Finance for water, sewer and fire hookup fee rebates, as well as building permit
and comprehensive plan review fee rebates.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35819-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Capital Projects Funds Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 535.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35819-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak to
the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35819-041502 was adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35820-041502) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 33019-070196,
adopted by City Council on July 1, 1996, which established certain local incentives
for the area designated as Enterprise Zone Two in the City by modifying it to delete
paragraphs 4 and 5 and substituting the paragraphs 4 and 5 set forth below to
extend the incentive rebates set forth therein to include rehabilitation work in
addition to new building construction and to modify the percent of rebates available
and that such modified incentives will be applicable from July 1, 2002, through
June 30, 2007, and also modifying and/or extending certain funding limits in
connection with certain local incentives in that ordinance; amending Ordinance No.
35414-061801, adopted by Council on June 18, 2001, which extended the availability
of local incentives through December 31,2003, by modifying it to extend such local
incentives through June 30, 2007; adding a local incentive to provide limited funds
for partial grants for the cost of certain building facade renovations only within
Enterprise Zone One; authorizing the City Manager to apply to the Virginia
Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD) for the approval of
the above amendments and/or to take such further action as may be necessary to
obtain or confirm those amendments; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 536.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35820-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council on Monday,
April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 15,
2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard on the request
of the Rescue Mission of Roanoke, Inc., that 3.56 acres of land, more or less,
consisting of 25 parcels generally located on Tazewell Avenue, Fourth Street and
Dale Avenue, S. E., be rezoned from RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium Density
District and C-2, General Commercial District, to INPUD, Institutional Planned Unit
Development District, subject to certain proffered conditions, the matter was before
the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 29, 2002 and Friday, April 5, 2002, and in The Roanoke
Tribune on Thursday, April 4, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the purpose of the
proposed zoning change is to expand the existing Rescue Mission facilities to
include a new building for services to women and children and an infirmary; the
existing facility currently provides approximately 200 beds allocated to the Men's
Transient Program (101 beds), Men's Recovery Shelter (39 beds), Women's Transient
Program (10 beds) and a Family Shelter (48 beds); some of the existing programs are
proposed to move to the new building; and the new facility is proposed to include
the following programs: Women's Residential Recovery Program (14 units/24 beds),
Female Transient Program (1 unit/10 beds), Family Shelter (12 units/48 beds),
Infirmary (2 units/12 beds), and residential staff (2 units); and the rezoning request
is being considered concurrently with a request to close four alleys in the vicinity
of Tazewell Avenue, Dale Avenue and 4TM Street, S. E., was before Council.
The City Planning Commission recommended approval of the request for
rezoning to INPUD for the purpose of expanding the Rescue Mission facility;
Planning Commission members in support of the request cited the need for human
services facilities, including a women's and children facility; expansion would not
adversely impact the neighborhood because there is currently an existing facility
and expansion is not considered to be clustering; those Commission members
opposed to the request cited clustering of the shelters in the area; effects on the
residential neighborhood expansion was not in conformance with preliminary
recommendations of the neighborhood plan; and past demolitions and new
construction did not enhance and protect the historic neighborhood.
47
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35821-041502) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 401, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of
Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City, subject to certain conditions
proffered by the applicant; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 542.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35821-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
speak to the matter; whereupon the following persons addressed Council:
Jean Edmunds, Chaplain, Roanoke City/County Jails, advised that there are
approximately 100 women in the City Jail and 50 in the County Jail this evening,
many of whom are serving time for drug-related crimes and have small children at
home; and as a Chaplain, one of the saddest things she hears is the guilt that these
women feel because they are separated from their children; therefore, jail is not the
answer for these addicts. She called attention to a young woman who was
incarcerated for over a year, who had three children, but when she was released
from jail, she returned less than six hours later on a charge of crack/cocaine. She
advised that saying no to drugs is not the only answer for drug addicts because they
need specialized treatment, self-examination, education in the reasons for their drug
abuse and how to stay away from drugs. She stated that unfortunately, simply
attending church is not the answer, and in her ministry she explains that God works
in many ways in addition to the 11:00 a.m. Sunday morning worship service and that
God works through treatment which is the purpose of the Roanoke Rescue Mission
program, by incorporating both the spiritual aspect of recovery with specialized
treatment. She asked that Council rezone the property so that the Rescue Mission
may continue its services to women in need.
Audrey Wheaton, 1324D Essex Avenue, N. W., President of the Board of
Directors of the Roanoke Rescue Mission, advised that the Rescue Mission has a
wonderful history in the Roanoke Valley; thousands of lives have been touched and
changed for the better; ten years ago there was a realization that there was a
genuine need for a shelter for women who were addicted to drugs and alcohol where
they could keep their young children with them while receiving treatment, and plans
were initiated to make this a reality, surveys were conducted, public meetings were
held at the Rescue Mission, the Southeast Presbyterian Center, Belmont Christian
Church, the old fire station on Jamison Avenue, and walking tours have been
conducted throughout the area. She stated that input has been sought from the
Southeast Action Forum, the Southeast Christian Partnership and Faith Works;
meetings have been held with the City Manager; and schematic drawings have been
45
changed on several occasions to accommodate community input. She stated that
the Rescue Mission has tried in every way to address the concerns of the citizens
of southeast; construction of the facility will not involve City funds; and many lives
will be rescued from a life of despair and degradation. On behalf of the Board of
Directors of the Rescue Mission, she urged that Council support the construction
of the shelter for women and children by approving the rezoning request.
Ms. Marion McConnell, 2407 Avenham Avenue, S. W., appeared before Council
as a citizen of the City of Roanoke, a volunteer of the Rescue Mission, and on behalf
of the Veterans Administration Medical Care Center. She advised that the Rescue
Mission has long been involved in utilizing volunteers to make the southeast
neighborhood a better place; over the past six years, the Rescue Mission, along with
the Southeast Action Forum and the Southeast Christian Partnership have
sponsored Clean Sweep in an effort to clean up southeast streets and alleys; and
recently 116 volunteers logged over 208 hours and collected 145 bags of trash, 16
tires and 2t/2 truckloads of refuse. She stated that she personally volunteered 60
days at the Rescue Mission through the VA Medical Care Center, because the
Medical Care Center fully supports the efforts of the Rescue Mission, especially in
view of the fact that approximately 34% of Rescue Mission guests are veterans.
Therefore, she encouraged Council to support the request for rezoning.
Ms. Barbara Shelton, 414 Arbor Avenue, S. E., advised that she has lived in
southeast Roanoke for 26 years; she has served as a volunteer at the Rescue
Mission and through the years she has seen the Rescue Mission respond to the
needs of the neighborhood by always offering a helping hand. She advised that
many families in Roanoke have been served by the Rescue Mission, and asked that
Council support the request for rezoning.
Mr. Bill Branch, 4552 Franklin Road, S. W., addressed the matter from a land
use standpoint. When looking at the area requested to be rezoned, along with
existing businesses between Fourth Street and Rt. 581, he advised that there is a car
wash, a paint store, a printing contractor, System Four building, a thrift store, a
glass store and an establishment with heavy equipment outside. With any type of
planning, he explained that it is important to have some kind of transition between
businesses and single family residences, and the proposed Rescue Mission
expansion would provide an ideal transition. He stated that the proposed building
would provide a visual barrier between residences, a pleasing visual site from 1-581
and an ideal use for the land in question. He recommended that Council approve the
request for rezoning.
Mr. John P. Bradshaw, 3132 Burnleigh Road, S. W., former member of the City
Planning Commission, advised that at the Planning Commission hearing, he took
exception to the original staff report which indicated that the proposal was contrary
to the newly drafted comprehensive plan. He stated that having attended most, if not
all of the public drafting sessions that formulated the current comprehensive plan,
he can attest to a number of objectives that the document recommended for the
good of the City; and the services provided and currently proposed by the Rescue
Mission are clearly included in the plan. He noted that the importance of the
neighborhood was stressed in the comprehensive plan, but not at the exclusion of
any other defined City objective; the comprehensive plan recognized the potential
of conflicting objectives, and included a section addressing those types of
occurrences. He stated that there is another issue relative to the applicability of the
comprehensive plan's objectives for maintaining the quality of the existing
neighborhood relative to the Rescue Mission proposal, and questioned whether the
Rescue Mission is truly an element of the neighborhood or merely a fringe activity;
and its location and function is more akin to the immediately adjacent downtown
neighborhood than to the residential setting on the other side of the cemetery. He
called attention to a parking garage on Williamson Road, a glass repair and
warehouse operation zoned light manufacturing, a City parking lot, railroad tracks,
1-581, and a series of vacant lots, etc., none of which are residential in nature, which
indicate that this is not a residential neighborhood, but a fringe to the residential
neighborhood. He noted that from a functional viewpoint, the Rescue Mission
provides a service to the City that is closely related to the adjacent core City, which
is the reason the facility was initially placed in its current location a number of years
ago.
Mr. Sidney Miller, 3745 Heritage Road, S. W., advised that a picture is worth
a thousand words, and as Construction Chairman of the Rescue Mission, he
presented a photograph of a house on the corner of Fourth Street and Bullitt Avenue
which is located in close proximity to the proposed Rescue Mission building. He
compared the condition of the structure before the Rescue Mission acquired the
property to its present condition.
Ms. Susie Donovan, 402 4th Street, S. E., appeared before Council in support
of the request for rezoning for the sake of the children of recovering drug addicts.
She stated that children of addicted mothers do not get the opportunity to be kids
because they are forced into the role of parent; one such child is a ten year old boy
who played the role of parent to not only his mother, but to his four month old
brother, and the final act he performed as parent to his mother was trying to wake
her, when she did not respond, he telephoned 911 and was later told that his mother
was dead as the result of a drug overdose. She advised that the Rescue Mission's
recovery program could have saved the mothers's life; therefore, she requested that
Council vote yes to the rezoning for the sake of the children who are affected.
Ms. Mary K. Bayse, 3138 Hidden Oak Road, S. W., spoke in support of the
rezoning request. She called attention to the significant investment of the Rescue
Mission to the southeast neighborhood; the Rescue Mission has spent to date in
excess of $8 million on its current properties; the Rescue Mission has been careful
about the appearance of its properties by using brick structures and attractive
landscaping, and property is well maintained. She stated that the Rescue Mission
is a good neighbor and has been a good neighbor in southeast Roanoke for over 30
years; the Mission has consistently led efforts to keep the neighborhood safe and
clean; and no other organization has demonstrated this level of commitment to the
southeast neighborhood. She asked that Council support the request for rezoning.
5O
Ms. Tamiko Franklin, 402 4th Street, S. E., a recovering addict who had to leave
the Roanoke Valley in order to find treatment, appeared before Council in support
of the request. She advised that she is the mother of seven children, drug treatment
programs in the Roanoke area did not allow her children to be with her, or she had
to wait long periods of time in order to see her children, therefore, as a result, she
left the drug recovery programs and again became a drug user; and five of her
children are now being raised by the State. She advised that when she became
pregnant with her sixth child, she left Virginia and moved to Connecticut where she
was allowed to go into drug treatment, to deliver her baby, and to bring her baby
back to the treatment facility. By allowing her to bring her child home, she stated
that it gave her the incentive to do what she had to do in order to raise the child.
She requested that Council help women like herself to do the right thing so that they
will not be forced to leave the Roanoke Valley to find the help they need.
Mr. B. Don Johnson, 429 Penn Road, Floyd County, Virginia, a member of the
Board of Directors of the Roanoke Rescue Mission, advised that the Rescue Mission
plans to construct an infirmary that will provide a safe, clean place for women to
recover, because many people receiving medical attention are discharged to the
streets or to unsanitary conditions. He called attention to the importance of
providing a safe, secure and nurturing environment for the children that will be
helped by the program many of whom are in the most critical learning periods of
their life. He requested that Council look with favor on the rezoning of the property,
thereby allowing expansion of the Roanoke Rescue Mission program.
Ms. Phyllis Dickerson, 402 4th Street, S. E., spoke on behalf of the Rescue
Mission's recovery program for women and children. She advised that there is no
quick fix for recovery from drug and alcohol abuse; these women have been caught
in the cycle of abuse for years and cannot make the lifestyle changes that are
necessary to break the cycle in a short period of time because they must change the
way they think, the way they act, and the way they feel which is not an overnight
process. She stated that at a time when funding is being cut for alternative
programs, the Rescue Mission is willing to invest the time and the necessary
resources to help women and their children make the needed lifestyle changes; and
the longer they spend learning how to live without drugs and alcohol, the better their
chances will be of making a permanent lifestyle change and breaking the cycle of
drug abuse. She urged that Council vote in favor of the Rescue Mission expansion.
Ms. Margaret Preston, 402 4th Street, S. E., appeared before Council in support
of the Rescue Mission's Recovery Program for Women and Children, which is a
program that is especially important for women who have no insurance, who survive
on Iow incomes and suffer from the disease of substance abuse. She advised that
there are no long term, faith based recovery programs in the Roanoke Valley; and
as a woman of color, she is especially concerned about the single mothers with
children in her community who are victims of this disease. She requested that
Council vote in favor of the Rescue Mission expansion program so that these women
and their children will receive the help they need and the cycle of substance abuse
can be broken.
Ms. Sharon McCroskey, 402 4th Street, S. E., advised that she has been free of
drugs and alcohol for three years due to a 20 month treatment program that she
received. She explained that she previously tried to get help in Roanoke to no avail;
she called numerous treatment centers and was turned away because of lack of
insurance, and with budget cuts, it will be even harder for women to get help with
their drug addiction. She stated that if more recovery programs for women and
children are not provided, the cycle of drug and alcohol abuse will continue; women
will die, children will be raised by the State, and the crime rate will escalate. She
advised that the Rescue Mission employs God-loving people who want to make a
difference, and she can think of no better place than the Rescue Mission for women
to begin recovery and to receive help in becoming productive citizens of society.
She asked that Council Members vote in favor of the request.
Ms. Nancy Brenneman, 4898 Raimey Lane, Salem, Virginia, read a
communication from Ms. Holly Pugh, 404 Bullitt Avenue, S. E., who has owned her
home since 1971, and supports the women and children's shelter proposed for
construction on Fourth Street, S. E., because the proposed building will be an
enhancement to the neighborhood. She advised that since the facility is proposed
to be located close to her home, she feels more secure knowing that the facility will
be monitored around the clock by Rescue Mission staff. Ms. Pugh advised that the
Rescue Mission has helped her family in the past, as well as many other persons in
the Roanoke Valley, and will continue to help those in need in the future.
Mr. Courtney Hoge, 3027 Golf Colony Drive, Salem, Virginia, advised that as
an emergency shelter for families, children, women and men, the Rescue Mission
provides a valuable service by serving 211,000 meals annually and provides over
50,000 nights of lodging, which is valued at over $3.5 million and the costs would be
overwhelming if residential recovery programs and a free clinic for the homeless
were added in. He stated that the Rescue Mission performs all of these services
without federal, state or local funding; therefore, he spoke in support of the Rescue
Mission program which helps to provide a better way of life for some of the Roanoke
Valley's citizens.
Mr. Thomas Markwood, 804 Welton Avenue, S. W., advised that the Roanoke
Rescue Mission provided 599 hours of volunteer trash pickup in the southeast
neighborhood in 2001 and 308 volunteer cleanup hours have been logged for the
year 2002 and each week volunteer groups canvas the neighborhood to pick up
trash to ensure that all residents enjoy a clean environment. He stated that the
women and children who will be helped in the new facility will not be contributors
to the concerns that southeast residents have expressed. He asked that Council
approve the request for rezoning so that the treatment facility for women and their
children will become a reality.
Mr. Earl Elkins, 921 Tazewell Avenue, S. E., spoke in support of the request of
the Rescue Mission which offers a helping hand to those in need. He asked that
Council approve the request for rezoning which will provide for construction of the
new treatment facility.
Mr. Richard Nichols, 1620 Kirk Avenue, S. E., Vice-President of the Southeast
Action Forum, advised that the Forum was instructed by a previous Mayor to work
with the Rescue Mission and that the Rescue Mission should work with the
Southeast Action Forum to address concerns regarding the expansion of the facility.
He stated that the Rescue Mission has contributed to the southeast community by
cleaning up the area and the Rescue Mission continues to do so on a daily basis.
He stated that the alleys proposed for closure will help to deter crime, the City will
no longer have to maintain the alleys, and the proposed expansion will be an
enhancement to the community. He advised that the Southeast Action Forum is
supportive of the Rescue Mission as a good neighbor and the addition of the
women's shelter.
Ms. Christine Proffitt, 424 Bullitt Avenue, S. E., appeared before Council in an
effort to support, promote and protect neighborhood preservation, but also in
opposition to the proposed rezoning of residential land and the closure of public
alleys by the Rescue Mission due to quality of life, violation of the historic nature of
the area, integrity of the neighborhood, and diminishing the historic value. She
stated that downtown Roanoke is surrounded by Old Southwest, Historic Gainsboro,
and Historic Belmont; historic properties are an asset to the City; historic buildings
and homes are unique and attractive and give the City character; and as elected
officials, Council should want to preserve historic properties, but it appears that the
City continues to allow non-profits and businesses to tear at the fabric of the
southeast community. She stated that the gateway into southeast Roanoke, Bullitt
Avenue and Jamison Avenue, which connects downtown, Vinton and Smith
Mountain Lake, lost 26 historic homes, because there was a plan for the residential
property; there is vacant land that has lost tax revenue; the Belmont neighborhood
surrounding the Roanoke Rescue Mission was intact in 1995, however, since that
time, another 15 historic properties have been razed, again raping the neighborhood
of its historic residential value. She questioned how much more stress can be
placed on this Iow income, struggling neighborhood, and noted that seven years
ago, the Belmont neighborhood was in a state of disrepair, with no investment by
the City, its residents, the Southeast Action Forum, or the Roanoke Rescue Mission.
She stated that Council, as elected officials, are charged with the responsibility to
ensure quality of life, not only for downtown, but for every neighborhood; and she
along with her neighbors have been working with the system for over five years and
they have tried to allow the system to work, but other people are playing outside the
system which is not fair. She advised that since this small, but vocal group, in
opposition to the Rescue Mission expansion went public with regard to
inappropriate behavior, much unChristian behavior has taken place by this faith-
based organization. She stated that the City recommended a community planning
process, however, the process was not honest and Rescue Mission planners tried
to sell the Mission's plans, which was not a legitimate effort to bring southeast
residents into discussions. She added that their concerns were ignored; therefor,
they submitted a letter on September 13, 2000, to address the Rescue Mission Board
of Directors in order to directly express concerns regarding present operations and
proposed expansion; however, residents have not to date been given the
opportunity to address the Board of Directors. She noted that on October 16, 2000,
neighborhood residents brought their concerns to Council; on October 24, 2000,
Rescue Mission staff and officers of the Southeast Action Forum conspired together
and called an illegal special meeting to expel neighborhood residents who stood in
opposition, accusing residents of being a conflict to the neighborhood, and the
Rescue Mission infiltrated the Southeast Action Forum with 17 new members. She
stated that the Rescue Mission has no concern for the neighborhood; if they did,
they would have preserved the historic homes and used them for the treatment
facility for women and children; and the rezoning of residential land is a done deal,
even though the surrounding neighborhood is in opposition. She advised that the
fact that the City of Roanoke appears to be supportive of the Rescue Mission has
seriously broken the trust level of the community, and it saddens her to know that
the City has not remained impartial.
Ms. Cassandra Anderson, 424 Bullitt Avenue, S. E., advised she lives one
block away from the Roanoke Rescue Mission; the proposed expansion of the
Rescue Mission is an outrageous idea, although it is commendable to build a new
facility that will help women and children, but residents of southeast have
experienced far too many problems as a result of the Rescue Mission; therefore, the
facility should be constructed at a location where there are no families with children.
She stated that the expansion is supposed to help people, but questioned how it will
help the neighborhood. She called attention to litter, harassment of persons
residing in the area, and undesirable persons congregating in the neighborhood.
She stated that the neighborhood is striving to correct existing problems, and
expanding the Rescue Mission will undermine the progress that has taken place.
She noted that expansion of the facility is not fair to the residents of southeast
Roanoke who will have to increase their efforts to clean up their neighborhood, and
parents are afraid to let their children play outside. She stated that the proposed
facility should be constructed at a location that is not in close proximity to
residential property.
Ms. Corinne Profitt, 424 Bullitt Avenue, S. E., advised that she lives in the
Belmont district of southeast. She stated that she addressed Council on October 16,
2000, with concerns of vagrants drinking in public, littering of streets and alleys, and
a severe safety problem that has been neglected by the City. She stated that
southeast residents came to Council for help, but nothing was done other than to
ignore the problem and allow it to continue.
Mr. Micky Pritchard, 1616 Campbell Avenue, S. E., spoke in opposition to the
rezoning and the closure of alleys for the benefit of the Roanoke Rescue Mission.
Mr. Bobby Meadows, 410 Bullitt Avenue, S. E., advised that the Roanoke
Rescue Mission has touched many lives in the Roanoke Valley; residents are not
opposed to the day to day operations; however, they are opposed to the transient
program that affects the quality of life in the neighborhood. He stated that the issue
is not with women and children, but the inability of the facility to control its clients;
and the Board of Directors and administration of the Rescue Mission facility should
be held accountable for the actions of its clients. He noted that when the issue first
became public, the neighborhood was told that no one in the Roanoke Valley offered
a full-time program for women with children; however, it was later learned that
Bethany Hall has provided this service for over 30 years; therefore, he asked that the
City encourage Bethany Hall to expand its facility and encourage the Rescue Mission
to construct single family homes in accordance with current zoning. He stated that
the City's Comprehensive Plan states that publicly assisted housing and shelters
will be equitably distributed in all parts of the region; the INPUD ordinance calls for
development to be harmonious with existing surrounding land uses; however, the
current facility does not meet that requirement, and residents of southeast would
support the women and children's shelter if the current Rescue Mission facility was
a harmonious development; and after years of deception and aggressive tactics
toward residents, trust has been lost. He urged City Council to abide by the City's
Comprehensive Plan and that the neighborhood plan be in place before approval of
site plans or rezoning are authorized. He stated that proposed plans call for a large
facility that will back up to single family homes; there is a need for a buffer and a
transition area so that neighborhood streets will continue to be viable; and the
Rescue Mission architect and the Board of Directors should work with residents to
approve buffering, to make the building facing the neighborhood more compatible,
and to monitor behavior issues. He advised that the Rescue Mission should fund
four new police officers to help relieve some of the tax burden created by the
organization. He pointed out that based on these facts, the Roanoke Neighborhood
Partnership Steering Committee voted to not support the Rescue Mission expansion
at its meeting on February 20; a staff report to the City Planning Commission did not
support the petition in its current form; and the President's Council stood firm with
regard to neighborhood solidarity and does not support the expansion, citing the
rationale that this is not only a Belmont issue, but an issue for every inner City
neighborhood.
Mr. Ricky Nelson, 1319 Tazewell Avenue, S. E., advised that he recently moved
to the City of Roanoke from South Carolina in the hopes of finding a new and
wonderful life in the southeast area; and as someone living near the Rescue
Mission, he often has second thoughts about his decision due to day to day crime,
drugs and the fears that he and his neighbors are forced to endure. He asked that
he and his neighbors be reassured that living in any area of Roanoke is a good
decision to make; many persons in attendance this evening and speaking in favor
of the request do not live near the Rescue Mission and invited them to move to
southeast, to become his neighbor and to live with the fears that he and his
neighbors experience every day. For the protection of the neighborhood, he
requested that the rezoning be denied.
Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that the inner cities have
become invisible, with poverty, crime and decay in Roanoke's oldest neighborhoods.
She referred to a publication written in 1997 which indicated that since 1975, the City
of Roanoke has received more than $49.1 million in Community Development Block
Grant funds from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; Federal
law states that the money is to be used to create housing and jobs for the poor;
Roanoke City used 37% of its Community Development Block Grant funds on
economic development for industrial parks, the Hotel Roanoke and Conference
Center and downtown parking garages; these projects have provided very few jobs
for the poor; and this is the main reason that inner cities are suffering from decay.
She advised that the City of Roanoke has been warned repeatedly to save old
housing stock and older neighborhoods, orthe entire Citywill suffer; and residential
neighborhoods are the foundation of the City, a City of neighborhoods according to
administrative officials. She stated that she was not speaking against the program
of the Rescue Mission, but about residential property which should not be
encroached upon. She asked that Council support its own statements, and urged
that Council help the historic Belmont Preservation Association in its quest to keep
its residential neighborhood intact.
Mr. John McGonigel, 706 Montrose Avenue, S. E., stated that even though the
Belmont Neighborhood Association believes that the proposed drug unit and
infirmary would best serve the women and children and surrounding neighborhood
at another location, they are not against this needed ministry; and as an individual
who has been involved with various ministries including chapel service at the
Rescue Mission, he supports any true ministry of God because there is a need to
reach out to the downtrodden and homeless who need and want to be restored to
a meaningful purpose in life. However, he advised that there is another group of
people who need to be considered, who are the forgotten residents of the west
Belmont neighborhood, who virtually have no voice in the process; their
neighborhood is on the line and they, like other areas in the northwest and
southwest quadrants, are fighting for their survival; and they need help to save what
is left of their neighborhood. He stated that no special interest group should have
a free hand on any neighborhood; just as the Rescue Mission has made differences
in the lives of people, residents of Belmont have made a significant difference
through cleaner streets, yards, upgrading of houses, and curbing criminal activity;
and the heros of the homeless are the staff and volunteers of the Rescue Mission,
but the real voices and heros of the neighborhood are the officers and members of
the Belmont Neighborhood Association who are committed to the protection,
preservation and well-being of their neighborhood in spite of overwhelming odds
against them. He stated that based upon periodicals, a correlated scrapbook of
photographs, and documented videos of criminal activity in the Belmont area, it is
recommended that City officials tour the area to view existing conditions which will
provide a better understanding of the reasons why residents of the west Belmont
neighborhood feel threatened and oppose the rezoning of property located at 4th
Street and Dale Avenue for the proposed treatment facility.
Ms. Caroline Camilleri, 1012 Morehead Avenue, S. E., appeared before Council
in opposition to the rezoning and closing of alleys by the Rescue Mission. She
stated that since the male vagrant population is declining, the Rescue Mission
should use that space for women and their children. She added that the Rescue
Mission should construct houses on those lots where the homes were previously
razed that will be compatible with the neighborhood for occupancy by families in
need of housing assistance until they are able to become self-sufficient.
Ms. Teresa Kidd, 902 Penmar Avenue, S. E., advised that from the viewpoint
of a mother who has had a child taken away and later having been reunited with that
child, it is the hardest thing that a mother can endure, and she sympathizes with any
woman on the street who cannot get help and is forced to give her child to the state.
As a member of the Southeast Action Forum Executive Board, she spoke in support
of the request of the Rescue Mission, and advised that the neighborhood will benefit
from the rezoning, and the Rescue Mission will work with southeast residents
toward a successful conclusion. She explained that currently there is only one
program for women in the Roanoke area, and if the program is full, women are
forced back on the streets to face the same problems; however, more programs are
offered for men, which is discriminatory. She stated that the City of Roanoke is
supposed to be an All America City and citizens should help each other.
Ms. Carolyn Nolan, 3008 Maywood Road, S. W., a member of the Advisory
Board of the Rescue Mission Healthcare Center, advised that the new treatment
center will include a 12 bed infirmary for members of the homeless population who
need healthcare and specialized nursing care for a short period of time who do not
need to be in the hospital, but may need to be kept in an isolated setting. She called
attention to a similar care facility in Savannah, Georgia, consisting of a 32-bed
respite care center, which reports in its first year of operation, that hospitals were
saved in the range of $9.5 million and Medicaid saved $1.3 million. She stated that
the Rescue Mission expansion program will help the uninsured to receive the short
term medical help they need, and it will help to keep insurance premiums at a lower
rate.
Mr. Lee Clark, 1408 West Drive, S. W., spoke in support of the Rescue Mission
expansion project.
57
Mr. R. J. Musel, 12748 Dickerson Mill Road, Moneta, Virginia, spoke on behalf
of the Roanoke Rescue Mission. He stated that the Rescue Mission has touched the
lives of thousands of people over the years; the new facility will provide a much
needed service; and the Rescue Mission has helped to improve the southeast
neighborhood and will continue to do so. He urged that Council vote to rezone the
property as requested by the Rescue Mission.
Ms. Joy S. Johnson, 421 Bullitt Avenue, S. E., spoke in support of the request.
Ms. Wanda Kemp, 444 Mountain Avenue, S. W., presented concerns with
regard to the proposed Rescue Mission expansion. She advised that she resides in
Old Southwest, she is Secretary-Treasurer of Gateway Guardians Crime Watch, and
a care patrol member; and on a smaller scale than southeast, Old Southwest has
been subjected to the undesirable behavior by some of the residents of the Rescue
Mission due to their migration to the southwest area. She stated that she is not
opposed to assisting the less fortunate, but she is opposed to their behavior and the
inability of the Rescue Mission to control them; these individuals should be held
accountable for their behavior, or the Rescue Mission should be deemed a nuisance
property; and sex offenders presently reside at the Rescue Mission, and offenses
committed by these individuals include aggravated sexual battery, rape and
attempted rape, forcible sodomy, and taking indecent liberties with children. She
inquired if the Rescue Mission has the right to jeopardize the safety of women and
children by closely positioning them with known registered sex offenders. She
explained that there are other service providers, such as Bethany Hall that is ready
to assist women and children in need of the services they are equipped to provide,
and expanding the Rescue Mission will only duplicate those services; Roanoke City
should be concerned about the impact of expanding the Rescue Mission on
residents of inner city neighborhoods and the dwindling tax base; and the expansion
will encourage more Roanoke City residents to relocate to safer areas outside of the
City of Roanoke. She noted that it should be said that Roanoke City is concerned
for the welfare of its residents, first and foremost; without a healthy residential and
business community, the long awaited Vision 2001 Comprehensive Plan will never
be implemented; and southeast residents will not be able to stabilize their already
crippled community, while absorbing an increase in the transient, homeless
population if the expansion is allowed to take place. She asked that Council deny
the request for rezoning.
Ms. Mary Allen, 1421 22nd Street, N. W., a Rescue Mission Officer, and
Secretary of the Healthcare Board, advised that as a school teacher of 35 years, she
knows first hand the importance of adequate preparation for school; and national
studies show 79% of homeless children never attend preschool and enter the first
grade 1,000 hours behind their peers in basic school preparation. She stated that
the proposed new facility for women and children will include a readiness to read
center with a focus on bringing these children into the school setting better
prepared to begin the educational process. She asked that Council join her in
supporting this important endeavor by approving the request for rezoning.
Mr. Donald Graybill, 2007 Shady Run Road, Vinton, Virginia, advised that he
owns the corner lot on Dale Avenue and Fifth Street, which in its current zoning will
allow construction of seven apartment units. He stated that upon his retirement, it
was his intent to construct a seven unit apartment facility, to reside in one of the
units and to rent the other six for retirement income. He called attention to the plight
of senior citizens who live on fixed incomes of only $300.00 - $400.00 per month, and
expressed concern that if the rezoning is approved, it will affect his ability to
construct a seven unit apartment building on his property.
Ms. Marie Dull, 821 Tazewell Avenue, S. E., advised that she has lived in
southeast for 43 years, and she is dissatisfied with conditions in her neighborhood
as a result of transients who must leave the Rescue Mission at 7:00 a.m., in the
morning and are free to roam the streets, begging for money to purchase food or
alcohol. She stated that southeast Roanoke has suffered through very difficult times
as a result of the Rescue Mission, and the Rescue Mission should not be located in
a residential setting.
Mr. Ray Barbour, 687 Montrose Avenue, S. E., expressed concern with regard
to the request for rezoning. He called attention to unsatisfactory conditions such as
crime, litter, loitering, etc., that have devalued property in the southeast
neighborhood. He commended Council for allowing citizens to be heard, and asked
that Council review the request from a practical standpoint because the Rescue
Mission is less than three blocks from downtown Roanoke and the Farmers Market
and transients could panhandle and steal from City Market patrons.
Mr. Rick Williams, 3725 Sunrise Avenue, N. W., advised that the Rescue
Mission performs a good service, but he believes that the Rescue Mission has, over
the years, exploited the people of Belmont for its own purposes, because the
Belmont area is a weak and relatively powerless neighborhood, in spite of the fact
that this has been done in order to provide much needed help for needy people, the
means that the Rescue Mission has used do not justify the ends; and the Rescue
Mission's closest neighbors appear to be its greatest foes. He stated that the
Rescue Mission has advised that this is the last phase of its expansion, although
some Mission supporters do not believe that the Rescue Mission is being honest;
however, there is a measure of healing which is possible in that the Rescue Mission
can most likely do the work it wants to do without further abuse of the Belmont
neighborhood; and a necessary first step is for the City to enforce provisions of the
INPUD ordinance under which the Rescue Mission is seeking the rezoning. He
explained that the intent of INPUD is to balance neighborhood and institutional
needs so that institutions get flexibility and neighborhoods get developments that
seamlessly fit in; however, the Rescue Mission's design does not fit in with the
neighborhood. He stated that if Council allows the Rescue Mission to use INPUD
rezoning to construct its facility, a condition should be attached to the rezoning
requiring that the facility be redesigned to fit in with the residential character of the
Belmont neighborhood which is required by the INPUD ordinance.
Mr. Martin Jeffrey, 3912 Hyde Park Drive, S. W., Roanoke County, advised that
he was not present to criticize the Rescue Mission or the good work it does. He
stated that the Rescue Mission and its Board of Directors are good people who are
trying to do good work, but there is a scripture that says, "Don't let your good be
spoken evil of"; and another scripture that says, "As much as possible, live in peace
with every man". He stated that if the rezoning is approved, it will basically take 25
parcels of real estate off the City's tax roles at a time when the budget is in crisis.
He advised that there is available space at the Rescue Mission that could be
renovated for the proposed treatment facility that is far enough away from the other
residential property of the Rescue Mission to accomplish the separation that the
Mission desires and would not harm or further encroach upon the neighborhood and
keep 25 parcels of land potentially on the City's tax roles.
Mr. Lee Osborne, 5152 Falcon Ridge Road, S. W., Roanoke County, advised
that he stands in support of the Rescue Mission's expansion request.
Ms. Kathy Hill, 509 Arbor Avenue, S. E., advised that the City should follow the
recommendation of the Comprehensive Plan. She stated that neighborhoods should
be protected against programs that will place a strain on already overwhelmed
neighborhoods by creating a facility that could lead to unsatisfactory living
conditions. She spoke in support of locating the shelter in another area of Roanoke
City or Roanoke County where it is not in close proximity to residential housing.
Ms. Linda Bannister, 3747 Long Meadow Avenue, N. W., appeared before
Council in support of the request of the Rescue Mission. She advised that there is
no facility in Virginia where a woman can go with her children for treatment; Bethany
Hall, a facility in the Roanoke Valley, will accept women into its program who are
pregnant and after treatment, they are moved to another home where they can have
their child, but there is no program currently in the Roanoke Valley that will permit
children to be with their mother during the treatment period. She stated that the
Rescue Mission helped her during her time of need; and stressed that the proposed
facility is not for transients, but for women who need help who have children; the
children would become a ward of the state without the facility, and the facility will
help women to become free of drugs. She asked that Council approve the request
for rezoning.
Mr. Lewis Burk, 3747 Long Meadow Avenue, N. W., advised that he was a
participant in the Rescue Mission Program which helped him to overcome certain
obstacles in his life. He spoke in support of the Rescue Mission and the services
that it provides, and asked that Council rezone the property which will enable the
Rescue Mission to enhance its programs.
Ms. Fran Hodges, 315 Cassell Lane, S. W., appeared before Council in support
of the Rescue Mission request.
Mr. Dan Doss, 523 Fifth Street, S. E., advised that within an eight month
period, he called the Police Department 73 times to report public drunkenness,
persons sleeping on his or his neighbor's back porch, and other unlawful actions
due to the Rescue Mission facility. He asked that Council deny the request for
rezoning.
Ms. Cheyanne Lark, 3501 Dona Drive, N. W., appeared before Council in
support of the request of the Rescue Mission. She stated that the proposed site of
the new facility will be on land that was not well maintained by the previous owner,
therefore, the Rescue Mission should not be punished for past failures of previous
property owners. She advised that she has seen dignity restored and hope renewed,
both in people and in the southeast neighborhood, as a result of Rescue Mission
programs. Speaking as a woman and a mother, she stated that it is her conviction
that for many women who have fallen prey to drugs, their children may be their only
hope for a life free of drugs and alcohol, because a mother will be less likely to seek
help if she is forced to separate from her children; and a rehabilitation facility that
provides a way for a mother to remain with her children may inspire dedication and
determination to not only seek treatment, but to remain free of drugs and alcohol in
the future.
Ms. Judy Rumford, 6334 Fairway Forest Drive, S. W., advised that she served
as a volunteer fund raiser for the Rescue Mission and she helped to raise a majority
of the capital funds necessary for expansion of the Rescue Mission from private
sources. She stated that she has observed first hand the need for the women's
facility. She called attention to the large number of persons who were in attendance
to voice their support of the request, which is a strong indication of the level of
support that exists throughout the Roanoke area. She urged that Council approve
the request for rezoning.
Ms. Mary Boitnoit, 518 Fifth Street, S. E., advised that she is a 17 year resident
of the southeast area and she is opposed to the rezoning of residential property and
the alley closures for the benefit of the Rescue Mission.
Mr. David Harrison, 3710 Bosworth Drive, S. W., spoke in support of the
request of the Rescue Mission.
Mr. David Burnleigh, 6622 Trevilian Road, N. E., spoke in support of the work
of the Rescue Mission because 19 years ago, the Rescue Mission saved his life. He
asked that the same privilege be afforded to women and children who are in need
of the same type of help.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that he has personal knowledge with regard to the
responsibility of recovery. He stated that 26 years ago, he served as a non-
commissioned officer in charge of an outpatient drug and alcohol counseling center
while serving with the United States Army stationed in Germany. He added that
through his work in that capacity and subsequently working in an alcoholism
residential treatment center in Richmond, he learned about the importance of
recovery, therefore, he supports recovery for both personal and non-political
reasons. He explained that he grew up with an alcoholic father who did not go into
recovery and died at the age of 53; therefore, he knows first hand the importance
of recovery. He advised that Council can impose enhanced penalties for people who
create problems on the City Market, but the real question is what can be done to
address the root causes of these problems. He pointed out that these people may
be the sons of mothers who needed the kind of help offered by the Rescue Mission
at some point in their life, but did not receive assistance. He stated that in some
areas there are conflicts within the comprehensive plan, therefore, it is necessary
to find the right balance; and the comprehensive plan speaks against clustering, but
does not provide clear and specific definitions of what clustering is. As one member
of Council, he requested that the record reflect that he will not support any further
expansion of the Rescue Mission. He noted that the point of view of all sides of the
issue has been beneficial and will contribute to a better decision; objectives,
concerns, and issues that were raised by residents and others have helped the
Rescue Mission come to what will, in fact, be a better design and a better facility;
and concerns of the neighborhood have been greatly reduced by the process.
Ms. Wyatt advised that she does not doubt the extraordinarily good work of
the Rescue Mission, but her concern is at whose expense. She stated that she has
lived in the neighborhood on the corner of 5th Street and Dale Avenue and knows
what the residents go through on a daily basis when they cannot allow their children
to catch the school bus without adult supervision. She advised that the Rescue
Mission did not intend for that to happen, but it is a reality. She explained that such
a facility for women with their children will add three more classrooms at Fallon Park
Elementary School that already has six outside trailers, which represents an added
expense to the school system and to the taxpayers of the City of Roanoke. In
addition, she noted that the Rescue Mission refers to the need to find housing for
these women and their children when they leave the treatment facility; however,
there is not one unit of subsidized housing anywhere outside of the City of Roanoke,
which means that the majority of these women when they come out of treatment,
without marketable skills, will need Iow entry jobs and subsidized housing, which
equates to more money to be expended by the City. She stated that more police
officers will be needed to address transient problems, which will be another pull on
the coffers of the City, and more social services will be required which will also have
to be funded by the City. She added that the types of commitments that the Rescue
Mission is requesting from every taxpayer in the City of Roanoke will support the
facility. She advised that she is not opposed to drug rehabilitation counseling;
however, residents of the neighborhood are in a tremendous amount of pain and
they are frustrated because they have tried to be heard, they believe that no one
wants to listen to their concerns, and they are being ignored because many people
who do not live in the southeast neighborhood like to feel good and they like to
support what they think is a good cause. She stated that she feels the pain of
southeast Roanoke residents, someone has to stand up for the downtrodden, and
the downtrodden in this case is the Rescue Mission's neighbors. She stated that the
neighborly thing to do would be to spread the good works of the Rescue Mission to
a 15 acre farm that it owns in the Roanoke Valley, which would be a good place for
children to enjoy fresh air, sunshine and freedom because they, too, will be
recovering. She requested that the Rescue Mission seriously look at its needs for
economy and expediency and whether or not those needs outweigh being a good
neighbor and sharing the load.
Vice- Mayor Carder expressed concern over the statement that one is either
for the neighborhood or for the Rescue Mission. He stated that the Rescue Mission
proffered that the maximum number of beds for male transients will not exceed 101
which is the current number; therefore, the Rescue Mission does not plan to expand
beds for male transients; and within the context of the rezoning request, he would
not be inclined, as one member of Council, to support further expansion of the
Rescue Mission beyond the request currently before the Council. He stated that the
City of Roanoke is about to invest its Community Development Block Grant money
into a comprehensive revitalization project in the southeast neighborhood between
Jamison and Bullitt Avenues and the City's vision is that southeast will be a vibrant
and beautiful community; the Jamison/Bullitt pilot project will be the most
comprehensive neighborhood revitalization in the history of the City of Roanoke, and
in order to be successful, all partners in the area will need to come together. With
regard to crime, he stated that he looks to the City Manager and to the Police Chief
to ensure a zero tolerance and if the City invests millions of dollars of CDBG funds
into the southeast area, police protection is a key element. He called attention to the
need for a healing process in order for neighborhood revitalization to move forward
and to be successful.
Council Member Harris advised that he will support the request for rezoning
based on the fact that the services to be provided for addicted women and their
children are needed. He stated that Bethany Hall will not take women with existing
children; therefore, it is a service that is not provided in the Roanoke Valley. He
reiterated the comments of Vice-Mayor Carder that the concerns expressed by the
Belmont neighborhood are an indictment that the City of Roanoke has not done its
job in regard to public safety and other issues. He added that if a citizen has to call
the Police Department 73 times over an eight month period, the City has failed in its
efforts to serve that citizen, his street and his neighborhood; however, the Rescue
Mission should not be held accountable. He requested a report on proposed
strategies by the City Administration to improve existing conditions.
Mr. Hudson commended the good work of the Rescue Mission, although he
stated that he understands the concerns of citizens of southeast Roanoke. He
advised that the facility is well managed and he will support the request for rezoning.
The Mayor advised that there was a time when the Rescue Mission was able
to contain its ministry within the walls of its facility, but it has been made clear that
the ministry must expand to the neighborhood. He stated that those persons on the
other side of the issue have clearly made their point that the City must do a better
job of policing the neighborhood; however, he stated that he looks to the leadership
of the Rescue Mission to provide more ministering to the need of the southeast
neighborhood. He added that all citizens are expected to abide by the law and there
should be no exceptions.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 35821-041502 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. 5.
NAYS: Council MemberWyatt ............................................................... 1.
(Council Member White was absent.)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by
Council on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing
for Monday, April 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m.,or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the request of the Rescue Mission of Roanoke, Inc., to permanently vacate,
discontinue and close four alleys in the vicinity of Dale Avenue and 4t~ Street, S. E.,
the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 29, 2002 and Friday, April 5, 2002 and in The Roanoke
Tribune on Thursday, April 4, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the subject closures
were requested to develop Rescue Mission property for a proposed new facility
which is the subject of a pending rezoning request, was before Council.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request, subject to
the following conditions:
64
The applicant shall submit a subdivision plat to the Agent for the
Planning Commission, receive all required approvals, and record the
plat with the Clerk of the Circuit Court for the City of Roanoke. Said
plat shall combine all properties which would otherwise dispose of the
land within the right-of-way to be vacated in a manner consistent with
law, and retain appropriate easements for the installation and
maintenance of any and all existing utilities that may be located within
the rights-of-way, including the right of ingress and egress.
The applicant shall dedicate new alley right-of-way as proposed in
Exhibit B attached to the report and shall construct new access
according to City standards.
Upon meeting all other conditions to the granting of the application, the
applicant shall deliver a certified copy of this ordinance for recordation
to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke, Virginia, indexing the same
in the name of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as Grantor, and in the
name of the petitioner, and the names of any other parties in interest
who may so request, as Grantees. The applicant shall pay such fees
and charges as are required by the Clerk to effect such recordation.
Upon recording a certified copy of this ordinance with the Clerk of
Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, Virginia, the applicant shall file
with the Engineer for the City of Roanoke, Virginia, the Clerk's receipt,
demonstrating that such recordation has occurred.
If the above conditions have not been met within a period of one year
from the date of adoption of this ordinance, said ordinance shall be null
and void with no further action by City Council being necessary.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35822-041502) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing certain public rights-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more
particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 544.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35822-041502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
speak to the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35822-041502 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder, and
Mayor Smith ..................................................................................................... 5.
NAYS: Council MemberWyatt .................................................................... 1.
(Council Member White was absent.)
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard; it is also a time for
informal dialogue between Council Members and citizens and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: Evelyn D. Bethel, Co-Chair,
Washington Park Improvements and Memorial Committee, advised that in June,
2000, it was revealed to the community at large that in 1999, Walter Sullivan, Bishop
of the Diocese of Richmond, had offered the sum of $300,000.00 to the City of
Roanoke to improve Washington Park so that St. Andrews Catholic School students
could have specific times to use Washington Park, LucyAddison Middle School, the
Booker T. Washington Administration Building, and Victory Stadium.
She further advised that City departments held community meetings in which
numerous segments of the community voiced displeasure with the proposed plans;
therefore, the City Manager requested citizens to volunteer to work on the
Washington Park Improvements and Washington Park Monument Committees, and
it was later decided to combine the two committees into one and to initially work on
park improvements.
She explained that the committee, along with personnel of the Department of
Parks and Recreation, met for many hours to analyze and study ideas solicited by
City staff and citizens about what was liked and needed in Washington Park;
knowing that the park was partially built on a dump/landfill, the Committee
repeatedly requested written information pertaining to the safety of the park, so that
the validity of their work could not be questioned, but no report was provided;
however, the Committee continued to work, despite the lack of engineering studies
and timely acceptance/approval of its request for an architect with experience in the
interpretation of black historical figures.
Ms. Bethel advised that on February 26, 2001, the Committee presented a
proposed Washington Park improvement "master plan" to the City Manager for
review, acceptance and presentation to the community at large; while the work of
the Committee was praised and plans were accepted by the City Manager, the
Committee was informed that Bishop Sullivan would have to review the plans;
apparently, Bishop Sullivan did not approve the Committee's work because he
withdrew his offer of $300,000.00; and prior to completion of the improvements plan,
no mention of a stream bank restoration project, or a First Tee Golf Program was
made.
She stated that as the Committee began working on the second phase of its
mission which was to develop a creative memorial for Booker T. Washington, it was
informed about a stream bank restoration project being considered for the park; two
presentations were made and during the last presentation, the Committee was told
that the project would not accomplish its basic purpose of water control; therefore,
the Committee rejected the stream bank restoration plan. She further stated that
before the improvement plan was presented in January 2001, the Committee
discussed and rejected putting golf in Washington Park; therefore, when City staff
stated in October 2001 that they wished to make a presentation about a First Tee
Golf program, the Committee rejected the idea; and it should be noted that golf was
not one of the priorities listed by either youth or seniors, nor was stream bank
restoration mentioned by the community at the various meetings.
Ms. Bethel explained that even though the Committee was told that an
architect with experience in black history interpretation could not be hired, the City
Manager later authorized $3,000.00 which was the maximum amount for a non-bid
project; the Committee was successful in contacting an architect with the
qualifications desired and obtained a statement for services, with an estimate of
costs that exceeded the $3,000.00 authorized by the City Manager; therefore, Inner
City Selective Development, a non-profit organization whose main goal is the
improvement of Washington Park, volunteered to donate a $10,000.00 grant/award
for such services; and after numerous meetings with officers of Inner City Selective
Development, representatives of the Washington Park Committee, and Parks and
Recreation staff, an agreement could not be reached between the City and the
architect.
She advised that recognizing that draft plans for a creative memorial
throughout the park could not be finalized without an architect's input and a
stalemate had been reached, on February 1,2002, the Committee informed the City
Manager that its task had been completed and suggested that a community meeting
be held to inform the community at large of its work; and on March 8, 2001, the City
Manager, in part, stated that she would convene a community meeting after an
engineering study had been completed. She stated that the Committee is baffled
because it requested such studies in 2000 at the beginning of its work; no mention
67
of such studies was made when the improvement plan was presented in February,
2001; with regard to finances for a well qualified architect with experience in
interpreting black history, the Committee is puzzled because the CityAttorneywould
not meet with the Committee, members of Inner City Selective Development and
other City staff to resolve significant questions; and a community-wide public
meeting should be held immediately to advise citizens about the true status of the
work of the Committee, the status of Bishop Sullivan's offer and what the City has
yet to do to implement the improvements master plan completed by the Committee.
Ms. Bethel advised that the improvement master plan was submitted by the
Committee in February, 2001 and the offer of Bishop Sullivan was withdrawn shortly
thereafter; the community at large has not been officially notified of the Committee's
action; work on the creative memorial has been stopped in its tracks because of
financial difficulties and to the extent of resources; therefore, it is requested that
Council take immediate action to: (1) adequately inform the community regarding the
status of Washington Park; (2) authorize sufficient funds to engage an architect with
the necessary experience so that the full task of the Committee can be completed;
and (3) assure that any engineering studies will be conducted immediately so that
the work of the committee will not be in vain.
Ms. Brenda Hale, 3595 Parkwood Drive, S. W., requested that the matter be
addressed immediately because it has been pending for over two years, promises
were made, and funds were allocated for new and improved comfort stations that
will be accessible by the physically disabled.
Robert Gravely, 617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., Member of the Washington Park
Improvements Committee, advised that the Committee was told that a comfort
station would be provided. He stated that parks are not included in the City's master
plan, the City's parks have been neglected for many years and the cost to upgrade
parks will be extremely high. He added that the City can use bond money for
buildings, but money for affordable housing, pay increases for City workers, and
park improvements is lacking.
Freddie Monk, 3343 Pittsfield Circle, N. W., Member of the Washington Park
Improvements Committee, advised that the comfort station was to have been
constructed last year. She expressed concern that at a recent meeting with the
Acting Director of Parks and Recreation, it was stated that Breckinridge Park will be
the first park to receive its comfort station and Washington Park will be next in line.
She expressed anger and frustration that Washington Park has again been placed
on the back burner.
It was the consensus of Council to refer the matter to the City Manager for
review and report to Council within 30 days.
Ms. Wyatt encouraged the City Manager to address the comfort station issue
as soon as possible.
COMPLAINTS-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert Gravely, 619 Hanover Avenue,
N. W., addressed the proposed pay raise for City employees. He stated that for the
average City worker who continues to receive a three per cent pay increase, it will
take approximately 30 years before that employee earns $10.00 per hour. He noted
that the City does not have a feasible pay scale, and the average black worker is
neglected and rarely considered for promotions. He advised that while the pay scale
for City workers is neglected, the City can finance bond issues for millions of dollars
that benefit the business community.
There being no further business, at 10:50 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council
meeting in recess until Thursday, April 18, 2002, at 12:00 noon, for a meeting of the
Roanoke Valley Leadership Summit at the Center for Applied Technology and Career
Exploration, Technology Drive, Route 220 South (North Main Street), Rocky Mount,
Virginia, to be hosted by the County of Franklin; and following the luncheon meeting,
the City Council meeting will again be declared in recess until 4:30 p.m., on
Thursday, April 18, 2002, in the City Council Chamber, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for the purpose of conducting five interviews
for appointments to the Roanoke City School Board.
The regular meeting of Roanoke City Council reconvened on Thursday,
April 18, 2002, at 12:00 noon for a meeting of the Roanoke Valley Leadership
Summit, which meeting was held at the Center for Applied Technology and Career
Exploration, Technology Drive, Route 200 North (Business), North Main Street,
Rocky Mount, Virginia. The meeting was hosted by Franklin County.
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Mayor Ralph K. Smith and
Council Member Linda F. Wyatt ........................................................................... 2.
ABSENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder, C. Nelson
Harris, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., and William White, Sr.- ............................................. 5.
OTHERS PRESENT REPRESENTING THE CITY OF ROANOKE: Darlene L.
Burcham, City Manager; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
LOCALITIES PRESENT: Representatives from Bedford County, Botetourt
County, Franklin County, Roanoke County, City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Town of
Vinton, Allegheny County and City of Covington.
The meeting was called to order by the Honorable Wayne Angell, Chair,
Franklin County Board of Supervisors.
Following lunch, the business meeting convened at 1:00 p.m.
CONSORTIUM FOR LOW FARE AIR CARRIER:
AIRPORT: Ms. Burcham called attention to a recent meeting of Mayors and
Chairs of member localities to the Roanoke Valley Leadership Summit in which
Jacqueline L. Shuck, Executive Director, Roanoke Regional Airport, presented
information on a potential grant to be made available at the Federal Government
level to improve air service, which will be applied for on behalf of the service area
supported by the Roanoke Regional Airport and as far west as three West Virginia
communities. She advised that at a subsequent meeting of City Managers/County
Administrators, the matter of forwarding letters of support of the grant application
and offering seed money to support the project was discussed. She explained that
Ms. Shuck will apply for a $2 million grant, although it is recognized that the Federal
grant will not fully fund efforts to improve air service; a dollar for dollar matching
agreement is not required, but from the experience of other communities that have
encouraged airlines to provide Iow cost jet service to a major destination, it is
estimated to cost in the range of $2 - 3 million for a multi-year commitment. She
stated that the application is about to be finalized and any member localities to the
Leadership Summit that have not forwarded their letters of support are requested
to do so as soon as possible.
Mayor Smith expressed appreciation to Franklin County for hosting the
Roanoke Valley Leadership Summit Luncheon.
He advised that at the first Leadership Summit, each participant identified
challenges facing the region and improved air service was at the top of the list. He
stated that the jurisdictions of the Roanoke Valley must work together to improve
air service because economic development successes are impacted by many
factors, with air service being a primary factor. He requested endorsement of a
Roanoke Regional Airport Alliance, the purpose of which will be to recruit corporate
support for the Roanoke Regional Airport, to coordinate/demonstrate the region's
unanimous support within the airport service area, to provide a forum for exchange
of information between the Alliance and the community at-large, to provide financial
support to the airport for airport promotion, to support local travel agents and to
assist in developing and implementing policy that will lead to improved general
aviation service. He stated that Roanoke City and Roanoke County, with the
concurrence of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, have retained the service
of Barry Duvall to coordinate efforts of the Roanoke Regional Airport Alliance; Mr.
Duvall is uniquely qualified to help the Roanoke Valley to increase its airport
patronage, air service and support; and he will report monthly to the Steering
Committee, assist with public relations, and appear before public boards and
commissions, local governing bodies, State and Federal agencies, the Governor and
Secretary of Transportation, and the State Board of Aviation.
7O
Summary of remarks from the floor:
Which airline(s) and what destination(s) will be addressed?
As a result of the Duvall study, will there be an opportunity to review
other possibilities, such as moving the location of the airport?
Do letters of support from the political subdivisions bind the localities
to the contribution of seed money? Ms. Burcham responded that at the
meeting of Mayors and Chairs, it was noted that those localities
providing seed money were requested to consider the sum of
$2,000.00; and even if a locality chooses not to contribute seed money,
it is requested that they forward a letter of support of the grant. She
called attention to representation by key businesses in the Roanoke
Regional Airport Alliance, and commitments may be monetary, or
business entities could commit to a certain amount of air travel time.
She advised that the City of Roanoke has committed $25,000.00, in
addition to its $2,000.00 in seed money; the grant application refers to
a consortium of communities; therefore, an endorsement letter is
requested from the 15 communities served by the Roanoke Regional
Airport, and it is envisioned that the Regional Alliance will form an
entity that will eventually become the source for dispensing funds paid
to an airline, or for a special promotion. She advised that this
arrangement has proven to be successful for the Cities of Richmond,
Newport News and Norfolk by serving as a vehicle for funding of grants
and other activities.
In conjunction with the grant application, Ms. Wyatt called attention to the
need for transportation to and from the airport for those persons residing or working
in outlying jurisdictions, such as Allegheny, Bedford and Franklin Counties, etc.
Therefore, she inquired if funding sources could be identified to provide a shuttle
service to and from outlying localities to the Roanoke Regional Airport.
REGIONAL WATER STUDY:
WATER RESOURCES: Wayne G. Strickland, Executive Director, Roanoke
Valley Allegheny Regional Commission, advised that the localities of Allegheny
County, Botetourt County, Roanoke County, Craig County, City of Covington, City of
Roanoke, City of Salem, Town of Vinton and Town of Clifton Forge are participating
in a regional water study to review future opportunities for water supply alternatives.
He further advised that proposals are due on Friday, April 19; a technical committee
composed of Utility Directors from the participating jurisdictions will review the
proposals; and it is anticipated that a consultant will be engaged in the near future.
7]
BRANDING EFFORT IN THE ROANOKE VALLEY:
Ms. Burcham called attention to a trip that was sponsored by the Roanoke
Valley Allegheny Regional Commission for members of the Roanoke Valley Coalition
for Economic Development on April 29 - May 1,2001, to Portland, Maine, which was
attended by certain officials also represented on the Roanoke Valley Leadership
organization. Following the visit to Portland, she advised that it was realized that
the Roanoke Valley needs to project an image - who we are and what we are about.
Also following the visit to Portland, she stated that four members of Roanoke City
Council who participated in the trip expressed an interest in moving forward to
define the image of the Roanoke region; therefore, at a meeting of City
Managers/County Administrators she presented a proposal of the City of Roanoke
to determine if other localities in the region would be interested in partnering with
the City of Roanoke in this venture. She explained that a request for proposals was
issued, and although a firm has not been selected, three firms are under
consideration as finalists. She advised that the City of Roanoke was selected as one
of 16 localities to be a pilot in Partners for Liveable Places (Creative City Project) and
the City of Roanoke was offered the opportunity to host a regional branding sheret.
She stated that 400 persons were invited and 65 persons attended the sheret on
Tuesday, April 16, 2002, at the Jefferson Center; the forum was facilitated by
Partners for Livable Communities and included a two-day visit by six community
development/marketing professionals from across the country; participants in the
forum included representatives from Roanoke County, Franklin County, Salem,
Bedford, Vinton, and Virginia Tech, as well as numerous private companies and
regional agencies; and Allegheny County has expressed strong interest in joining
in the effort. She stated that it has been identified that the next steps are to define
the region; a small team of marketing professionals from within the larger group is
tasked with developing a market research survey to help identify key voices and
themes in the region; each locality was asked to identify the amounts currently being
spent on tourism and economic development marketing; and this research will then
be used as a basis for the regional branding initiative.
A video was presented highlighting activities and accomplishments of
Franklin County.
Mr. Strickland advised that the next meeting of the Mayors and Chairs of the
Leadership Summit will be hosted by the City of Covington on May 10, 2002.
Mr. Strickland also advised that the next Roanoke Valley Coalition for
Economic Development trip to be hosted by the Roanoke ValleyAIlegheny Regional
Commission will be held on October 6 - 8, 2002, at which time the delegation will
visit Charleston, South Carolina.
72
The Town of Vinton extended an invitation to host the next Leadership Summit
Luncheon.
There being no further business, at 2:30 p.m., the Roanoke City Council
meeting was declared in recess until 4:30 p.m., on Thursday, April 18, 2002, in the
City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, at which time Council will engage in interviews of
five persons who have applied for appointment to the Roanoke City School Board.
At 4:30 p.m., on Thursday, April 18, 2002, the City Council meeting reconvened
in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor Ralph K. Smith presiding, to
conduct five interviews for the position of Roanoke City School Board Trustee.
PRESENT: Council Members W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, William
D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder, Linda F. Wyatt, William White, Sr, and Mayor
Ralph K. Smith ................................................................................................. -7.
ABSENT: None ....................................................................................... -0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
SCHOOL BOARD APPLICANTS PRESENT: Carl D. Cooper, Edward Garner,
William H. Lindsey, William E. Skeen, and Robert J. Sparrow.
The invocation was delivered by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that on June 30, 2002, the three year terms of
office of Brian J. Wishneff and Charles W. Day as Trustees of the Roanoke City
School Board will expire, and the purpose of the reconvened meeting was to
interview five candidates for two vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board, for
terms of office commencing July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2005.
He further advised that past actions of Council to comply with the School
Board selection process include:
At regular meetings of the City Council held on January 22 and
February 4, 2002, Council announced its intention to elect Trustees to
the Roanoke City School Board for terms commencing July 1, 2002.
73
Advertisements were placed in The Roanoke Times and in The Roanoke
Tribune inviting applications for the two vacancies. Seven applications
were received in the City Clerk's Office prior to the deadline on Friday,
March 8, 2002.
At the regular meeting of City Council on Monday, March 18, 2002, at
2:00 p.m., Council reviewed and considered all applications.
At the regular meeting of City Council on Monday, April 1, 2002, at
2:00 p.m., Council voted to interview Carl D. Cooper, Edward Garner,
William H. Lindsey, William E. Skeen, and Robert J. Sparrow for the two
vacancies.
A notice was published in The Roanoke Times inviting attendance at a
public hearing to be held by City Council on Monday, April 15, 2002, at
7:00 p.m., to receive the views of citizens regarding School Board
applicants, and further inviting the public to submit proposed questions
to the candidates by filing such written questions in the City Clerk's
Office by 5:00 p.m., on Thursday, April 11, 2002. No questions were
submitted.
The Mayor explained that the selection process provides that Council will
publicly interview each candidate separately and out of the presence and hearing of
the other candidates; and interviews will be conducted in the following order:
4:30 p.m.
4:45 p.m.
5:00 p.m.
5:15 p.m.
5:30 p.m.
William E. Skeen
Carl D. Cooper
William H. Lindsey
Robert J. Sparrow
Edward Garner
The Mayor pointed out that each candidate will be given the opportunity to
make an opening statement of not more than five minutes, and thereafter, Council
may ask such questions as Council, in its discretion, deems advisable. He stated
that Council will hold five interviews and each interview will consist of approximately
30 minutes; after each interview has been completed, the candidate may leave the
Council Chamber inasmuch as no action will be taken by the Council this evening;
and all interviews will be taped by RVTV Channel 3 to be televised on April 22 at
11:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m., and April 24 at 11:00 a.m. and 9:00 p.m.
In conclusion, the Mayor advised that at the regular meeting of City Council
on Monday, May 6, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, Council will hold an election to fill the two vacancies on the Roanoke City
School Board for terms commencing July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2005.
74
The first person to be interviewed was William E. Skeen.
Mr. Skeen advised that the City of Roanoke enjoys one of the finest school
systems in the country; under the leadership of City Council, Superintendent Harris
and the School Board, Roanoke City is fortunate to have modern, up-to-date
facilities, staffed with educators who are committed to their jobs; and over the last
three years he has visited 20 schools and found safe, orderly, progressive facilities,
with teachers actively engaging students with diverse school themes and special
programs. He further advised that he found character in the schools, in
administrators and teachers, and most of all in the students; he visited with Dr.
Harris to learn more about Roanoke's schools, the duties and responsibilities of
being a School Board member and Dr. Harris' vision for Roanoke's schools; and he
came away from the meeting with an understanding of the importance of reaching
full Standards of Learning accreditation for all schools, the serious ramifications if
Roanoke does not achieve accreditation and he was impressed with the deliberate
focus and direction of the City's educational system. He stated that he wanted to be
a part of continuing to build on the tradition of excellence in education that
Roanoke's school system enjoys today; and his experiences in business, non-profit,
education and School Board-related activities will enable him to be a contributing
member of the School Board. He related that as the parent of three teenage boys,
one of whom continues to be educated at Patrick Henry High School, he
understands the challenges and pressures that students face; as Business Director
of a local community action agency, which has a major alternative education
program, he knows first-hand the difficulties some children face in completing their
education; as the husband of a special educator, he understands the challenges that
administrators and educators face in working with limited resources; and as a 17
year adjunct faculty member at Virginia Western Community College, he
understands the things that challenge, motivate and stimulate students toward
higher achievement. He advised that with over 20 years of experience in banking,
finance, and business administration, he has a good understanding of what the
business community wants and needs in tomorrow's employees; and if appointed
to the School Board, he would work to continue the tradition of excellence and to
help implement and enhance numerous initiatives. He stated a desire to ensure that
everyone is included in the communication and decision making process, including
parents and teachers; an independently conducted annual survey should be
conducted inviting teachers, staff and parents to comment anonymously on the
progress of the school system, as well as existing and pending issues; and
suggestions should be sought on how to make Roanoke's schools more progressive
and productive. He noted that while there are many existing forums, such as School
Board meetings, public hearings, and the Roanoke Central Council PTA, time is a
factor for many parents and educators who may not be able to participate in these
opportunities. Second, he added that an aggressive program is needed to educate
and involve parents in their role as the primary motivator for their child's educational
success; and it must be emphasized to parents that the School system is not the
75
primary and sole determinate of a child's academic success, because
encouragement, modeling and motivation for learning begins at home, long before
a child enters the school system, and continues during their formative years. He
called attention to the importance of reaching out early in a child's first year of
school and at the beginning of each school year by engaging teachers and
principals to use personal telephone calls to educate, challenge and build a
partnership with parents, because sometimes it is simply a matter of asking
parents/guardians to be involved. Third, during this time of continued concern over
school safety, he advised that a more developed and ongoing life skills program
must be embraced, along with developing self esteem, teaching skills to manage
anger and resolve conflict, and preparing students to emotionally handle the
challenges, pressures and conflicts they will face during their school years and
throughout their lifetime. He called attention to the need for increased investment
in additional and ongoing teacher education and training, as well as technology
upgrades, because the world is changing daily and teaching methods must adapt
to a changing world; and teachers need an ongoing investment in their careers,
along with the resources to teach children who live in and will work in a technology-
based society. He stated that recruiting, hiring and retaining the best teachers and
administrators is the most pressing need in the school system, as manyexperienced
educators approach retirement or leave the school system for other opportunities;
it is necessary to ensure that new teachers receive professional mentors, and the
support they need to enable them to do their jobs effectively, that educators be
compensated competitively and fairly for the time they devote to their profession,
and that they receive the recognition they deserve. He called attention to the need
to implement independent exit interviews, to collate findings, to identify issues, and
to make changes when necessary and appropriate. If elected to the School Board,
he pledged a willingness to listen carefully, study closely and work cooperatively to
become a contributing member; and to be an advocate for meeting the education
needs of all children, regardless of social or economic background. He requested
Council's support, and advised that he welcomed the opportunity to give something
back to the School system which prepared two of his sons for college and continues
to prepare his third son for higher education, work and community responsibilities.
Mr. Hudson asked the following question:
Define what accountability means to you at the following levels:
administration, teacher and student?
Mr. Skeen responded that accountability focuses primarily on students,
teachers and the administration, but City Council and the community are' also
important components. He stated that students are the primary recipient and by
grade five, six, seven or eight they must understand that they are the beneficiary,
they are primarily responsible for their own education, and they need to be given the
right and ability to fail or to succeed. Second, he advised that parents need to be
actively involved in their children's education by ensuring that they do their
homework and acting as disciplinarians and role models. Third, he added that
teachers, administrators and the School Board are responsible for providing safe,
effective facilities and good educators; and City Council is accountable because the
City has the taxing authority to raise revenue and the City Council appoints Members
to the School Board. Finally, he advised that the community is responsible and
accountable because the community is the ultimate beneficiary of the children who
are educated for tomorrow's workforce.
Mr. Harris asked the following questions:
The Retired Teachers Association has expressed a concern for several years
relative to a health insurance credit. As a School Board member, would you be
willing to discuss the issues and give the matter consideration during School Board
budget deliberations?
Mr. Skeen responded in the affirmative.
There are Standards of Learning and different philosophies relative to testing.
What do you consider to be the instructional challenges facing the Roanoke City
Public Schools, and what would you as a School Board member do to bring your
philosophy of emphasis on instruction to the budgeting process and to other areas
of the School Board's responsibilities?
Mr. Skeen advised that high standards and accountability are important for
Roanoke's schools, facts and figures do not complete an education, and the
Standards of Learning should not be used as the dominant factor in evaluating
teachers, schools, or the School system. He stated that unfortunately, Federal and
State governments have decided and mandated accountability, such that by 2004
students must pass the Standards of Learning to graduate, and by 2007, 70% of the
student population must pass the Standards of Learning or the school system will
run afoul of certain regulations and run the risk that the State will become involved
in the local school system. He further stated that he would be hard pressed to say
that proficiency in English, Math, Science and History are unimportant; however, the
real solution lies with parents and teachers, in raising the level of expectation of
involvement throughout the community, involving parents early in the school year,
especially with at risk children by contacting the parent whenever a child's grade
level falls below passing, and to work diligently to create improvement plans that
enjoin everyone in the process, all of which are the key determinants to raising
Standards of Learning scores and placing Roanoke City in the proper posture.
77
Mr. Bestpitch asked the following question:
In order to operate a school system, there are three primary categories; i.e.:
buildings and buses, materials and supplies and personnel. How would you
prioritize the three categories?
Mr. Skeen advised that people are the program, with primary interaction by
teachers and educators who are given the solemn trust of educating Roanoke's
children and preparing the community for the future; and if one had to choose
between more pencils, books, and computers, as opposed to retaining well-trained,
educated, and committed teachers, he would choose in favor of personnel. He
stated that it is very important to remember that the current difficult economic times
will not last forever, and if the community wishes to make any type of change or to
retain a major extracurricular activity, citizens should advise City Council and be
willing to provide the money to fund a quality education.
Vice-Mayor Carder asked the following question:
Please place the following items in priority order: salaries, program
enhancement, new schools/facilities, and student/faculty safety.
Mr. Skeen advised that student and faculty safety would be foremost followed
by teacher salaries, program enhancement, and new facilities.
Ms. Wyatt asked the following question:
The new evaluation process for the City schools requires teachers to be
involved in public service, and to demonstrate community involvement; however,
there is a school policy that states if teachers serve on boards or commissions of
non-profit or community organizations, or public office of the City, they must take
leave without pay. Would you be willing to look at changing that policy to be more
user friendly and to accommodate teachers in order to perform community service?
Mr. Skeen answered in the affirmative and advised that having spent most of
his working career in the business field, he values the experience and expertise that
citizens gain when they perform community service. However, he stated that
persons must be available to operate the school system, therefore, the question
becomes a weighting mechanism between what is considered to be time offwith pay
versus time off without pay; and he would be amenable to reviewing the matter.
78
Mr. White asked the following question:
What do you see as the major strengths and the major weaknesses facing the
Roanoke City School system, and if appointed to the School Board, what would you
do to amplify the strengths and to mitigate the weaknesses?
Mr. Skeen advised that the major strength is people--dedicated teachers,
administrators, School Board members, and students; the historically close working
relationship over the years between the School Board and City Council is definitely
a strength; and diverse programming, with over 50 different programs, 33 magnet
schools, approximately a 19 to one teacher to student ratio, a three to one computer
to student ratio and five fully accredited elementary schools, with high schools
provisionally accredited and meeting State standards all represent major strengths
which demonstrate a commitment to education. He stated that the on-going
facilities renovation program which started many years ago, not only improve the
educational experience for students, but helps to stabilize neighborhoods; and
advent of the two high school renovations create a certain level of excitement in the
community. He further stated that the proactive work in making schools safe, with
safety audits, and resource officers are strengths; and the diversity of students and
educators provides students with a real world experience and something that will
prepare them to interact over the long term. He noted that over 33% of all students
participate in extracurricular activities which demonstrates that they understand not
only the need to attend school, but a desire to attend. He referred to weaknesses as
challenges, and noted that providing competitive, fair compensation to employees
in tight budget times is a major challenge; there is a need to work diligently to
improve the Standards of Learning scores, and working with parents to improve the
lines of communication regarding the status of a child in his or her academic career;
there is a need to work on the drop out rate, which is too high, with 300 to 500
students who drop out of school every year; there is a need to maintain a good pool
of qualified people who are ready to assume responsibility and take administrative
and principalship leadership roles, because in the past, personnel have retired and
the school system struggled with teacher and administrator shortages. He called
attention to the need for a proactive program to identify those educators and
teachers in need of mentorship and development to empower them to assume their
position when there are vacancies; site based counsels need to take a proactive role
in the parental involvement initiative which is a major challenge, and the only way
to improve Standards of Learning scores is through parental involvement. He
further added that teaching life skills programs in the schools is important, most
persons learn to manage anger and resolve conflict much later in their lives,
therefore, an aggressive program needs to be put into place to teach students early
in their academic career how to get what they want in the way it should be achieved.
Finally, he called attention to the need to promote the school system, and to work
with the Chamber of Commerce and the City's Economic Development Department
to do a better job of educating people throughout the five-fifteen state east coast
national area that Roanoke attracts quality teachers so that more persons will have
a desire to relocate to the Roanoke Valley.
79
The Mayor asked the following questions:
Did I understand you to state that you did not think the Standards of Learning
was a fair way to grade the teacher?
Mr. Skeen responded that he did not believe the Standards of Learning is the
only way to grade teacher performance, but should be one component used in
grading the teacher.
What is the proper way to grade and qualify the teacher?
Mr. Skeen stated the teacher must be qualified based upon how well the
school performs, because the teacher has the student for only one year, if the
student is in the fifth grade, four other teachers have supposedly done their job to
prepare that student to complete and pass the Standards of Learning in year five; if
the student reaches year five, and for whatever reason has passed through years
one - four and in year five there is a problem, it should not be the sole responsibility
of the teacher who got the student in year five. He added that if an entire school is
doing very well on its Standards of Learning, and one class is not passing, that
presents a different situation.
With regard to the per cent of City revenue, or the formula that is used for
distribution of funds to the School Board, would you categorize the share allocated
to the School system as Iow, high or about right?
Mr. Skeen ventured a guess that the allocation is probably about right,
however, he qualified his answer to say that additional resources are needed.
The second person to be interviewed was Carl D. Cooper.
Mr. Cooper advised that the main reason he would like to serve on the School
Board is because he has an autistic son and he worries about what life will be like
for him, and because he needs to do everything in his power to ensure the best
possible life for his child within his disability; and in fighting for his son, he will be
fighting for other children. He explained that his son was a part of education
systems in California and Pennsylvania; in California they said he had no problem,
in Pennsylvania there was a small back room where they shut off children with
disabilities, therefore, he and his wife reached the conclusion that they would return
to Roanoke where their child could receive a good education. He advised that he
wants to be an advocate for special education children, to fight the battle for those
children at the policy level to ensure that they receive the services they need. He
stated that he should be appointed to the School Board because he has worked with
the City of Roanoke in various capacities, from the Roanoke Neighborhood
Partnership Steering Committee where he served as first Vice Chair and to his
present position as Chair; he completed the citizen police academy and served on
the Civilian Review Board, in which capacity he continues to serve; he serves as a
80
member of the Neighborhood Development Review Team for his neighborhood, a
member of the NAACP, President of the American Production and Inventory Control
Society, and the Board of Directors of Girls Scouts. He added that he served on the
Roanoke Vision 2001 Task Force, Chair of the Public Services Task Team, and Chair
of the Multi-Services Center Round Table; therefore, if appointed to the School
Board, Council would not be appointing a person who is unknown in the community.
He expressed a desire to serve and to be of service which is a humbling experience.
He advised that he has served to the best of his ability in all of his assignments; he
would like the opportunity to serve on the School Board to ensure that his son
receives the best possible education and to help other parents of children with
disabilities. He expressed appreciation to Council for allowing him to reach this
point in the School Board selection process.
Vice-Mayor Carder asked the following question:
Place the following in priority order: (1) higher teacher salaries, (2) program
enhancement, (3) new facilities or new high schools, and (4) student and faculty
safety.
Mr. Cooper responded (1) student and faculty safety, (2) program
enhancement, (3) teacher salaries, and (4) new facilities.
Ms. Wyatt asked the following question:
One of the problems of the school system is finding substitute teachers when
teachers are out of the classroom, and as a result, there are many times when
classes are split among other teachers. How would you propose that the problem
be solved?
Mr. Cooper advised the school system could draw on the resources of student
teachers and students in their senior years in college who are planning to become
teachers, by developing a pool of student teachers from local colleges, because
student teachers or students in their senior year, engage in independent course
study, have more time, are more settled into what they are doing, and have decided
to choose teaching as a career. He added that there is a way to partner with higher
education systems throughout the Roanoke Valley to draw on their resources, by
offering incentives such as extra credit or a higher per diem. He stated that the most
important thing is to get teachers in front of the students; and while some persons
might be of the mindset that they are not full fledged teachers and not qualified, they
are going through the training to be teachers, and they would not be in the
classrooms alone, but in the presence of principals.
Mr. White asked the following question:
What do you see as the major strengths and the major weaknesses facing the
Roanoke City Schools; and if appointed to the School Board, what would you do to
amplify the strengths and to mitigate the weaknesses?
Mr. Cooper advised the greatest weakness is the lack of parental involvement;
and it has been determined that children who have high parental involvement in their
education do better in school. He further advised that a strength is a community that
is interested in its school system, with citizens who want to volunteer by working in
the schools. He stated that to minimize the weakness, parents must be more
involved through programs where parents can come to the schools at night or
during off-hours and be a part of the process, with the ultimate goal of having
parents become part of the team of student-parent-teacher. He stated that the
strength in Roanoke is the caliber of citizens and their willingness to be involved in
whatever needs to be done; there is a need to draw on citizen expertise through
programs that allow parents and the community to be part of the educational
process; there is a tendency to think that the teacher is the expert, the principal is
the administrator and knows what is best, and the School Board is overseeing all
aspects of the school system, but there should be a mechanism to ensure that
citizens are allowed to be involved in the process, to bring their thoughts to the table
and to encourage citizens by letting them know that while it may not be an overnight
process, they have to persevere and negotiate until a conclusion is reached.
Mr. Hudson asked the following question:
Define what accountability means to you at the following levels:
administration, teacher, and student.
Mr. Cooper stated that accountability at the administrative level is being
responsible for the results of the school system; administrator accountability is
results based, or what is being delivered for the money provided, and parents need
to know what accountability means and where their children stand; and if things are
not as they should be, accountability means saying to administrators that they have
failed. He further stated if administrators succeed, accountability is in telling them
that they did an excellent job, and as a result to provide a bonus or some other type
of reward. He added that teacher accountability has to do with whether teachers are
teaching what they are supposed to teach in a way that students can understand and
learn, because a teacher can impart all of his or her knowledge about a subject, but
at the end of the school year, if the student still does not understand the subject, the
teacher has failed; there are reasons why failure occurs, and it has to be determined
whether or not the accountability is teacher-caused; and if failure is teacher-related,
the teacher should be held accountable. He called attention to the need to be
results-oriented, and demand at the end of the day to know how many students have
learned what they are supposed to learn; teachers are the single most important
element in a child's life in regard to education because it is the one-on-one bond
between student and teacher, or the teacher who fires up the will and the excitement
to learn that encourages and motivates a student. He stated that student
82
accountability means following the rules; student accountability has to be tempered
because the school system is not only teaching learning skills, but growing people
who will participate in society as good, productive citizens; students must be
accountable within a system that tempers justice with mercy; students make
mistakes that sometimes make no sense, and the question becomes what to do
when these things occur, and if students are suspended or expelled, juvenile
problems could increase; and accountability for students must include an incentive
for accountability.
Mr. Harris asked the following question:
The School Board, through budgeting and policy, influences instruction. What
do you believe are the greatest instructional challenges facing our City schools, and
how would you seek to address those as a School Board member?
Mr. Cooper advised that the greatest challenges are the lack of money and
resources to implement policy, and there are struggles over distributing funds
among different priorities which are equally as good, but difficult choices have to be
made. He stated that as a School Board Member, he would consider where the
priorities should be; the greatest instructional challenges are not in the classroom,
but outside the classroom; and the greatest challenge is the relationship between
student-faculty-parents, because if that relationship is good, a lot more will be
accomplished within the school system.
Mr. Bestpitch asked the following question:
What should the relationship be between the School Board and the
Superintendent, and between the School Board and the City Council?
Mr. Cooper stated the School Board makes policy and the Superintendent
executes that policy; City Council entrusts the operation of the School system to the
School Board; and while City Council does not interface with day-to-day operations,
it has an overall fiduciary responsibility as to how the schools are operating through
a system of checks and balances. He advised that the relationship between the
School Board and the Superintendent, and between the School Board and City
Council must be built on mutual trust and respect.
The Mayor asked the following questions:
There has been discussion over qualifying teachers based on the Standards
of Learning. What is the best method of gauging the qualities and results of a
particular teacher?
Mr. Cooper stated that the best gauge is to determine the capability of the
student and to determine how far the teacher has brought that student along in the
learning process. He advised that teacher performance can be measured through
the Standards of Learning, or any number of other tests, but should be results
based.
With regard to the per cent of City revenue passed along to the School Board,
or the formula that is used, do you think the per cent the School Board receives is
Iow, high, or about right?
Mr. Cooper advised that the percentage is Iow. He added that it should be
recognized when talking about school funding that in past years, funding was based
on property values, and in today's changing world, as long as schools are funded
based on property values, there will continue to be problems.
The third person to be interviewed was William H. Lindsey.
Mr. Lindsey advised that he is a proponent of the Roanoke City Public School
System; there are approximately 13,000 students with a great variety of needs; and
with such a diverse student population, he has been impressed with both student
and teaching quality. He commended the City/Schools on school
construction/renovation which will present a challenge to all. As an attorney, he
stated that he has had an opportunity to work with the School Superintendent's
Office through the Juvenile Court system and he has been impressed with the level
of talent and energy exhibited by staff. If appointed to the School Board, he added
that his intention would be to continue with the strengths that have been
demonstrated in the past, to encourage remaining on course with school
construction and renovation projects, and continue to ensure a bright future for
Roanoke's students.
Mr. Harris asked the following question:
What do you believe are the greatest instructional challenges facing the
Roanoke City Public Schools, and what would you, as a School Board Member, do
to address those challenges?
Mr. Lindsey advised that one of the most important challenges is to keep class
sizes at a tolerable level; there must be teaching quality and Roanoke's process of
attracting teachers helps the school system to attract good teachers. He stated that
if class sizes can be kept at an appropriate level, if the level of teacher compensation
is competitive with neighboring jurisdictions, other markets in Virginia, and the
national level, those things alone should maintain the quality of the past. He called
attention to the effectiveness of teaching assistants in the classroom, whether they
be student teachers, interns or extras; he would not favor programs that impede a
teacher's ability to teach, and would prefer to keep certain matters outside of the
classroom, thereby allowing teachers to do their job.
Mr. Bestpitch asked the following question:
84
What should be the relationship between the School Board and the
Superintendent, and between the School Board and City Council?
Mr. Lindsey stated that City Council appoints the School Board and there is
accountability to Council, individuals should be appointed who will bring energy and
creativity to the job of setting policy for the school system and managing the budget;
and the school budget is in the range of $100 million so there is considerable
accountability as far as voters, taxpayers and parents are concerned. With regard
to the office of Superintendent, he stated that the School Board's responsibilities are
to hire, review and if necessary fire the Superintendent; the Superintendent has a
difficult job; and as a School Board Member, it would be his goal to become well
acquainted with the Office of Superintendent which appears to be a complex office,
with a talented staff. In summary, he advised that the Superintendent must be
accountable to the School Board, the School Board must be accountable to City
Council, and all parties must be accountable to parents and taxpayers.
Vice-Mayor Carder asked the following question:
Prioritize the following: (1) higher teacher salaries, (2) program enhancement,
(3) new facilities and new high schools, and (4) student/faculty safety.
First, Mr. Lindsey stated that teacher salaries have some priority, followed by
construction needs. He advised that based upon reports from students and parents,
the school system is performing well in regard to school safety, which he would rank
below program enhancement.
Ms. Wyatt asked the following question:
As a School Board member, would you be interested in before and after
school programs as a joint effort between the City, the School Board, and
community organizations?
Mr. Lindsey responded in the affirmative, and advised that in view of where
some schools are ranking in performance on standardized tests, some type of
assistance will be necessary; and it is essential in all schools that before and after
school programs be provided. From what he has seen of current programs, he
advised that there is not a lot to work with, but the system does a good job with
current resources; more assistance is needed insofar as community involvement,
volunteer involvement, and organizations taking more interest through mentorship
programs. He noted that quite often in two parent families, both parents work, and
some parents do not have control over their schedules; therefore, if attention is not
given to the before and after school programs, there could be difficulty with the
student receiving the help they need to focus on their studies, particularly those with
special education. He advised that ideally every student will have 30 - 60 minutes
of quiet time every evening with someone to help him or her with homework, but that
does not always apply, therefore, if assistance can be provided through after school
and before school programs, it will be beneficial to all schools and particularly to
those schools that are struggling to improve performance and to help students to
be more productive.
Mr. White asked the following question:
What do you see as the major strengths and the major weaknesses facing the
Roanoke City Schools, and if appointed to the School Board, what would you do to
amplify the strengths and to mitigate the weaknesses?
Mr. Lindsey stated that the Roanoke City School System has a different job
than some of the neighboring school systems, because the system works with a
diverse group of students, with varying abilities and needs, which is a strength
because it provides the City with an opportunity to place resources into what is now
a fairly good size student population. He stated that the School system has done a
particularly good job with students who are at the upper end, or those who have
ability and are clearly college bound and hungry for challenge through good
programs which motivate and keep them fed intellectually. With regard to
weaknesses, he stated that there are students who are less able academically and
need assistance through more remedial programs. He explained that mainstream
students in most any system will perform well, but it is at the perimeters at either
end where the challenges are encountered; from the court system perspective, the
City must deal with special situations that other jurisdictions either do not have the
ability or the desire to address which is both a strength and a weakness in that the
City has the programs and historically the City has had a good functioning system.
He called attention to a weakness insofar as losing personnel, even for legitimate
reasons such as retirement; the school system has vacant positions that need to be
filled and if good people fill those positions, good things will happen to the school
system, therefore, the school system should track and retain good personnel. He
stated that he would be interested in seeing some sort of feedback from teachers
and administrators as to why they leave the school system through an exit interview.
He further stated that the School Board should have a level of involvement by going
into every school to become acquainted with personnel and to implement
procedures in order to obtain the necessary information.
Mr. Hudson asked the following question:
Define what accountability means to you at the following levels:
administration, teacher, and student.
Mr. Lindsey advised that it is necessary to define the types of students that are
a product of Roanoke's school system; if the school system has a lot of successful
students going to college and being successful in the community, this is defined as
accountability; accountability at the School Board level means to do the work
through creativity, managing the budget and being responsible to the public through
City Council for expenditures. In terms of student accountability, he stated that he
was reluctant to measure students in terms of test scores because of the different
abilities represented and because good students will score well and those students
who need help will not score as well; and a good relationship with just one teacher
will help a less than talented student do well.
The Mayor asked the following questions:
There has been discussion over qualifying teachers based on the Standards
of Learning. What is the best method of gauging the qualities and results of a
particular teacher?
Mr. Lindsey advised that he is not aware of a good way to articulate how to
gauge the performance of teachers; one cannot look at the test scores of a particular
class and say that a teacher is doing a good job, and say in another class that the
teacher is not performing well. He called attention to the importance of the opinion
of principals, what do teachers think about other teachers, and a self-evaluation
process; typically, in any given field, peers are a good judge of how others perform,
and he would favor an evaluation process including the opinion of parents regarding
a teacher's performance, what teachers think of each other, and how the principal
views operation of the school and whether teachers are responsive to the goals set
out in the academic program. In summary, he stated that all of the above wou!d be
a fair measure of teacher performance.
Do you think the per cent of the City's revenue that is passed on to the School
Board is Iow, high, or about right?
Mr. Lindsey responded that the percentage is Iow based on construction
needs for school improvements and capital projects.
The fourth person to be interviewed was Robert J. Sparrow.
Mr. Sparrow expressed appreciation for the opportunity to be interviewed for
a position on the School Board and requested that he be entrusted with the support
of Council to fill one of the two School Board vacancies. He advised that he is a
native of Roanoke, he attended the Roanoke City Public Schools, two of his children
currently attend Roanoke City Public Schools; and he has had numerous
opportunities to leave the City of Roanoke, but has chosen to reside in Roanoke
where he is employed by First Union National Bank as a Financial Specialist. He
87
stated that he applied for appointment to the School Board because Roanoke is the
best place in the nation to live, to raise a family, and to attend school; and his major
reason for remaining in the City of Roanoke is its school system and the
commitment by educators to Roanoke's students. He added that he was fortunate
to be raised in a home where both parents were educators, his mother worked in the
City schools and his father taught in the City schools for over 39 years, his siblings
are employed in the educational system, and conversations with his siblings and
their peers, his children and their friends, students, teachers and principals have
provided invaluable information on some of the successes and areas of opportunity
within the Roanoke City School system. He advised that one of the successes is the
continued effort to make the Roanoke school system one of the safest in the nation.
He spoke in support of developing a forum where instructional best practices could
be shared in a team approach within all schools, in an effort to use the best
practices to raise test preparedness and results for the Standards of Learning
scores. He further advised that he would bring to the School Board his experiences
as a father through perspectives he has received from his two school age children
insofar as using this leverage to help other students within the Roanoke City School
system, teachers and principals. He added that he would bring his personal
experiences as a product of the City school system, he would bring the experience
of a Substitute Teacher, he would bring experiences and education as an accountant
and a systems analyst in a large corporation, he would bring entrepreneurial
experiences from owning his own business, which has helped him to understand the
need to make every dollar go toward the benefit that needs to be achieved, and he
would bring the knowledge acquired from an intense training program at First Union
Wachovia with regard to money management, annuities and mutual funds. He stated
that the School Board is currently comprised of some of the brightest leaders in the
Roanoke Valley; and his personal and professional experiences and his vested
interests would allow him to quickly become a productive member of that team, to
adapt quickly to fiduciary responsibilities as a School Board member, and to draw
upon his experiences to make good, common sense decisions that will continue to
give all children the opportunity to compete and to succeed in a global arena.
Mr. White asked the following question:
What do you see as the major strengths and the major weaknesses facing the
Roanoke City schools, and if you are appointed to the School Board, what would you
do to amplify the strengths and to mitigate the weaknesses?
Mr. Sparrow stated the major strengths within the school system are the
opportunities offered to children, coupled with the opportunities for staff
development among teachers, and the most beneficial strength is the commitment
of teachers to students. He further stated that some areas of opportunity or
weaknesses pertain to parental involvement; communication of the same
information to all teachers in all schools from central administration to enable
everyone to understand what is expected; and the lack of male African-American
role models within some of the schools in certain neighborhoods.
Mr. Hudson asked the following question:
Briefly define what accountability means to you at the following levels:
administration, teacher, and student.
Mr. Sparrow advised that accountability for the school administration starts
from the top; accountability would consist of those involved on City Council and
those involved on the School Board, as well as the Superintendent; and this is a
circle or pattern where each should hold the other accountable and have a clear
understanding of all expectations with regard to teachers. He stated that the
expectation is to deliver, based on available tools, the best opportunity to learn and
to create an educational friendly environment for students so that they will be more
receptive to learning. For students, he stated that their accountability is to attend
school every day and to put forth their very best effort.
Mr. Bestpitch explained that Council Member Harris had to leave the meeting
to attend another commitment; whereupon, he asked the following question on
behalf of Mr. Harris:
The School Board, through budgeting and policy, influences instruction. What
do you believe are the greatest instructional challenges facing the City schools, and
how would you seek to address those challenges as a School Board member?
Mr. Sparrow stated that with proposed budget cuts, the greatest challenge will
be to place more educational support staff in the classrooms, especially grades K - 3
where development begins. He advised that as a School Board member, he would
hold himself and other School Board members accountable to ensure that funds are
used where they will have the greatest impact on students.
Mr. Bestpitch asked the following question:
What do you think the relationship should be between the School Board and
the Superintendent, and between the School Board and City Council?
Mr. Sparrow stated that it is the responsibility of the School Board to hire the
School Superintendent, therefore, the School Board should make sure that it is well
educated in its choice of a Superintendent; and the Superintendent should be held
accountable for the goals and initiatives that have a direct impact on the children.
He advised that City Council is entrusted with appointment of the School Board and
it is important for Council to know each individual appointed to the School Board to
ensure the selection of individuals who represent the citizens of Roanoke.
Vice-Mayor Carder asked the following question:
Prioritize the following: (1) higher teacher salaries, (2) program enhancement,
(3) new high schools or new facilities, and (4) student/faculty safety.
Mr. Sparrow advised that first is student and faculty safety, second would be
teacher salaries, third would be new high schools or facilities, and fourth would be
program enhancement.
Ms. Wyatt asked the following question:
If elected to the School Board, what would be your position on before and
after school programs that would involve not only the school system, but the City
and certain community organizations?
Mr. Sparrow stated that before and after school programs offer a great
opportunity, and if appointed to the School Board, he would be willing to work to
ensure that children who are taking care of themselves are provided with the role
models they need to help in their educational pursuits, and to provide role models
to help develop their interests and standards so that students may compete globally.
The Mayor asked the following questions:
With regard to grading teacher performance, what method would you use to
qualify whether a teacher is performing satisfactorily?
Mr. Sparrow advised that once expectations are clearly set forth by the School
Board, the Superintendent and principals, teachers can be observed on a daily or
weekly basis to determine and ensure that they are performing as expected.
There is a formula of revenues that come to the City which is shared with the
School system. Would you say that the portion which is appropriated to the School
Board is too Iow, too high, or about right?
Mr. Sparrow advised the portion allocated to the schools is too Iow.
The fifth and last person to be interviewed was Edward Garner.
Mr. Garner advised that he has been married for 33 years, he has one
daughter, he has an undergraduate degree from Albany State College in Albany,
Georgia, a masters degree in public administration from the University of Georgia,
a law degree and is a member of the Georgia State Bar Association. He stated that
he believes in public education because it is the foundation of the nation and the
foundation of what Americans have achieved over the years; and he is qualified to
serve via his education, training, and temperament. He added that as a Member of
the School Board, his first priority would be student achievement; the purpose of a
School Board is to ensure that the standards which have been set and certain basics
of learning are achieved by the young people; students should be educated to the
point where they can assume leadership roles in the future, with the education and
ability to operate the City and continue to educate future generations. With regard
to achievement, he called attention to the importance of school safety for all 13,160
90
students in the City of Roanoke public schools, because school safety has a definite
impact upon the ability of students to learn and to achieve. He added that another
priority that has to be considered is the Standards of Learning because Roanoke
City Schools must meet certain requirements, which are tied into the standards of
accreditation and the standards of quality, that design and mandate a number of
things that City Council and he, if appointed to the School Board, will have to do.
He stated that the Standards of Learning set out an agenda that must be followed
and he is confident that the City of Roanoke has in place the infrastructure that is
necessary to achieve those objectives and to reach those standards. He explained
that in the year 2001, eight schools had not achieved the Standards of Learning
requirements, and this year the number was cut to four schools, with testing to
resume shortly. He further stated that remedial programs have been put into place
to help achieve goals and objectives that are mandated to be achieved; and the
Flannagan Assessment Methodology and the Walstrom Data Analysis have been
acquired to help Roanoke City teachers to achieve the goals and objectives of the
Standards of Learning, as well as to meet the requirements set out in the Standards
of Quality. He advised that another priority is personnel; Roanoke City schools
employ 1,962 persons, the City school budget is in the range of $106 million with
approximately $47 million coming from the City of Roanoke which demonstrates that
City Council has a commitment and a stake in the public school system. He noted
that $47 million goes a long way to fund the salaries of the 1,962 personnel; along
with the $47 million from the City is another $42 million from the State and another
$9 million from State income tax. He stated that he was gratified to see the changes
in the budget, most of which will be slated for personnel costs, and raising teacher
salaries from 2.75 per cent to 3 per cent, since personnel in the City schools should
be just as well compensated or better than others in the region and state. He added
that City Council has done a good job in bringing up the salary level to the national
average, and an effort should be made to maintain that level. At the same time, he
added that Roanoke must be competitive regionally, and keeping the 1,049 teachers
compensated is a part of personnel development. Also, he noted that there are 29
administrators, 29 principals, and 21 assistant principals who need to be adequately
compensated and trained in their quest to achieve the goals and objectives for the
Standards of Learning. In addition, he added that there are classified and
transportation personnel whose salaries and benefits are important and as a School
Trustee he would work to ensure that these employees are adequately compensated,
trained, and that their goals and expectations are met. He called attention to a
professional development plan which was devised and implemented in order to
upgrade the skills of teachers, administrators, principals and assistant principals to
help them to be the best they can be, and to help students become the best they can
be by achieving what has been mandated in the Standards of Learning. He advised
that school personnel have achieved and in many instances surpassed the
standards of quality mandated by the State and as a School Trustee he would work
to ensure that the standards of quality mandates are fully funded. He stated that
student achievement is of first importance, followed by personnel development,
parental and citizen involvement, and maintaining a cordial, effective relationship
with City Council and other School Board members and elected officials.
Ms. Wyatt asked the following question:
What is your position regarding before and after school programs for our
young people as a combined effort of the City of Roanoke, the School system, and
community organizations?
Mr. Garner spoke in support of before and after school programs; however,
funding must be considered; the school system must ensure that mandated
requirements are met first; and if mandated requirements are met and there are
excess funds to provide before and after school programs, he would support their
implementation.
Mr. White asked the following question:
What do you see as the major strengths and the major weaknesses facing the
Roanoke City Schools, and if appointed to the School Board, what would you do to
amplify the strengths and to mitigate the weaknesses?
Mr. Garner stated that a major strength is in the commitment that citizens have
exhibited to the school system, and citizens have done an admirable job in funding
the school system, although perhaps not at the level desired; and there is a
commitment from the business community, in conjunction with the Higher Education
Center, with regard to workforce training. He advised that a weakness lies in the fact
that approximately 56 per cent of students qualify for free or reduced lunches, which
presents a challenge; there is a need for more parental involvement which goes a
long way in making a difference and changing and influencing a child's attitude
toward education because children are much more willing to learn if they have an
attitude of learning and have been taught that learning has a benefit and a reward,
not only from a pecuniary standpoint, but from the standpoint of making oneself a
better person and a better citizen.
Mr. Hudson asked the following question:
Briefly define what accountability means to you at the following levels:
administration, teacher and student.
Mr. Garner advised that accountability means to be held to a standard so that
one knows what one is supposed to do and the task is performed accordingly, and
to be knowledgeable about all aspects of responsibility. From the standpoint of an
administrator, he stated the importance of being knowledgeable about the position
and to execute responsibilities by initiating those programs that will achieve the
necessary standards, whether they be Standards of Learning objectives or
objectives of the School Board, or programs that citizens support. He stated that
the teacher is accountable to the student by ensuring that the student is taught to
the best of the teacher's ability and to the best of the student's ability; the teacher
is also accountable to the administration, to the principal, to the School Board, and
to the City of Roanoke. He advised that the student is accountable to the school
first, to attend school and to be prepared and ready to learn, to help ensure that the
school system works well and is safe; and the student has a responsibility to
himself, his parents, his teachers, administrators and all persons in the chain of
command to learn.
Mr. Bestpitch explained that Council Member Harris had to leave the Council
meeting due to another commitment; therefore, on behalf of Mr. Harris he asked the
following question:
The School Board, through budgeting and policy, influences instruction. What
do you believe are the greatest instructional challenges facing our City schools and
how would you seek to address those challenges as a School Board member?
Mr. Garner stated that the School Board does, in effect, influence policy
through the budget process, and without policy or priorities as instituted via the
budget, the level of education and the teaching curriculum would be directly
influenced or affected by the budget proper. He further stated that the greatest
challenge to instruction is the reception itself from students by instilling in young
people a desire to learn and the knowledge that education is required if they are to
take their place in a changing world. He advised that the infrastructure is in place,
with good personnel in general, good programs, good feedback, but young people
must be inspired to learn and receptive to learning. He noted that part of being a
good teacher is the means to inspire and to motivate a young person, and the key
to instruction is overcoming a challenge.
Mr. Bestpitch asked the following question:
What do you think the relationship should be between the School Board and
the Superintendent and between the School Board and the City Council?
Mr. Garner stated that the relationship between the School Board and the
Superintendent has to be one of respect and communication, which also applies to
the relationship between the School Board and City Council. He added that if
appointed to the School Board, he would serve at Council's pleasure which in itself
engenders respect; he would be respectful and mindful of the desires and wishes
of the Council, just as the Superintendent must be mindful and respectful of the
desires and wishes of the School Board. He advised that he would work to make
sure that the good relationship between the School Board and City Council
continues; Council has made a commitment as the stakeholders; there is good
communication between the School Board and the Superintendent; and the School
Board has done its job by implementing programs, retaining staff, financing, and
infrastructure to get the job done.
Vice-Mayor Carder asked the following question:
Place the following in priority order: (1) higher teacher salaries, (2) program
enhancement, (3) new school facilities, and (4) student/faculty safety.
Mr. Garner stated that student and faculty safety would be his number one
priority, but along with that would be new facilities; program enhancement would be
number two, n umber three would be higher teacher salaries; and number four would
be new facilities; however, numbers three and four could be interchangeable.
The Mayor asked the following questions:
There has been a lot of discussion about how to qualify teachers and how to
determine if a teacher is doing a good job. If you were called upon to make that
determination, how would you qualify a teacher?
Mr. Garner advised that there would have to be some kind of objective
standards or outcome measurements, and one of the best and most objective
methods currently in use is the Standards of Learning, which is a basic; there
should be feedback from teachers, students, and teachers' peers to determine if
teachers are doing a good job; and the outcome, or the product produced, which are
the students themselves, should be reviewed with the knowledge that all students
are not college bound. In summary, he advised that working with teachers, getting
feedback, and engaging in some kind of outcome measurement, is the best way to
determine if teachers are doing a good job, and setting up an objective standard or
measurement that teachers must achieve. If elected to the School Board, he advised
that he would look at the results, taking the feedback from those results and
factoring it in to set up professional development programs to ensure that the skills
of teachers are improved and measure up to the task or requirements that are set
forth for attainment, and he would work diligently to implement programs and to
receive feedback to ensure that those objectives are met.
With regard to the formula for determining the School Board's share of the
City's revenues, orthe percentage formula that is currently in place, do you think the
formula is too Iow, too high, or about right?
Mr. Garner stated that it is difficult to say, the City has done a good job in
funding education, there are State and Federal mandates that have been unfunded,
and he would like to work with liaison persons and the appropriate legislative bodies
to generate additional funding. He further stated that the formula works out to be
about 24 per cent of the total City budget, and that determination would have to
come from the elected officials who are closest to the citizenry to determine if, in
fact, the percentage is correct. In summary, he advised that 24 per cent of the City's
overall budget is about right.
94
The Mayor announced that Council will elect two School Board Trustees at the
City Council meeting on Monday, May 6, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 6:50 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
C-1
SPECIAL SESSION .... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 29, 2002
7:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in special session on Monday,
April 29, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., in the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibit Hall, 710 Williamson
Road, N. E., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor Ralph K. Smith presiding, pursuant
to Section 10, Meetings of Council of the City Charter, pursuant to the budget study
schedule for adoption of the City's fiscal year 2002-03 budget which was approved
by Council on Tuesday, January 22, 2002, and pursuant to Resolution No.
35816-041502, adopted by Council on Monday, April 15, 2002.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
C. Nelson Harris, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., William White, Sr., Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor
Ralph K. Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
ABSENT:None .................................................................................. 0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The meeting was opened with a prayer by Council Member C. Nelson Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
Budget: Pursuant to instructions of Council, the Mayor advised that public
hearings were advertised for Monday, April 29, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., on the proposed
fiscal year 2002-03 HUD budget, City budget, admissions tax rate, and an increase
in certain fees, including subdivision and zoning fees.
Legal advertisements of the public hearings were published in The Roanoke
Times on Wednesday, April 10, 2002 and Tuesday, April 16, 2002, Wednesday,
April 17, 2002; and in The Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, April 11, 2002 and
Thursday, April 25, 2002.
In view of the number of speakers who wished to be heard, the Mayor
requested that each speaker limit their remarks to no more than three minutes.
HOUSING/AUTHORITY-GRANTS: The Mayor advised that the first public
hearing was on the HUD budget which recommends an allocation of $4,468,232.00
in Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnership and
Emergency Shelter Grant funds to support an array of housing, homeless
prevention, neighborhood and community development, public services and
economic development activities.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
the matter; whereupon, Rebecca Spaid, representing The Girl Scouts of Virginia
Skyline Council, expressed disappointment in not receiving Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for fiscal year 2003. She advised that the
Girl Scout Council was allocated funds for approximately three years; funds were
used to provide Girl Scouting to 175 girls in seven of Roanoke's housing
communities; and in 2003, it was their goal to increase the numbers and to provide
extra services, including field trips to cultural organizations, membership to GSUSA,
uniforms, badges, pins, and other programming materials. She stated that the Girl
Scout Council serves approximately 300 clients in the housing communities, at a
projected cost for the year 2003 of $145,000.00; program services have been
decreased due to lower revenues in order to provide outreach programs; and
without CDBG funds for the year 2003, it may be necessary to cut the salary for ten
part-time outreach coordinators and decrease programming in housing
communities.
No other persons wishing to be heard, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
The Mayor advised that the second public hearing pertained to the proposed
fiscal year 2002-03 City budget, which totals $194.9 million, and inquired if there
were persons in attendance who wished to be heard; whereupon, the following
persons addressed Council:
The Honorable George M. McMillan, City Sheriff, advised that one would think
with the events of September 11,2001, the current emphasis on homeland security,
and the recent rash of murders in the City of Roanoke over the past several months,
would be cause for all persons to realize that public safety officers are more vital
now than ever before to ensure the safety of those citizens who live and work in
Roanoke; however, that does not appear to be the case in the Roanoke area. He
stated that the Commonwealth of Virginia will maintain all State Police positions and
the Governor and General Assembly, while cuffing expenses, have added funds for
additional personnel in Sheriff's offices; and to the best of his knowledge, the City
of Roanoke is the only locality that is recommending the unfunding of public safety
officers. He further stated that the City administration has recommended the
elimination, or the lack of funding, of 17 public safety officers, or 60 per cent of the
29 net positions being eliminated in the City of Roanoke. He explained that all cities
and counties across Virginia are experiencing a tight budget year, but they wish to
maintain public safety positions at the current levels, and in some cases have even
increased public safety positions. Therefore, he requested that Council maintain
Roanoke's public safety positions at a status quo to ensure the safety of citizens
who live and work in Roanoke. He noted that the Sheriff's Office is funded by the
State, the City, and fees that the Sheriff's Office is permitted to collect by the State;
information regarding the Sheriff's requested budget demonstrates how the
department will provide approximately $1.5 million more in funding to the City than
is required and can be used bythe City as it deems appropriate; and the information
also calls attention to taxpayers' funds that are saved through use of inmate labor.
He stated that the requested budget includes funding for the two positions that the
City administration has not recommended for funding and the conversion of two
temporary Deputy Sheriff positions to full-time positions. He explained that earlier
today, he was advised that through negotiations with the Compensation Board, all
four Deputy Sheriff positions will be State approved and State funded positions as
of July 1, 2002, and will no longer be locally funded; as such, the City cannot
eliminate these State approved positions for the Sheriff's Office, in accordance with
the Code of Virginia; and in addition, another $284,000.00 will be received from the
Compensation Board for next fiscal year, reducing the loss of State funding to only
$37,000.00. In conclusion, he advised that the Sheriff's Office is a revenue source
for the City of Roanoke, providing a valuable and mandated service to the citizens
of Roanoke at no cost to local taxpayers; therefore, he requested that the budget
of the Sheriff's Office be fully funded.
Estelle Avner, representing the Bradley Free Clinic, 1240 3rd Street, S. W.,
advised that the Free Clinic has been in operation for 28 years, and provides $2.2
million worth of free medical, dental, and pharmacy care annually to Roanoke City
residents; all services are provided by volunteer healthcare professionals, and the
Free Clinic has never requested assistance from the City of Roanoke; however, for
fiscal year 2003, the Free Clinic is requesting $70,000.00. She explained that during
the past 28 years, the Bradley Free Clinic has provided over $15 million worth of care
to Roanoke City residents; in 2002, the Free Clinic found itself in a deficit of
$114,000.00 because of the high cost of medications, and agreed to approach the
City of Roanoke for funding assistance since they do not receive Federal or State
funding. She called attention to the desire of the Free Clinic to partner with the City
of Roanoke in its efforts to provide much needed services to Roanoke's
disadvantaged citizens.
Dr. Thomas McKeon, representing the Roanoke Higher Education Center,
advised that from the beginning, the City's role in the development and financing
of the Higher Education Center has been pivotal to its success; whereupon, he
expressed appreciation for the City's contribution of $2.5 million for building
renovations and for the City's commitment of $8.5 million to the development of
parking and other infrastructure improvements. He stated that the operating
success of the Roanoke Higher Education Center is clear, enrollments are high and
academic support services have been well received. He added that 60 per cent of
the Higher Education Center's operating funds are generated from rent payments
made by participating organizations, supplemented by State appropriation; this ratio
was created in the first year of operation when the year 2000 session the Virginia
General Assembly cut the Center's request for operating funds by one-third, and
funding remained at the same level in 2001; during the 2002 session of the General
Assembly, the Higher Education Center again requested appropriation increases,
however, given the financial crisis, they were again turned down and sustained new
reductions of seven to eight per cent for the next two years. He explained that from
their first visits to the General Assembly, the Higher Education Center has been
encouraged to seek additional operational funds from local governments in the
Roanoke Valley region, but the Center has been reluctant to make such requests;
however, current circumstances have caused the Higher Education Center to seek
additional assistance. Therefore, he noted that the Higher Education Center is
requesting a total of $300,000.00 from Roanoke City, Roanoke County, Botetourt
County, and the City of Salem, with a request to the City of Roanoke of $121,000.00;
additional funding would be used for operating expenses which include $100,000.00
fora Communications Director and support, $50,000.00 for communications efforts,
$50,000.00 for the library, and $100,000.00 for maintenance reserves. He advised
that funding from the City of Roanoke will ensure that the facility and its programs
are maintained to serve the citizens of the greater Roanoke region, and requested
favorable consideration of the request by Council.
Pamela Irvine, Executive Director, Southwest Virginia Second Harvest Food
Bank, expressed appreciation for the City's support of the Food Bank over the
years. She advised that last year, with funding from the City of Roanoke, the Food
Bank provided $1,692,226.00 worth of food, or enough to provide 871,473 meals
through 103 non-profit feeding programs in Roanoke City alone; through partnership
with Roanoke City and HUD funding last year, 248,747 pounds of nutritious produce
was provided to project areas; from July - March, $1,493,083.00 worth of food was
distributed to over 110 non-profit feeding programs, or enough to provide over
768,917 meals; and 12 kid caf~ programs were operated in partnership with
children's feeding programs where food was provided for afternoon programs. She
asked that the request of the Southwest Virginia Second Harvest Food Bank for
fiscal year 2003 be favorably considered.
Marshal McAden, Artistic Director for the Dumas Drama Guild, addressed
Council in connection with funding needs for the Dumas Center for Artistic
Development. He advised that the Dumas Drama Guild is a community theater
composed of neighbors and co-workers, launching their ninth production of a
socially conscious theater, and seeking funding consideration in the City's 2003
budget year. He stated that the community theater has outgrown the facility in which
it is currently housed and is in need of larger facilities to provide a creative outlet for
children to showcase their talent, to provide a unique cultural experience for college
students, and for the young at heart who love art. He further stated that in less than
two years of operation, more than 70 performances have taken place, the summer
youth program has provided a service for children, and any investment by the City
of Roanoke will be an investment in the children of Roanoke and their future.
Lisa Gabourel, Youth Coordinator for the Dumas Drama Guild, spoke on behalf
of a youth organization, known as the "Yo-Yo Players", whose creed is to express,
interact, and create on a positive level, to utilize community resources, to focus on
self-discovery and artistic excellence, and consists of an afternoon drama workshop
that meets once a week at the Dumas Music Center which is the first of its kind and
is free to the community. She advised that the children range in age from four to
fifteen, and come from as close as the Greater Gainsboro community and es far
away as Bedford County; and children of all races participate in a true melting pot
program. She explained that in the first season, 55 children from age five to 12
participated in a program from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m. where they received breakfast,
and lunch and engaged in two theatrical productions; and the program will again be
provided this summer in partnership with the City's Department of Parks and
Recreation, Apple Ridge Farm and Total Action Against Poverty in an effort to offer
a safe haven for youth and professionals who are willing to shape artistic and
creative minds. She requested favorable consideration by Council of the funding
request for the Dumas Theater.
Matthew Despard, 1934Avon Road, S. W., representing the Board of Directors
of the Downtown Music Lab, which is an after school music and recording program
for middle and high school students, addressed Council with regard to funding
issues. He advised that the Downtown Music Lab is scheduled to move into the
Dumas Center for Artistic Development; currently 60 students regularly come to the
Music Lab for approximately two hours for a program that includes supervision and
guidance from a stafftrained in music production and recording; and because of the
Music Lab, 84 per cent of the young people state that they are more likely to attend
school, while 72 per cent advise that they now have an opportunity to express
themselves. He stated that the Dumas Theater will give the Music Lab a permanent
home, including a full recording studio and computer lab for youth to complete
homework assignments which does not currently exist in its Kirk Avenue location;
provide a place where youth can play and record music without using headphones;
increase the square footage of available space for the Music Lab; and the location
on First Street will provide easier access for youth from the Gainsboro and
Washington Park neighborhoods and other City neighborhoods. He added that the
Dumas Center for Artistic Development, in partnership with the Downtown Music
Lab, will provide a place for positive youth development, the request of the Dumas
Guild for matching funds from the City over a multi-year period is reasonable, and
he encouraged Council to honor the request.
Dr. Randall Thea, President of the Board, Bradley Free Clinic in the Roanoke
Valley, advised that this is the first time the Free Clinic has requested funding from
the City. He explained that $3 million in health care is provided annually to Roanoke
Valley residents, with 75 per cent going to City residents, averaging 16,000 visits per
year; in addition to medical exams, the Free Clinic provides lab work, x-rays, free
specialty referrals, dental services, and 35,000 prescriptions are provided annually
to working patients who are caught in the middle between welfare and the inability
to afford quality health care. He noted that the Free Clinic Pharmacy fills
prescriptions for not only Free Clinic patients, but for patients seen at emergency
rooms and those recently discharged from hospitals, as well as from private
physicians in the area; and in providing this service to Roanoke's disadvantaged
citizens, the Free Clinic helps to pay their taxes, decrease the welfare role, and
reduce emergency room and hospital visits. He explained that professionals
volunteer their services free of charge; the medical and dental communities have
continued to support this vital effort through volunteer and financial support; private
contributions have carried the burden of support for 28 years and the Free Clinic has
now reached the point where funding assistance is needed from the City of
Roanoke. He requested that Council look with favor on the request of the Free Clinic
for $70,000.00 for fiscal year 2003.
Theodore J. Edlich, Executive Director, Total Action Against Poverty, advised
that the top ten reasons to support the Dumas Center for Artistic Development are:
(10) the Dumas is the last habitable structure on the Yard representing a past of
dignity and excellence and the structure deserves to be preserved for the future in
a way that is consistent with the spirit of the past; (9) plans to convert the Dumas
into a Center for Artistic Development is the outcome of a six year process involving
neighborhoods, the business and education communities, and the arts community;
(8) there is a well identified need for an after school artistic development center that
concentrates on the young where they not only can learn how to express their talent,
but learn something about themselves and their place in society; (7) the Dumas has
already generated exciting artistic ventures such as the Drama Guild, "Yo Yo
Players", and the Downtown Music Lab; (6) the Dumas will play a positive role in
bringing blacks, whites, and other ethnic groups together for diversity which is
already represented in all of the projects that have been outlined; (5) the Dumas
Center has broad community support, organizations that stand behind the project
are Historic Gainsboro, Greater Gainsboro Alliance, Downtown Roanoke, the Higher
Education Center, the Harrison Museum of African-American Culture, the Arts
Council of the Blue Ridge, Total Action Against Poverty, the Roanoke Branch of the
NAACP, and the Southern Christian Leadership Conference; (4) the Dumas Center
for Artistic Development is a key ingredient completing the circle of excellence now
represented by the Higher Education Center, the new apartments, The Hotel
Roanoke and Conference Center, and anticipated continued progress in the
Gainsboro neighborhoods; (3) the request for $500,000.00 over several years will
help to leverage $3.5 million to complete restoration; (2) the Dumas Center is
available to other organizations such as the Harrison Museum, the Higher Education
Center, area private and public schools, community organizations, etc.; and (1) the
Dumas Center for Artistic Development is a good business deal for the City which
will generate revenue, and at a minimum as a for-profit corporation, the facility can
generate as much as $28,000.00 a year and has the potential of serving as a tourist
attraction.
Ms. Amazetta Anderson, 920 Loudon Avenue, N. W., spoke on behalf of
funding for the Dumas Drama Guild, and asked that Council consider the funding
request on the basis that the Drama Guild will be a venture of total artistic
development for youth and seniors.
Marc Chandler, Vice-President, Roanoke City Police Association, advised that
a portion of the proposed budget cuts are caused by an approximate $1.7 million
decrease in funding from the Commonwealth of Virginia; however, this does not
alter the focus or importance of his message. He stated that every department in the
City is concerned about the effect of proposed budget cuts; while not wishing to
diminish the work of other City departments that are staffed by dedicated
employees, but in times of budgetary crisis, it must be determined what is of priority
to citizens of the City of Roanoke, and no other department within City government
is as vital to the daily lives of Roanoke's citizens as is the public safety component.
He advised that proposed budget cuts will directly effect the ability to train
personnel and respond to issues which affect the safety and well-being of the
citizens of the City of Roanoke. He asked that Council, during budget study
sessions, consider its public safety departments that are on call 24 hours a day,
seven days a week, 365 days a year to ensure that the citizens of Roanoke, along
with those who visit the Roanoke area are safe and secure. He requested that the
2003 fiscal year budget be balanced without funding cuts in the public safety
departments.
Ms. Carrie Jefferson, 192 McKinley Drive, Henry, Virginia, a senior at Patrick
Henry High School, spoke on behalf of the Roanoke City DARE Camp. She stated
that having participated in the DARE Camp, she can attest to the quality of the
program. She advised that she has served as a DARE Camp counselor for the past
four years where children enjoy learning experiences and make life long friendships,
and requested that the City of Roanoke continue to provide funding for the DARE
Camp.
Mr. Rodney Jordan, 20 Rock Haven Lane, Boones Mill, Virginia, representing
the Roanoke Firefighters Association, expressed concern with regard to the
proposed reduction in the 2003 fiscal year budget for public safety personnel which
could lead to risks by firefighters and citizens. He stated that the proposed budget
calls for a reduction in staffing in the Fire-EMS Department of four positions; and the
Fire Chief has stated that position cuts will come in the form of elimination of three
fire suppression positions from Ladder One in downtown Roanoke; and for the non-
funding of the Deputy Chief of Suppression position, which is the number two slot
in the department. He inquired as to why the City would want to weaken its ability
to respond to emergencies when the Federal Government and the Governor of
Virginia have committed to strengthening public safety capabilities; and whywould
the City of Roanoke want to eliminate staffing positions when it does not currently
meet minimum standards. He stated that the City Manager's proposal, even though
it will save City taxpayer dollars in the long run, does not make good sense because
the department is constantly calling firefighters back to duty on overtime status in
order to meet minimum staffing levels which are currently below the national
standard. He explained that elimination of positions from the ladder truck will result
in three less firefighters to meet the minimum level; the final result will be
elimination of a position at regular salary and replacing that position with one at
overtime salary, which does not make good sense. He noted that of top priority is
the safety of citizens and firefighters; firefighters intend to show Council why the
positions are needed, consequences of eliminating the positions, figures regarding
national standards, and why there is a trend and a need across the nation to hire
more firefighters, police and EMS personnel.
Mr. Robert Gravely, 617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., advised that the average
citizen, and specifically City employees, do not earn sufficient wages to own a
house; and citizens do not receive sufficient services for their tax dollars. He spoke
against bond referendas authorized by the City that have benefitted businesses as
opposed to citizens.
Allen Shiplett, 1006 Hamilton Avenue, S. W., Vice-President of the Wasena
Neighborhood Forum, expressed appreciation to the Sheriff's department for
assigning inmate labor to work in the Wasena neighborhood. He stated that as a
result of their work, neighborhoods are safer, cleaner and a better place to live.
Mr. Ricky Nelson, 1319 Tazewell Avenue, S. E., addressed Council in
connection with the recent approval for expansion of the Roanoke Rescue Mission
on 4th Street, S. E. He called attention to unsafe living conditions in southeast
Roanoke where a zero tolerance to crime is needed. He stated that the historic value
of southeast Roanoke should be protected and expressed concern in regard to
proposed budget cuts in public safety.
Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that it has been stated
that the true worth of a City or a City Council is determined not by how many new
buildings are constructed, but by how they treat citizens who are less fortunate than
they. With this thought in mind, she requested that Council support the grant-in-kind
requested by TAP for the Dumas Artistic Center which is based not only upon the
rich history of the area, but upon the successes of TAP and the diversity of students
and people who will use the facility. She asked that the City fund the Dumas Center
for the sake of the children who currently use the facility and for future generations.
Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., appeared before Council in
support of the Dumas Artistic Guild. She stated that the Hotel Dumas is only one of
three historic buildings left in the Gainsboro community. She advised that the
proposed budget has serious flaws relative to public safety, and expressed concern
regarding the closing of fire stations, with no definitive answers from the Fire Chief
and the City Manager in connection with the closure of the fire station in the Peters
Creek Road/Orange Avenue/Williamson Road area which covers the predominantly
black neighborhoods. She stated that if the fire stations were in such poor
condition, why were they not repaired. She expressed concern in regard to
proposed funding cuts in public safety positions which are crucial to the well being
of the City, and added that municipal employees are the backbone of the City of
Roanoke, there is much unhappiness and unrest, and asked that Council review the
proposed personnel reductions and stand up for municipal employees.
Ms. Zoe Hewitt-Stennett, 3531 Peters Creek Road, N. W., asked that Council
not approve the proposed decreases in public safety budgets. She commended the
services provided by Fire/EMS, Police and Sheriff's personnel for the safety and well
being of the citizens of Roanoke.
Courtney Penn, 506 12th Street, N. W., representing the Roanoke Branch,
NAACP and its President, spoke in support of Phase II, Dumas Center construction,
and allocation of funds by the City to the project. He also expressed support of the
project not only because of its economic development potential, but for the
promotion of youth and adult creative and cultural development expression, and
because the requested allocation is reasonable and equitable, especially given
recent budgetary promises made to other organizations. He asked that Council see
the value in the programs that will be offered at the Dumas Artistic Center and
appropriate the requested funds.
Ms. Estelle McCadden, 2128 Mercer Avenue, N. W., requested answers and
clarification on certain proposed recommendations for fiscal year 2003. She stated
that money is needed for public safety, programs for youth, and diversity in housing,
work places and everyday activities. She advised that the proposed budget calls for
the hiring of a tax administrator; however, the position is not needed and funds
should be designated for youth and public safety issues. She inquired if those
positions recommended by the City Manager to be eliminated have been identified.
She expressed concern that citizens are asked to serve on boards and committees,
but committee recommendations are not given serious consideration. She also
expressed concern that some persons have already made up their mind about those
items to be included in the proposed fiscal year 2003 budget.
No other persons wishing to be heard, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
The Mayor advised that the third public hearing was on a proposed increase
in the admissions tax. He stated that the City Manager is recommending an increase
from 5 per cent to 6.5 per cent, effective July 1, 2002.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who wished to be
heard on the matter. There being none, without objection by Council, he declared
the public hearing closed.
The Mayor advised that the next public hearing relates to proposed increases
in certain fees, including subdivision and zoning fees. He inquired if there were
persons in attendance who would like to address Council; whereupon, the following
persons spoke:
Mr. Roger Roberts, 121 West Campbell Avenue, spoke with regard to the
proposed fee for refuse collection in the downtown area. He stated that the City
should do everything in its power to help the businesses in downtown Roanoke,
because 35-40 per cent of businesses along Campbell Avenue have closed; and the
proposed $50 per month trash collection fee is out of line for businesses that are not
subsidized by the City. He stated that downtown businesses are operating in the
midst of parking limitations and $15 parking tickets, and the downtown area is not
condusive for shopping or recreational purposes. He asked that Council enact
measures that will help downtown businesses.
Mr. Leo Trenor, 543 Petty Avenue, N. W., advised that Williamson Road
business people pay a tax penalty for having their businesses located on Williamson
Road; the City of Roanoke spent funds, unnecessarily, from Orange Avenue up
Williamson Road replacing perfectly good sidewalks, while the other end of
Williamson Road does not have any sidewalks. He stated that funds collected as a
part of the special service tax district are allocated to the Williamson Road Area
Business Association, a large majority of members are not property owners on
Williamson Road, nor do they own businesses on Williamson Road, and private
property owners on Williamson Road are being over looked. He stated that private
landowners believe that the City of Roanoke should provide free refuse collection
in view of the taxes that they pay on an annual basis, and if a refuse collection tax
is enacted, it should apply City-wide.
Erick Moore, Government Affairs Public Relations Coordinator, advised that
the Roanoke Regional Home Builders Association, is a non-profit trade association
representing approximately 500 members and over 16,000 men and women in
associated trades throughout the region. He stated that the building industry
represents one-sixth of the economy, which is a struggling economy that has
somehow remained strong. He spoke to the proposed 100 per cent increase in
building and planning fees on new home buyers which will have the effect of putting
l0
new homes out of the reach of many new home buyers; and will hurt not only
rehabilitation efforts within the City, but also new construction. He called attention
to comments by City officials that housing is a critical component to revitalization
efforts in Roanoke City; therefore, the proposed fees will hurt efforts to construct
new housing in the City of Roanoke. During Council's budget deliberations, he
asked that the proposed tax increase of 100 per cent in fees for planning and zoning
be reconsidered.
Mr. Robert Crouch, P. O. Box 37, Villamont, Virginia, expressed concern that
he was not permitted to register to speak upon his arrival at the Council meeting at
approximately 7:'15 p.m. He referred to a letter from the City administration in
connection with a proposed increase in fees for refuse collection in the downtown
Roanoke commercial district. He stated that if a fee is to be imposed for refuse
collection, it should be enacted City-wide and not discriminate on the downtown
area business owner. He expressed concern that he did not receive notification of
the proposed increase and would not have known about the proposal had it not been
for another business owner in the area. He stated that he did not envy the job of
Council Members, and it is hoped that the upcoming Councilmanic election will
produce Council Members who are cognizant of the financial dilemma of the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
The Mayor noted that Council will convene in fiscal year 2002-03 budget study
sessions on Thursday and Friday, May 9 and 10, 2002, at 8:30 a.m., in the Emergency
Operations Center Conference Room, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke with the goal of referring the proposed budget back
to the City Manager for the necessary adjustments and preparation of the
appropriate measures for adoption by Council at a special meeting to be held on
Monday, May 13, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the special meeting
adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
l!
SPECIAL SESSION .... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 29, 2002
Immediately Following the Public Hearing on the 2002-03
Fiscal Year Budget Which Convened At 7:00 p.m. (8:20 p.m.)
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in special session on Monday, April
29, 2002, immediately following the public hearing on the proposed fiscal year
2002-03 budget, which convened at 7:00 p.m., in the Roanoke Civic Center Exhibit
Hall, 710 Williamson Road, N. E., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor Ralph K.
Smith presiding, pursuant to Section 10, Meetings of Council of the City Charter,
pursuant to the budget study schedule for adoption of the City's fiscal year 2002-03
budget which was approved by Council on Tuesday, January 22, 2002, and pursuant
to Resolution No. 35816-041502 adopted by Council on Monday, April 15, 2002.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
C. Nelson Harris, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., William White, Sr., Linda F. Wyatt, and Mayor
Ralph K. Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
ABSENT: None ............................................................................. -0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
BUDGET-TAXES: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the special meeting
is to consider the City's proposed real property tax rate for fiscal year 2002-03. He
further advised that the City Manager's proposed budget includes a real property
tax rate of $1.21 per $100.00 of assessed value, which is the current tax rate for
fiscal year 2001-02.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Tuesday, April 16, 2002, and in The Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, April
25, 2002.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
address Council with regard to the matter. There being none, without objection by
Council, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the special meeting
adjourned at 8:25 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
June 3, 2002
Office of the City Manager
The Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
The Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
The Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
The Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Council Member
The Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
The Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Request For Public Hearing to Consider
Continuing Lease of City Owned Property
Background:
The City of Roanoke currently leases 3,000 square feet of retail space to Orvis Roanoke, Inc.
The current lease agreement of the property located at 11 Campbell Avenue SE, commonly
known as the Market Square Parking Garage, expires August 31, 2002. Orvis Roanoke, Inc
has expressed interest in continuing the lease of this space beyond the current term. To
continue the lease of this property, a new lease agreement is required.
Recommended Action:
Authorize the scheduling and advertising of a public hearing to consider entering into a new
agreement between the City of Roanoke and Orvis Roanoke, Inc.
Respectfully submitted,
City Manager
DLB:slm
C:
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Elizabeth A. Neu, Director of Economic Development
CM02-00113
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci.roanoke.va.us
Roanoke City Electoral Board
May 20,2002
Carl T. Tinsley, Sr., Chairman
Frances V. Garland, Vice Chairman
Gilbert E. Butler, Jr., Secretary
Mrs. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 454, Municipal Building
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Mrs. Parker:
Pursuant to Section 24.2-675 of the Virginia Election Laws, attached is a certified copy
of the abstract of votes cast in the General Election held in the City of Roanoke on
May 7, 2002.
Gilbe~ E. Butler, Jr~Secretary
Roanoke City Electoral Board
Room 109, Municipal North
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011
P.O. Box 1095, Roanoke, Virginia 24005
(540) 853-2281
Fax (540) 853-1025
ABSTRACT OF VOTES
cast in the City of ROANOKE
at the May 7, 2002 General Election· for:
· Virginia,
MEMBER
CITY COUNCIL
AT LARGE
ENTER AT LARGE OR APPROPRIATE DISTRICT OR WARD NAME
NAMES OF CANDIDATES AS SHOWN ON BALLOT
TOTAL VOTES
RECEIVED
(/IV FIGURES)
Mark H. Hurley
Steve J. Mabry
John H. "Jack" Parrott
3,310
3,016
4,227
M. Rupert Cutler
...................... 4.335
Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
C. Nelson Harris
Don L. Hoqan
4,506
4,905
...................... 445
Total Write-In Votes [SEE WRITE-INS CERTIFICATION] ............ 77~4,
CONTINUE CANDIDA TES ON PAGE 2, IF NECES.~4RY
We, the undersigned Electoral Board, upon examination of the official records deposited with the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of the election held on May 7, 2002, do hereby certify that the above is a true and correct Abstract of Votes cast
at said election and do, therefore, determine and declare that the following person(s) has (have) received the greatest
number of votes cast for the above office in said election:
C. Nelson Harris Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. M. Rupert Cutler
Given under our hands this
· 4 copy teste:
8 th day of May, 2002.
· Chairman
Chairman
· Secretary
Electoral Board
City of ~Q~NOKE
Member, City Council
AT LARGE
ENTER AT LARGE OR APPROPRIATE DISTRICT OR WARD NAME
May 7, 2002
General Election
Page 2 of 2
NAMES OF CANDIOATES AS SHOWN ON BALLOT
M. Doug Trout
TOTAL VOTES
RECEIVED
fin FIGURES)
916
WRITE-INS CER TIFICA TION
ROANOKE J~General ~ Special Election
[_l TOWN/COUNT~ [] C.~
MEMBER CITY COUNCIL
OFFICE TITLE
DISTRICT NAME OR NUMBER, IF APPLICABLE
WRITE-INS - SUMMARY [P~qVZR~V]
1. Invalid Write-Ins .............................
2. Valid Write-Ins ..............................
3. Total Write-Ins ..............................
[ENTER THIS FIGURE ON LINE FOR TOTAL WRITE-IN VOTES OS ABSTRACT FOR THIS OFFICE.]
May 7, 2002
Page I of 1
TOTAL VOTES
RECEIVED
fin FIGURES)
ENTER TOTAL INVALID
77~
ENTER TOTAL VALID
774
ADD LINES 1 AND 2
VALID WRITE-INS - DETAIL [REQUIRED ONLY IF (i) TOTAL NUMBER OF WRITE-INS IS 5% OR MORE OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF
VOTES CAST FOR OFFICE OR {ii) A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE WAS ELECTED TO THE OFFICE.]
LIST VALID WRITE-INS IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER BELOW AND ON CONTINUATION PAGES,
AS NEEDED. ALL VALID WRITE'INS WHEN ADDED TOGETHER MUST EQUAL TOTAL ENTERED
ON LINE 2 ABOVE.
Evelyn Bethel
Chris Craft
TOTA£ VOTES
RECEIVED
(l~v F~uaEs)
1
2
765
1
Bev Fitzpatrick
Angela M. Norman
Georqia C. Reeves
CONTINUED ON PAGES THROUGH
We, the undersigned Electoral Board, upon examination of the official records deposited with the Clerk of the
Circuit Court of the election held on May 7, 2002, do hereby certify that, with the continuation pages indicated,
the above is a true and correct certification of the write-in votes cast at said election for the office indicated
above.
Given under our hands this
A copy teste:
8th
day of May, 2002.
~/~.-'i.,~. ~- ~J~~J~ ,Chairman
RALPH K. SMITH
Mayor
CITY OF ROANOKE
CITY COUNCIL
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
June 3,2002
Council Members:
William D. Bestpitch
William H. Carder
C. Nelson Harris
W. Alvin Hudson, Jr.
William White, Sr.
Linda E Wyatt
The Honorable Vice-Mayor and
Members of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
I wish to request a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards,
commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1),
Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
, ~cerely,
Mayor
RKS:sm
N:\cksml~Agenda.02\Closed Session on Vacancies.wpd
Office of the City Manager
June 3,2002
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Re: Request for closed meeting
Dear Mayor Smith and Council Members:
This is to request that City Council convene a closed meeting to discuss the disposition of
publicly-owned property pursuant to §2.2-3711 .A.3, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
DLB/f
Sincerely,
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
C:
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 364
Municipal South
215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591
CityWeb:www. ci.roanoke.va.us
(540) 853-2333
FAX (540) 853-1138
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10, 2002
File #15-110-178
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
John P. Baker, Executive Director
City of Roanoke RedeveloPment
and Housing Authority
2624 Salem Turnpike, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Dear Mr. Baker:
This is to advise you that Bevedy T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., has qualified as a Commissioner of the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, to fill the unexpired term of
Willis M Anderson, deceased, ending August 31,2002
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc: Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk
N:\CKMHl~Agcnda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
Oath or Affirmation of Office
Commonwealth of Virginia, City of Roanoke, to-wit:
I, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the
Constitution of the United States of America and the Constitution of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, and that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties
incumbent upon me as a member of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority,
to fill the unexpired term of Willis M. Anderson, deceased, ending August 31, 2002,
according to the best of my ability.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ,10 day of /~c,.,z2002.
/
ARTHUR B. CRUSH, III, CLERK
, DEPUTY CLERK
H:~Agenda.02XaMay6, 2002 co~espondence.wpd
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #15-110-304
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Marion A. Vaughn-Howard, Secretary
Youth Services Citizen Board
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Vaugh-Howard:
This is to advise you that James H. Smith has qualified as a member of the Youth Services
Citizen Board for a term ending May 31,2005.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc: Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk
N:\CKMHlXAgenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
Oath or Affirmation of Office
Commonwealth of Virginia, City of Roanoke, to-wit:
I, James H. Smith, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support the Constitution
of the United States of America and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and
that I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me
as a member of the Youth Services Citizen Board, for a term ending May 31, 2005,
according to the best of my ability.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this ,~ ~ day of/T~ ~
2002.
ARTHUR B. C I, CLE
, DEPUTY CLERK
H:",Agenda.02WIay 6, 2002 correspondence.wpd
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #24-60-110-132-137
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Burcham:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 35888-060302 amending Chapter 2, Administration,
of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending §2-299, Budget and
planning committee, and §2-303, Personnel committee, and by the addition of a new
§2-304, Legislative committee, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
MFP:mh
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Attachment
pc:
The Honorable Richard C. Pattisall, Chief Judge, Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit of
Virginia
The Honorable Diane McQ. Strickland, Judge, Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit of
Virginia
The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit of
Virginia
N:\CKMHlXAgenda.02~June 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
Darlene L. Burcham
June 10,2002
Page 2
pc:
The
The
The
The
The
The
Honorable Robert P. Doherty, Judge, Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit of Virginia
Honorable Jonathan M. Apgar, Judge, Twenty-Third Judicial Circuit of Virginia
Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
George W. Harris, Jr., Judge, General District Court
Vincent A. Lilley, Judge, General District Court
William D. Broadhurst, Judge, General District Court
The Honorable Jacqueline F. Ward Talevi, Judge, General District Court
The Honorable John B. Ferguson, Chief Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations
District Court
The Honorable Joseph M. Clarke, II, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations
District Court
The Honorable Philip. Trompeter, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District
Court
The Honorable Joseph P. Bounds, Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District
Court
Sheila N. Hartman, Assistant City Clerk, (For transmittal by electronic mail to
Municipal Code Corporation)
Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, 210 First Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia
24011
Ronald S. Albright, Clerk, General District Court
David C. Wells, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court
Peggy B. Stewart, Office of the Magistrate
Michael R. Meise, Law Librarian
N:\CKMHl\Agenda.02XJunc 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No.35888-060302.
AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 2, ~li~aa_~, of the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending §2-299, Budget and planning committee, and §2-
303, Personnel committee,, and by the addition of a new §2-304, Leo$1ative committee,, and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. Section 2-299, Budget and planning committee,, and §2-303, Pe~'sonnel
committee, of Chapter 2, AIimiI~_ti~, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, are hereby amended and reordained to read and provide as follows:
§2-299. Budget and planning comllaittee.
(a) The budget and planning committee shall be composed of the
seven (7) members of the council. The committee shall select a chair from
among its members. The city clerk shall serve as secretary to the committee.
The committee shall meet at such times as it deems advisable.
(b) The budget and planning committee shall be responsible for short
and long-range financial planning for the city, particularly with regard to
matters that affect the city budget, except for matters for which the audit or
other committees are responsible, and shall make such recommendations to the
council as it deems advisable concerning the same.
§2-303. personnel committee,
The personnel committee of city council shall be composed of all
members of the council. The committee shall select a chair from among its
members. The personnel committee shall have the responsibility of screening,
interviewing and selecting the person best qualified to fill any vacancy that
may occur in any of the six (6) full-time positions within city government
which are appointed or elected by city council. The personnel committee shall
also have the responsibility for evaluating the aforementioned council
appointees.
2. Chapter 2, ~, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended is amended by the addition of a new §2-304, Legislative committee, which shall
read and provide as follows:
§2-304. Legislative committ¢,.
(a) The legislative committee shall be composed of at least four (4)
members of the Council, and two (2) members appointed by the school board.
The committee shall select a chair from among its members who are members
of Council. The City Clerk shall serve as the secretary of the committee and
maintain minutes as a permanent record. The committee shall meet on call of
any member or the Mayor.
(b) The legislative committee shall prepare annually a legislative
program for consideration by Council, setting forth the legislative needs of the
City and its school system. Once such program is adopted by Council, the
committee shall, in coordination with the City Attorney and the City's
legislative liaison, work to advance and promote the program.
3. Pursuant to Chapter 12 of the Charter, the second reading of this ordinance
by title is hereby dispensed with.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
RALPH K. SMITH
Mayor
CITY OF ROANOKE
CITY COUNCIL
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-254!
Fax: (540) 853-1145
June 3,2002
Council Members:
William D. Bestpitch
William H. Carder
C. Nelson Harris
W. Alvin Hudson, Jr.
William White, Sr.
Linda F. Wyatt
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of Council:
As you know, Chapter 2, Administration, Article XIV. Authorities, Boards, Commissions and
Committees Generally, Division 2. Permanent Committees, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, provides, in part, for appointment of certain permanent committees,
i.e., Audit Committee, Budget and Planning Committee, Human Services Committee, and
Personnel Committee.
I was surprised recently to realize that the Legislative Committee is not included as a
permanent committee. Code Section 2-299 requires that the Budget and Planning
Committee meet "on the third Monday of each month at 2:00 p.m." I understand that this
committee has not met in at least ten years. Code Section 2-303 does not include a
method for choosing a member to chair the Personnel Committee, and requires that
evaluations of council-appointed officers be completed on the anniversary dates of their
employment.
I have requested that an ordinance be drafted to conform the Code to the current practices
of Council, and to provide for greater consistency among the Audit, Budget and Planning,
Personnel, and Legislative Committees. Accordingly, I would respectfully propose that
Section 2-299. Budget and Planning Committee, be amended as follows:
The committee shall select a chair from among its members and shall meet at such times
as it deems advisable. The responsibilities of the committee shall reflect the work
accomplished during financial planning and budget study sessions.
I would further propose that Section 2-303. Personnel Committee, be amended as follows:
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
The committee shall select a chair from among its members, but shall not be required to
conduct performance evaluations on the anniversary dates of council appointees, allowing
all evaluations to be conducted at the same time of year.
Finally, I would propose that a new Section 2-304. Legislative Committee, be added to the
City Code to define the responsibilities and membership of the Legislative Committee as
follows:
The legislative committee shall be composed of at least four members of the Council and
two members appointed by the school board. The committee shall select a chair from
among its members who are members of council. The city clerk shall serve as the
secretary of the committee and maintain minutes as a permanent record. The committee
shall meet on call of any member or the Mayor.
The legislative committee shall prepare annually a legislative program for consideration by
council, setting forth the legislative needs of the City and its school system. Once such a
program is adopted by council, the committee shall, in coordination with the city attorney
and the City's legislative liaison, work to advance and promote the program.
The City Attorney has prepared the attached ordinance for your review and recommended
adoption.
Sincerely,.
William D. Bestpitch
Council Member
WDB:sm
Attachment
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
May 10, 2002
File #60-246
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Hall:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 35889-060302 amending and reordaining certain
seCtions of the 2002-03 Fifth District Employment and Training Consortium Appropriations,
providing for appropriation of $383,916.00, in connection with funding for the Fifth District
Employment and Training Consortium
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Attachment
pc:
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
Rolanda A. Johnson, Assistant City Manager for Community Development
Glenn D. Radcliffe, Director, Human Services
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
N:\CKMHlkAgenda.02~June 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35889-060302.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 2002-2003 Fifth
District Employment and Training Consortium Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City
of Roanoke, an emergency ii declared to exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that certain
sections of the 2002-2003 Fifth Distdct Employment and Training Consortium Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows,
in part:
Fifth Distdct Employment and Training Consortium
Administration FY03 (1-9) ........................................
WIA Youth In-School FY03 (10-20) ................................
WIA Youth Out-of-School FY03 (21-31) .............................
Revenues
Fifth Distdct Employment and Training Consortium
Administration FY03 (32) ........................................
WIA Youth In-School FY03 (33) ...................................
WIA Youth Out-of-School FY03 (34) ...............................
1) Staff to Board (034-633-2300-8049) $ 30,000
2) Wages (034-633-2300-8050) 1,000
3) Fdnges (034-633-2300-8051) 250
4) Travel (034-633-2300-8052) 446
5) Communication (034-633-2300-8053) 500
6) Supplies (034-633-2300-8055) 500
7) Insurance (034-633-2300-8056) 150
$ 4,086,788
38,396
241,520
104,000
$ 4,086,788
38,396
241,520
104,000
8) Contractual
Services (Rent)
9) Miscellaneous
10) Wages
11) Fdnges
12) Travel
13) Communication
14) Supplies
15) Insurance
16) Contractual
Services (Rent)
17) Miscellaneous
18) DSLSS
19) TAP
20) STEP, INC
21) Wages
22) Fringes
23) Travel
24) Communication
25) Supplies
26) Insurance
27) Contractual
Services (Rent)
28) Miscellaneous
29) OS/TAP
30) OS/STEP,INC
31) ALLEGHANY CO
32) Administration-
Revenue
33) WIA Youth In-
School- Revenue
34) WIA Youth Out-of-
School- Revenue
(034-633-2300-8057)
(034-633-2300-8060)
(034-633-2363-8050)
(034-633-2363-8051 )
(034-633-2363-8052)
(034-633-2363-8053)
(034-633-2363-8055)
(034-633-2363-8056)
(034-633-2363-8057)
(034-633-2363-8060)
(034-633-2363-8232)
(034-633-2363-8233)
{034-633-2363-8234)
(034-633-2364-8050)
(034-633-2364-8051 )
(034-633-2364-8052)
(034-633-2364-8053)
(034-633-2364-8055)
(034-633-2364-8056)
(034-633-2364-8057)
(034-633-2364-8060)
(034-633-2364-8236)
(034-633-2364-8237)
(034-633-2364-8238)
(034-633-2300-2300)
(034-633-2363-2363)
(034-633-2364-2364)
$ 5,500
5O
29,500
7,375
750
750
750
750
11,000
645
25,000
130,000
35,000
14,000
3,500
250
500
500
250
4,500
500
40,000
15,000
25,000
38,396
241,520
104,000
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall be
in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the City Manager
June 3, 2002
Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Funding for Fifth District
Employment and Training
Consortium - WlA Youth
Programs
Background:
The Fifth District Employment and Training Consortium (FDETC) administers the
federally funded Workforce Investment Act (WIA) for the region, which encompasses
the counties of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke as well as the cities
of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem. WlA funding is for two primary client populations:
· Dislocated workers who have been laid off from employment through no fault of
their own, and
· Economically disadvantaged individuals as determined by household income
guidelines set up by the U.S. Department of Labor.
The City of Roanoke is the grant recipient and fiscal agent for FDETC funding, thus,
City Council must appropriate the funding for all grants and other monies the FDETC
receives.
The FDETC has received a Notice of Obligation (NO0) from the Virginia
Employment Commission authorizing the Workforce Area to spend $383,916 for
WlA Youth Programs.
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci.roanoke.va.us
Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
Considerations:
· Program Operations - Existing activities will continue and planned programs will
be implemented.
· Funding - Funds are available from the Grantor agency and other sources as
indicated, at no additional cost to the City.
· Timing - Immediate action will allow transition activities to be implemented and
completed within planned time frames, July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003.
Recommendations:
Appropriate the FDETC's funding totaling $383,916 and increase the revenue estimate
by $383,916 in accounts to be established in the Consortium fund by the Director of
Finance.
City Manager
DLB:tem
C;
Rolanda Johnson, Assistant City Manager for Community Development
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Barry L. Key, Director of Management and Budget
Glenn D. Radcliffe, Director of Human Services
CM02-00098
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk®ci.roanoke.va, us
June 10,2002
File #514
STEPHAN1E M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Gary W. Wright, Executive Vice-President
Adams Construction Co.
P. O. Box 12627
Roanoke, Virginia 24027
Dear Mr. Wright:
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 35891-060302 accepting the bid of Adams
Construction Co., for paving of various streets and raising manholes in the City of
Roanoke, in the amount of $2,034,202.55; and rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Enclosure
pc:
Dadene L. Burcham, City Manager
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Philip C. Schirmer, City Engineer
George C. Snead, Jr., Acting Director, General Services
Robert H. Bird, Acting Purchasing Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
N:\CKMHlXAgenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10, 2002
File #60-514
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Stanley H. Puckett, President
L. H. Sawyer Paving Co., Inc.
496 Glenmore Drive
Salem, Virginia 24018
Gentlemen:
M. Wayne Hylton, Jr., Vice-President
S. R. Draper Paving Co.
4742 Old Rocky Mount Road, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24014
I am enclosing copy of Ordinance No. 35891-060302 accepting the bid of Adams
Construction Co., for paving of various streets and raising manholes in the City of
Roanoke, in the amount of $2,034,202.55; and rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
On behalf of the City of Roanoke, thank you for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed
project.
Enclosure
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
N:\CKMHl~.genda.02\lunc 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
1N THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35891-060302.
AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Adams Construction Company for paving of
various streets and raising manholes, upon certain terms and conditions, and awarding a
contract therefor; authorizing the proper City officials to execute the requisite contract for
such work; rejecting all other bids made to the City for the work; and providing for an
emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. The bid of Adams Construction Company made to the City in the total amount
of $2,034,202.55 (base bid plus Alternate No. 1), for paving of various streets and raising
manholes, within the City of Roanoke, as is more particularly set forth in the City Manager's
report to this Council, dated June 3, 2002, such bid being in full compliance with the City's
plans and specifications made therefor and as provided in the contract documents offered
said bidder, which bid is on file in the Office of the Purchasing Manager, be and is hereby
ACCEPTED.
2. The City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby authorized on behalf of the
City to execute and attest, respectively, the requisite contract with the successful bidder,
based on its proposal made therefor and the City's specifications made therefor, said contract
to be in such form as is approved by the City Attorney, and the cost of the work to be paid for
out of funds heretofore or simultaneously appropriated by Council.
3. Any and all other bids made to the City for the above work are hereby
RE$£CT£D, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each
the City's appreciation for such bid.
4. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the municipal government,
an emergency is deemed to exist, and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its
passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
H:\OILDI'NANC ES\O-PAVfNG.ADAMS060302 W'PD
CITY OF R O 4NOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
May 10, 2002
File #60-514
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Hall:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 35890-060302 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2001-02 General Fund Appropriations, in connection with acceptance of a
bid submitted by Adams Construction Co., in the amount of $2,034,202.55, for paving of
various streets and raising manholes in the City of Roanoke.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Attachment
pc:
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
Philip C. Schirmer, City Engineer
George C. Snead, Jr., Acting Director, General Services
Robert H. Bird, Acting Purchasing Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
N:\CKMH l~Agenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35890-060302.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 2001-2002
General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City
of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
certain sections of the 2001-2002 General Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are
hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part:
ADDropriation~
Public Works
Paving Program (1) ........................................
Revenues
$ 25,643,231
2,766,362
Grants-In-Aid Commonwealth
Other Categorical Aid (2). $
1 ) Fees for Professional
Services (001-530-4120-2010) $ 273,218
2) Street Maintenance (001-110-1234-0650) 273,218
46,675,290
16,671,410
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall be
in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the City Manager
June 3,2002
Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Contract Award
2002 Paving Program
Bid No. 02-04-25
Background:
Following proper advertisement, three bids for the 2002 Street Paving Program were
received on Monday, May 13, 2002 (see Attachment 1 - Tabulation of Bids). Adams
Construction Company (of Roanoke, Virginia) submitted the Iow bid in the amount of
$2,034,202.55, which included a base.bid of $1,871,702.55 and Alternate No.1 (raising
manholes) of $162,500.00. A time of one hundred eighty (180) days was specified for
this project.
City Council has directed the Administration to give "every consideration" to maintaining
a 20-year paving cycle on City streets. The 20-year paving cycle requires that 57 lane-
miles be paved each year within the City of Roanoke.
Considerations:
City staff carefully evaluated the three bids and it is recommended that a contract in the
amount of $2,034,202.55 be awarded to Adams Construction Company that includes
the base bid and Alternate No. 1 (raising manholes). The unit prices for asphalt ($43.95
per ton) and raising manholes ($325.00 each) are higher than last year's prices;
however, they are in line with current industry costs. The asphalt quantities total 26,800
tons of asphalt, which will enable the resurfacing of the streets listed in Attachment 2 -
2002 Paving Program List of Streets. Funding in the amount of $2,074,202.55 is
available to cover all the associated cost of the paving program, which include the
contract expense, and replacement of traffic signal detectors (see Attachment 3 -
Paving Program Financial Breakdown).
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci. roanoke.va.us
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
Recommended Actions:
Accept the bid of Adams Construction Company and authorize the City Manager to
enter into a contractual agreement with Adams Construction Company in the amount of
$2,034,202.55 (which includes alternate 1), in a form approved by the City Attorney.
Increase the revenue estimate for Highway Maintenance revenues $273,218 and
appropriate $273,218 to the FY 02 Paving Program account.
Reject all other bids received.
Re~spectfully submitted,
City Manager
DLB/KHK/gpe
Attachments
C;
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Philip C. Schirmer, City Engineer
Robert Bird, Acting Purchasing Manager
#CM02-00106
ATTACHMENT 1
TABULATION OF BIDS
2002 PAVING PROGRAM
BID NO. 02-04-25
Robert L. White, Purchasing Manager, opened bids on Monday, May 13, 2002 at
2:00 p.m.
CONTRACTOR BASE BID ALT. 1 BID TOTAL BID
L. H. Sawyer Paving Company Inc. $1,953,198.32 $159,000 $ 2,112,198.32
Adams Construction Company $1,871,702.55 $162,500 $ 2,034,202.55
S. R. Draper Paving Company $1,883,597.93 $160,000 $ 2,043,597.93
Engineer's Contract Estimate: $1,986,090
Streets & Traffic Division
Roanoke, Virginia
June 3, 2001
2002 PAVING PROGRAM LIST OF STREETS
Street From
ATTACHMENT 2
Avenham
Buena Vista
To
12th Street Salem Avenue Chapman Avenue
14th Street Dale Avenue Kenwood Boulevard
28th Street Rosalind Avenue Avenue
9th Street , Jamison Avenue Boulevard
Airport Road Nelms Lane !Municipal Road
Avenel Avenue , Carter Road i Grandin Road
Bohon Street i Huntington Boulevard i Trinkle Avenue
Caldwell Street Lane
Carroll Avenue
Chapman
Cove
Crystal Spring
Avenue
i Summit
16th
Street
10th Street
!Salem Turnpike
,22nd Street
13th Street
Road Lafayette Boulevard 22nd Street
Avenue 26th Street End
Forest Hill Avenue Shenandoah Valley Avenue Plantation Road
Gardens Road
Grandin Road
Jackson Street
Kanter Road
Kenwood Boulevard
Roberts Road
End
Carlton Road i Garst Mills Road
12th Street i 1118 Jackson Street
Plantation Road Shenandoah Valley Avenue
200 block ' Vernon Street
Livingston Road
Loudon
Montgomery
Montvale Avenue
Guilford Avenue
i Spring Street
14th
Avenue 5th Street Street
Mattaponi Drive Ranch Road Lewiston Street
Melrose EBL Avenue Peters Creek Road Fentress Street
Avenue Oak Street Woodlawn Avenue
NB Williamson Road
Old Sherwood Avenue
Guilford Avenue
N. Civic Center Drive Drive
Orange Avenue
Oregon Avenue
Parliament Road Townside
Ridgefield Street Liberty
Roanoke Avenue Bridge
10th
Rockland Avenue
Rosemead Street
Rutherford Avenue
Rutherford Avenue
Arlington Road
Gainsboro
Salem Avenue
Woodlawn
Weaver Road
Orange Avenue
Blenheim Road
Road illth
Shenandoah Valley
Avenue
Staunton Avenue
Road
Avenue !Guilford
Road i Southway
Road i Wertz
Street
Street
Troutland Avenue
3rd Street
Madison Avenue
13th Street
Kanter Road
19th
Tillett Road Montvale Avenue
Townside
Troutland Avenue
Washington Avenue
Street
Franklin Road
Old Stevens Road
Franklin Road
WBL - Dale Avenue
13th Street
Weaver Road
Tillet Road
Burks
Western End
Rolling Hill
5th
5th
Boulevard
Forest Hill
Crescent
i Spring
City Limit
i Westwood
16th
City Limit
i Livingston
Southern End
Street
Avenue
Drive
Road
Street
Avenue
Street
Street
Avenue
Street
Street
Boulevard
Street
Road
Westside Boulevard Shenandoah Avenue
Westwood Boulevard Shenandoah Avenue i Troutland Avenue
Williamson Road Cumberland Street ! Angell Lane
Woodlawn Avenue i Spring Road ! Montgomery Avenue
Yellow Mt. Road i Welcome Valley Road i City Limit
ATTACHMENT 3
2002 PAVING PROGRAM FINANCIAL BREAKDOWN
PAVING PROGRAM FUNDING
SOURCE
Fiscal Year 2002-2003 Adopted Budget
Fiscal Year 2001-2002 CMERP
Additional Street Maintenance Revenue Fiscal Year 2001-2002
Total Funds Available
AMOUNT
$1,752,872
$48,113
$ 273,218
$ 2,O74,2O3
PAVING PROGRAM COSTS
DESCRIPTION
Contract Base Bid
Alternate Bid for Manhole Adjustments
Total Contract Amount
Associated Traffic Signal Detector Repair
Replacement of roadway embedded traffic signal detectors that will
be destroyed by the paving work.
AMOUNT
$1,871,702.55
$162,500.00
$ 2,034,202.55
$ 40,000
Total Program Costs $ 2,074,203
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10, 2002
File ¢~-468-472
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Jack M. Bertram, President
Griffin Pipe Products Co.
P. O. Box 740
Lynchburg, Virginia 24505
Dear Mr. Bertram:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35892-060302 accepting the bid of Griffin Pipe
Products Co., for furnishing and delivering ductile iron water pipe, in the amount of
$148,688.50; and rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Enclosure
pc;
Dadene L.. Burcham, City Manager
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
George C. Snead, Jr., Acting Director, General Services
Robert H. Bird, Acting Purchasing Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
N:\CKMHlXAgenda.02Uunc 3, 2002 correspondencc.wpd
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10, 2002
File ¢f468-472
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Hughes Supply, Inc.
CMC Supply, Inc.
Ferguson Enterprises, Inc.
Atlantic States Cast Iron Pipe Co.
Waterworks Supply
U. S. Filter Distribution Group
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35892-060302 accepting the bid of Griffin' Pipe
Products Co., for furnishing and delivering ductile iron water pipe, in the amount of
$148,688.50; and rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
On behalf of the City of Roanoke, thank you for submitting your bid on ductile iron water
pipe.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Enclosure
H:~Agenda.02~Iune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THECOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35892-060302.
A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Griffin Pipe Products Company made to the City
for furnishing and delivering ductile iron water pipe; and rejecting all other bids made to the
City.
BE IT RESOLVED b.y this Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. This unit price bid of Griffin Pipe Products Company made to the City, offering
to supply ductile iron water pipe, for the period of July I, 2002 to June 30, 2003, meeting all of
the City's specifications and requirements therefor, at the unit price as set forth in its bid
documents, not anticipated to exceed $148,688.50, based on estimated quantities, which bid is on
file in the Purchasing Division, is hereby ACCEPTED, as set forth in the City Manager's letter to
Council dated June 3, 2002.
2. The City's Manager of the Purchasing Division is hereby authorized and directed
to issue the requisite purchase order therefor, incorporating into such order the City's
specifications, the terms of such bidder's proposal and the terms and provisions of this
resolution.
3. Any and all other bids made to the City for the aforesaid procurement are hereby
REJECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each the
City's appreciation for such bid.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
H:UVleasures\gdffin pipe duclfle iron pipe 20~, 2.doc
Office of the City Manager
June 3,2002
Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Bids for Ductile Iron Water
Pipe
Bid No. 02-05-22
Background:
Bids were requested on a fiscal year basis to provide and deliver to the City
estimated quantities of ductile iron water pipe for a period of one (1) year, from
July 1, 2002 to June 30, 2003.
Specifications were developed and sent with the Invitation for Bid to fourteen (14)
vendors currently on the City's bid list. The bid was publicly advertised in
accordance with Chapter 23.1 of the Code of the City of Roanoke.
Considerations:
Seven (7) bids were received. All bids received were evaluated in a consistent
manner. Griffin Pipe Products Company was the Iow responsive and responsible
bidder and meets the required specifications. Funding is available in the Water
Department and various Capital Projects accounts.
Room 364 Municipal South
215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1 ]38
CityWeb:www. ci,roanoke.va.us
The Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
Recommended Action:
Accept the Iow bid and authorize the purchase of ductile iron water pipe from
Griffin Pipe Products Company for a period of one (1) year on a unit cost basis
as set forth in its bid documents, not anticipated to exceed $148,688.50 and
reject all other bids. Authorize the Manager of the Purchasing Division to issue
the requisite purchase order therefor, incorporating into such order the City's
specifications, the terms of the successful bidder's proposal and the terms and
provisions of the attached resolution.
Respectfully submitted,
Darlene L.~
City Manager
DLB: bdf
C~
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Barry L. Key, Director of Management and Budget
Robert Bird, ActingManager, Purchasing
CM02-00100
BID TABULATION
Bids received and opened in the Purchasing Division, 2:00 p.m., MAY 6, 2002
QTY
100
L.F.
1000
L.F.
80O0
L.F.
80O0
L.F.
150
L.F.
3000
L.F.
5OO
L.F.
TOTAL~
DESC
3"PIPE,
MECHANICAL
JOINT
4" PIPE,
PUSH-ON
JOINT
6" PIPE,
PUSH-ON
JOINT
8" PIPE,
PUSH-ON
JOINT
0"PIPE,
PUSH-ON
JOINT
12 PIPE,
PUSH-ON
JOINT
16" PIPE,
PUSH-ON
JOINT
VENDOR
HUGHES
SUPPLY,
INC.
7.62 FT
5.77 ~¥-
5.35 FT
7.35 FT
9.72 FT
12.43 FT
18.98
For
DUCTILE IRON WATER PIPE
Bid No. 02-05-22
VENDOR VENDOR
CMC
SUPPLY
INC.
FERGUSON
ENTERPRISE
S INC.
$156,3~
NO BID
6.45
5.15 FT
7.10 FT
9.40 ~--
12.00 FT
18.30 FT
$151,010.00
7.31
5.55 FT
5.14 FT
7.06 FT
9.32 F~-
11.93
18.22 FT
$150,179.00
VENDOR
ATLANTIC
STATES
CAST IRON
PIPE CO.
6.32 FT
5.08
5.58 FT
7.73 FT
10.22 ~--
13.07 ~-
19.81 ~-
$162,840.00
VENDOR
GRIFFIN PIPE
PRODUCTS
COMPANY
VENDOR
WATER
WORKS
SUPPLY
VENDOR
U.S. FILTER
DISTRIBUTI
ON GRP
** Indicates recommendation
7.24 FT 7.79
5.49 5.96
5.09 FT 5.52 FT
6.99 7.60 FT
9.23 FT 10.03 FT
11.81 FT 12.83 FT
18.04 FT 19.57 FT
$148,688.50'* $161,478.50
7.00
5.81 FT
5.20 FT
7.20 FT
9.61 FT
12.20 FT
18.70 FT
$153,101.50
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va, us
June 10,2002
File ~-468
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
CIBA Specialty Chemicals Corp.
Eaglebrook, Inc.
General Chemical Co.
JCl Jones Chemicals, Inc.
Polydyne, Inc.
Brenntag Southeast, Inc.
Vopak USA, Inc.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35893-060302 accepting your bids for water and
wastewater treatment chemicals for the City of Roanoke for fiscal year 2002-03; and
rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Enclosure
pc:
Dadene L. Burcham, City Manager
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
George C. Snead, Jr., Acting Director, General Services
Robert H. Bird, Acting Purchasing Manager
Robert K. Bengtson, Director, Public Works
Michael T. McEvoy, Director of Utilities
N:\CKMHl~Agenda.02~June 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10,2002
File fl-468
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Prochem Technologies, Inc.
Vopak USA, Inc.
Polydyne, Inc.
Ondeo Nalco Co.
George S. Coyne Chemical Co., Inc.
Geo Specialty Chemicals, Inc.
Delta Chemical Corp.
Control Chemical
Control Equipment Co, Inc.
Brenntag Southeast, Inc.
Calciquest, Inc.
JCl Jones Chemicals, Inc.
Basic Chemical Solutions, L.L.C.
Ladies and Gentlemen:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35893-060302 accepting bids for water and
wastewater treatment chemicals for the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year 2002-03; and
rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
On behalf of the City of Roanoke, thank you for submitting your bid on wastewater
treatment chemicals.
MFP:mh
Enciosure
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
N:xt ;KMI~ 1 ~Agcnda.02klune 3, 2002 corrcspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35893-060302.
A RESOLUTION accepting the bids for water and wastewater treatment chemicals for
fiscal year 2002-2003, and rejecting all other bids.
BE IT RESOLVED by this Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. The bids in writing of the following named bidders to furnish to the City the items
hereinafter set out and generally described as needed for the period July 1, 2002 to June 30,
2003, such items being more particularly described in the letter of the City Manager to this
Council dated June 3, 2002, and in the City's specifications and any alternates and in each
bidder's proposal, which are on file in the Purchasing Division are hereby ACCEPTED at the
unit purchase prices set out with each item:
Water Fu d
Item # DeScription Successful Bidd~ Unit Purch~e Price
1 a. Liquid Alum/Carvins Cove General Chemical $ .4185 per gal.
Corporation
1 b. Liquid Alum/Falling Creek General Chemical $1.2285 per gal.
Corporation
2 a. Liquid Chlorine JCI Jones Chemicals, $ 39.00 per cwt
150 lb. Cylinders Inc.
2 b. Liquid Chlorine JCI Jones Chemicals, $15.00 per cwt
2,000 lb. Cylinders Inc.
3 a. Sodium Hy-droxide/Carvin.q Cove Brenntag Southeast Inc. $ .566 per gal.
3 b. Sodium Hydroxide/Falling Creek Vopak USA, Inc. $1.276 per gal.
3 c. Sodittm Hydroxide/Crystal Spring Vopak USA, Inc. $ 1.35 per gal.
4 Polymer ~estol 186 KH ] Polydyne Inc. $ 2.75 per gal.
Wastewater Treat~ ~t Ft
Item # Description Successful Bidder Unit Purchase Price
1 Liquid Chlorine JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. $ 15.00 per cwt
2,000 lb. cylinders
2 Ferric Chloride Eaglebrook, Inc. $ .55 per gal.
3 Sulfur Dioxide JCI Jones Chemicals, Inc. $370.00 per cyl.
H:~Measures~stp chemicals 2002.doc
1
~ ~hemicals Co~
$ .249~
2. The City's Manager of the Purchasing Division is hereby authorized and directed
to issue the requisite purchase orders for the above mentioned items, said purchase orders to be
made and filed in accordance with the City's specifications, the respective bids made therefor
and in accordance with this resolution.
3. Any and all other bids made to the City for the aforesaid items are hereby
RE.)'ECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each the
City's appreciation for such ~id.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
H:\Measure$~stp chemicals 2002.doc
2
Office of the City Manager
June 3, 2002
Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Bids for Water and Wastewater
Treatment Chemicals for FY 2003
Background:
Funds are designated in the operating budgets for Water and Water Pollution Control
divisions to allow for the purchase of necessary chemicals to operate plants.
Bid requests, with specifications, were sent to thirty-six (36) vendors currently on the City's
bid list. The bids were publicly advertised in accordance with Chapter 23.1 of the Code of
the City of Roanoke. Bids were received on May 6, 2002.
Considerations:
All bids were evaluated in a consistent manner. No single vendor responded to all
chemical requirements.
Funding is available in the Water account 002-510-2170-2045 and Water Pollution Control
Plant accounts 003-510-3155-2045 and 003-510-3160-2045 in the FY 2003 adopted
budgets.
Recommended Action:
Authorize the acceptance of the lowest responsible bids for Water and Wastewater
Treatment Chemicals as stated above and reject all other bids. Authorize the Manager of
the Purchasing Division to issue the requisite purchase order for the above mentioned
items.
Room 364 Municipal South
Respectfully submitted,
City Manager
215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci. roanoke.va.us
The Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
DLB: bdf
C~
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Michael McEvoy, Director of Utilities
Robert H. Bird, Acting Manager, Purchasing
CM02-00108
Bid Tabulations
Bids Received And Opened In The Purchasing Division, 2:00 P.M., May 6, 2002
Catonic Polymer Bid # 02-05-03
Qty & Description / Vendor Prochem Vopak USA, CIBA Specialty Polydyne Ondeo Nalco George S. Coyne
Technologies Inc. Chemicals Inc. Company Chemical Co.,
· . Corporation Inc
10,000 Gal FOB Sewage 7.02 7.56 3.903 3.99 3.698 4.31
Treatment Facility- per
Gal
Ferric Chloride Bid # 02-05-05 Cannot provide in small deliveries as required
Qty & Description / Vendor Eaglebrook Inc George S.
Coyne
Chemical Co.,
Inc
230,000 Gallons FOB .55 .898
Sewage Treatment Facility
- per Gal
Ferrous Chloride Bid # 02-05-06
Qty & Description / Vendor Eaglebrook George S. Coyne
Inc Chemical Co Inc
832,000 Gal FOB Sewage .249 .41
Treatment Facility - per
Gal
Liquid Alum Bid # 02-05-09
Qt~, & Description / Vendor Prochem General Geo Specialty Delta Chemical George S. Coyne
Technologies Chemical Chemicals Inc Corporation Chemical Co., Inc
Corporation
168,000 Gal FOB Carvins Cove No Bid .4185 .50825 .60 No Bid
Filter Plant - per Gal
3,700 Gal FOB Falling Crock Filter 1.57 1.2285 No Bid .60 No Bid
Plant - per Gal **
Bold Print indicates recommendation
Cannot provide small truck for delivery
Liquid Chlorine Bid # 02-05-10
Qt~, & Description / Vendor Vopak USA, Inc JCl Jones Chemicals
Inc
37 Cylinders (150 lb per cylinder)60.00 39.00
FOB Crystal Spring Filter Plant -
per Hundred Weight
170 Cylinders (150 lb per cylinder) 60.00 39,00
FOB Falling Creek Filter Plant --
per Hundred Weight
120 Cylinders (2,000 lb per 19.66 15.00
cylinder) FOB Carvins Cove Filter
Plant -- per Hundred Weight
140 Cylinders (2,000 lb per 19.66 15.00
cylinder) FOB Sewage Treatment
Facility-- per Hundred Weight
Polymer Praesto1186kh Bid # 02-05-12
Qty'& Description/Vendor Control Brenntag Prochem Ondeo Nalco Polydyne Inc Calciquest Inc
Equipment Co Southeast Technologies
Inc Inc.
11,000 Gal FOB Carvins 4.52 4.524 7.10 3.567 2.75 3.01
Cove Filter Plant - per Gal
Sodium Hydroxide Bid # 02-05-15
Qty & Description / Vendor Brenntag Vopak USA, JCl Jones Prochem Basic Chemical George S. Coyne
Southeast Inc Chemicals Inc Technologies Inc Solutions LLC Chemical Co., Inc
Inc.
440 Gal FOB Crystal Spring 1.76 1.35 No Bid 1.98 No Bid No Bid
Filter Plant - per Gal
87,500 Gal FOB Carvins Cove .566 .727 .597 No Bid .667 No Bid
Filter Plant - per Gal
4,000 Gal FOB Falling Creek No Bid 1.276 1.85 1.98 No Bid No Bid
Filter Plant - per Gal
Sulfur Dioxide Bid # 02-05-16
Qty & Description/Vendor I Vopak USA Inc
140 Tons FOB Sewage Treatment Facility- per Ton 373.40
JCl Jones Chemicals Inc
370.00
Bold print indicates recommendation
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.manoke.va.us
June 10,2002
File #67-472
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Stan Bain, Assistant Sales Manager
Smith Turf and Irrigation Co.
P. O. Box 6327
Roanoke, Virginia 23230
Dear Mr. Bain:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35894-060302 accepting the bid of Smith Turf &
Irrigation Co., for the purchase of one new 16 foot rotary mower, in the amount of
$68,107.00; and rejecting all other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
MFP:mh
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Enclosure
pc:
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
George C. Snead, Jr., Acting Director, General Services
Robert H. Bird, Acting Purchasing Manager
Steven C. Buschor, Director, Parks and Recreation
N:\CF'aMHl\Agenda.02XJunc 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10, 2002
File #67-472
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
Donald W. Beckner, Jr., General Manager
Boone & Beckner Implement, Inc.
327 South College Avenue
Salem, Virginia 24153
Dear Mr. Beckner:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35894-060302 accepting the bid of Smith Turf &
Irrigation Co., for the purchase of one new 16 foot rotary mower, in the amount of
$68,107.00, and rejecting a bid submitted by Boone and Beckner Implement, Inc., for a
tractor and articulated boom mower system, in the amount of $95,867.33; and rejecting all
other bids received by the City.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
'On behalf of the City of Roanoke, thank you for submitting your bid on the abovedescribed
equipment.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Enclosure
H:',Agenda.02klune 3~ 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35894-060302.
A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Smith Turf & Irrigation Co. for the purchase of one
(1) new 16 foot rotary mower, upon certain terms and conditions; rejecting the bid received for a
tractor and articulated boom mower; and rejecting all other bids.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. The bid submitted by Smith Turf& Irrigation Co. to furnish one (1) new 16 foot
rotary mower at a total cost of $68,107.00, as set forth in the City Manager's letter to Council dated
June 3, 2002, is hereby ACCEPTED.
2. The bid submitted by Boone & Beckner Implement, Inc., to furnish one (1) new
tractor and articulated boom mower system at a total cost of $95,867.33, as set form in the City
Manager's letter to Council dated June 3, 2002, is hereby REJECTED.
3. The City's Acting Manager of Purchasing is hereby authorized to issue the requisite
purchase order for the purchase of such equipment, and the City Manager is authorized to execute,
for and on behalf of the City, any required purchase agreements with respect to the aforesaid
equipment, such documents to be in form approved by the City Attorney.
4. Any and all other bids made to the City for the aforesaid items are hereby
REJECTED, and the City Clerk is directed to notify each such bidder and to express to each the
City's appreciation for such bid.
ATTEST:
O- Purchaseo fRo~'yMow~60302
City Clerk.
Office of the City Manager
June 3, 2002
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Purchase of Mowers
Bid # 02-03-24
Background:
Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP) has
identified the need to replace one (1) tractor and articulated boom mower system
and one (1) rotary mower for Parks and Recreation.
Specifications were developed and, along with an Invitation for Bid, were sent to
thirteen (13) providers. The bid was publicly advertised in accordance with
Chapter 23.1 of the Code of the City of Roanoke.
Considerations:
Due to pricing of the tractor and articulated boom mower system being
substantially over anticipated budget, our current bid specifications will need to
be updated to ensure the procurement of the highest quality equipment as
economically as possible. As such, the one bid received for the tractor and
articulated boom mower for $95,867.33 from Boone & Becker Implement, Inc.
Salem, VA should be rejected. '
The lowest bid for one (1) 16-foot rotary mower was submitted by Smith Turf &
Irrigation Co., Richmond, VA. This bid met all specifications at a cost of
$68,107.00.
Funding for the 16-foot rotary mower is available in the Lease of Vehicle Account
#017-440-9852-9015.
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. cl. roanoke.va.us
The Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
Recommended Action:
Award the bid for one (1) 16-foot rotary mower to Smith Turf & Irrigation Co., at a
total cost of $68,107.00, and reject all other bids.
Respectfully submitted,
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
DLB: bdf
Attachment
C:
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Steven C. Buschor, Director of Parks & Recreation
Robert H. Bird, Acting Manager, Purchasing
CM02~00110
CITY OF OANOIC
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #5-20-60-236
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Burcham:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 35896-060302 accepting the Driving Under the
Influence Enforcement Grant offer made to the City by the Commonwealth of Virginia's
Department of Motor Vehicles, in the amount of $15,000.00.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
MFP:mh
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Attachment
pc:
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
A. L. Gaskins, Chief of Police
N:\CKMHl\Agenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNC~ OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35896-060302.
A RESOLUTION accepting the Driving Under the Influence Enforcement Grant offer
made to the City by the Commonwealth of Virginia's Department of Motor Vehicles and
authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. The City of. Roanoke does hereby accept the offer made to the City by the
Commonwealth of Virginia's Department of Motor Vehicles of the Driving Under the Influence
Enforcement grant in the amount of $15,000, such grant being more particularly described in the
letter of the City Manager, dated June 3, 2002, upon all the terms, provisions and conditions
relating to the receipt of such funds.
2. The City Manager and the City Clerk, are hereby authorized to execute, seal and
attest, respectively, the grant agreement and all necessary documents required to accept this
grant, including any documents providing for indemnification from the City that may be required
for the City's acceptance of this grant, all such documents to be approved as to form by the City
Attorney.
3. The City Manager is further directed to furnish such additional information as
may be required by the Commonwealth of Virginia's Department of Motor Vehicles in
connection with the City's acceptance of this grant.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
H:\Measures\dui grant 2002.doc
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
May 10, 2002
File #60-514
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr..Hall:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 35895-060302 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2001-02 Grant Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation of
$15,000.00 in connection with a grant agreement with the Virginia Department of Motor
Vehicles for a Driver/Occupant Awareness Grant.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk-
MFP:mh
Attachment
pc:
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
A. L. Gaskins, Chief of Police
N:\CKMHl~Agenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35895-060302.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 2001-2002 Grant
Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City
of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
certain sections of the 2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are
hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part:
ADDropdationR
Public Safety
DUI Overtime Grant - FY02 (1-2) .............................
Revenues
Public Safety
DUI Overtime Grant - FY02 (3) ..............................
1) Overtime (035-640-3409-1003) $ 13,852
2) FICA (035-640-3409-1120) 1,148
3) State Grant Receipts (035-640-3409-3409) 15,000
$ 2,136,993
15,OOO
$ 2,136,993
15,O0O
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall
be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the Ci~ Manager
June 3,2002
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
William White, Sr., Council Member
Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject: Driver/OccuPant Awareness Grant
Background:
The Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (DMV) is the administering agency for pass
through funds provided by the United States Department of Transportation for highway
safety projects in Virginia. DMV offers these funds to successful applicants for activities
which improve highway safety in Virginia.
In September 2001, DMV awarded the Roanoke Police Department $15,000 to conduct
selective enforcement activities which target Driving Under the Influence (DUI), speeding,
and motor vehicle occupant safety. This is the sixth year Roanoke has received funds
under this program.
There is a statistically proven proportional correlation between levels of motor vehicle law
enforcement and traffic accidents in the City of Roanoke. Historically, speed and alcohol
are factors in 17 percent of Roanoke's motor vehicle accidents. This program allows
officers to concentrate on alcohol impaired drivers and speeders at times when such
violations are most likely to occur.
Recommended Action:
Establish a revenue estimate and appropriate the $15,000 to grant fund accounts to be
established by the Director of Finance. Authorize the City Manager to execute the
requisite grant agreement and any related documents; such as documents to be approved
as to form by the City Attorney.
R~pectfully submjtted,
City Manager
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci.roanoke.va.us
DLB:rla
C:
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
A. L. Gaskins, Police Chief
CM02-00088
MARY F. PARKER, CMC
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
OFFICE OF CITY CLERK
215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456
Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536
Telephone: (540) 853-2541
Fax: (540) 853-1145
E-mail: clerk@ci.roanoke.va.us
June 10,2002
File #60-110o247
STEPHANIE M. MOON
Deputy City Clerk
SHEILA N. HARTMAN
Assistant Deputy City Clerk
C. Clark Jones, Chair
Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission
Vice Provost for Outreach
Virginia Tech,
12 Burruss Hall
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
Dear Mr. Jones:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 35898-060302 approving the annual operating
budget of the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission for Fiscal Year 2002-2003,
with the City's share totalling $125,000.00.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
A~achment
pc:
Minnis E. Ridenhour, Executive Vice-President, Virginia Tech, 210 Burruss Hall,
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Deborah J. Moses, Executive Director, Hotel Roanoke Conference Center
Commission
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
H.X~.genda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35898-060302.
A RESOLUTION apProving the annual operating budget of the Hotel
Conference Center Commission for Fiscal Year 2002-2003.
Roanoke
WHEREAS, §21 of the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission Act (Chapter
440 of 1991 Acts of Assembly) requires that each participating party approve the
Commission's proposed operating budget for the forthcoming fiscal year;
WHEREAS, the Commission has submitted to this Council a proposed operating
budget for Fiscal Year 2002-2003; and
WHEREAS, this Council desires to approve such proposed budget;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that the
annual operating budget for the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission for Fiscal
Year 2002-2003, a copy o£ which is attached to the letter of the City Manager to this
Council, dated.rune 3, 2002, with the City's share of the operating subsidy being established
at $125,000, is hereby approved.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
June 10,2002
File #60-110-247
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Hall:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 35897-060302 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2002-03 Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission Fund
Appropriations, in connection with approval of the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center
Commission annual budget for fiscal year 2002-03, in the total amount of $250,000.00,
with the City's contribution totalling $125,000.00.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
MFP:mh
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Attachment
pc: Minnis E. Ridenhour, Executive Vice-President, Virginia Tech, 210 Burruss Hall,
Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
C. Clark Jones, Chair, Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission, Vice
Provost for Outreach, Virginia Tech, 112 Burruss Hall, Blacksburg, Virginia 24061
Deborah J. Moses, Executive Director, Hotel Roanoke Conference Center
Commission
Dadene L. Burcham, City Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
N:\CKMHlkAgenda.02',June 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35897-060302.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 2002-2003 Hotel
Roanoke Conference Center Commission Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City
of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
certain sections of the 2002-2003 Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows,
in part:
ADDropdationa
Operating
Personal Services (1).
Contractual Services (~)i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i i
Other Charges (34) ..........................................
Revenue~
250,000
138,000
100,000
12,000
Nonoperating
City Contribution (5) .......................... . ................
Virginia Tach Contribution (6) ..................................
1 ) Regular Employee
Salaries
2) Fees for Professional
Services
3) Training and
Development
4) Administration
5) City Contribution
(010-320-9500-1002)
(010-320-9500-2010)
(010-320-9500-2044)
(010-320-9500-2092)
(010-320-1234-1125)
138,000
100,000
2,000
10,000
125,000
$ 250,000
125,000
125,000
6) Virginia Tech
Contribution
(010-320-1234-1128) $ 125,000
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall
be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the City Manager
June 3,2002
Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Annual Operating Budget
Hotel Roanoke
Conference Center
Commission for Fiscal
Year 2002-2003
Background:
The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission was created by the Virginia
General Assembly in 1991 to construct, equip, maintain and operate the
Conference Center of Roanoke adjacent to the Hotel Roanoke. The City of
Roanoke and Virginia Tech are participating entities in the Commission. In 1992,
City Council authorized the establishment of an Agency Fund entitled" Hotel
Roanoke Conference Center Commission." The Commission's enabling
legislation allows for the participating parties to equally contribute funds to the
Commission to fund operating deficits of the Commission and to enable the
Commission to expend such revenues for their proper purposes. The budget
must be approved by each of the participating entities. City Council included
funding in the FY2002-2003 General Fund adopted budget to be used for such
purposes.
Considerations:
The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission recommends the attached
FY 2002-2003 operating budget for your consideration.
Recommended Action:
City Council approve the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission Budget
for FY2002-2003, appropriate $250,000 to the Conference Center Agency Fund
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci.roanoke.va.us
Honorable Mayorand Members of Council
June 3,2002
Page 2
accounts and establish revenue estimates of $125,000 each for the City and
Virginia Tech contributions.
Respectfully submitted,
City Manager
DLB: djm
c: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget
Minnis E. Ridenour, Executive Vice-President, Virginia Tech
C. Clark Jones, Chairman, Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission
Deborah J. Moses, Executive Director, Hotel Roanoke Conference Center
Commission
CMO2-00116
Revenues
City of Roanoke
Virginia Tech
TOTAL REVENUES
Expenses
Operating Expenses
Professional Services
Administrative Costs
Professional
Development
125,000
125,000
250,000
138,000
100,000
10,000
2,000
TOTAL EXPENSES 250,000
Operating Revenues
Total Operating
Revenues
Non Operating
Revenues
City of Roanoke
Virginia Tech
Retained Earnings
Total Revenues
Commission
$ -
125,000
' 125,000
250,000,
Conference
Center
$3,239,765
3,239,765
Total
$3,239,765
3,239,765
125,000
125,000
155,167
3,644,932
Operating Expenses
Commission.
Commission OperationS~
Professional Services
Administrative
DevelOpment
10,0~
2',000~
' 138,000
' - 100,000
' 10,000
2,000
Conference Center
Operating
Fixed Asset Expense
Total O
Attachment Number 1
2,970,997 2,970,997
423,935 423,935
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #60-237
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Hall:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 35899-060302 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2001-02 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, providing for transfer of
funds between various accounts within the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Projects and
Series 2002 Public Improvements Bond Reserve Account.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Attachment
pc:
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Management and Budget
H:~Agenda.02~June 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35899-060302.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 2001-2002
Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City
of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
certain sections of the 2001-2002 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, be, and the same
are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Flood Reduction
Roanoke River Corddor Plan (1-2) ..............................
Surveying Roanoke River Flood Reduction (3-4) ...................
Roanoke River Flood Reduction - Land Acquisition (5-6) ............
Roanoke River Flood Reduction (7-8) ...........................
Roanoke River Flood Reduction Phase II Environmental (9-10) .......
Roanoke River Utility Relocation (11-12) .........................
Capital Improvement Reserve
Sedes 2002 Public Improvement Bonds (13) ......................
1) Appropriated from
General Revenue
2) Appropriated from
Sedes 2002
Bond Issue
3) Appropriated from
General Revenue
4) Appropriated from
Series 2002
Bond Issue
5) Appropriated from
General Revenue
(008-052-9614-9003) $ ( 66,375)
(008-052-9614-9076)
(008-056-9618-9003)
(008-056-9618-9076)
(008-056-9619-9003)
66,375
(413,433)
413,433
(754,408)
$ 21,832,065
66,375
413,433
1,040,507
13,822,868
1,213,587
240,000
$ 15,686,139
13,000,000
6) Appropriated from
Sedes 2002
Bond Issue
7) Appropriated from
General Revenue
8) Appropriated from
Series 2002
Bond Issue
9) Appropriated from
General Revenue
10) Appropriated from
Series 2002
Bond Issue
11) Appropriated from
General Revenue
12) Appropriated from
Sedes 2002
Bond Issue
13) Flood Reduction
(008-056-9619-9076)
(008-056-9620-9003)
(008-056-9620-9076)
(008-056-9623-9003)
(008-056-9623-9076)
'(008-530-9765-9003)
(008-530-9765-9076)
(008-530-9711-9185)
$ 754,408
2,687,803
4,812,197
(1,213,587)
1,213,587
(240,000)
240,000
(7,500,000)
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall
be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
June 3,2002
CITY OF ROANOKE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
215 Church Avenue, S.W. Room 461
P.O. Box 1220
Roanoke, VA 24006-1220
Telephone: (540) 853-2824
Fax: (540) 853-2940
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Honorable
Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
William White, Sr., Council Member
Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Background:
The Series 2002 bonds have been issued, and funding of $7.5 million is available
for the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project. This project has been in
existence for a number of years with several project accounts established
throughout the years to fund its various components. Current funding
appropriated to the project is $10.3 million, of which approximately $5.0 million
has been spent or is obligated. Funding currently appropriated consists of
approximately $.5 million in federal funding plus $9.8 million of local funding. The
local funding has been added annually via transfer from the General Fund since
the late 1980s as a result of an increase in the utility tax to finance flood
reduction efforts.
Current Situation:
Federal regulations governing arbitrage require that, in general, tax exempt bond
proceeds must be spent within two years of issuance to avoid paying arbitrage
proceeds to the Internal Revenue Service. Regulations allow us to reimburse
ourselves for certain project expenditures incurred prior to issuance of the bonds.
An analysis has been made of the status of the project accounts, their initial
source of funding, and the extent to which Series 2002 bond funds can be
substituted for other funding. Based on this analysis, reallocation of $7.5 million
of previously appropriated local funding is recommended. This will allow the City
to receive reimbursement from bond funds to the extent allowable to remove
these funds from exposure to arbitrage.
The Honorable Mayor and Members
Of City Council
June 3, 2002
2
All expenditures within the prior eighteen months of City Council's approval of
this reimbursement request may be reimbursed (the expenditures from
December 4, 2000 to June 3, 2002). Additionally, the City may reimburse itself
without regard to a particular reimbursement period for "preliminary expenditures"
not in excess of twenty percent of the issue price of the bonds. Preliminary
expenditures include architectural, engineering, surveying, soil testing, and
similar costs that are incurred prior to commencement of acquisition, construction
or rehabilitation of a project.
The following transfers of funds are recommended:
Adjustments:
Appropriated Appropriated from
Project Name Account from General Series 2002 Bonds
Revenue
RR Corridor Plan 008-052-9614 ( 66,375) 66,375
Surveying RRFR 008-056-9618 ( 413,433) 413,433
RRFR Land
Acquisition 008-056-9619 ( 754,408) 754,408
RRFR 008-056-9620 2,687,803 4,812,197
RRFR Phase II
Environmental 008-056-9623 (1,213,587) 1,213,587
RR Utility Relocation008-530-9765 ( 240,000) 240,000
Series 2002 Public
Improvement Bonds 008-530-9711-9185 - (7,500,000)
Net of Adjustments .
The adjustment shown above for the Roanoke River Flood Reduction account
008-056-9620 fully appropriates the $7.5 million of Series 2002 Bonds sold for
the purpose of the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project. The transfer of
Series 2002 bond funds will increase this total funding to the Roanoke River
project to $17.8 million. Again with approximately $5.0 million expended or
obligated, funding of $12.8 million will be available for future project costs.
Construction on the first phase of this project is expected to begin in 2003.
These funding adjustments have been coordinated with the City's Bond Counsel
for compliance with federal regulations governing arbitrage.
The Honorable Mayor and Members
Of City Council
June 3, 2002
Recommendation:
City Council adopt the attached budget ordinance to transfer funding between
various accounts within Roanoke River Flood Reduction Projects and the Series
2002 Public Improvements Bond reserve account.
Respectfully Submitted,
City Manager
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
DLB/JAH/ahs
C~
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Barry L. Key, Director of Management and Budget
Ann H. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File ~416
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Dadene L. Burcham
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Burcham:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 35900-060302 authorizing execution of an
Amendment to the Agreement, dated October 4, 2000, entered into by and between the
City of Roanoke and the Art Museum of Western Virginia, in order to provide for an
extension of time for performance of certain actions to be taken pursuant to the
Agreement.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
Attachment
pc:
Judy L. Larson, Executive Director, Art Museum of Western Virginia, Center in the
Square, One Market Square, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
N:\CKMHl~Agenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGrNIA,
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35900-060302.
A RESOLUTION authorizing execution of an Amendment to the Agreement, dated
October 4, 2000, entered into by and between the City of Roanoke and the An Museum of
Western Virginia, in order to provide for an extension of time for performance of certain
actions t° be taken pursuant to the Agreement
WHEREAS, pursuant to the authority contained in Resolution No. 35091-100200,
adopted by City Council October 2, 2000, the City and the An Museum of Western Virginia
entered into an Agreement dated October 4, 2000, in connection with the City's providing
certain funding in relation to the An Museum's proposal to design, develop and construct a
new building or complex located in the City of Roanoke to house an An Museum, IMAX
Theater, and possible other entities; which Agreement required the performance of certain
actions by a particular date, and the parties mutually desire that the time of performance as
set forth in Section 2(B) and (C) of the Agreement be extended.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. The City Manager and the City Clerk are authorized to execute and attest,
respectively, an Amendment to the Agreement dated October 4, 2000,in order to extend the
time of performance of certain actions required to be taken by the Agreement, all in
accordance with the recommendation set forth in the report of the City Manager, dated June
3, 2002.
2. The Amendment shall be in substantially the same form as that which is
attached to the aforementioned City Manager's report, and shall be approved as to form by
the City Attorney.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the City Manager
June 3,2002
The Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
The Honorable William H. Carder, Vice-Mayor
The Honorable William D. Bestpitch
The Honorable C. Nelson Harris
The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr.
The Honorable William White, Sr.
The Honorable Linda F. Wyatt
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Subject:
Amendment to Agreement
Between the City of Roanoke and
Art Museum of Western Virginia
Background:
On October 2, 2000, City Council by Resolution 35091-100200 authorized the execution of
an Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Art Museum of Western Virginia providing
for the City to make certain appropriations to the Art Museum upon certain terms and
conditions. These appropriations were to be used to partially fund the construction of a
new Art Museum and IMAX Theater.
$300,000 was paid to the Art Museum shortly after the execution of the Agreement, and an
additional $3.7 million was to be paid by June 30, 2004 ($2.5 million by June 30, 2003, the
agreed upon construction start date, and an additional $1.2 million by June 30, 2004). The
total appropriations from the City to the Art Museum were also limited by the Agreement to
no more than 20% of the total project cost.
City Council has previously concurred conceptually in the issuance of $3.7 million in
general obligation bonds at a future date to fund this project.
Considerations:
Due to various project delays, including a delay in hiring a project architect, the Art
Museum is now requesting that the construction start date in the Agreement be changed to
June 30, 2005. This would mean that the initial $2.5 million in project funding would not be
needed until that date, with an' additional $1.2 million needed by June 30, 2006.
Room 364 Municipal South 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1591 (540) 853-2333 FAX (540) 853-1138
CityWeb:www. ci .roanoke,va .us
Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
The Art Museum will also be requesting at a future date that the City close the part of the
street cutting between Norfolk and Salem Avenues adjacent to the project site in the City
Market area, and donate the land where the street and right-of-way currently exist to the
Art Museum to allow a better, safer, more dramatic, and more efficient Art Museum/IMAX
Theatre facility.
Recommendation:
Authorize the City Manager to amend the Agreement previously executed to extend the
construction start date to June 30, 2005, with the initial $2.5 million appropriation by the
City due at that time. The second appropriation of $1.2 million would not be required under
the amended Agreement until June 30, 2006.
Sincerely,
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
DLB:blk
C;
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
#CM02-00127
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #60-132-137
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
The Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
Roanoke,
Virginia
Dear Mayor Smith:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke which was held on Monday,
June 3, 2002, Council Member William White, Sr., recommended that the Mayor's Office
schedule informal meetings with the City's delegation to the General Assembly and Council
Members to discuss revenue/funding issues.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc:
Dadene L. Burcham, City Manager
Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance
H:~genda.02~June 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
June 3,2002
CITY OF ROANOKE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
215 Church Avenue, S.W. Room 461
P.O. Box 1220
Roanoke, VA 24006-1220
Telephone: (540) 853-2824
Fax: (540) 853-2940
The Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
The Honorable William H. Carder, Vice Mayor
The Honorable William O. Bestpitch, Council Member
The Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
The Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
The Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
SUBJECT:
April Financial Report
This financial report covers the first ten months of the 2001-2002 fiscal year. The following narrative discusses
revenues and expenditures to date.
REVENUES
General Fund revenues reflect an increase of 2.86% or $4,429,000 compared to FY01. Variances in specific
categories of revenues are as follows:
General Property Taxes increased 2.80% or $1,799,000 through April 30th. The revenue in this category is
higher at April 30th than is expected for the fiscal year, however. Real estate tax, the largest tax collected by
the City, is up 4.8% from the prior year and has exceeded budget estimates. A small amount of additional real
estate revenue is expected as we wrap up the fiscal year. Personal property taxes, the second largest tax, are
due May 31st. Total personal property tax assessments reflects a decline of nearly 4% compared to the prior
year, although this local tax category does not reflect all of that decline due to the portion which is accounted
for as a Grant-in-Aid Commonwealth. The decline in personal property tax is attributed to lower assessments
for vehicles, business personal property and machinery and tools. Public Service Corporation Tax is received
in large part on or around the May 31st due date. The Public Service tax collections at the end of April are
higher than anticipated based on adopted budget estimates. The exact performance of this tax will be more
definitive as we move into June.
Other Local Taxes are up 2.62% or $1,170,000. This category is also performing better at April 30th than we
predict for the fiscal year as a whole. Sales tax declined 2.44% or $326,000 from the prior year, a reflection of
the economic decline experienced in recent months. The sales tax performance has been 2 to 3% below the
FY01 level all year. Bank stock taxes have not yet been received, so the expected negative impact on revenue
caused by this tax cannot yet be noticed in our revenue performance. Based on bank stock assessments,
however, we expect the tax to drop $538,000 from FY01~ The bank stock taxes are generally collected in May.
Utility taxes may decline slightly in FY02 from FY01 if year-to-date trends in the tax continue through June 30th.
However, through April, these taxes have produced growth due to a timing difference in the receipt of the
electric utility tax. Additionally, the cellular phone utility tax continues to produce growth in revenues due to
increases in both the number of cell-phone users and the volume of phone use upon which the tax is applied.
Honorable Mayor and Members
Roanoke City Council Page 2
June 3, 2002
Business license tax (BPOL) was due March 1. This tax has performed at approximately the same level as
FY01, producing revenue slightly greater than the FY02 budget. Cigarette and transient room tax rate
increases have generated additional revenues, but the revenue growth is slightly less than the equivalent tax
rate increases.
Permits, Fees and Licenses are up $208,000 or 29.49% due to increases in rates charged for building,
electrical and plumbing inspections as well as the establishment of new construction-related fees.
Fines and Forfeitures rose 26.79% or $197,000. General District Court fines increased 9%, and revenues
from parking tickets rose almost 65% as compared to the prior year. Civilianizing of the ticketing function
combined with an increase in parking fines has led to an increase in parking ticket revenues.
Miscellaneous Revenue is up $151,000 or 62.96%. This growth is the result of the transfer of $105,000 to
the General Fund from the Transportation Fund and an increase in miscellaneous revenue, less a decrease in
proceeds from the sale of surplus property. The Transportation Fund is providing funding to the General Fund
in FY02 to partially fund the subsidy to the Greater Roanoke Transit Company (GRTC). In prior years, that
subsidy was paid through the Transportation Fund. Surplus property sales are down on a year-to-date basis
due to timing of surplus sales and due to the fact that an extra sale was held in FY01 to remove surplus
vehicular equipment. The last FY02 surplus sale was held on May 18, the proceeds of which will be reflected
on the May financial report.
EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES
General fund expenditures and encumbrances have increased 4.87% or $7,656,000 since FY01. Variances in
individual expenditure categories are discussed as follows:
Health and Welfare expenditures rose $1,477,000 or 7.46%. Salary and client assistance costs in the Social
Services department are up as are expenditures under the Comprehensive Services Act.
Community Development expenditures increased 20.43% or $726,000 due to the establishment of the
Neighborhood Partnership department as part of the General Fund. This department was included in the
Grant Fund in prior years. Memberships and Affiliations expenditures increased due to increased contributions
to the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau.
Nondepartmental expenditures increased 29.05% or $2,412,000. Transfers of CMERP funding to the
Department of Technology and Fleet Funds are larger in FY02 than FY01. The current fiscal year is the first
year repayment of the equipment lease is required and transfers were made to the Fleet and Department of
Technology Funds for this repayment. The transfer of the GRTC subsidy, which was previously paid through
the Transportation Fund, also contributed to the increase in this category.
I would be pleased to answer questions City Council may have regarding the monthly financial statements.
JAH/AHS/tht
Attachments
Director of Finance
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
SUMMARY OF CITY MANAGER TRANSFERS
AND AVAILABLE CONTINGENCY
APRIL 30, 2002
Transfer
Number
General Fund:
Date
CMT-1863 07/30/01
CMT-532 08/09/01
CMT-533 08/09/01
CMT-1176 08/28/01
CMT-1177 08/31/01
CMT-536 10/04/01
C MT-1195 10~04~01
CMT-544 11/20/01
CMT-1214 12/12/01
CMT-548 12/13/01
CMT-550 01/16/02
CMT- 1230 01/17/02
CMT-554 01/31/02
CMT-556 02/08/02
CMT-558 02/08/02
CMT-561 02/08/02
CMT-562 02/22/02
CMT-568 03/19~02
C MT-570 03/19~02
CMT-572 03/25/02
CMT-578 04/24/02
CMT-580 04/24/02
Capital Projects Fund:
CMT-1180 09/05/01
CMT-1244 02/14/02
CMT-564 02/20/02
Explanation From
Donation to Brain Injury Association
Tipping Fees
Tipping Fees
Deficit in State and Local
Hospitalization Reimbursements
Fees Due to Downtown Roanoke
Inc. Related to Farmer's Market
Consultant Payment for Health
Care Renewal
Adoption Incentive Funds
Feasibility Study Related to
Proposed Art Center
Contribution to Greater
Raleigh Court Civic League
RRHA Property Reimbursement
Fund Professional Fees
Needed for Year
Additional Advertising Due to
Increase in IFBs and RFPs
Furnishings in Court
and Jury Rooms
Transfer Housing and Neighborhood
Services Coordinator Position
Transfer Executive Secretary
Position
Transfer Project Specialist
Position
Supplement Operating Expenses
Funding for 22 Transferred Employees
City Share of Electric Service
Negotiations with AEP
Strategic Business Planning
Consultant
Additional Elections and Unexpected
Redistricting
Renovations to Belmont Community
Fire Station
Additional Project Expenses
Preston Tennis Court Renovations
Construction Cost of Fire-EMS
Regional Training Center
Jail
Solid Waste Management
Solid Waste Management
Human Services Support
Contingency*
Residual Fringe Benefits
Income Maintenance
Residual Fdnge Benefits
Pay Raise/Supplemental
Budget
Juvenile and Domestic
Relations Court Services
Residual Fdnge Benefits
General Services
Jail
City Manager
Planning and Code
Enforcement
Housing and Neighbor-
hood Services
Management and Budget
Parks
Building Maintenance
Outreach Detention
Miscellaneous
Housing and Neighbor-
hood Services
Broadway Street Bridge
Special Park Project
Grants
Fire EMS Facility
Improvement Program
T._~o Amount
Membership and Affiliations $ 5,000
Engineering 568
Building Maintenance 2,270
Hospitalization Program 995
Memberships and Affiliations 15,856
Human Resources 13,000
Social Services-Services 15,089
City Manager 75,000
Memberships and Affiliations 25,000
Housing and Neighborhood
Services 53,700
City Attorney 20,000
Purchasing 5,000
Circuit Court Judges 55,000
Housing and Neighborhood
Services 38,255
Housing and Neighborhood
Services 22,036
Director of Public Works
42,958
Director of Public Works 2,000
Streets and Traffic 50,595
Memberships and Affiliations 44,750
Human Services Support 9,313
Electoral Board 22,294
Building Maintenance 10~500
Total General Fund $529~179
First Street Bridge $ 23,550
Athletic Court Improvements 522
Regional Fire EMS Training
Center 8,800
Total Capital Projects Fund $ 32,872
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
SUMMARY OF CITY MANAGER TRANSFERS
AND AVAILABLE CONTINGENCY
APRIL 30, 2002
(CONTINUED)
Transfer
Number Date Explanation
Available Contingency
Balance of Contingency at July 1, 2001
*Contingency Appropriations From Above
Contingency Appropriations Through Budget Ordinances:
BO 35515 08/20/01 Drug Prosecutor
BO 35544 09/04/01 Zoning Inspector Positions
BO 35782 04/01/02 Virginia Exile Grant Local Match
Available Contingency at April 30, 2002
Contingency
Contingency
Contingency
From
T._~o
Transfer to Grant Fund
Transfer to Grant Fund
Transfer to Grant Fund
Amount
$500,000
(15,856)
(8,170)
(80,996)
(17,401)
$377,577
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
GENERAL FUND
STATEMENT OF REVENUE
Revenue Source
General Property Taxes
Other Local Taxes
Permits, Fees and Licenses
Fines and Forfeitures
Revenue from Use of Money and Property
Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth
Grants-in-Aid Federal Government
Charges for Services
Miscellaneous Revenue
Internal Services
Total
Year to Date for the Period
July I - April 30 July I - April 30 Percentage
2000o2001 2001-2002 of Change
$ 64,237,076 $ 66,035,626
44,693,233 45,863,392
706,688 915,090
736,292 933,561
815,894 803,139
38,545,903 39,378,1 68
17,180 17,179
2,999,108 3,062,465
239,693 390,610
1,600,962 1,621,477
$ 154r592r029 $ 159r020r727
2.80 %
2.62 %
29.49 %
26.79 %
-1.56 %
2.16 %
-0.01%
2.11%
62.96 %
1.28 %
2.86 %
Current Fiscal Year
Revised
Revenue
Estimates
77,105,366
58,016,878
957,150
1,014,600
1,118,330
46,402,072
34,300
3,888,997
560,236
2,330,692
$ 191r428~621
Percent of
Revenue
Estimate
Received
85.64%
79.05%
95.61%
92.01%
71.82%
84.86%
50.08%
78.75%
69~72%
69.57%
83.07%
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES
Expenditures
General Government
Judicial Administration
Public Safety
Public Works
Health and Welfare
Parks, Recreation and
Cultural
Community Development
Transfer to Debt Service
Fund
Transfer to School Fund
Nondepartmental
Total
Year to Date for the Period
July 1 - April 30 July I - April 30 Percentage Unencumbered
2000-2001 2001-2002 of Change Balance
$ 9,554,296
4,661,510
36,895,772
20,259,009
19,799,140
$ 9,721,614
4,825,975
38,454,949
20,904,390
21,275,995
3,921,573
3,554,067
4,103,956
4,280,303
Current Fiscal Year
12,109,799
38,066,341
8,304,728
$ 157;126;235
12,147,755
38,349,951
10,716,865
$ 164;781;753
1.75 % $ 2,356,520
3.53 % 1,205,684
4.23 % 8,410,774
3.19 % 4,465,623
7.46 % 6,080,318
Percent of
Revised Budget
Appropriations Obligated
$ 12,078,134 80.49%
6,031,659 80.01%
46,865,723 82.05%
25,370,013 82.40%
27,356,313 77.77%
4.65% 852,813 4,956,769
20.43% 979,457 5,259,760
82.79%
81.38%
0.31% 119,144 12,266,899 99.03%
0.75% 7,664,611 46,014,562 83.34%
29.05% 2,711,820 13,428,685 79.81%
$ 199;628r517
4.87 % $ 34~846r764
82.54%
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
SCHOOL FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUE
Revenue Source
State Sales Tax
Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth
Grants-in-Aid Federal Government
Charges for Services
Transfer from General Fund
Special Purpose Grants
Total
Year to Date for the Period
Current Fiscal Year
Revised
July I - Apr 30 July 1 - Apr 30 Percentage Revenue
2000-2001 2001-2002 of Change Estimates
$ 6,633,408 $ 6,626,771 -0.10 % $ 9,492,986
33,623,596 32,242,142 -4.11% 41,656,787
89,189 90,565 1.54 % 115,390
1,122,046 1,430,369 27.48 % 1,971,820
38,066,341 38,349,951 0.75 % 46,014,562
7,770,969 7,146,830 -8.03 % 11,462,731
$ 87,305,549 $ 86,886,628 -1.63 % $ 110,714,276
Percent of
Revenue
Estimate
Received
69.81%
77.40 %
78.49 %
72.54 %
83.34 %
NA
77.58 %
SCHOOL FUND STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES
Expenditures
Instruction
General Support
Transportation
Operation and
Maintenance of Plant
Facilities
Other Uses of Funds
Special Purpose Grants
Total
Year to Date for the Period
Current Fiscal Year
July I - Apr 30 July 1 - Apr 30 Percentage Unencumbered Revised
2000-2001 2001-2002 of Change Balance Appropriations
$ 60,069,946 $ 59,015,652 -1.76% $ 15,637,797 $ 74,653,449
3,161,906 2,748,457 -13.08% 1,094,702 3,843,159
2,942,727 3,180,261 8.07 % 732,585 3,912,846
Percent of
Budget
Obligated
79.05 %
71.52 %
81.28 %
8,063,076 7,869,918 -2.40% 2,461,547
2,084,352 1,692,743 -18.79% (61,693)
5,417,355 6,188,753 14.24% 418,748
11,373,777 11,462,731 0.78%
$ 93,113,139 $ 92,158,518 -1.03% $ 20,283,686
10,331,465
1,631,050
6,607,501
11,462,731
$ 112,442,201
76.17 %
103.78 %
93.66 %
NA
81.96 %
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
SCHOOL FOOD SERVICE FUND STATEMENT OF REVENUE
Year to Date for the Period
Current Fiscal Year
Percent of
Revised Revenue
July I - Apr 30 July I - Apr 30 Percentage Revenue Estimate
Revenue Source 2000-2001 2001-2002 of Change Estimates Received
Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth $ 85,762 $ 84,483 -1,49 % $ 84,464 100.02 %
Grants-in-Aid Federal Government 2,079,396 2,299,022 10~56 % 2,891,594 79.51%
Charges for Services 1,136,881 1,237,828 8.88 % 1,545,256 80.11%
Total $ 3,302,039 $ 3,621,333 9.67 % $ 4,521,314 80.09 %
SCHOOL FOOD SERVICE FUND STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES AND ENCUMBRANCES
Expenditures
Food Services
Facilities
Total
Year to Date for the Period
Current Fiscal Year
July I - Apr 30 July 1 - Apr 30 Percentage Unencumbered Revised
2000-2001 200t-2002 of Change Balance Appropriations
$ 3,566,063 0.01 % $ 979,946 $ 4,546,009
17,099 100.00 % 16,978 16,978
$ 3,583,162 0.49 % $ 996,924 $ 4,562,987
$ 3,565,753
$ 3,565,753
Percent of
Budget
Obligated
78.44 %
100.71%
78.53 %
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES, ENCUMBRANCES, AND
UNENCUMBERED APPROPRIATIONS SUMMARY AS OF APRIL 30, 2002
General Government
Flood Reduction
Economic Development
Community Development
Public Safety
Recreation
Streets and Bridges
Storm Drains
Traffic Engineering
Nondepartmental
Capital Improvement Reserve
Expenditures Unexpended Outstanding Unobligated
Budget To Date Balance Encumbrances Balance
$ 12,846,523 $ 10,975,906 $ 1,870,617 $ 140,696 $ 1,729,921
14,332,065 8,400,544 5,931,521 238,054 5,693,467
24,908,040 21,728,251 3,179,789 186,143 2,993,646
6,016,143 3,233,548 2,782,595 632,291 2,150,304
8,252,126 7,164,108 1,088,018 261,026 826,992
26,878,741 5,991,519 20,887,222 420,284 20,466,938
25,336,497 20,747,123 4,589,374 2,804,568 1,784,806
2,652,131 1,447,382 1,204,749 591,758 612,991
5,270,380 3,961,120 1,309,260 1,203,915 105,345
410,000 410,000 -
23,186,139 23,186,139 23,186,139
Total
$ 150,088,785 $ 84,059,501 $ 66,029,284 $ 6,478,735 $ 59,550,549
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
STATEMENT OF EXPENDITURES, ENCUMBRANCES, AND
UNENCUMBERED APPROPRIATIONS SUMMARY AS OF APRIL 30, 2002
Expenditures Unexpended Outstanding Unobligated
Budget To Date Balance Encumbrances Balance
Elementary Schools Renovation
Middle Schools Renovation
High Schools Renovation
Interest Expense
Capital Improvement Reserve
$ 17,484,240 $ 12,468,253 $ 5,015,987 $ 319,589 $ 4,696,398
2,751,455 2,725,893 25,562 - 25,562
3,500,000 3,403,170 96,830 39,653 57,177
262,929 256,337 6,592 6,592
1,051,271 1,051,271 1,051,271
Total
$ 25,049,895 $ 18,853,653 $ 6,196,242 $ 359,242 $ 5,837,000
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Interest Revenue:
Interest on Bond Proceeds
Interest on SunTrust Lease
Interest on Idle Working Capital
Total Interest Revenue
Multi Year Revenues:
Intergovernmental Revenue:
Federal Government:
FEMA - Garden City
FEMA- Regional Mitigation Project
Commonwealth:
VDES - Garden City Mitigation Project
Virginia Transportation Museum - ISTEA
VDES - 1998 Regional Mitigation
Passenger Station Enhancement - TEA-21
Total Intergovernmental Revenue
Revenue from Third Parties:
Verizon - Brambleton Avenue Signals
Mill Mountain Visitors Center - Private Donations
Victory Stadium - Private Donations
First Union Penalty Payment
First Union Job Grant Repayment
Times-World Corporation - Land Sale
Trigon Insurance - Land Sale
Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation
Westview Terrace - Land Sale
Roanoke Times Air Rights Lease
Sale of Nelms Lane Property
Advance Stores GOF Agreement
Total Revenue from Third Parties
Other Revenue:
Transfers from General Fund
Transfers from Water Fund
Transfers from Sewage Fund
Transfers from Management Services Fund
General Obligation Bond Proceeds - Series 2002
Total Other Revenue
Total
$ 588,386
11,563
411,497
1,011,446
19,223
10,143
23,064
118,989
171,419
44,400
3,100
100
8,500
500
500,000
556,600
4,438,517
375,OOO
41,530,000
46,343,517
$ 48,O82,982
$1,302,515
4,606
966,545
2,273,666
259,932
239,409
18,368
3,733
521,442
36,055
10,000
7
34,000
137,445
125,110
342,617
4,508,818
2,900
12,600
100,000
4,624,318
$ 7,762,043
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
WATER FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Operating Revenues
Commercial Sales
Domestic Sales
Industrial Sales
Town of Vinton
City of Salem
County of Botetourt
County of Bedford
Customer Services
Charges for Services
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Income
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
Interest on Investments
Rent
Sale of Land
Miscellaneous Revenue
Interest and Fiscal Charges
Transfer to Capital Projects Fund
Net Nonoperating Expenses
Net Income
FY 2002
$3,748,697
3,167,375
588,354
23,364
25,294
194,644
20,116
521~942
2,229,984
10,519,770
3,511,155
3,789,469
1,397,118
8,697,742
1,822,028
171,728
62,303
375,000
43,832
(862,444)
(375,000)
(584,581)
$1,237,447
FY2001
$ 3,247,329
2,968,392
212,332
12,929
26,604
191,041
12,354
392,447
2,785,603
9,849,031
3,332,503
3,574,050
1,394,512
8,301,065
1,547,966
358,281
58,431
9,458
(938,798)
(2,900)
(515,528)
$1,032,438
8
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
SEWAGE TREATMENT FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Operating Revenues
Sewage Charges - City
Sewage Charges - Roanoke County
Sewage Charges - Vinton
Sewage Charges - Salem
Sewage Charges - Botetourt County
Customer Services
Interfund Services
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Income
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
Interest on Investments
Interest and Fiscal Charges
Capital Contributions - Other Jurisdictions
Miscellaneous Revenue
Transfer to Capital Projects Fund
Net Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
Net Income
FY2002
$ 5,999,635
638,618
187,622
698,224
126,756
186,120
130,933
7,967,908
1,750,046
4,732,760
1,153,776
7,636,582
331,326
147,091
(632,980)
930,095
135
444,341
$775,667
FY2001
$ 6,028,453
770 496
204 158
796 298
124 095
220 784
147 101
8,291,385
1,574,972
4,583,725
978,928
7,137,625
1,153,760
329,170
(645,448)
317,744
(12,600)
(11,134)
$1,142,626
9
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
CiViC CENTER FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Operating Revenues
Rentals
Event Expenses
Display Advertising
Admissions Tax
Electrical Fees
Novelty Fees
Facility Surcharge
Charge Card Fees
Commissions
Catering/Concessions
Other
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses
Personal Services
Operating Expenses
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Loss
Nonoperating Revenues
Transfer from General Fund - Operating
Transfer from General Fund - Nonoperating
Transfer from General Fund - Victory Stadium
Transfer from Capital Projects Fund
Interest on Investments
Miscellaneous
Total Nonoperating Revenues
Net Income (Loss)
FY 2002
$ 491 251
269,716
75200
206014
13651
40 534
238604
61119
6,200
1,143,788
30,286
2,576,363
1,643,054
1,679,442
257,283
3,579,779
(1,003,416)
712,565
830,000
102,278
385,000
25,048
3,893
2,058,784
$1,055,368
FY2001
$ 397,083
121,479
81,000
133,167
22,739
34,511
187,301
11,320
911,153
11,981
1,911,734
1,093,470
1,742,200
368,675
3,204,345
(1,292,611)
878,703
56,306
3,768
938,777
($353,834)
10
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
TRANSPORTATION FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Operating Revenues
Century Station Parking Garage
Williamson Road Parking Garage
Market Square Parking Garage
Church Avenue Parking Garage
Tower Parking Garage
Gainsboro Parking Garage
Williamson Road Surface Lots
Norfolk Avenue Surface Lot
Gainsboro Surface Lot
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses
Operating Expenses
Depreciation
Total Operating Expenses
Operating Income
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
Interest on Investments
Miscellaneous
Transfer from General Fund
Transfer from Capital Projects Fund
Transfer to General Fund
Transfer to GRTC - Operating
Transfer to GRTC - Capital
Transfer to GRTC - Shuttle Service
Interest and Fiscal Charges
Net Nonoperating Expenses
Net Income
FY 2002
321,538
367 045
179 792
391 707
328 093
4 864
92 642
18 076
10,067
1,713,824
731,118
451,089
1,182,207
531,617
25,041
1,829
32,000
108,608
(104,918)
(414,269)
(351,709)
$179,908
FY 2001
298,980
360,650
173,913
380,793
336,635
56,942
1,607,913
653,136
478,763
1,131,899
476,014
21,570
10,225
761,358
(637,637)
(49,000)
(65,000)
(434,790)
(393,274)
$82,740
11
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
HOTEL ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER FUND
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Operating Revenues
FY 2002 FY 2001
TOTAL
Conference Center
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses
CONFERENCE
COMMISSION (1) CENTER (2)
$ - $ 2,472,432
$ 2,472,432 $ 2,302,558
2,472,432 2,472,432 2,302,558
Personal Services
Fees for Professional Services
Administrative Expenses
Conference Center
Total Operating Expenses
42,088 42,088 75,208
60,130 - 60,130 33,579
32,895 - 32,895 1,124
2,113,129 2,113,129 2,106,002
135,113 2,113,129 2,248,242 2,215,913
(135,113) 359,303 224,190 86,645
Net Operating Income (Loss)
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
Contributions from City of Roanoke
Contributions from Virginia Tech
HRCCC Settlement Proceeds
Construction Repairs
Interest on Investments
Rent, Taxes, Insurance, and Other
175,000
175,000
Net Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
175,000 175,000
175,000 175,000
- 8,000,000
(57,428) (57,428) (3,902,938)
89,910 89,910 201,030
- (111,034) (111,034) (143,122)
382,482 (111,034) 271,448 4,504,970
Net Income Before Depreciation
247,369 248,269 495,638 4,591,615
Depreciation Expense/Replacement Reserve
(426,030) (123,563) (549,593) (494,374)
Net Income (Loss) $ (178~661) $ 124~706 $ (53,955) $ 4r097r241
Notes to Financial Statement:
(1) The column entitled "Commission" represents Commission activity in the City's financial records.
(2) The column entitled "Conference Center" represents actual revenue and expenses of the Conference Center, as
provided by Doubletree Management.
12
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
COMPARATIVE INCOME STATEMENT
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDING APRIL 30, 2002
Oper~ing Revenues
Charges for Services
Total Operating Revenues
Operating Expenses
TOTALS
Department
of Materials Fleet Risk
Technology Control Management Management FY 2002 FY 2001
$3,493,334 $1,099,337 $3,313,791 $8,021,976 $15,928,438 $13,590,648
3,493,334 1,099,337 3,313,791 8,021,976 10,928,438 13,590,649
Personal Services 1,792,966 56,618 1,059,978 139,184 3,048,746 3,001,433
Operating Expenses 1,094,298 1,156,661 890,347 8,623,255 11,764,561 9,247,047
Depreciation 422,743 1,675,213 2,097,956 1,865,722
Total Operating Expenses 3,310,007 1,213,279 3,625,538 8,762,439 16,911,263 14,114,202
Operating Income (Loss) 183,327 (113,942) (311,747) (740,463) (982,825) (523,554)
Nonoperating Revenues (Expenses)
111,823 4,877 27,311 251,701 395,712 830,030
(12,726) (47,388) (60,114)
(41,350) - (41,350) (104,000)
- (44,034) (44,034) (153,103)
2,582,247 573,639 250,000 3,405,886 1,451,205
10,183 - 10,183
2,650,177 4,877 509,528 501,701 3,666,283 2,024,132
$2,833,504 ($109,065) $197,701 ($239,762) $2,683,458 $1,500,578
Interest Revenue
interest Expense
Transfers To Other Funds
Loss on Disposal of Fixed Assets
Transfers From Other Funds
Other Revenue
Net Nonoperating Revenues
Net Income (Loss)
13
CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
CITY TREASURER'S OFFICE
GENERAL STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTABILITY
FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2002
TO THE DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
GENERAL STATEMENT OF ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE CITY TREASURER OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA FOR
THE FUNDS OF SAID CITY FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2002.
BALANCE AT BALANCE AT BALANCE AT
FUND MARCH 31, 2002 RECEIPTS DISBURSEMENTS APRIL 30, 2002 APRIL 30, 2001
GENERAL
WATER
SEWAGE
CIVIC CENTER
TRANSPORTATION
CAPITAL PROJECTS
CONFERENCE CENTER
RKE VALLEY DETENTION COMM
DEBT SERVICE
DEPT OF TECHNOLOGY
MATERIALS CONTROL
MANAGEMENT SERVICES
FLEET MANAGEMENT
PAYROLL
RISK MANAGEMENT
PENSION
SCHOOL FUND
SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS
SCHOOL FOOD SERVICE
FDETC
GRANT
($4,229,452.43) $19,604,576.59
12,142,600.18 599,531.04
7,335,328.83 1,700,078.15
3,192,913.85 1,425,730.30
2,841,351.88 206,161.71
66,489,818.03 2,297,169.89
4,212,197.42 49,817.58
2,306,828.98 467,531.39
13,302,849.72 910,984.21
5,803,930.77 197,895.73
305,815.70 73,990.97
0.00 0.00
853,478.09 620,254.09
(13,736,393.05) 14,691,593.78
11,938,260.28 642,368.37
2,012,268.64 326,108.16
6,389,688.18 5,411,620.95
6,897,553.84 8,864.59
244,930.49 423,112.03
23,431.40 247,464.38
670,252.96 578,047.32
$15,390,073.64
1,242,518.55
1,363,728.75
305,568.40
2,673,146.49
3,620,620.06
1,755.59
248,555.11
155,524.80
243,733.O8
88,081.90
0.00
351,506.35
12,847 966.34
658 515.07
1,371 546.34
6,231 672.98
104 357.24
369 039.46
150 778.85
601 258.74
($14,949.48) $423,767.19
11,499,612.67 7,646,394.75
7,671,678.23 6,911,951.11
4,313,075.75 1,149,845.68
374,367.10 499,651.88
65,166,367.86 38,745,307.83
4,260,259.41 5,406,930.60
2,525,805.26 3,108,771.16
14,058,309.13 12,722,501.83
5,758,093.42 5,163,292.04
291,724.77 162,313.29
0.00 172,081.06
1,122,225.83 950,120.49
(11,892,765.61) (11 108,116.98'
11,922,113.58 11,426,454.80
966,830.46 1,328,023.93
5,569,636.15 6,603,304.30
6,802,061.19 1,077,404.52
299,003.06 721,076.96
120,116.93 34,671.30
647,041.54 955,297.22
TOTAL
$128,997,653.76 $50,482,901.23 $48,019,947.74 $131,460,607.25 $94,101,044.96
CERTIFICATE
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE FOREGOING IS A TRUE STATEMENT OF MY ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
VIRGINIA, FOR THE FUNDS OF THE VARIOUS ACCOUNTS THEREOF FOR THE MONTH ENDED APRIL 30, 2002.
THAT SAID FOREGOING:
CASH:
CASH IN HAND
CASH IN BANK
INVESTMENTS ACQUIRED FROM COMPETITIVE PROPOSALS:
COMMERCIAL HIGH PERFORMANCE MONEY MARKET
COMMERCIAL PAPER
LOCAL GOVERNMENT INVESTMENT POOL
MONEY MANAGEMENT ACCOUNT
REPURCHASE AGREEMENTS
U. S. AGENCIES
VIRGINIA AIM PROGRAM (U. S. SECURITIES)
TOTAL
$31,669.64
2,274,653.60
10,863,381.50
14,079,920.16
26,848,471.11
10,110,608.17
7,000,000.00
4,904,125.00
55,347,778.07
$131,460,607.25
DATE: MAY 9, 2002
DAVID (~. ;~IDERSON, TREASUEE~
14
CITY OF ROANOKE PENSION PLAN
STATEMENT OF CHANGES IN PLAN NET ASSETS
FOR THE 10 MONTHS ENDED APRIL 30, 2002
Additions:
Employer Contributions
Investment Income
Net Appreciation (Depreciation) in Fair Value of Investments
Interest and Dividend Income
Total Investment Income (Loss)
Less Investment Expense
Net Investment Income (Loss)
Total Additions (Deductions)
FY 2002
$ 3,398,534 $
(14,087,151)
2,985,917
(11,101,234)
85,096
(11,186,330)
$ (7,787,796)
FY 2001
3,199,751
(19,131,292)
5,419,593
(13,711,699)
476,698
(14,188,397)
$ (10,988,646)
Deductions
Benefits Paid to Participants
Administrative Expenses
Total Deductions
Net Increase (Decrease)
Net Assets Held in Trust for Pension Benefits:
Fund Balance July 1
Fund Balance April 30
$ 12,400,859
308,712
12,709,571
(20,497,367)
326,337,980
$305r840r613
$ 10,807,614
287,396
11,095,010
(22,083,656)
350,929,145
$328r845~489
15
CITY OF ROANOKE PENSION PLAN
BALANCE SHEET
APRIL 30, 2002
Assets
FY 2002
FY 2001
Cash
Investments, at Fair Value
Due from Other Funds
Other Assets
$ 965,78O
306,143,523
3,492
5,434
1,299,624
328,658,025
3,538
5,097
Total Assets
$ 307~118r229
$ 329r966r284
Liabilities and Fund Balance
Liabilities:
Due to Other Funds
Accounts Payable
$ 1,273,962
3,654
$ 1,120,548
247
Total Liabilities
1,277,616
1,120,795
Fund Balance:
Fund Balance, July 1
Net Gain (Loss) -Yearto Date
326,337,980
(20,497,367)
350,929,145
(22,083,656)
Total Fund Balance
305,840,613
328,845,489
Total Liabilities and Fund Balance
$ 307r118~229
$ 329r966~284
16
CITY OF ROANOI
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
May 10, 2002
File #60-178-200
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Hall:
I am a.ttaching copy of Ordinance No. 35901-060302 amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2001-02 Grant Fund Appropriations, providing for appropriation of funds in
connection with CDBG/HOME program income from the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority and CDBG miscellaneous program income.
The abovereferenced measure was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting which was held on Monday, June 3, 2002.
MFP:mh
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
Attachment
pc'
Dadene L. Burcham, City Manager
Barry L. Key, Director, Office of Management and Budget
Frank E. Baratta, Budget Team Leader
N:\CKMHl~.genda.02Uune 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 3rd day of June, 2002.
No. 35901-060302.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 2001-2002 Grant
Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City
of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
certain sections of the 2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are
hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part:
ADDroDriation~
Community Development Block Grant- FY02
CDBG Unprogrammed - FY02 (1-2). $
HOME Program - FY02
HOME Unprogrammed - FY02 (3) $
Revenues
2,635,444
375,883
781,097
28,097
Community Development Block Grant - FY02 (4-7)
HOME Program - FY02 (8-9). ' ................. $
1) Unprogrammed CDBG -
Other - FY02 (035-G02-0240-5189)
2) Unprogrammed CDBG-
RRHA- FY02
3) Unprogrammed
HOME - FY02
4) Parking Lot Income
5) Other Program
Income - RRHA
6) Home Ownership
Assistance
7) Rental Rehabilitation
Repayment
$ 1,703
(035-G02-0240-5197) 31,854
(035-090-5324-5320) 8,463
(035-G02-0200-2202) 11,100
(035-G02-0200-2203) 2,640
(035-G02-0200-2222) 1,703
(035-G02-0200-2240) 18,114
2,635,444
781,097
8) HOME Program Income
First Union - FY02 (035-090-5324-5320) $ 4,882
9) HOME Program Income
RRHA - FY02 (035-090-5324-5324) 3,581
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall
be in effect from its passage..
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
June 3,2002
CITY OF ROANOKE
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
215 Church Avenue, S.W. Room 461
P.O. Box 1220
Roanoke, VA 24006-1220
Telephone: (§40) 853-2824
Fax: (540) 853-2940
The Honorable Ralph K. Smith, Mayor
The Honorable William H. Carder, Vice-Mayor
The Honorable William D. Bestpitch, Council Member
The Honorable C. Nelson Harris, Council Member
The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Council Member
The Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member
The Honorable Linda F. Wyatt, Council Member
Dear Mayor Smith and Members of City Council:
Background:
By agreement with the City of Roanoke, the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority
administers a large segment of the City's Community Development Block Grant program. The
Housing Authority receives program income during the course of its administration of various
projects through the sale of land and the receipt of loan repayments from project area
residents. The Housing Authority is required to transfer this program income to the City of
Roanoke. The City is required to use the income for eligible community development
activities.
Current Situation:
CDBG Program Income from Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority
The Housing Authority has made payments to the City in the amount of $31,854 from
February 1, 2002 to April 30, 2002 in excess of revenue estimates previously adopted. Of this
amount, $11,100 resulted from parking lot rental, and $20,754 from various loan repayment
programs.
CDBG Miscellaneous Program Income
The City has received miscellaneous program income of $1,703 in various loan repayments.
This amount represents the difference between what was actually received and the amount
that was previously adopted based on repayment estimates.
HOME Program Income
The Housing Authority also administers a segment of the City's HOME program. The
assistance provided by the Housing Authority is predominantly in the form of Iow or no interest
active and deferred loans to eligible homeowners and homebuyers. Loan repayments
constitute program income to the City's HOME program. As of April 30, 2002, loan
repayments received in excess of the budget estimates equals $8,463.
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
June 3, 2002
Page 2
Recommendation:
We recommend that City Council appropriate the total $42,020 in unanticipated CDBG and
HOME program income as follows:
Unprogrammed CDBG - Other- FY02
Unprogrammed CDBG - RRHA- FY02
Unprogrammed HOME - FY02
(035-G02-0240-5189) $ 1,703
(035-G02-0240-5197) 31,854
(035-090-5324-5320) 8,463
The amounts being appropriated to unprogrammed accounts will be available for future
appropriation for eligible CDBG or HOME activities.
I would be pleased to answer questions City Council may have.
Sincerely,
Jesse A. Hall
Director of Finance
JAH/SND
C;
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Barry L. Key, Director of Management and Budget
Frank E. Baratta, Budget Team Leader
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #20-137-383
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
The Honorable William White, Sr., Chair
Legislative Committee
3698 Partridge Lane, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Dear Mr. White:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke which was held on Monday,
June 3, 2002, Vice-Mayor William H. Carder addressed the issue of cellular telephones,
and requested that the matter of prohibiting the use of cellular telephones while operating
a motor vehicle in the City of Roanoke, be referred to the City's Legislative Committee for
study, report and recommendation to Council.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc:
Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney
H:kAgcnda.02~Junc 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #66-169-277-352-514
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Burcham:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke which was held on Monday,
June 3, 2002, William H. Carder, General Manager, Patrick Henry Hotel, spoke as a citizen
and business person working in the downtown Roanoke area. He referred to instances
during the past four years when streets surrounding the Patrick Henry Hotel have been
barricaded for Festival in the Park activities, resulting in inconvenience to hotel staff and
patrons and loss of revenue to the hotel. He advised that by discussing the matter publicly,
it is hoped that the City of Roanoke will review parade permits, city-wide, to ensure that
businesses are propedy and timely notified of street closings.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc: Robert K. Bengtson, Director, Public Works
H:',Agenda.02Uunc 3, 2002 correspondcnce.wpd
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #18-184
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Burcham:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke which was held on Monday,
June 3, 2002, Council Member Linda F. Wyatt requested a report on the City's Pay for
Performance Program, i.e.; a comparison between 2001-02 of percentages within
departments, number of persons in departments, changes in ratings, etc.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc: Kenneth S. Cronin, Director, Human Resources
N:\CKMHl~Agenda.02XJunc 3, 2002 correspondence.wpd
CITY OF ROANOKE
Office of the City Clerk
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
June 10, 2002
File #184
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
Sheila N. Hartman
Assistant City Clerk
Darlene L. Burcham
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Ms. Burcham:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke which was held on Monday,
June 3, 2002, Council Member Linda F. Wyatt requested that Council approve
July 5, 2002, as a floating holiday for City employees.
It was the consensus of Council to refer the matter to the City Manager for report and
preparation of the proper measure for consideration by Council at its next regular meeting
on Monday, June 17, 2002.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:mh
pc: Kenneth S. Cronin, Director, Human Resources
HSAgenda.02XJune 3, 2002 correspondencc.wpd
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, SHERMAN V. BURROUGHS, IV, was appointed
as a member of the Fair Housing Board for a term ending March 31,2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, I. B. HEINEMANN was reappointed as a member
of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, LYLBURN D. MOORE, JR., was reappointed as
a member of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission for a term ending
June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, FRANK J. EASTBURN was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Arts Commission for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, ANNA S. WENTWORTH was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Arts Commission for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH Of VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, HARRIET S. LEWIS was reappointed as a
member of the Virginia Western Community College, Board of Directors, for a term ending
June 30, 2006.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, ROBERT R. YOUNG was reappointed as a
member of the Towing Advisory Board for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, CHRISTINE PROFFITT was reappointed as a
member of the Towing Advisory Board for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
waS held on the third day of June, 2002, DAVID C. KEY was reappointed as a member of
the City of Roanoke Pension Plan, Board of Trustees, for a term ending June 30, 2006.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF ROANOKE
To-wit:
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereo.f, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, D. DUANE DIXON was reappointed as a member
of the City of Roanoke Pension Plan, Board of Trustees, for a term ending June 30, 2004.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH Of VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City'Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, CYRIL J. GOENS was appointed as a member
of the City of Roanoke Pension Plan, Board of Trustees, for a term ending June 30, 2004.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, HARRY F. COLLINS, SR., was reappointed as
a member of the Board of Fire Appeals for a term ending June 30, 2006.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, JOHN C. MOODY, JR., was reappointed as a
member of the Board of Fire Appeals, for a term ending June 30, 2006.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, BARRY W. BAIRD was reappointed as a member
of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, ROLAND H. MACHER was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Public Library Board, for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, STANLEY G. BREAKELL was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Public Library Board, for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, MARGARET C. THOMPSON was reappointed
as a member of the Human Services Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, EVELYN F. BOARD, was reappointed as a
member of the Human Services Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal Of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH Of VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, JUDY O. JACKSON, was reappointed as a
member of the Human Services Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH O.F VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, CYNTHIA S. BRYANT was reappointed as a
member of the Human Services Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City .of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, GLENN D. RADCLIFFE, was reappointed as a
member of the Human Services Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF ROANOKE
To-wit:
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of COuncil which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, ALFRED C. MOORE, was reappointed as a
member of the War Memorial Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2003.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this tWelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, WILLIAM D. BESTPITCH was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, for a term ending
June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the City of Roanoke and
keeper of the records thereof, do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council which
was held on the third day of June, 2002, SHERMAN A. HOLLAND was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, for a term ending
June 30, 2005.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this twelfth day of
June, 2002.
City Clerk