HomeMy WebLinkAboutMins 04/15/02 - 08/19/02NOTICE
Pursuant to Commonwealth of Virginia, Library of Virginia Records
Management and Imaging Services Division, Records Retention and
Disposition Schedule, General Schedule No. 4, County, City and Town
Administration Records, Series No. 010001; and General Schedule No.
19, Administrative Records, Series No. 010037, those items referred to
in the Minutes for full text other than Ordinances and Resolutions
have been destroyed in compliance with Guidelines provided by the
Library of Virginia.
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
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.
2
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.m .......................................... 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.
a proclamation declaring the week of April 14
Telecommunicator's Week.
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
20, 2002, as National
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:
3
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.
4
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 O.
(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.
5
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.
6
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.
7
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
8
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,
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:
9
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.
10
$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. Forfiscal 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.
11
One of Council's short-term action items is anti-litter 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 lifter along streets and rights-of-way.
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.
12
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:
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.
13
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.
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.
14
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.
15
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 quality
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.
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
16
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.)
17
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.)
18
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.)
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.
19
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35800-041502) AN ORDINANCE determining that Appalachian Power
Company, dlb/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.
20¸
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. O.
(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:
21
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.)
22
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:
998.25 s.f. plus an 18.5 s.f. alcove outsid® the
dining facility
Term of the Agreement:
One year, with four additional one year
renewal options
Lease Rate:
No Charge
Utilities:
Provided by City
Janitorial and Maintenance:
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:
23
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
24
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:
25
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.)
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.
26
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 facade, 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.)
27
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;
Citystaff 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 S_~rina - 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.
28
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._q - 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.
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.
29
The City Manager recommended that the Water Fund FY 200112002 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
30
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 AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS:
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:
31
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 shuffle 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.
32
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.
33
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.
34
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
35
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 mak~- 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.
36
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.
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 Member William 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.
37
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, there 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,
38
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 achieve
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
39
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.
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.
40
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 for the job; 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
41
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
42
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
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.
43
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.
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.
44
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.
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
45
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.)
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;
46
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.
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 ~:omprehensive 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.
47
(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.)
48
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.
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.)
49
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 anc~ 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¢ould 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
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
50
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 i'-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;
51
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.
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
52
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.
53
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.
54
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, orthe 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
55
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.
56
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 City will 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
58
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.
59
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
60
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 hsr 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, lifter, 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
61
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.
62
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.
63
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 do,e 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 sh= 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,ave
64
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.
65
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 4th 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:
66
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.
67
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 Member Wyatt .............................................................. 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, Lucy Addison 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.
68
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 puffing 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
69
because it requested such studies in 2000 at the beginning of its work; no mention
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 City Attorney would
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.
70
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 forApplied 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, Bote!ourt
County, Franklin County, Roanoke County, City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Town of
Vinton, Allegheny County and City of Covington.
71
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
72
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.
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 shuffle
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
73
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.
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 Iocalitywas asked to identifythe 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.
74
Mr. Strickland also advised that the next Roanoke Valley Coalition for
Economic Development trip to be hosted by the Roanoke Valley Allegheny Regional
Commission will be held on October 6 - 8, 2002, at which time the delegation will
visit Charleston, South Carolina.
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.
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:
75
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.
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.
76
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.
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 ora 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
77
and productive. He noted that while thers 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
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 many experienced
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?
78
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
79
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.
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.
80
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
81
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.
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 jcb 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
82
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
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
83
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
84
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
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
85
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:
86
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:
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.
87
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 d~ne 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
88
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 Stanc~ards
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 would be
a fair measure of teacher performance.
89
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
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
90
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?
91
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 wou~d 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:
92
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 Membsr 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
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 expl;~ined
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
93
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.
94
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:
95
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, financin[t, 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, number three would be higher teacher salaries; and number fourwould
be new facilities; however, numbers three and four could be interchangeable.
96
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; them
should be feedback from teachers, students, and teachers' peers to determine if
teachers are doing a good job; and the outcome, orthe 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, or the 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.
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.
97
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 6:50 p.m.
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
APPROVED
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
98
WORK SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 29, 2002
12:15 p.m.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 35454-070201, adopted by Council on Monday, on
July 2, 2001, a work session of Roanoke City Council was called to order on Monday,
April 29, 2002, at 12:15 p.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room,
Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder, Linda F.
Wyatt, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., William White, Sr., and Mayor Ralph K. Smith .......... 6.
ABSENT: Council Member C. Nelson Harris ............................................ 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.
CITY ATTORNEY-COUNCIL: A communication from the City Attorney
requesting that Council convene in Closed Session to consult with legal counsel on
a matter of probable litigation, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A)(7), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, was before the body.
Mr. Hudson moved that Council concur in the request of the City Attorney to
convene in Closed Session to consult with legal counsel on a matter of probable
litigation, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A)(7), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Hudson, White, Wyatt and Mayor
Smith ............................................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent)
At 12:20 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess.
At 12:50 p.m., the meeting reconvened, with Mayor Smith presiding, and all
members of the Council present, with the exception of Council Member Harris.
98(A)
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Session just concluded, Mr. Bestpitch
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
Session was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Hudson, White, Wyatt and Mayor
Smith ............................................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None-
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
REPORTS BY COUNCIL MEMBERS SERVING IN LIAISON CAPACITIES ON
VARIOUS COMMITTEES:
LEGISLATION-COMMITTEES: Council MemberWhite, Chairofthe Legislative
Committee, and Audit Committee, advised that the Audit Committee is in a good
position to do positive things in the future; and expressed appreciation for the
opportunity to serve on both Committees.
VIRGINIA'S FIRST REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL FACILITY AUTHORITY: Council
Member Bestpitch, Liaison to Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facilities Authority,
advised that an announcement will be made in the near future regarding the first
business to locate in the commerce park in Pulaski County.
PARKS AND RECREATION-ANIMALS/INSECTS-COMMITTEES: Council
Member Bestpitch, Liaison to the Mill Mountain Zoo Board of Directors, advised that
one issue which continues to impact the Zoo is water pressure and since water
pressure is important, the City should consider funds for an upgrade in the Capital
Improvements Plan.
MAYOR'S COMMITTEE ON HIGH TECHNOLOGY: The Mayor advised that the
Committee has not met in recent months; Roanoke had some setbacks from the
September 11 events as did the entire country; high tech centers were not the only
areas affected; and a strategy is still being sought to locate high tech companies to
the Roanoke area.
98(B)
Ms. Wyatt called attention to outdated and antiquated computer technology
used in the school system, advising that students do not have the hardware and
technology to be computer literate in the technology sector; and suggested a
partnership with the technology community, the schools and the City of Roanoke.
Dr. Rita D. Bishop, Associate Superintendent for Instructional Services,
Roanoke City Schools, addressed the issue of technology in the Roanoke City Public
schools. There was discussion with regard to providing the schools with outdated
computers from City offices and businesses in the City of Roanoke which replace
their technology at a faster pace than City offices. She stated this is the first lime
that the school system has had funds to begin a "refreshing" project which could
be as much as $200,000.00 for one elementary school, the school system has
allocated approximately $800,000.00 to the high schools, the State would like to do
on line testing for the Standards of Learning, and a considerable amount of funds
are needed when one takes into consideration that there are 29 education related
sites.
AIRPORT: The Mayor commented that at the last Leadership Summit meeting
which was hosted by Franklin County, the localities agreed to improve air service
to Roanoke Regional Airport, and he would keep Council abreast of progress.
BRIEFINGS BY THE CITY MANAGER:
GRANTS: The briefing with regard to the V-Stop Grant was deferred until the
next regular meeting of Council on Monday, May 6, 2002, at 2:00 p.m.
HUMAN SERVICES COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES ACT: Rolanda A. Johnson,
Assistant City Manager, introduced Vickie Price, Chief Social Work Supervisor, to
present a briefing with regard to the Comprehensive Services Act.
Ms. Price advised that in 1992, the Comprehensive Services Act for at-risk
youth and families was enacted by the Virginia General Assembly; the Act created
an interagency system of services and funding that is child-centered, family-focused,
and community-based; and the Act required consolidation of eight categorical
funding streams from the Departments of Social Services, Education, Youth and
Family Services, and Mental Health/Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse
Services into a State Funds Pool which is distributed to localities on a formula basis.
98(C)
She further advised that the Act is designed to provide greater flexibility in the
use of funds to purchase services based on the strengths and needs of at-risk youth
and their families to place authority for making program and funding decisions at the
community level, which decisions are made by a community planning team
consisting of representatives from the City of Roanoke Social Services, the Roanoke
City Public Schools, Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, Court Services Unit, and the
Public Health Department, based on recommendations from the interdisciplinary
Family Assessment and Planning Teams.
Ms. Price highlighted the following:
CSA Mandated Target Population
Children/Youth who are:
Placed for the purposes of receiving special education services in
approved private school educational programs;
Disabled and placed by local Social Services agencies in private
residential facilities; and
Receiving supportive services, as defined by Section 63.1-55.8, as a
means of preventing foster care placements.
CSA Referral Process
Referral is made by any community planning team member
organization; other public or private agency, a parent, or the
Comprehensive Services Act Coordinator. The Coordinator assigns the
referral to one of the Family Assessment and Planning Teams (FAPT)
which meet weekly.
FAPT develops an Individual Family Service Plan for the client which
may include services to be funded by the Comprehensive Services Act
State Funds Pool. Recommendations for the Act funding of services is
referred to the Community Planning Team or Roanoke Interagency
Council.
98(D)
The Roanoke Interagency Council, which meets twice monthly, reviews
the recommendations submitted by each Family Assessment and
Planning Teams and, upon concurrence, authorizes expenditures of
Comprehensive Services Act funds.
CSA Funding Categories
Mandated Residential
Foster Care - children in therapeutic foster care, residential facilities or
family foster care placements.
Special Education. residential placements for children with serious
emotional disturbance or behaviors that prevent education in traditional
school settings.
Mandated Non-Residential
Foster Care Prevention - in-home services, mentoring, and/or clinical
services designed to prevent foster care placement.
Special Education (Private Day Facilities) - community-based special
education programs for children with serious emotional disturbance or
behavioral disturbance.
Special Education (Other Day Services) - mentoring, day treatment,
and/or tutoring which allow children to remain in public schools.
Non-Mandated Residential -residential placements for children referred
by organizations other than DSS or public schools.
Non-Mandated Non-Residential - mentoring, in-home services and/or
clinical services designed to stablize children within their homes.
Ms. Price cited several case studies, presented an overview of projected
funding for the City of Roanoke Comprehensive Services Act, and shared data from
2001 for comparison with other localities.
98(E)
In closing, Ms. Price called attention to the following new services and
resources developed to address community-wide needs for Comprehensive Services
Act children:
Enhanced in-home and mentoring services to prevent both foster care
and private day placements.
Site-based day treatment programs at Roanoke City elementary and
middle schools.
Day treatment for "Headstart" children.
Recruitment of therapeutic foster care homes.
A full-time substance abuse counselor in the Court Services Unit.
Virtual Residential Program through Family Preservation to prevent out
of home placements.
Enhanced reading programs at the Achievement Center and Minnick
Education Center to promote children's return to public school.
Pilot program at Rivermont School for after-school reading and
tutoring.
Council Member Wyatt requested that the matter with regard to a regional
facility be placed on the agenda for discussion at an upcoming summit meetings.
Council Member Hudson expressed concern with regard to an individual who
demonstrates serious emotional and sexual behaviors being returned to the
community just because of age maturity; whereupon, the City Manager advised that
there are limited conditions under which the City can keep children in foster care
past the age of maturity.
At 2:00 p.m., Mr. White left the meeting.
PERCENT FOR ARTS PROGRAM: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that during the Financial and Planning Session held in
March, 2002, an item was requested for inclusion in the Capital Improvements
budget as requested by the Roanoke Arts Commission for the Percent for Arts
98(F)
Program; and the purpose of the briefing is to allow for further discussion and to
receive direction from City Council, and to give specific direction to the Arts
Commission. She further advised that the Capital Improvement budget proposed
for 2002- 2003 does not include funds for the Percent for the Arts Program, nor other
requests received from other agencies.
Council Member Wyatt commented that it was her understanding that one
percent of the Capital budget was to be designated for the arts, and it was never
intended to be site specific.
Vice-Mayor Carder pointed out that the guidelines state" .... of the construction
cost of a designated capital improvement project, .... "and the intent is clear that one
percent of the Capital budget is to be set aside for the Sewage Treatment Plant, one
percent for the schools, etc.; and he supports one percent of the capital budget
being designated for the arts.
Council Member Bestpitch suggested that the Roanoke Arts Commission
and/or the Percent for Arts Committee present a proposed plan identifying locations
for art, types of art, etc., to Council because he is not in favor of giving a certain
percentage of funds to the Arts Commission to spend without prior approval by
Council.
Mayor Smith voiced concern with regard to the Percent for Art funds being
spent on a pet project that may not be in the overall best interest of the City.
The City Manager commented that she would meet with the City Attorney to
discuss document changes, and submit a report to Council for action, and
thereafter, meet with the Roanoke Arts Commission to request that a plan be
formulated with suggested locations for art, descriptions of art, etc., that the City
may wish to obtain in the future.
Following discussion, the City Manager advised that a report would be
submitted to Council for review within 30 days.
Mr. Hudson left the meeting.
OUTLOOK ROANOKE PLAN: The City Manager introduced Ray Gendros,
Urban Design Associates, to respond to questions or concerns by Members of
Council with regard to the Outlook Roanoke Plan.
98(G)
The following items were highlighted:
Options for Library Location
Revitalization of the Park- Library be located on the high land close to
Elm Avenue, thereby opening the rest of the park to both Jefferson
Street and Bullitt Avenue.
Jefferson and Church- Heironimus Building: former department store
has the high ceilings and large bay structure that make it ideal for a
number of uses including: loft apartments, high tech offices and
"accelerator" office space, retail uses, or public facilities such as a
Library. Its large windows provide visual access from the street, which
could create an open, accessible environment for the Library.
Bullitt Avenue Extension
The consultants recommended extending Bullitt Avenue to Williamson
Road, thereby further defining the park and connecting it to the
downtown network. Once the park and its relationship to streets is
improved, the sites on its north and eastern edges will become prime
development pads. While in the greater interest of developing a world-
class park, the design of the Bullitt Avenue extension should be
sensitive to the impact, which it will have upon the existing Magnolia
Walk and could be sealed off to through traffic during performances or
festivals.
First Street Bridge
The bridge, with its symbolic significance as a cultural link between
historic Gainsboro and downtown is in great need of repair. Without
through traffic, commercial development on Henry Street is not viable,
and the role of the bridge in uniting diverse cultures will be diminished.
Consultants recommend that the proposed elevator be constructed at
the south end of the bridge to address accessibility issues, but the
bridge also continue to allow vehicular traffic.
Council Member Bestpitch noted that there was previous discussion
regarding other redesigns of Elmwood Park, and inquired as to how the proposed
new Library at the corner of Jefferson Street and Elm Avenue facilitate or mitigate
against other ideas for redesigning the Park, specifically how would it impact the
rock outcropping on the hill.
98(H)
It was explained that several alternatives were considered, i.e., page 32 of the
Outlook Roanoke Plan describes the Library along the eastern part of the Park and
designed to be south of the rock outcropping, which will locate the Library to where
it originally was -- above the rock outcropping. He further advised that the rock
outcropping would become an overlook point from reading terraces from the Library
looking down over the City which would give a greater sense of activity in and
around the Park; the main activity area would be between the outcropping and the
Magnolia Walk; the design would need to be carefully worked out; it is hoped to keep
the monument on the axis of Magnolia Walk; and there should be sufficient space
to accommodate a Library building based on the program the Library now has.
Council Member Wyatt inquired as to whether the Library will be located
somewhere other than in Elmwood Park, and how would the Park be envisioqed;
whereupon, the consultant advised that Urban Design Associates envisions the Park
as needing something, and suggested that a facility be constructed.
Vice-Mayor Carder noted that there was opposition to the Bullitt Avenue
extension, and asked for an explanation as to how to get the Park back since the
idea is to open Bullitt Avenue. He called attention to the vagrant situation in the Park
and asked for elaboration concerning security; whereupon, the consultant advised
that Elmwood Park is especially problematic because of the tall trees along
Williamson Road which blocks the view, closes offthe Park, and makes the City less
understandable.
With regard to the First Street Bridge, the consultant stated that it is a
complicated and difficult area physically to work out; it represents the connection
between the Gainsboro community and downtown, and one of the serious problems
with the closing of Jefferson Street is the main street does not connect across the
tracks. He further stated that the success of the Higher Education Center and the
residential section adjacent to First Street is progressing; and the consultants would
like to ensure that whatever happens, the design will support the Henry Street
initiative and the vitality of development.
Mayor Smith noted increased activity on the north side of the tracks, and how
First Street Bridge serves the Higher Education Center and the downtown area; and
the historic significance of the Bridge was also noted and how it is becoming more
important to citizens.
98(I)
Vice-Mayor Carder expressed his appreciation for a good street grid design
and also two-way traffic; he called attention to old photographs looking up Jefferson
Street into the Gainsboro area, and questioned why the City could not lobby the
railroad to not only have First Street Bridge open, but also to again open Jefferson
Street.
Vice-Mayor Carder raised a question with regard to the recommendation
concerning a two-way street; whereupon, the consultant advised that the
recommendation is to extend two-way traffic all the way to Williamson Road.
OTHER BUSINESS:
BUDGET: Council Member Wyatt suggested that the Fiscal Year 2002-03
Recommended Budget list departments and unfunded positions; whereupon, the
City Manager advised that there are 11unfunded positions and a list of affected
departments will be provided.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 2:55 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
APPROVED
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
98(J)
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 s~udy
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
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 M3yor
requested that each speaker limit their remarks to no more than three minutes.
99
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 cutting 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
100
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 by the 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 3~ 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.
101
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
for a 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.
102
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 as 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, 1934 Avon 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 forArtistic 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 cf 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;
103
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 disadvanteged
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
104
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
105
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.
106
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,
107
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
108
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
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 Emergoncy
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.
109
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the special meeting
adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
APPROVED
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Mayor
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.
110
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 rato 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
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
111
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 6, 2002
12:15 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, May 6,
2002, at 12:15 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber, fourth
floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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, Re~lular Meetin~ls,
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
PRESENT: Council Members William H. Carder, Linda F. Wyatt, W. Alvin
Hudson, Jr., William White, Sr., C. Nelson Harris, William D. Bestpitch and Mayor
Ralph K. Smith ................................................................................................. -7.
ABSENT: None ..................................................................................... -0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, CityAttorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor Ralph K. Smith
requesting a Closed Session 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.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to
convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss personnel matters relating to 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. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
COMMITTEES-CITY MANAGER-CITY PROPERTY: A communication from the
City Manager requesting a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711
(A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before Council.
112
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager
to convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned property,
where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position
or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ......................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
At 12:20 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened in
the Council's Conference Room for the purpose of holding one Closed Session
which was previously approved by Council.
At 1:30 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened in the
Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, for a briefing on the
City of Roanoke Pension Plan and fiscal year 2002 revenues, with potential changes
to proposed fiscal year 2003.
At 1:35 p.m., the meeting reconvened in the Emergency Operations Center
Conference Room, Room 159, for a briefing with regard to the City of Roanoke
Pension Plan, with Mayor Smith presiding and all Members of the Council in
attendance.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk.
PENSIONS: The Director of Finance introduced a briefing in regard to
changes to the City's Pension Plan. He called upon Harold R. Harless, Acting
Retirement Administrator, for a detailed briefing.
Mr. Harless advised that in 1926, the City of Roanoke established its first
retirement system - Police and Fire system; in 1946, the second retirement system,
the Employees Retirement System governing police and fire, as well as other
employees of the City was established; and in 1984, a third system was created, the
Employees Supplemental Retirement System. He stated that subsequent to the 1984
restatement, numerous changes have been made to Chapter 22.1 of the City Code;
and a required amendment of all IRS qualified plans provided an opportunity to
restate the Plan to increase ease of understanding and administration, the result of
which was a better organized and more user-friendly Plan document.
113
He stated that the Plan has evolved from a single employer plan to a multiple
employer plan; participating employers are clearly identified; i.e.: City of Roanoke,
Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority,
Roanoke Valley Juvenile Detention Commission and Roanoke City Schools (Food
Service/Maintenance employees); and composition of the Board of Trustees is as
follows: two Trustees who are members of the Plan and who are employees of the
City, other than an employee of the Police or Fire Department; and one Trustee who
is a member of the Plan and an employee of the Police or Fire Department. He
explained that a proposed amendment to Board composition provides for two
Trustees who are members of the Plan and an employee of a participating Employer
(only one of the two may be an employee of a participating Employer other than the
City), and a Trustee from the Police or Fire Department remains unchanged.
It was explained that further clarification of ESRS of Average Final
Compensation provides that clarifying language has been added to avoid penalizing
members who have a break in service, and months in which no Creditable Service
is earned are not included in the 36 consecutive month period of Earnable
Compensation used to calculate Average Final Compensation; and the term "duty",
with regard to disability retirement, as used in the existing Plan, has been replaced
with more appropriate terminology, i.e.: "further performance of any gainful
employment for which the Member if qualified with his most recent Participating
Employer".
It was noted that currently, the City Code defines the actuarial cost method
to be used to determine the employer contribution rate; however, the restated Plan
allows the Pension Plan Board of Trustees to adopt a generally accepted actuarial
cost method to be utilized for determination of the employer contribution rate.
With regard to the Actuarial method to determine employer contributions,
Mr. Harless stated that the Board of Trustees has proposed a change from the
actuarial cost method required under the current Code; and the proposed actuarial
cost method minimizes the potential for significant fluctuation in the required
employer contribution in a given year.
He explained that the current actuarial method to determine employer
contributions is: aggregate method used if Plan has no unfunded liability,
recommended contribution rate of 7.15 per cent, entry age normal method used if
unfunded liability, if unfunded liability, recommended contribution rate of 11.77 per
cent; and the proposed actual method is: projected unit credit method,
recommended contribution rate incorporating revised assumptions from experience
study of 5.89 per cent; and cost method does not change if there is a change
unfunded status.
114
It was further explained that the Economic Growth and Tax Relief
Reconciliation Act of 2001 made legal the purchase of prior service credit utilizing
a trustee to trustee transfer of assets; and restatement allows members of the Plan
to purchase eligible prior service utilizing assets from their Deferred Compensation
Plan.
In closing, Mr. Harless advised that the IRS Determination Letter filing
deadline is June 30, 2002.
At 1:58 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building.
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, May 6, 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 William H. Carder, Linda F. Wyatt, W. Alvin
Hudson, Jr., William White, Sr., C. Nelson Harris, William D. Bestpitch and Mayor
Ralph K. Smith .7.
ABSENT: None O.
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 The Reverend
Edward T. Burton, Pastor, Sweet Union Baptist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
115
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-
DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Carder offered the following resolution memorializing the
late Willis M. "Wick" Anderson, a former Mayor of the City of Roanoke:
(#35824-050602) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Willis M. "Wick"
Anderson, a former Mayor of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65 page 549.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35824-050602. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ..................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure to
Ms. Gerry Keister, cousin of the late Mr. Anderson.
LANDMARKS/HISTORIC
a proclamation declaring the
Preservation Week.
PRESERVATION: The Mayor presented
week of May 12-18, 2002, as National Historic
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT- ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The Mayor
presented a proclamation declaring the week of May 12-18, 2002, as Business
Appreciation Week.
TOURISM: The Mayor presented a proclamation declaring the week of May 5-
11, 2002, as National Tourism Week.
YOUTH: The Mayor presented a proclamation declaring the month of May 2002
as Childhood Early Intervention Month.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Council Member Harris introduced
representatives of Faith Christian School, sponsors of the Faith Walk, a community
service project that will also benefit the City of Roanoke, which will be held on
Friday, May 10, 2002.
Bret Jones, student leader associated with the annual fund raiser, advised
that for the past three years, Faith Christian School has held a walk-a-thon in which
students have solicited sponsors; however, this year, participants will be mulching
the trail at Fishburn Park as a dual fund raiser and community project.
116
On behalf of the City of Roanoke, Council Member Harris presented Head
Master Sam Cox with a City of Roanoke brass paper weight star.
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.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday, April 1,
2002, were before the body.
(For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
Mr. Hudson moved that the reading of the Minutes be dispensed with and that
the Minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ..................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... 0.
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-EASEMENTS-APPALACHIAN POWER
COMPANY-PARKS AND RECREATION-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL-UTILITY LINE
SERVICES-AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER: A communication from the City Manager
advising that pursuant to the requirements of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, the City of Roanoke is required to hold a public hearing on the proposed
conveyance of property rights; was before Council.
The City Manager requested that Council authorize advertisement of a public
hearing for Monday, May 20, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., on as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, with regard to easements FOR RELOCATION OF American Electric
Power transmission and distribution lines Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project.
Mr. Hudson moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith. 7.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
1,17
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: A report of
qualification of Erin Garvin for a term ending March 31,2003; Anita L. Lee for a term
ending March 31,2004; David Walton and Onzlee Ware for terms ending March 31,
2005, as members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, was before Council.
Mr. Hudson moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
REGULAR AGENDA
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that on July 1,2002, there will
be two vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board for terms of three years, each,
commencing July 1,2002 and ending June 30, 2005; and the following persons were
interviewed by Council for the positions on Thursday, April 18, 2002, said interviews
having started 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 opened the floor for nominations for the two vacancies.
Mr. Hudson placed in nomination the name of William E. Skeen.
Mr. White placed in nomination the name of Robert J. Sparrow.
Mr. Carder placed in nomination the name of Edward Garner.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Skeen and Sparrow were
appointed as Trustees of the Roanoke City School Board for terms of three years,
each, commencing July 1, 2002 and ending June 30, 2005, by the following vote:
FOR MR. SKEEN: Council Members Carder, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch,
Wyatt and Mayor Smith ..................................................................................... 7.
FOR MR. SPARROW: Council Members Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris and
Bestpitch ....................................................................................................... 5.
FOR MR. GARNER: Vice-Mayor Carder and Mayor Smith ............................ -2.
118
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
PARKS AND RECREATION-FESTIVAL IN THE PARK: Stuart Israel, Executive
Director, Festival in the Park, advised that Festival season 2002 is in full swing, with
events like the Celtic Festival, Chili Cook Off, and Local Colors, and in approximately
18 days the 33rd Annual Festival in the Park kicks off with an activity at Victory
Stadium. He stated that many people view Festival as an event of the City of
Roanoke and the City deserves much credit for its success; Festival has brought
thousands of people to downtown Roanoke to enjoy art, crafts, music, theater,
children's activities and sports; and Festival is completely self-supporting, however,
the City has provided in kind support as a major sponsor. He added that with the
current level of City support and in kind services, for every dollar spent by the City
in in kind contributions, Festival returns in excess of $1.50. In appreciation of the
City's support, he presented Festival in the Parks buttons which will admit Council
Members to all Festival activities from May 24- June 2, 2002.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the remarks of Mr. Israel
would be received and filed.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS:
POLICE DEPARTMENT- GRANTS: The City Manager introduced a briefing on
the V-STOP program; whereupon, she called upon Pam Gold, Domestic Violence
Specialist, for remarks.
Ms. Gold presented a video prepared by RVTV on the V-STOP program, and
advised that the City of Roanoke received V-STOP funds from 1999 to date; i.e.:
$18,000.00 in 1999, $33,000.00 in 2000, $33,000.00 in 2001, and $27,000.00 in 2002.
She presented photographs of domestic violence victims for viewing by Council
only, and explained that the grant allows for such photographs and other evidence
to aid in the prosecution of misdemeanor and felony domestic assault cases. She
stated that evidence collected is critical for prosecution in these types of cases
because witnesses are rarely present during the assault; and many cases are
dismissed in court because of the unwillingness of the victim to testify in the
presence of the abuser. She explained that police responded to 6,511 domestic
disorder calls for service in 2001, 1,402 of which were forwarded to her office for
119
follow up, 786 were simple assaults, 67 were aggravated assaults, 63 per cent of the
victims received some type of injury during the assault and 82 per cent were female;
and in addition in 2001, detectives in the criminal investigation bureau spent a total
of 2,034 hours investigating felony domestic related crimes. She advised that in
coordination with U. S. Cellular, 40 cellular and digital phones are currently in use;
approximately 25 per cent of the victims in Roanoke City do not have residential
telephone service, therefore, these phones are vital for communication during an
emergency; and victims are referred to other area agencies for additional service
such as counseling, shelter and legal advice.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the briefing would be
received and filed.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
POSTAL SERVICES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising
that in an effort to provide postage services in the most cost efficient manner,
specifications were developed and an Invitation for Bids were forwarded to seven
postal processing firms; and the bid was publicly advertised in accordance with
Chapter 23.1, Code of the City of Roanoke, (1979), as amended.
It was further advised that the lowest responsible bidder meeting
specifications was Automated Mailing Systems, Inc.; based on the bid per piece of
mail processed at $.025, plus a one per cent additional fee for front funding actual
postage cost paid by the vendor, annual cost of the contract would be approximately
$19,150.00; and funding for payment of the contract is available in individual
department/division postage Account No. 2160.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to award the bid and
enter into a one-year agreement, with the option to renew for four additional one year
periods, with Automated Mailing Systems, Inc., for provision of postage metering,
bar coding and presort services, at a contract price of $.025 per piece of mail
processed, plus a one per cent additional fee for front funding actual postage cost
paid by the vendor, or approximately $19,150.00 per year; and reject all other bids
received by the City.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35825-050602) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Automated Mailing
Systems, Inc., made to the City for providing outbound postage service, upon certain
terms and conditions, and awarding a contract therefor; authorizing the proper City
officials to execute the requisite contract for such services; and rejecting all other
bids made to the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 551.)
120
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35825-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and Mayor
Smith .......................................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: Council MemberWyatt ................................................. 1.
ZONING-CONSULTANTS REPORTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that according to Section 15.2-2285, Code of Virginia, 1950,
as amended, "the planning commission of each locality may, and at the direction
of the governing body shall, prepare a proposed zoning ordinance including a map
or maps showing the division of the territory into districts and a text setting forth the
regulations applying in each district."
It was further advised that the last major revision of the City's zoning
ordinance was in 1987; in 2001, Council adopted a new Comprehensive Plan, Vision
2001-2020; revisions to the zoning ordinance are needed to provide development
and land use tools to implement the plan's recommendations; and development of
the new zoning ordinance will include a comprehensive review of the existing zoning
ordinance, consideration of future goals for the City as established in Vision 2001-
2020, coordination of public participation processes, and development of new land
use regulations that encourage quality development and traditional development
patterns that comprise a significant part of the City.
It was stated that with approval of a September 4, 2001, Council report,
Budget Ordinance No. 35556-090401 appropriated $100,000.00 for funding to provide
for professional assistance to update the Zoning Ordinance; and as such, funding
in the amount of $99,974.00 is available in Account No. 008-610-9901-9132.
It was advised that a Request f*or Proposal was advertised and notices were
sent to national firms known to have an expertise in this area; five written proposals
were received and three firms were selected for interviews by the team; the proposal
chosen is the venture of the qualified firm of Freilich, Leitner and Carlisle
("Consultant") and the firms of Planning Works, LLC, and The Lawrence Group will
serve as subconsultants; and scope of services has been negotiated and consists
of the following three phases to be completed in an estimated 15-month timeframe:
Phase I - Reconnaissance (June, 2002 - September, 2002)
General orientation, data compilation, Reconnaissance
Report, and Annotated Code Outline.
121
Phase II - Ordinance Draft (October, 2002 - May, 2003)
Drafting of Zoning Ordinance document and document
review.
Phase III - Adoption (June, 2003 - August, 2003) Planning
Commission public hearing and recommendations; City
Council public hearing and recommendations; and
incorporation of final revisions into Zoning Ordinance as
approved and adopted by City Council.
It was pointed out that the negotiated cost of the project is $99,974.00 and
includes a camera-ready original for the City, including a digital writeable copy
containing properly formatted text and all graphic illustrations contained in the
ordinance.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the proposal of Freilich,
Leitner & Carlisle ("Consultant"), with Planning Works, LLC, and The Lawrence
Group as subconsultants, and that the City Manager be further authorized to execute
an agreement with the consultant, approved as to form by the City Attorney, for the
above described planning services.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35826-050602) A RESOLUTION accepting the proposal of Freilich, Leitner
and Carlisle, with the firms of Planning Works, LLC, and The Lawrence Group
Architects of North Carolina, Inc., as subconsultants, for professional assistance in
updating the City of Roanoke's zoning ordinance, upon certain terms and
conditions, and awarding a contract therefor; authorizing the proper City officials
to execute the requisite contract for such work; and rejecting all other proposals
made to the City for the work.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 552.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35826-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
PARKS AND RECREATION-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 three
122
trucks for the Transportation Division of the Public Works Department;
specifications were developed and, along with an Invitation for Bid, were sent to 11
providers; and the bid was publicly advertised in accordance with Chapter 23.1 of
the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
It was further advised that the lowest bid for three landscape maintenance
cab/chassis and bodies was submitted by Super Lawn Truck, Inc., which bid met all
specifications, at a price of $54,912.83 per unit; and funding is available from Lease
of Vehicle Account No. 017-440-9852-9015.
The City Manager recommended that Council award the bid for three
landscape maintenance trucks to Super Lawn Truck, Inc., at a total cost of
$164,738.49; and reject all other bids received by the City.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35827-050602) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Super Lawn Truck, Inc.,
for the purchase of three new landscape maintenance cab/chassis and 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 553.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35827-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
The Mayor called attention to the submittal of only one completed bid, and
advised that with an expenditure of this magnitude, there should be more than one
bidder on the cab/chassis and landscape maintenance bodies. He stated that there
may be a flaw in the purchasing process if the City is unable to attract more than one
bid on a $164,000.00 purchase.
BUDGET-TELEPHONE COMPANIES-TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the State of Virginia mandated
that localities take responsibility for answering wireless E911 calls instead of routing
the calls for response by the State Police; the Virginia State Wireless E911 Services
Board provides funding to the localities for staffing and equipment to provide the
service; and the State currently collects 75 cents per month for each wireless
telephone user to fund localities for expenses for the services.
123
It was further advised that on December 12, 2001, the Virginia State Wircless
E911 Services Board awarded the City of Roanoke an additional $349,790.00 to
complete Phases I and II for fiscal year 2001/2002; Wireless Phase II, which provides
the location of the caller, is scheduled for implementation on October 1, 2002; and
there is no requirement for matching funds.
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $44,000.00 to E911
Center No. 001-430-4130-2020 for E911 Telephone Bill funding; and appropriate
$305,790.00 to an account to be established by the Director of Finance for funding
upgrades to software and hardware.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35828-050602) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 General and Department of Technology Fund Appropriations, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 554.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35828-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-ANIMALS/INSECTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Roanoke City Police Department's Mounted Patrol
Unitwas formed in 1993; the Mounted Patrol Unit has relied on numerous donations
to maintain its operations; in July, 2000, Ms. Diane Dominguez of Palm City, Florida,
donated two Friesian horses to the program; and both homes have been trained and
are utilized by the Mounted Patrol Unit.
It was further advised that Ms. Dominguez has offered to donate another
Friesian horse to the Mounted Patrol Unit, which is a three-year old gelding, docile,
and suitable for police training, valued at $30,000.00; accepting the additional horse
would allow the retirement of one of the Unit's older mounts; and City Code Section
2-263 requires action by Council to approve acceptance of gifts exceeding $5,000.00
in value.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize acceptance of a
Friesian home from Ms. Diane Dominguez of Palm City, Florida.
124
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35829-050602) A RESOLUTION accepting the donation of a Friesian horse
for use by the City's Mounted Patrol Unit of the Police Department, and expressing
appreciation for such donation.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 555.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35829-050602. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
LIBRARIES-OUTDOOR DINING: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the Roanoke Public Library wishes to enter into a contractual
agreement with an individual or restaurant corporation to operate a coffee shop on
the lower level of the Main Library, off Bullitt Avenue, with both indoor and outdoor
areas, and the vendor will be required to:
make any needed renovations, including furnishings, to
the existing space to make it suitable for a coffee shop;
be responsible for maintenance, repairs, and upkeep;
pay minimal rent and/or a small percentage of profits to
the library system;and
adhere to all other conditions specified in the contract.
It was further advised that the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, Section
63.1-155, requires that the Department for the Blind and Visually Impaired have first
priority in assuming the operation of such a facility in a public building; if the
Department chooses not to exercise this option, the City will issue a Request for
Proposals; although the sealed bid method of procurement would normally be used,
it is not practicable or fiscally advantageous to the public in procuring the above
referenced service, since the experience, qualifications, and references of
individuals and/or corporations that can provide the above listed service are of
primary importance; the highest quality of service (food, pricing, operations, and
environment) is desired for library customers, in order to have a successful
operation; therefore, the process of competitive negotiation using the request for
proposal has been identified as the best method for procurement of these services.
125
It was pointed out that the City Code 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; and this method will allow for negotiations with two or more providers
to determine the best qualified at the most competitive price or rate.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the use of competitive
negotiation as the method to secure vendors to provide the appropriate services.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35830-050602) A RESOLUTION designating the procurement method known
as competitive negotiation, rather than the procurement method known as
competitive sealed bidding, to be used for the procurement of an operator of coffee
shop services for the Main Library; and documenting the basis for this
determination.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 557.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35830-050602. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bespitch and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
GRANTS-CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS-LIBRARIES-SCHOOLS: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that in the fall of 2001, the Roanoke
Public Libraries applied to the Library of Virginia for a grant that would fund a
program for middle and high school age students to be trained to assist library
patrons in using computers in the Main Library and in branch libraries; a grant in the
amount of $5,000.00 was awarded; in the fall of 2001, the Roanoke Public Libraries
applied to the Library of Virginia for an additional grant that would enable the
creation of a library website, and a grant of $5,000.00 was awarded.
It was further advised that the PC Navigators grant will help the library meet
the diverse needs of patrons whose computer skills and knowledge vary widely and
will help teen participants to reinforce computer skills required by the Virginia
Standards of Learning, learn to provide meaningful service to others, and develop
interpersonal skills; and the grant provides funding for small stipends for program
participants.
126
It was explained that the library website grant will enable the library to
broaden its customer reach by offering online information on the different library
departments and their services, including circulation (new acquisitions and material
reviews), reference (links to online research databases and reference question
email), the Virginia Room, the Afro-Lee Americana Collection, library programs,
Friends of the Library, and other updates; additional links on the website would
include lifelong learning opportunities, pertinent local information, cultural events,
and other aspects relating to the uniqueness of the Roanoke Valley; and a web site
will also serve as a marketing tool, positioning the library as a state of the art facility.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the two grants from the
Library of Virginia and appropriate funding from each to revenue and expenditure
accounts to be established in the Grant Fund.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35831-050602) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 558.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35831-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
MayorSmith ................................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ................................................................................. -0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35832-050602) A RESOLUTION accepting a Library PC Navigators Grant and
a Library Website Grant from the Library of Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 559.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35832-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
127
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS-DIRECTOR OF FINANCE: The Director of
Finance submitted the Financial Report for the City of Roanoke for the month of
March 2002.
There being no questions, and without objection by Council, the Mayor
advised that the Financial Report would be received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS-BUDGET-ANNUAL REPORTS-COMMITTEES-
CABLE TELEVISION: A communication from Council Member W. Alvin Hudson, Jr.,
Council's Representative to the Roanoke Valley Cable Television Committee,
transmitting the Roanoke Valley Cable Television Annual Budget for Fiscal Year
2002-03, totaling $267,885.00, with the City's contribution totaling $147,337.00, was
before the body.
It was advised that the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, and the Town
of Vinton jointly operate Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV); initial equipment and
facilities for the television station were funded through a $480,000.00 capital grant
from Cox Communications; the station is located at the Jefferson Center and
currently employs five full-time staff members; and staff produces videos and shows
for local governments and school systems for cable casting, along with government
meetings, on Cox Communications' Channel 3.
It was further advised that on June 8, 1992, Council approved the Roanoke
Regional Cable Television Agreement, which requires that the RVTV Operating
Budget be approved by the governing bodies of the city, the county, and the town;
funding for the Operating Budget is shared by the three governments, based on the
annual proportion of Cox subscribers located in each jurisdiction; and the Roanoke
Regional Cable Television Committee approved the RVTV Operating Budget for
Fiscal Year 2002-03 at its April meeting, which amounts to $267,885.00 and is a 0.99
per cent decrease from the current years budget of $269,616.00.
It was noted that Cox Communications paid a five per cent franchise fee to the
local governments in 2001, which amounted to $1,718,936.00; the local governments
have traditionally agreed to allocate up to 20 per cent of the franchise fees collected
to the RVTV Operating Budget; for the coming year, that amount would be
$343,787.00; and RVTV's requested budget of $267,885.00 is $75,902.00 less than
that amount.
128
Locality Subscribers Percentage (%)
City of Roanoke 32,332 55
Roanoke County 23,214 40
Town of Vinton 2,727 5
It was pointed out that each Iocality's contribution to the Operating Budget
would be as follows:
Locality
City of Roanoke
Roanoke County
Town of Vinton
Contribution
$147,337.00
$107,154.00
$ 13,394.00
On behalf of the City's representatives to the Roanoke Valley Cable Television
Committee, and as Council's representative to the committee, Council Member
Hudson recommended that Council approve the proposed RVTV budget for Fiscal
Year 2002-03, in the amount of $267,885.00, with the City's contribution totaling
$147,337.00.
Mr. Hudson offered the following resolution:
(#35833-050602) A RESOLUTION approving the recommendation of the
Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee to approve the annual
operating budget for Fiscal Year 2002-2003 for the operation of the regional
government and educational access station, Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV),
Channel 3, and for the City to provide partial funding.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 560.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35833-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that Council approve appropriation of $104,255.00 from the Capital
Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Fund, said funds to be used for the
purchase of instructional technology requests, replacement of a transportation fuel
truck, facility maintenance requirements, elementary physical education equipment
and improvements, and facility improvements at Woodrow Wilson Middle School,
was before the body.
129
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35834-050602) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 General and School Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 561.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35834-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS:
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
ZONING: Ordinance No. 35818 amending, repealing or replacing proffered
conditions authorized by Ordinance No. 32294-121994 presently binding upon
Official Tax No. 2761409 and rezoning Official Tax No. 2761409 from RS-3,
Residential Single Family, Low Density District, to C-2, General Commercial District;
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 petitioner, having previously been before the Council for its first
reading on Monday, April 15, 2002, read and adopted on its first reading and laid
over, was again before the body, Mr. Harris offering the following for its second
reading and final adoption:
(#35818) AN ORDINANCE: amending, repealing or replacing proffered
conditions authorized by Ordinance No. 32294-121994 presently binding upon
Official Tax No. 2761409 and rezoning Official Tax No. 2761409 from RS-3,
Residential Single Family, Low Density District, to C-2, General Commercial District;
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 petitioner.
130
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35818. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Carder.
Mr. Mike Shepherd, 829 Virginia Avenue, N. W., business owner in the City of
Roanoke, advised that Mr. Wells has come before Council with little or no regard for
the neighborhood or its residents, he does not live in the neighborhood and Could
care less how he treats the people who reside there. He stated that Mr. Wells'
request was denied by the City Planning Commission, therefore, why is he
appearing before Council. He added that Mr. Wells was told by the City not to
excavate his lot, but he did so anyway; and he was told not to come before Council
for further expansion, yet his request is under consideration. He stated that if
Mr. Wells wishes to expand his business, he should relocate to an area that is
currently zoned for a car wash facility. In view of the current water shortage, he
advised that expansion of the car wash operation will compound the problem, and
asked that Council deny the request.
Ms. Betty McCormack, 3826 Virginia Avenue, N. W., advised that residents
have appeared before Council on the same subject on several occasions. She
stated that she has lived in the neighborhood since 1958 and witnessed many
changes, but expansion of Mr. Wells business is not in the best interest of the
neighborhood. She added that the business is too close to the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and Westside Boulevard, and Mr. Wells stops traffic on Westside
Boulevard to move vehicles in and out of his building, which could lead to a serious
traffic accident. She stated that vehicles are parked at Fairview Methodist Church,
on the lot next to her home, and at the Stop In convenience store; and water runs
down the curb to the drain at Melrose Avenue. She advised that Mr. Wells was
authorized to engage in the business of car detailing, but referred to photographs
of tractors, boats, mobile homes and a police car that have been washed at his
establishment. She advised that if his current location is not large enough, he
should relocate elsewhere on property that is appropriately zoned.
Mr. Fred Galloway, 3402 Kershaw Road, N. W., advised that he has known
Mr. Wells for over 30 years and he is a hardworking, Christian gentleman, who
operates his business in an efficient manner, with no loud noise, and observes
regular working hours. He asked that Mr. Wells be allowed to continue to expand
his business.
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that Mr. Wells has requested expansion of his
business on several occasions. He expressed concern with regard to the
encroachment by businesses into residential areas, and advised that if Mr. Wells
wishes to expand his business, he should look at locations that are currently zoned
for this type of business. For the above reasons, he stated that he intends to vote
against the request.
131
Mr. Bestpitch advised that in 1994, Mr. Wells approached City Council
regarding two tax parcels that he owns, across the front of which one house has
been constructed on Virginia Avenue, and in 1994, only the back portion of one of
the residential parcels was rezoned. He stated that the measure currently before
Council rezones all of both tax parcels to C-2, General Commercial District,
therefore, anyone who might decide at some point in the future that they wanted to
purchase the house to live in at such time as Mr. Wells reaches the age where he
can no longer maintain the property, would not be able to obtain a mortgage to
purchase the house as a residence because, if the ordinance currently before
Council is adopted, the house would not be zoned for residential purposes. He
asked that Members of Council recognize what they will be doing to the
neighborhood, to the house and to the future of the City and cast their vote against
the ordinance.
The Mayor called attention to an individual who some time ago, operated an
establishment in the area whose main business was in illegal activities, and advised
that he hoped there is not a misconception by assuming that if an individual has a
successful carwashing business, there must be illegal activities involved. He noted
that it has been stated that when Mr. Wells came before the Council on previous
occasions, there was an understanding that there would be no further expansion of
his business; however, that statement is not reflected in the minutes of Council as
a motion adopted by the Council. He stated that he has visited Mr. Wells
establishment on several occasions, everything has been in order and he was
impressed with Mr. Wells ambition and motivation to make his business a success.
He added that if there is illegal activity, he would encourage residents and other
citizens to report incidents and prosecute to the fullest extent of the law by bringing
evidence to the attention of the Police Department. He stated that he will support the
request of Mr. Wells until he sees evidence to the contrary.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that he was not sure who the Mayor intended to impugn
with his comments. He stated that he found the comments to be inappropriate for
a City Council meeting and asked that the record reflect that he has no reason to
presume that Mr. Wells is guilty of any crime whatsoever, since, to his knowledge,
he has not been convicted of a crime. He added that the responsibility of Council
as elected officials is to support and uphold the Constitution of this country which
includes the provision that requires assuming that a citizen is innocent until proven
guilty. He stated that Council is not being asked to zone or rezone Mr. Wells zoning
outlives the present owner of any piece of property, which has been his concern
about this issue all along, as well as his concern on numerous zoning issues that
have come before the Council; and he deeply resents any implication that his vote
is being influenced by unsubstantiated speculation.
Mr. Harris advised that since the matter came before Council at its last
meeting, he has received numerous correspondence and telephone calls from
citizens; whereupon, he requested the opportunity to follow up on certain concerns
and issues that have been raised with City staff.
132
Mr. Harris offered a substitute motion that the matter be tabled until the next
regular meeting of Council on Monday, May 20, 2002, at 2:00 p.m. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted, Council Members White and Bestpitch voting
no,
BUDGET-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Carder offered the following resolution
establishing the date of a Special Meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke on
Monday, May 13, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, for the purpose of
considering and enacting measures regarding the fiscal year 2002-03 budget:
(#35823-050602) 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 548.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35823-050602. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, White, Harris, Bestpitch and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None .................................................................................. 0.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR, VICE-MAYOR AND
MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: By consensus of Council, the "Shining
Stars Recognition Program" was approved for implementation.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
BUDGET-CELEBRATIONS: The City Manager encouraged citizens of the
Roanoke Valley to take advantage of the many cultural activities/festivities offered
by the City of Roanoke.
She advised that Council is currently participating in the fiscal year 2002-03
budget process, budget study sessions will be held on May 9 and 10, 2002, and the
budget is scheduled for adoption by Council on Monday, May 13, 2002 at 2:00 p.m.
She further advised that later in the day, Council will receive a briefing on
revenue/revenue adjustments, and asked that citizens be mindful of budget
concerns as the City prepares for fiscal years 2002-03 and 2003-04.
133
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 citizens and Council Members and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, report and
recommendation to Council.
TRAFFIC-COMPLAINTS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Ms. Pat Gordon, 3204
Christian Avenue, N. E., spoke with regard to cruising on Williamson Road, N. W.,
and Winsloe Avenue, N. E. She presented a petition signed by 21 persons also
expressing their concerns. She referred to loud noise from car radios, improperly
altered exhaust systems on vehicles, and stereos from the trunks of vehicles which
vibrate walls, etc. She asked that Council enforce the noise ordinance by instructing
police officers to patrol the neighborhood and to issue tickets to those persons in
violation in an effort to curtail noise and other unfavorable activities.
The Mayor advised that he has recently received a complaint from residents
at the corner of Trinkle Avenue and Winsloe Avenue, N. E.
Ms. Wyatt called attention to a similar problem in Roanoke County in the
Boxley Hills area where it became necessary to gate the street. She stated that
gating off the appropriate streets at Williamson Road might begin to solve the
problem, and asked that other creative ways be studied to address the matter in
addition to issuing citations by police officers.
It was the consensus of Council to refer the matter to the City Manager for
report within 30 days.
At 4:00 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., for a briefing with
regard to Fiscal Year 2002 revenue, with potential changes to proposed Fiscal Year
2003.
At 4:05 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, with all Members
of the Council in attendance, Mayor Smith presiding.
BUDGET-TAXES: The Director of Finance referred to his communication
under date of May 3, 2002, in which he advised that the Commissioner of the
Revenue is currently processing assessments and finalizing the tax levy for
Personal Property and Bank Stock Tax; Personal Property tax due date is May 31,
and the Commissioner has just prepared the levy for Bank Stock Tax; based on
assessments to date, it appears that Personal Property receipts will decline three to
five per cent from the prior year, or approximately $700,000.00 to $1,160,000.00;
based on the Bank Stock tax levy, receipts will decline from the prior year to one
134
third, or approximately $500,000.00; and the dramatic decline in these two local
taxes, combined with other local taxes performing over budget, is expected to cause
the overall category of local taxes to perform under budget for fiscal year 2002 by
approximately $800,000.00.
He called attention to an administrative hold that was placed on approximately
$2.0 million of appropriations; the intent of which was to allow the opportunity to
take action on specific adjustments, if needed, during the last quarter of the fiscal
year to compensate for any potential declines in revenues. He pointed out that in
normal budget years, there typically are unspent appropriations and with the
foresight of the action taken during the first quarter of the fiscal year, the City is not
in danger of having an overall budget deficit for fiscal year 2002; and the anticipated
impact would be a significantly small CMERP balance than is traditional.
The Director of Finance advised that based on previous year growth trends,
revenue estimates were developed for fiscal year 2003 for Personal Property and
Bank Stock from what was believed to be a conservative standpoint; and the extent
of decline of these two taxes was not anticipated, thus, it is believed to be prudent
to reduce estimates in the Recommended Fiscal Year 2003 budget. He stated that
the Finance Department is working with the Commissioner of the Revenue to
confirm assessments to date and with the Office of Management and Budget to
develop a strategy to minimize the impact of any proposed reduction on priority
expenditure items included in the Recommended Budget.
Mr. Hall reviewed charts showing an average five year growth through fiscal
year 2001 for the following taxes: 4.2% - real estate tax, 4.4% - personal property tax,
3.1% -sales tax, 3.2% - utility taxes (includes electricity, gas, water, telephone and
cellular telephone), 4.5% - business, professional and occupational license, 4.1% -
prepared food and beverage tax, and 16.3% - and bank stock tax.
He advised that based on current projections, fiscal year 2002 local tax
revenues will under perform the estimate by approximately $800,000.00; personal
property decline of three to five per cent is primarily responsible for the entire
category of local taxes underperforming the budget; bank stock tax has also under
performed the budget by $.2 million; other local taxes that have performed in excess
of their estimates offset some of the declines; and in a September 27, 2001 letter to
Council, administrative holds of approximately $2.0 million were announced in
anticipation of a potential economic decline.
Mr. Hall explained that a review of the fiscal year 2003 recommended budget
is necessitated by the declines in fiscal year 2002 of the personal property and bank
stock taxes. In regard to the personal property tax, fiscal year 2003 estimate was
developed assuming one per cent growth in fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003;
the decline of three to five per cent will require the fiscal year 2003 estimate to be
135
reduced, with an impact reduction of $1.4 million; fiscal year 2003 estimate
conservatively established Bank Stock Tax at a level below fiscal year 2001 actual
receipts; and the under performance in fiscal year 2002 by $.2 million will require the
fiscal year 2003 estimate to be reduced, with an impact of $.4 million.
Mr. Hall made the following points:
Real estate taxes are on target.
Last year was a record year for automobile sales due to
incentives that were offered. Contrary to the declining
economy, there were strong automobile sales which was
believed would offset the decline in investment in
equipment by businesses; however, that did not prove to
be the case and there was not an increase in personal
property receipts generated from investment in
automobiles by private citizens. There is a reasonable
decline in the personal property tax being generated from
businesses in the form of machine and tools and business
personal property; therefore, between a 3.5 and 5 per cent
decline from this years' receipts to last years' receipts is
anticipated. When the decline is compared to what the City
anticipated would be a one per cent growth in fiscal year
2002 and a one per cent growth in fiscal year 2003, there
is approximately a $1.4 million spread between what is
projected for the current year and what is projected for the
upcoming year.
Personal property is the City's second largest revenue
source, and the City lost a large tax paying company last
year in the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology.
Personal property from businesses are assessed at six
per cent of the value in the year in which they are new,
which depreciates ten per cent per year (the first year
valued at 60 per cent, the second year at 50 per cent, the
third year at 50 - 40 per cent and value floors at 20 per
cent). Therefore, it is important to have reasonable
investment ongoing to offset any decline in value that
businesses are assessed pursuant to City Code
provisions. Evidence reveals that the investment was not
present this year to offset the decline in personal property
receipts, and private automobile purchases.
136
The City is requesting a count of automobiles registered
in the City of Roanoke from the Division of Motor Vehicles.
The Commissioner of the Revenue receives a periodic
report from the DMV for automobiles that are purchased
and registered with the DMV that are domiciled in the City
of Roanoke, which is used as an audit tool to ensure that
citizens have filed their returns. The City Manager clarified
that the DMV provides the City with a list of monthly new
car transactions, but a list of every vehicle domiciled in
the City of Roanoke is not normally provided to the
localities; however, since this is an extraordinary
situation, the Commissioner of the Revenue has been
requested to submit a request for the information through
the DMV. She advised that the Treasurer has made a local
contact with the DMV and has been advised that it is
possible to obtain the information and the City is willing to
bear the necessary costs.
Neighboring localities are not experiencing this kind of
reduction, but instead are holding their own, or have
incurred a slight increase, and other urban communities
in Virginia are not experiencing this type of decline.
The Municipal Auditor advised that it has been difficult to pull all of the
numbers together with exonerations, billings, deletions and disposals; business
personal property taxes appear to be more of the problem which is mixed in with
furniture and fixtures, vehicles and machinery and tools tax; and a review has been
conducted of those businesses that filed taxes in the 2001 tax year, but did not file
in 2002, and it was discovered that approximately 198 businesses did not file this
year as compared to last year. According to the Virginia Employment Commission;
he stated that the City of Roanoke Economic Development Department has reported
for the first three fourths of the 2001 calendar year, the City lost a net of
approximately 65 businesses.
The Treasurer stated that the DMV counts motor vehicles on January 1 and
July 1 of each year and if counts are needed in between those periods of time, a
request must be filed for a program to be prepared by the Commonwealth of Virginia,
and the requesting locality must fund all costs associated with preparing the
program.
Mr. Hall advised that a 1.4 per cent reduction in the revenue estimate is
recommended for fiscal year 2003 for personal property tax, bringing the figure
down to $22.3 million; whereupon, the City Manager advised that City staff will
continue to work the numbers prior to Council's budget studysession scheduled for
137
Thursday, May 9; staffwill submit a budget to Council that is balanced with a lesser
number for personal property tax and bank stock tax; however, in making the
adjustments, the City will be even more limited in its ability to make other
adjustments because any flexibility in the fiscal year 2003 proposed budget will be
eliminated in order to address these two revenue issues.
The Commissioner of the Revenue called attention to a shortfall in the State's
revenue of $3.5 billion, the Federal Government is projecting a shortfall of $215
billion for the upcoming year which will affect all citizens because buying habits will
be different, and persons will not receive the same amount of returns on their
investments in stocks, mutual funds, etc., therefore, they may not purchase new
vehicles.
Mr. Hall advised that the business license tax is on track with budget, and
prepared food and beverage tax is also on target, averaging a little over four per cent
growth per year. He further advised that the bank stock tax is down from
$1,560,000 in 2001 to approximately $1 million in 2002. He called attention to a
conversation with a local banking representative who advised that deposits have not
moved out of the City of Roanoke, nor has the amount of tax paid by the bank
declined; however, because of the merger of two banks in the local area, a study
was conducted to identify locations of deposits throughout the state and it was
discovered that the City of Roanoke received the benefit in previous years of over
stated deposits which is a reason for the present decline in bank stock tax.
In summary, the Director of Finance explained that for the fiscal year 2003
budget, personal property tax and bank stock tax are on the decline in the range of
$1.4 million for personal property tax, and approximately $400,000.00 for bank stock
tax, for a total impact of $1.8 million reduction in the revenue estimate for fiscal year
2003.
The City Manager advised that the numbers will be worked until Thursday,
May 9, when Council convenes in 2002-2003 budget study session; however, as the
decrease in revenue relates to the budget of the Roanoke City Schools, based on the
funding formula for sharing local growth, the $1.8 million could represent a
reduction of $655,000.00 to the school budget.
Vice-Mayor Carder, one of the City's representatives to the First Cities
Coalition, called attention to the need to send a strong message that if the City of
Roanoke continues to fund shortfalls from the State, at some point in time the State
must be held accountable. He stated that citizens need to understand that when
there are no surpluses and when the City is forced to cut school budgets and public
service jobs, citizens should express their concerns at the state level. He added that
138
the only way citizens will understand the pressure that local municipal officials
operate under is to start cutting services. He advised that the City does not have the
power to raise revenues creatively, which is a topic that Council should discuss as
a part of its budget study sessions beginning on Thursday morning.
At 5:15 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened in
Closed Session in the City Council's fourth floor Conference Room.
At 5:40 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council Chamber, with
all Members of the Council in attendance, with the exception of Council Member
White, who left the meeting during the Closed Session.
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 Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, Harris Bestpitch
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member White was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOTEL ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER:
The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center
Commission, due to expiration of the term of office of John H. Parrot on April 12,
2002; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations.
Mr. Carder placed in nomination the name of Darlene L. Burcham, City
Manager.
There being no further nominations, Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager, was
appointed as a Commissioner of the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission,
for a term ending April 12, 2006, by the following vote:
FOR MS. BURCHAM: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, Harris
Bestpitch and Mayor Smith 6.
(Council Member White was absent.)
139
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-YOUTH: The Mayor advised that the terms
of office of Sherman A. Holland and James H. Smith as members of the Youth
Services Citizen Board expired on May 31,2002, and called for nominations to fill the
vacancies.
Mr. Carder placed in nomination the names of Sherman A. Holland and
James H. Smith.
There being no further nominations, Messrs Holland and Smith were
reappointed as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board, for terms ending
May 31, 2005, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS HOLLAND AND SMITH: Council Members Carder, Wyatt,
Hudson, Harris, Bestpitch and Mayor Smith .........................................................6.
(Council Member White was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor advised
that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority,
created by the death of Willis M. Anderson for a term ending August 31, 2002, and
called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Harris placed in nomination the name of Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Fitzpatrick was appointed as a
member of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, for a term ending
August 31, 2002, by the following vote:
FOR MR. FITZPATRICK: Council Members Carder, Wyatt, Hudson, Harris
Bestpitch and Mayor Smith ................................................................................ 6.
(Council Member White was absent.)
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE: It was the consensus of Council that the
following persons would be nominated to serve on Virginia Municipal League Policy
Committees:
Environmental Quality
Finance
General Laws
Human Development and Education
Transportation
Mayor Ralph K. Smith
Jesse A. Hall
William M. Hackworth
Linda F. Wyatt
Vice-Mayor William H.
Carder
140 -
At 5:50 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened at
8:30 a.m., on Thursday, May 9, 2002, in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building,
for fiscal year 2002-03 budget study.
The Fiscal Year 2002-03 Budget Study Session was called to order on
Thursday, May 9, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference
Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue. S. W., City
of Roanoke, with Mayor Ralph K. Smith presiding.
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.
ALSO PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth,
City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; Troy A.
Harmon, Municipal Auditor, Willard N. Claytor, Director of Real Estate Valuation;
George C. Snead, Jr., Assistant City Manager for Operations; Rolanda A. Johnson,
Assistant City Manager for Community Development; Ann H. Shawver, Deputy
Director of Finance; Barry L. Key, Director of Management and Budget; Alicia F.
Stone, Budget Administrator; Sherman M. Stovall, Planning/Support Services
Supervisor; Frank Baratta, Budget Team Leader; Robert K. Bengtson, Director of
Public Works; and George M. McMillan, City Sheriff.
COUNCIL-BUDGET: The Mayor welcomed Council Member-Elect M. Rupert
Cutler and advised that Council Member-Elect Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., was out of the
City.
The City Manager called attention to a number of slides that would be used
throughout the budget presentation. She explained that expenditure adjustments
have been made in order to balance the budget in view of the reduction in personal
property taxes and bank stock revenue; a number of items will be reviewed that were
previously identified by Council and referred to fiscal year 2002-03 budget study
during the past year; and City staffwill address concerns of Council Members above
and beyond those items. She advised that from the beginning, the fiscal year 2003
budget has been a challenge and a most difficult budget to balance as a result of
the City of Roanoke being the recipient and or non-recipient of certain State monies
140(A)
and changing issues locally. On a positive note, she called attention to State
revenues pertaining to Constitutional Offices; and as the various State departments
balance their budget, the City of Roanoke can continue to expect surprises, therefor,
she requested that Council bear with City staff as they work with changing budget
figures from the State.
The City Manager referred to the remarks of Ms. Estelle McCadden, 2128
Mercer Avenue, N. W., which were presented at the fiscal year 2002-03 Budget
Public Hearing on Monday, April 29, 2002, at which time Ms. McCadden raised
specific questions (see April 29, 2002 minutes); whereupon, the City Manager
advised that she recently met with Ms. McCadden for approximately 90 minutes and
satisfactorily answered her questions.
Mr. Key advised that the issue on the minds of everyone is how to balance the
fiscal year 2002-03 budget in view of the recent downturn in the personal property
and bank stock taxes. He stated that the original recommended General Fund
revenue estimate 2003 was approximately $195 million and three adjustments are
currently recommended: (1)a reduction in personal property tax of approximately
$1.4 million, (2) a reduction in bank stock tax of $383,000.00 and (3) it appears that
the State has restored almost all of the cuts that were anticipated in Constitutional
Offices, totaling approximately $394,520.00, with the majority, $287,000.00, in the
Sheriff's Office. He explained that the total of the two adjustments for personal
property tax and bank stock tax is $1,798,000.00, which represents a reduction in
local taxes; and the three adjustments, added to a reduction of $1.4 million, brings
the revenue estimate down to $193.5 million increase from fiscal year 2002 of
approximately $2 million, or 1.15 per cent.
He reviewed recommendations on expenditure reductions to balance the
budget taking into consideration a revenue reduction of $1,403,480.00. He stated
that the first item is in the school's share of the local revenue reduction and per the
existing formula between the City and the Schools, the schools would share in 36.42
per cent of the reduction, totaling $654,832.00. He explained that the impact on the
school budget, according to the school administration (has not been approved by
the School Board), is that employee raises will be reduced from 3.25 per cent to 2.55
per cent, a reduction in debt reserve and future capital projects, plans to upgrade
principal salaries will be eliminated, and plans for additional training and recruitment
for site based administrators will also be eliminated.
140(B)
Mr. Key explained that it was the goal of City staff to increase the City's debt
capacity by including $878,000.00 for fiscal year 2003; however, staff now
recommends a reduction of the figure to the minimum which is $570,000.00 as
included in the Six Year Plan previously approved by Council. He stated that the City
has an approved financial policy to fund the Contingency Reserve at one-half of one
per cent of the General Fund which has not been achieved to date and would be in
the range of $900,000.00 - $1,000,000.00 for fiscal year 2003, and to accommodate
the necessary revenue adjustment, $500,000.00 is recommended for the Contingency
Reserve which is the same level as fiscal year 2002. He advised that the City's
contribution to the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission will be reduced
for fiscal year 2003 from $175,000.00 to $125,000.00; and Council recently approved
the cable television budget and staff overestimated the City's portion of the budget
by $25,063.00.
Mr. Key explained that City staff was requested to recommend ways to better
manage costs within Solid Waste Management, therefore, the level of expenditures
in the area of contract labor to accommodate increased volume during fiscal year
2002 has been reviewed, and it is recommended to replace two full time contractual
employee drivers with City positions to address increased bulk and brush which will
result in a $20,176.00 savings. He called attention to renegotiation of the National
Guard Armory lease over the past year, whereby the National Guard would pay for
more expenses and utilities relating to the facility in the range of $70,000.00 per year;
and the cost of the merit raise for City employees has been revised to provide ;or a
cost reduction of approximately $188,070.00. He stated that added back to the fiscal
year 2003 budget will be four full time equivalent deputy sheriff positions that have
been approved by the Compensation Board, in the amount of $138,140.00, the
Compensation Board has approved 205 positions which is the current staffing level
and with the change in the additional revenue, the two positions that had been
recommended for unfunding and the two overhire positions will be reinstated to the
Sheriff's budget, which results in there being no locally funded positions in the
Sheriff's Department. He explained that the Police Department had previously
recommended that the DARE Camp be scaled back by approximately 50 per cent,
however, it is recommended that full funding be restored ($12,877.00), to provide for
a full week at the 4H Camp at Smith Mountain Lake.
140(C)
Mr. Key reviewed those issues that were referred by Council to fiscal year
2002-03 budget study during the course of the year:
(1) The need to reduce reliance on the year end fund balance for capital
funding for technology upgrades, vehicle replacement and other items.
Mr. Key called attention to $4.3 million in capital funding in the fiscal
year 2002 budget, $0.8 million has been included in additional capital
funding in the fiscal year 2003 budget, for a total of $5.1 million and
attainment of more adequate funding levels will be considered as part
of a long range financial plan to try and find a way to budget funds in
the actual budget each year as opposed to relying on the year end
balance. He advised that during fiscal year 2003, the Department of
Finance and the Office of Management and Budget will address a long
range financial plan, consisting of a five year projection on revenues
and expenditures, to determine shortfalls over a five year period, and
to recommend financial strategies for review by Council on how to
meet the needs of the City over the next five years.
(2) Recognition of the location of past historic buildings. Mr. Key
explained that the Engineering Department is working on the most cost
effective method and referred to the possibility of various types of fund
raisers, etc. Council MemberWhite called attention to a similar request
regarding the First Street Bridge and asked that downtown buildings
and the First Street Bridge be considered simultaneously. There was
discussion that $10,000.00 for the project may be a more realistic
figure, as opposed to the $25,000.00 included in the proposed fiscal
year 2003 budget, and that all plaques should be uniform.
(3) Cost-of-living increase for City retirees. The fiscal year 2003 budget
recommends a 2.6 per cent increase which is consistent with the Social
Security increase granted effective January 1, 2002, and other
government retirement systems to be funded by the Pension Plan.
(4) Request for Fire-EMS information as previously requested by
Council Member Bestpitch in regard to staffing on fire apparatus and
cost for services that were provided by REMS. Mr. Key advised that fire
apparatus are staffed with three personnel 90-92 per cent of the time,
140(D)
and with four personnel during the remainder of the time, for a "total
emergency scene staffing" philosophy; 58 additional full time employee
positions would be required at a cost of $2.2 million to staff each apparatus
with four personnel 100 per cent of the time; and the City's
current response protocol is about 13 people on the scene for a fire call and
in the event of a working fire, an additional five positions are dispatched. He
stated that if the City were to move to a minimum apparatus staffing of four
per apparatus, approximately 58 additional positions would be required, at a
cost of approximately $2.2 million to guarantee staffing at that level 100 per
cent of the time.
Ms. Wyatt inquired as to whether the positions are supervised firefighters;
whereupon, a response was delayed until arrival of the Fire Chief.
In regard to REMS, Mr. Key advised that the value added is $129,523.00
annually, which means that without REMS, there would be a cost increase in that
amount in the Fire/EMS budget. He noted that 18 part-time employees are used to
staff REMS Medic I, Monday - Friday, from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. (60 hours per week),
at a cost of $72,000.00 annually, and two full time positions also fill in as needed.
Mr. Bestpitch pointed out that none of the 18 part-time employees receive
benefits as part-time employees and at 60 hours per week, there could be at least
one full time position which would provide that individual with a career position,
while splitting up the other 20 hours. It was the consensus of Council to hold
discussion in abeyance until the arrival of the Fire Chief.
(5) Request for information on consultants. Mr. Key called attention to
a communication from the City Manager under date of May 3, 2002, that
was provided to Council indicating that there is in the range of $9
million worth of consultants' contracts at this time, the majority of
which covers engineering design type contracts, totaling approximately
$8.1 million, with the balance being administrative in nature.
140(E)
During the past year, Mr. Hudson inquired as to costs for overtime pay in the
Fire/EMS budget for call backs of off duty firefighters, in order to maintain a staffing
level of three per fire apparatus.
It was agreed that the question would be held in abeyance until the arrival of
the Fire Chief.
(6) Request for information regarding cultural and human service
organizations. Mr. Key advised that a communication from the City
Manager under date of May 3, 2002, was previously provided to Council
including preliminary recommendations for fiscal year 2003 in regard
to the Cultural Services Committee, the Human Services Committee,
and other human service type agencies that receive funding through
the HUD budget.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that the data received by Council appears to compare
projected budgets year after year; if a specific agency were more successful in
raising funds from other sources, the percentage of the budget that the City provides
should be lower, and if the agency fails to raise funds, the figure will reflect a higher
percentage, therefore, some refinement seems to be in order.
(7) Funding for the Roanoke Adolescent Health Partnership. Mr. Key
advised that $25,000.00 is recommended in the fiscal year 2003 budget
as a transfer to Roanoke City Public Schools, although no specific line
item has been included in the budget.
(8) Request for information on the Solid Waste program. Mr. Key
advised that Ms. Wyatt requested additional information on the
Homeowner Program volume at the transfer station; i.e.: 965 tons of
household waste was disposed of in 1998, over the next two years,
volume increased and leveled off after fiscal year 2000 because curb
service was initiated, and the numbers do not appear to be changing;
and a large amount of equipment is proposed to be replaced in fiscal
year 2003 in solid waste management, and rental of equipment in the
amount of $120,000.00 will not be included in fiscal year 2003.
140(1:)
. Mr. Bengtson presented a report in regard to residential solid waste collection,
and called attention to service enhancements and changes that have been made in
the last 18 months:
(1) Implementation of the weekly route based bulk and brush collection.
(2) Expansion of the weekly recycling collection which included the
ability to co-mingle recyclables making the system more user friendly
for customers and City staff.
(3) Moving to more curb side collection points to maximize efficiency
and the utilization of manpower, with a goal to reduce the percentage
of alley collection points from 44 per cent to approximately 15 per cent.
He advised that in developing the service level enhancements, the following
key assumptions were made:
An increase in the number of daily bulk and brush collection routes
from three to four routes, with two pieces of equipment (knuckleboom
truck and packer truck assigned to each route).
Resources that previously had been dedicated to alley collection could
be reallocated to the enhanced bulk and brush program and the
expanded recycling program. This would also provide for a sufficient
compliment of back up manpower to provide coverage for vacation
time, illness and other paid leave situations.
A nominal increase in the tonnage of bulk and brush items collected.
An increase from seven per cent to 14 per cent in the tonnage diverted
from the normal waste stream as a result of expanding and simplifying
the collection system for recyclables. It was anticipated that this would
require an increase in the number of daily recycling routes from two to
three routes.
140(G)
With implementation of the enhanced services, Mr. Bengtson advised that the
following factors have been considered when evaluating the current status of
residential refuse collection:
The tonnage of bulk and brush items collected has increased 70 per
cent since the inception of route-based bulk and brush collection at a
cost of $66,153.00.
The tonnage of residential recyclable materials diverted from the
normal waste stream has increased to 30 per cent since the inception
of the expanded recycling program, compared to the initial projection
of 14 per cent. The number of daily recycling routes had to be
increased from the anticipated three routes per day to four routes per
day to handle the additional volume. While staffing and equipment needs
have increased, recyclables are not being directed to the landfill for disposal
at a cost of $42.00 per ton. The cost to dispose of recyclables is $5.00 per ton
for mixed paper and $40.00 per ton for plastics, bottles, and glass.
As a result of moving back into a number of alleys, the percentage of
alley collection points is 37 per cent, compared to the initial goal of 15
per cent. This foreclosed the opportunity to reallocate manpower to the
enhanced bulk and brush program and the expanded recycling
program, and required the use of contract labor to meet service
demands.
With the exception of the special collection programs, the use of
contract labor to meet the daily manpower requirement and to provide
a sufficient backup compliment equates to nine full-time equivalent
positions, at a cost of approximately $194,000.00. It has been
determined that it is more cost effective to use sanitation workers on
a contract basis than to add permanent positions to the existing
staffing compliment. Also, it has been determined that it is more cost
effective to add sanitation drivers to the staffing compliment than it is
to use drivers on a contract basis.
140(H)
Due to increased service demands and the poor condition of the solid
waste vehicular fleet, it became necessary to rent vehicles during fiscal
year 2002 at a cost of $151,404.00. The acquisition of new collection
equipment will eliminate the requirement to rent equipment in the
upcoming fiscal year. The next round of vehicular equipment
replacement is now being planned to continue the upgrade of the solid
waste fleet to cost-effectively meet service demands.
In conclusion, Mr. Bengtson advised that the recommended fiscal year
2002-03 budget contains sufficient funding to operate the residential collection
programs at the current service levels based on the anticipated tonnage of materials
collected and the use of contract labor; whereupon, he offered the following
recommendations:
The addition of two sanitation drivers to the permanent Solid Waste
Management staffing compliment, which will result in a savings of
approximately $20,176.00 when compared to the cost of using contract
sanitation drivers.
Enhancing the level of expenditure monitoring for solid waste tipping
fees and the use of contract labor to ensure that both items are within
budget.
Report quarterly to Council on the status of the residential solid waste
collection program with respect to actual expenditures compared to
budget.
Continue to replace vehicular equipment on schedule to ensure that
adequate vehicles are available to meet service demands.
Ms. Wyatt requested information on contract labor costs, continuity, caliber
and quality of employees. She expressed concern that when contract labor is used,
the City of Roanoke cannot expect to receive the same level of dedication from
contract labor that it receives from full-time City employees and Roanoke's citizens
have come to expect quality service.
Mr. Key pointed out that it would cost $40,000.00 more per year to replace
contract labor with full-time City employees.
140( )
There was considerable discussion regarding contract labor versus
employment of full time City employees; whereupon, Ms. Wyatt requested
information on the total cost of full-time City employees versus contract labor.
Mr. White advised that Council should be provided with periodic information
on costs, delivery of service and benefits. He inquired if the City Manager has
considered the possibility of including a question with regard to the level of citizens
satisfaction with the City's solid waste collection program in the annual citizens
survey; whereupon, the City Manager advised that a question has been included in
previous surveys and will continue to be included in future citizen surveys. Mr.
White commended the City's solid waste management program which has improved
the overall cleanliness of the City of Roanoke.
Ms. Wyatt advised that her concern pertains to the $700,000.00 over run in the
2002 fiscal year budget for solid waste management, and called attention to the need
to budget appropriately so that there will not be another $700,000.00 over
expenditure in the budgeted amount. She called attention to the need to look at
more and better efficiencies so that a recycling truck, a bulk refuse collection truck
and a regular refuse collection truck are not required to go down every street in the
City every week, resulting in a waste of taxpayers' money. She stated that there may
be a need for a better communication system, vehicle to vehicle, which would enable
drivers to alert each other if there is bulk, brush or recyclables to be removed on any
given street.
The Mayor requested information on collection costs of comparable cities in
Virginia and nearby states and whether or not they engage in recycling which will
enable Council to make an informed decision as to whether City of Roanoke costs
are comparable with other localities. He advised that Council should decide how
much it wishes to appropriate to solid waste management and look to the City
Manager to accomplish the City's goals within funds that are appropriated.
Mr. Hudson referred to those persons who have been evicted from rental
properties, whose possessions are set out on the street for 20 days before they may
be removed by solid waste management. He stated that the landlord should be
140(J)
responsible for moving the items to a specific area so as not to clutter City streets;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that staff is working on an ordinance to
address the matter and it is anticipated to bring the measure to Council for
consideration within the next two months.
The City Manager advised that the Fire Chief was present to respond to
previous questions raised by Council Members.
In regard to the question pertaining to the additional compliment of fire staff
that are deployed to a fire scene when there is an actual working fire, how those five
individuals are used, their qualifications, and actual duties on the fire scene, Chief
Grigsby responded that the five persons can be used in any way that the incident
commander chooses, the individuals have received cross training and 94 per cent
of the entire Fire/EMS Department is cross trained in basic life support and
emergency medical training, and 15 per cent of the department is trained in advance
life support. He explained that each fire scene determines how staff will be used.
In regard to the question of REMS and its role in EMS service, with 18
employees engaged on a part-time basis to supplement REMS staff, why would the
City not consider employing one full-time employee and supplement the one
employee with part-time staff at a lesser number by virtue of the fact that there would
be a full time employee engaged in part of the service delivery,Chief Grigsby
advised that it has been determined that using part time personnel as emergency
medical technicians has been advantageous to the City. He stated that he would
give further review to the matter to determine whether the service should be a paid
service, and if so, four full time persons, or approximately 7000 staff hours per year,
would be required.
In regard to the amount of overtime paid to off duty personnel by the Fire/EMS
Department to achieve a minimum staffing level of three, Chief Grigsby responded
that the figure is in the range of $120,000.00 - $130,000.00 in overtime wages per
year.
Upon question by a Member of Council, Mr. Key referred to page 207 of the
proposed budget document in which a total of four positions in the Fire/EMS
Department are recommended for elimination, i.e.: the Deputy Chief and Captain
positions and two Firefighter EMT positions, with the total of the Captain and the two
Firefighter/EMT positions at $143,000.00 and the Deputy Chief position at
approximately $85,000.00.
140(K)
There was discussion in regard to the airport fire station, financial operation,
and the rationale behind eliminating the two Fire/EMS positions.
Vice-Mayor Carder inquired if the proposed cuts will cause an increase in
risks to Roanoke's citizens through loss of life, injury and personal property;
whereupon, the Fire Chief advised in the negative inasmuch as the Fire/EMS
department will continue to maintain its operational strength of 65 per day.
In regard to the issue of public safety, the City Manager advised that the City
has been unable for a number of years to fill all of its police officer positions through
recruitment and retention methods and the department routinely has between five
and ten vacancies on a continuing basis, and rather than recommend cutting five
other positions somewhere else in the budget in fiscal year 2003, it is recommended
that Council unfund five police officer positions, or one-half of what the department
normally carries as vacancies. She advised that if the Police Department can fill
every one of those positions at any time during fiscal year 2003, she will find the
money to fund the positions. She stated that during this tight budget situation, it is
difficult to allow funds to remain in the budget knowing that those funds will not be
used, while cutting other positions in the budget. She stressed that every
recommendation that was made in the proposed fiscal year 2003 budget has some
pain, but the budget is manageable and continues to provide the level of service that
Roanoke's citizens want.
Question arose with regard to six positions that are being recommended for
funding by the City Manager in fiscal year 2003, versus the elimination of five
positions in the Fire/EMS Department; whereupon, the City Manager advised that two
of the six positions are the substitution of positions for what has been a contract
in the past, and such action will not cost the City any more money; and three of the
positions relate to revenue maximization for the City. She advised that a revenue
maximization coordinator has been used in other localities and has demonstrated
a significant capacity to bring additional Federal and State dollars to the locality,
thus saving local tax dollars. She stated that a position was recommended by the
Municipal Auditor for the Billings and Collections Department for a new position that
would not only pay for itself, but identify and collect additional revenues on behalf
of the City, because revenue collection is a key to Roanoke's future to ensure that
every penney the City is entitled to receive is collected. She added that another
position is proposed for the Department of Parks and Recreation to create additional
140(L)
opportunities for grants and donations to fund recreation programs. She advised
that a librarian for the Law Library will be funded through fees that are collected on
court cases, with no local contribution. She explained that three of the six positions
have no budget impact and the other three positions are designed to generate
revenues for the City.
Ms. Wyatt advised that based upon discussions with her fellow Council
Members, is it clear that the majority of Council does not wish to cut positions in the
Fire/EMS Department; whereupon, she requested that the City Manager recommend
a solution to balance the fiscal year 2003 budget without cutting those positions.
The City Manager advised that she would submit a recommendation to address the
request at Council's budget study session on Friday, May 10. Following further
discussion, it was clarified that Council was referring to three firefighter positions.
At 11:45 a.m., the Mayor declared the 2002-03 budget study session in recess.
At 1:45 p.m., the budget study session reconvened in Room 159 of the Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor
Smith presiding.
The City Manager advised that Council was at a point in the agenda to discuss
other issues or adjustments that Council might wish to address.
The Mayor referred to a request of the Bradley Free Clinic for an increase in
funding by the City from $30,000.00 to $50,000.00; whereupon, the City Manager
called attention to the possibility of contracting with the Bradley Free Clinic to
provide all non-narcotic prescription drugs that the City routinely purchases for its
clients on an annual basis, which amounts to approximately $80,000.00 per year.
She advised that if the City could be assured that its clients will receive the same
level of prescriptions currently received at $80,000.00, the Free Clinic would be the
recipient of the profit. She added that a meeting will be held in the near future with
representatives of the Bradley Free Clinic and the City of Roanoke to discuss the
proposal, if the arrangement can be worked out, the net result would be an even
greater benefit than the $20,000.00 in additional funds requested by the Free Clinic;
however, if the interested parties are unable to work out the necessary arrangement,
she would be willing to take the additional $20,000.00 from the City Manager's
contingency on a one time basis, pursuant to approval by Council.
140(M)
In connection with compliance and collection of taxes, Mr. White moved that
the City Manager be authorized to contact the Commissioner of the Revenue to
discuss the possibility of adding two audit positions to the staff of the Office of
Commissioner of the Revenue for the purpose of enhancing compliance with iaws
currently on the books, and that an Audit Review Board be established to work with
the Commissioner of the Revenue to ensure that the City is aggressively and fairly
enforcing the collection of all taxes that the City is entitled to receive. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Harris, Hudson, White, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ................ ---7.
NAYS: None O.
Ms. Wyatt inquired about the status of a grant of $25,000.00 for child car seat
safety; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the $25,000.00 has, in the past,
been a grant through the Police Department, the Police Chief will continue to apply
for the grant; however, if the City is not a recipient of the grant in fiscal year 2003,
$25,000.00 will be included in the budget of the Police Department.
Mr. Bestpitch addressed the issue of a request byTotal Action Against Poverty
for the Dumas Center for Artistic Development and advised that as Council's liaison
to the TAP Board of Directors, he was requested to generate discussion. He
advised that the basic question is not one of funding in fiscal year 2003, but to
provide a mechanism to develop support based upon a fundraising campaign
beginning with fiscal year 2004, whereby the City would provide a local match of
$100,000.00 for every $500,000.00 raised by TAP over a period of five years, which
would give TAP the $500,000.00 it has requested from the City toward a total $3.5
million project.
It was the consensus of Council to refer the matter to the City Manager for
report to Council with regard to funding, and to address compatibility of the Dumas
Center for Artistic Development with future development in the area. It was pointed
out that there is a need for a viable master plan for the entire area.
Ms. Wyatt inquired about the status of previous discussions in regard to using
Williamson Road Pharmacy and Brambleton Avenue Pharmacy to provide
prescription services for City employees.
140(N)
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that the City should focus on a five year strategic
plan in anticipation of what could happen at the State level with budget cuts and in
conjunction with strategic business plans prepared by each City department. He
stated that the budget process can be easier if there is some knowledge two or three
years out in terms of revenues and anticipated decreases so that Council does not
feel as though it is constantly puffing out fires.
The City Manager advised that the strategic business plans for both the
Department of Finance and the Office of Management and Budget call for
development of a Five Year Financial Plan over the next year, and as a part of 2004
budget study sessions, study Council will be provided with a longer range plan that
will include not only the City's operating budget, but the capital budget as well.
Mr. Harris advised that he would like to introduce a measure at the regular
meeting of Council on Monday, May 20, 2002, expressing appreciation to the citizens
of Crescent City, Florida, for their assistance in connection with the recent Amtrak
derailment.
There being no further business, at 2:15 p.m., the Mayor declared the budget
study session in recess until Friday, May 10, 2002, at 8:30 a.m., for a joint meeting
of Council and the School Board.
The 2002-03 budget study session reconvened on Friday, May 10, 2002, at
8:30 a.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., with Council Member William
White, Sr., and School Board Chair Sherman L. Lea presiding.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: William D. Bestpitch, C. Nelson Harris
(arrived late), W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., Linda F. Wyatt, William White, Sr., and Mayor
Ralph K. Smith (arrived late)-. - ............ -6.
ABSENT: Vice-MayorWilliam H. Carder-- - ........... 1.
140(0)
SCHOOL BOARD TRUSTEES PRESENT: Marsha W. Ellison, Ruth C. Willson,
Melinda J. Payne, Charles W. Day and Chairman Sherman P. Lea .......................... 5.
ABSENT: School Trustees Gloria P. Manns and Brian J. Wishneff- ............... -2.
OTHERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk; Troy A. Harmon, Municipal Auditor, George C. Snead, Jr., Assistant City
Manager for Operations; Rolanda A. Johnson, Assistant City Manager for Community
Development; Ann H. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; Barry L. Key, Director of
Management and Budget; Alicia F. Stone, Budget Adminitstrator; Sherman M.
Stovall, Planning/Support Services Supervisor; Frank Baratta, Budget Team Leader,
M. Rupert Cutler, Council Member-Elect; Richard L. Kelly, Assistant Superintendent
for Operations, Roanoke City Schools; and Cindy H. Lee, Clerk, Roanoke City
School Board.
In the absence of the Mayor who arrived later in the meeting, Council Member
William White called the meeting to order, and expressed appreciation to the School
Board for their leadership. Inasmuch as Mr. Day will be retiring from the School
Board on June 30, 2002, on behalf of the Members of Council, he expressed
appreciation to Mr. Day for his years of service.
Chairman Lea advised that the School Board understands the difficult revenue
situation facing the City and wishes to work with Council and the City administration
to allow for a mutual resolution of the revenue shortfall. He stated that the School
Board, at its April meeting, adopted a budget totaling $106.6 million, or an increase
of $2.85 million over the previous year. He added that the adopted budget includes
the $378,500.00 in additional City revenue that the school system was notified of in
early April. He stated that the adopted budget supports the School Board's major
priorities for improving student performance, in order that all schools will comPlete
State accreditation standards by the year 2004, increasing the competitiveness of
employee salaries in relation to salaries by neighboring localities, optimizing the use
of School Board resources through budget reductions and savings amounting to
$640,000.00, and funding debt service requirements necessary for the School Board
to maintain, finalize and complete the high school and elementary school capital
projects. He stated that the School Board adopted a balanced budget that
accomplishes major priorities, primarily through the growth of City revenue
14o(P)
allocated to the schools; despite the difficult economic situation, total school
revenue was projected to increase by $2.85 million over current budget figures; and
the State's budget difficulties, from a slow down in economic growth and
implementation of a car tax rebate, will mean that growth in State revenue will
continue to be substantially less than in the years prior to fiscal year 2002. He noted
that State revenue will increase by $1.3 million, or 2.6 per cent, while City revenue
was projected to grow by the same amount and Federal and other revenue will
increase by $250,000.00, or 12.5 per cent. He stated that the City's original revenue
estimate also included almost $205,000.00 for pre school programs, $25,000.00 in
pass through funds to support the Roanoke Adolescent Health Partnership, and
expressed appreciation to Council and to the City Manager for continuing the
support of these critical school programs and health initiatives.
Mr. Lea advised that as a result of the short fall in the personal property and
bank stock taxes, the schools were notified that the City's revenue estimate for the
schools will increase by only $629,000.00, or 1.4 per cent, which is a decrease of
approximately $655,000.00 from the increase of City revenue included in the School
Board's adopted budget. He stated that since almost all new revenue has been
allocated to employee salary raises, the School Board's only viable option to meet
the revenue reduction at this late date in the budget process is to reduce the amount
of the employee average salary rate by three-fourths of one per cent, which red,;ces
the average raise for administrators and teachers from 3.25 per cent to 2.5 per cent,
the result being that the competitive salary push in comparison to neighboring
localities will continue to erode. He explained that the beginning teacher salary has
declined from sixth highest in the state to 31st out of 133 localities and the salary for
teachers with 15 years of experience now ranks 39th in the State, while salaries for
senior teachers ranks 48th; and furthermore, the average teacher salary increase in
fiscal year 2001-02 was two per cent, while the average increase in teacher salaries
for all localities in the state was 4.3 per cent.
In addition to the reduction in the average employee raise, Chairman Lea
advised that the School Board must also rescind approval of certain other budget
initiatives in order to absorb the $655,000.00 City revenue reduction and to balance
the budget, i. e.:
140 Q
Reduce the upgrading of the elementary principals' salary and the
implementation of site based leadership development programs, saving
a total of $115,000.00
Reduce the increase in debt service reserve for high school projects by
$100,000.00, which will result in the reserve being $950,000.00, and the
School Board will have to add a total of $650,000.00 to the reserve in
fiscal year 2004 and 2005 to meet debt service requirements of $1.6
million by 2005.
He stated that the School Boards' adopted budget includes a total savings of
$640,000.00, achieved primarily through personnel, attrition, and energy costs and
efficiencies, and it would be difficult to further reduce the budget at this point in the
budget cycle since the only option offering a significant amount of cost savings
would be to eliminate jobs; however, the School Board is bound by State law to
notify professional employees of their employment status by April 15 of each year.
Mr. Lea advised that the School Board requests that the amount of the
revenue shortfall to be allocated to the schools be limited to $378,500.00, or the
amount of the revenue adjustment provided to the School Board in April, which
would mean that total City revenue to the schools would increase by approximately
$905,000.00, or two per cent. He stated that such action would allow the School
Board to achieve its minimum objective for a three per cent average salary increase
for employees, which would be one fourth of one per cent less than that adopted in
the original budget; a three per cent average salary raise for professional employees,
which would maintain the City's competitive position with Roanoke County and most
other neighboring localities, except the City of Salem; in order to balance the budget,
the School Board would still be required to phase in the upgrade of elementary
school principal salaries, eliminate the site based leadership program, and reduce
the increase in the debt service reserve for the high school project by $100,000.00.
He explained that if Council elects to limit the reduction in City revenue to the
schools by $378,500.00, the School Board would be able to finance initiatives in the
following areas:
An increase in the employee health insurance premiums -
$600,000.00.
140(R)
An average salary raise for employees of three per cent -
$1.9 million.
An increase in transportation employees retirement
$47,500.00.
Assumption of local cost of Round Hill Magnet School
aides- $60,000.00.
New debt service for elementary school projects and an
increase in the high school debt service reserve -
$580,000.00.
$25,000.00 in pass through funds to support a teen health
clinic at each high school, and
Because of personnel savings for fiscal year 2003,
maintenance of service budget would decline by
$148,000.00.
Chairman Lea advised that the School Board would be able to add $210,000.00
to the high school debt service reserve, totaling $950,000.00, with the objective of
accumulating a reserve of $1.6 million by 2005 to finance its share of the cost of the
first phase of the high school improvements estimated to be $78 million. He
explained that the time line for high school improvements is on schedule; specific
design plans for the high schools will be completed by the winter of 2004 and
construction on Patrick Henry High School improvements will start in the late spring
of 2004, with a targeted completion date of late fall of 2006, and improvements to
William Fleming High School will start in the late spring of 2006, with a targeted
completion date in the late fall of 2008.
Chairman Lea noted that Council's pro active role in support of the City's
public education system has made Roanoke City Public Schools a leader in
providing academically challenging educational programs to children from a variety
of cultures and economic backgrounds, and Council's support and approval of the
140(S)
School Board's funding request will continue Roanoke's progress in leading schools
to accreditation and ensuring that Roanoke City schools are successful in passing
the standards of learning.
At this point, the Mayor entered the meeting.
Ms. Wyatt advised that fiscal year 2003 will be a difficult budget year, and
expressed appreciation to the School Board for not cuffing positions.
Mr. Hudson commended the School Board for submitting a balanced budget,
including a pay increase for school personnel.
Mr. Harris advised that Council will complete its fiscal year 2003 budget study
session this morning, and also noted that it has been a difficult budget to address.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that the $655,000.00 reduction is not a figure that
Council or the School administration decided at some point to cut, but is the result
of changes in numbers that fit into the funding formula that the City and the Schools
have used for a number of years to determine the amount of City revenues that are
provided to the School Board; when revenue forecasts change, the percentage that
is available based on the funding formula changes as well, therefor, it becomes a
major challenge to not only come up with a dollar amount, but to try and evaluate
the impact on a process that has worked well in the past. He noted that the City is
in this situation not because of anything it has done or failed to do, but because of
a number of decisions that have been made at the State level and localities are
bearing the brunt of those decisions. He called attention to the responsibility of the
City to ensure that citizens understand the reasons why the City is in this position,
and as the commission on restructuring of taxes moves forward in its work, citizens
must be involved and speak out with regard to necessary changes in the way
revenues are collected and distributed in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
The Mayor spoke in support of better financial times. He advised that he
would hope that the City would live within its budget, and move forward with a
budget that expects the worst, but works to obtain the best, thereby generating more
funds for the following year.
140(T)
Mr. Kelley advised that the City of Roanoke is beginning to fall behind in terms
of teacher salaries; and if the State does not come through with additional funds for
teacher salaries, the City of Roanoke will be faced with giving educators two to three
per cent pay increases and at some point in time, the School Board and City Council
will have to come to terms with the question of building schools or eliminating
salaries. He asked that Council be aware of this concern because the future could
be a question of salaries versus continuation of capital projects over the next three
to five years.
The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke is an active participant in
Virginia's First Cities Coalition, a group of 14 older Virginia cities that are concerned
about the level of funding that is provided on a state-wide basis, and particularly
with regard to urban communities facing significant challenges in education, public
safety, human services and other areas. She stated that the First Cities Coalition
has made significant public statements about the plight of urban communities; over
the next several months, there will be an aggressive public information and
education program, and representatives of the 14 communities will address the
financial plight of their communities, because the Coalition believes that localities
need new revenue and not a redistribution of existing revenue. She called attention
to a review of the JLARC report on public education and the fact that the State is not
meeting its legal obligations to school systems across the state and there is the
possibility of litigation as a way to address the matter. She stated that over the long
term, business must be conducted differently, there must be a major restructuring
of the way service is delivered, along with who is responsible for providing services,
or localities will have to receive new monies.
The City Manager explained that yesterday's budget work session was a
difficult meeting because staff shared with Council its recommendations on how to
reduce the City's budget by $1.4 million, which forced Council to likewise reduce the
amount that the City is able to set aside for debt service for the future, to reduce the
City's already small contingency for next year, and it is anticipated that there will be
further reductions as the various State agencies move forward into the budget year
as they experience five to seven per cent budget reductions. She stated that with
the loss of State revenues, the City's budget will only increase by 1.1 per cent for
fiscal year 2003; overall, and the City is firmly committed to sharing those funds with
the School Board at the percentage that has been agreed upon; however, the City
does not have the funds this year for Council to go beyond what the funding formula
represents. She added that the City will vigorously pursue all of the tax revenues
140(U)
that it is entitled to as a community to ensure maximum opportunities to provide for
the services needed by the community. She advised that education is a top priority
for the Roanoke community and for City Council, and Council and the School Board
must continue to be closer partners in the future and look for ways to avoid
duplication of service and reduce expenses in order to make the maximum available
for needed services.
There being no further business to come before the Council and the School
Board, the Mayor declared the meeting in recess at 9:20 a.m.
The budget study session reconvened at 9:35 a.m., with Mayor Smith
presiding, and all Members of the Council in attendance, with the exception of Vice-
Mayor Carder.
The City Manager advised that on Thursday, staff received two specific
directives from Council, i.e.: the reinstatement of three firefighter positions and the
addition of two auditor positions for the Commissioner of the Revenue's Office. She
stated that staff was unable to meet with the Commissioner of the Revenue on
Thursday, but he has indicated a willingness to talk with staff regarding the
positions, how they would be used, and appointment of a revenue committee that
would be composed of representatives of all of the activities that have a
responsibility for revenue generation. Unless Council has additional changes to be
addressed by City staff, she explained that in order to accommodate the inclusion
of three firefighter positions back into the cOmplement of Fire/EMS staff, it is
proposed to defer the salary increase for City employees by one month, or until
July 31, 2002. With reference to the two auditor positions, she stated that since a
detailed discussion with the Commissioner of the Revenue has not taken place, and
rather than indicate an offset for revenue as a result of the two positions, it is
suggested that personnel lapse be increased by an equal amount, and if additional
revenues are generated, Council will have an opportunity to make an adjustment at
some point during fiscal year 2003.
Ms. Wyatt encouraged the City Manager to give top priority to a technology
plan that will lend to the sharing of pertinent information by the Department of Real
Estate Valuation, City Treasurer, Commissioner of the Revenue, Office of Billings
and Collections and any other revenue producing City departments, so that each
department will know what the other is doing via a centralized system, leading to
more efficiencies and better service to Roanoke's citizens.
140(V)
Mr. White encouraged City staff to share the deferral method recommended
by the City Manager regarding City employee pay raises with the School
administration for consideration in connection with employee raises.
In view of the appointment of a Revenue Committee as previously authorized
by Council, Mr. Bestpitch suggested that Council schedule quarterly budget
sessions to discuss financial issues so that Members of Council will be better
attuned to financial matters as the City moves through the 2003 fiscal year. He
suggested that Council discuss the matter at its planning retreat to be held later in
the year.
Mr. Harris requested informal quarterly reports by the City Manager on the
City's recruitment efforts to fill police officer positions.
Council Member Harris advised that the performance evaluations of
Council-Appointed Officers will be conducted at the 12:15 p.m., session of Council
on Monday, June 3, 2002, as opposed to conducting the evaluations during budget
study session which has been the practice of Council in the past.
There was discussion in regard to recognizing the outstanding contributions
of public safety employees and social service employees which could include
recognition by Council at a City Council meeting. It was noted that a monthly
recognition of public safety employees is jointly sponsored by the Kiwanis Club and
the Regional Chamber of Commerce on a valley-wide basis, and when a City
employee is recognized by those groups, they could also be invited to the next City
Council meeting for purposes of recognition.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 10:10 a.m.
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
APPROVED
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
141
SPECIAL SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 13, 2002
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in special session on Monday, May 13,
2002, at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor Ralph K.
Smith presiding, pursuant to Resolution No. 35823-050602 adopted by Council on
May 6, 2002.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William White, Sr.,
William H. Carder, W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., C. Nelson Harris and Mayor Ralph K. Smith
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~
ABSENT: Council Member Linda F. Wyatt ................................................ 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 meeting was opened with a prayer by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
The Mayor advised that the purpose of the special meeting was to enact
measures adopting the fiscal year 2002-03 budget for the City of Roanoke.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-BUDGET: The Director of Finance submitted a
certificate advising that funds required for the 2002-03 General Fund, Water Fund,
Water Pollution Control Fund, Civic Facilities Fund, Parking Fund, Capital Projects
Fund, Department of Technology Fund, Fleet Management Fund, Risk Management
Fund, School Fund, School Food Service Fund and Grant Fund budgets will be
available for appropriation.
(For full text, see Certificate on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Certificate would be
received and filed.
142
BUDGET: Mr. White offered the following emergency ordinance adopting the
annual General Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year
beginning July 1,2002, and ending June 30, 2003, in the amount of $193,544,364.00:
(#35835-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual General Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 1.)
Mr. White moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35835-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
David A. Diaz, President, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., advised that the City of
Roanoke and Downtown Roanoke, Inc., have enjoyed a long working relationship,
and as President of DRI he looks forward to continuing the relationship. He stated
that the Downtown Plan was recently completed and expressed appreciation to the
City of Roanoke for allowing DRI to oversee preparation of the Plan and the Board
of Directors looks forward to its adoption. He further stated that E-Town and the
Riverside Center for Research and Technology are projects that will support
downtown Roanoke by encouraging high tech businesses in the downtown area.
He added that the Riverside Center for Research and Technology is a key
component to expanding the downtown which solidifies the partnership of the City
and DRI and accentuates Roanoke and Virginia Tech as the two economic engines
for the Roanoke Valley. He stated that the proposed new refuse collection fees in
the Central Business District have been accepted, in general, by downtown
businesses which appear to understand the rationale for the proposed fees which
is to ensure equity for all. He called attention to discussions regarding initiation of
a pilot project for compact trash collectors and to also encourage recycling in the
Central Business District to help offset some of the costs of the new refuse
collection fees. In summary, he stated that he looks forward to working with the City
to improve downtown Roanoke and offered his assistance in that regard.
Rodney Jordan, representing the Roanoke Firefighters Association, expressed
appreciation to Council for restoring the three firefighter suppression positions to
the 2002-03 budget, and for Council's commitment to public safety, which decision
could save lives. He stated that it was hoped that funding for all positions in the
Fire/EMS Department could have been resolved; and funding for the Deputy Chief
of Operations position could have gone toward the funding of two additional
firefighters to help the City in moving toward its goal of meeting national standards.
He explained that while the Fire Chief recognizes every NFPA standard, he has
stated that City Council sets the standard for departmental staffing, therefore, he
143
asked that Council consider NFPA standards on future decisions regarding Fire/EMS
staffing. He advised that the Firefighters Association will work to identify additional
funds to help the City meet NFPA standards, in order to provide the citizens of
Roanoke with the best possible protection and to make the jobs of firefighters as
safe as possible.
Ordinance No. 35835-051302 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES: Mr. Carder offered the following emergency
ordinance adopting the annual Water Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for
the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003, in the amount of
$13,246,295.00:
(#35836-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Water Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 6.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35836-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-BUDGET: Mr. Carder offered the following
emergency ordinance adopting the annual Sewage Treatment Fund Appropriation
of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending
June 30, 2003, in the amount of $10,698,200.00:
(#35837-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Sewage Treatment Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 7.)
144
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35837-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-ROANOKE CiViC CENTER: Mr. Carder offered the following
emergency ordinance adopting the annual Civic Center Fund Appropriation of the
City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2002, and ending June 30, 2003,
in the amount of $5,735,254.00:
(#35838-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Civic Center Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002= and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 8.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35838-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-TRANSPORTATION FUND: Mr. Carder offered the following
emergency ordinance adopting the annual Parking Fund Appropriation of the City
of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003, in
the amount of $2,438,171.00:
(#35839-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Parking Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 9.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35839-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
145
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: Mr. Carder offered the
following emergency ordinance adopting the annual Capital Projects Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003, in the amount of $757,640.00.
(#35840-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Capital Projects Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 11.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35840-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS: Mr. Carder offered the following
emergency ordinance adopting the annual Department of Technology Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003, in the amount of $4,354,502.00.
(#35841-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Department of
Technology Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 12.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35841-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
146
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris and Mayor
Smith .......................................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-FLEET MAINTENANCE FUND: Mr. Carder offered the following
emergency ordinance adopting the annual Fleet Management Fund Appropriation
of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending
June 30, 2003, in the amount of $6,012,839.00:
(#35842-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Fleet Management Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 13.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35842-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris and Mayor
Smith ........................................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND: Mr. Carder offered the following
emergency ordinance adopting the annual Risk Management Fund Appropriation of
the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending
June 30, 2003, in the amount of $12,401,096.00:
(#35843-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual Risk Management Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 14.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35843-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
147
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris and Mayor
Smith ............................................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: Mr. White offered the following emergency ordinance
adopting the annual School Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal
year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003, in the amount of
$101,423,210.00:
-' (#35844-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual School Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 15.)
Mr. White moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35844-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ...............................................................................-0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
: BUDGET-SCHOOLS: Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance
adopting the annual School Food Service Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke
for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003, in the amount
of $4,522,117.00:
(#35845-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual School Food Service
Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1,2002,
and ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 16.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35845-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
148
AYES: Council
and Mayor Smith
Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
NAYS: None--
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-GRANTS: Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance
adopting a portion of the annual Grant Fund Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for
the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2003, in the amount of
$179,673.00:
(#35846-051302) AN ORDINANCE adopting a portion of the annual Grant Fund
Appropriation of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2002, and
ending June 30, 2003; and declaring the existence of an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 17.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35846-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris and Mayor
Smith .......................................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
POLICE DEPARTMENT-PAY PLAN-BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-CITY
EMPLOYEES: Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance which will be in full force
and effect on July 31, 2002:
(#35847-051302) AN ORDINANCE to adopt and establish a Pay Plan for officers
and employees of the City, effective July 1, 2002; providing for certain salary
adjustments and merit increases; authorizing annual salary increments for certain
officers and employees for use of private motor vehicles; authorizing annual salary
increments for sworn police officers assigned to the Criminal Investigation Division;
authorizing annual salary increments for certain members of the Fire-Emergency
Medical Services Department who are certified as Emergency Medical Technicians;
authorizing annual salary increments for certain members of the Fire-Emergency
Medical Services Departmentwho are members of the Regional Hazardous Materials
Response Team; providing for continuation of a police career enhancement
149
program; providing for continuation of a FirefighterlEmergency Medical Technician
merit pay program; providing for payment of a monthly stipend to certain board and
commission members; repealing Ordinance No. 35344-050701, adopted May7, 2001,
to the extent of any inconsistency; and providing for an emergency and effective
date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 18.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35847-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote.
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris and Mayor
Smith ............................................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in order to receive Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter
Grant (ESG) funding, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
requires that entitlement localities such as the City of Roanoke submit a five-year
Consolidated Plan and Annual Updates.
It was further advised that on April 11, 2002, Council received the proposed
2002-03 Annual Update as part of the Recommended Resource Allocation Plan; the
draft Annual Update was made available for public review and comment for the
30-day period that began April 11 and ended May 10, 2002; opportunities for citizen
input were provided at three public hearings held on January 10, March 28, and April
29, 2002; and to ensure that the City's HUD fiscal year begins on July 1,2002, HUD
must receive the Annual Update on May 15, 2002; and funding for FY 2002-03 would
be available from the following sources:
New 2002-03 HUD Entitlements
Estimated 2002-03 Program Income
Estimated Prior Year Excess Program Income
Estimated Prior Year Carry-over
$ 3,068,000.00
450,034.00
316,766.00
633,432.00
Total HUD Funds
$ 4,468,232.00
150
It was explained that the $4.5 million in HUD funds indicated above will
leverage as much as an additional $4.8 million in other public and private funding;
thus, total investment in those activities included in the Annual Update will be
approximately $9.3 million; whereupon, the City Manager recommended that she be
authorized to submit the 2002-03 Consolidated Plan Annual Update to HUD for
review and approval.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35848-051302) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to submit an
approved Annual Update to the Consolidated Plan for FY 2002-2003 to the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for final review and
approval, and authorizing execution of the appropriate documents for the
acceptance of such funding.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 22.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35848-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Hudson, Harris and Mayor Smith .............. -4.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
(Council Members Bestpitch and White advised that they are required to abstain
from voting, pursuant to HUD regulations.)
BUDGET-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: The City Manager submitted
a communication advising that the Capital Improvement Program (ClP) for Fiscal
Years 2003-2007 is a plan recommended for approval by Council for capital
expenditures to be incurred over the next five years, in order to address priority
long-term capital needs of the City of Roanoke; and the ClP reflects the current
status of projects which have previously been approved and funded by Council, plus
three new recommended projects, and is a revision to the Fiscal Years 2002-2006
Capital Improvement Program approved by Council on June 18, 2001.
It was further advised that on April 15, 2002, Council received the proposed
Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2003-2007 as part of the
Recommended Resource Allocation Plan; the Capital Improvement Program for
Fiscal Years 2003-2007 is comprised of capital projects, with an estimated cost of
project completion totaling $298,192,974.00; and three new projects are included in
the total that requires additional funding of $49,300,000.00:
Civic Center Improvements - Phase II - $14,941,020.00 -
General Obligation Bonds totaling $14.3 million would be
issued to fund the project, with debt service being funded
from a 1.5% increase in the Admissions Tax, a 5% Capital
Improvements Fee charged on admission to events at the
Civic Facilities Complex, and additional revenue from
Civic Facilities operations.
151
Fire/EMS Facility Improvements $947,640.00 - City
Council recently approved a new EMS Fee Schedule that
will generate additional revenue totaling $147,640.00 in FY
2003. This revenue would be used to supplement
$800,000.00 currently included in the ClP for land
acquisitions, design and partial cash funding of the first of
three stations to be constructed. A future bond issue
would be needed to fund construction costs, with the Fire-
EMS revenues being used to repay the debt.
Water Pollution Control - $35,000,000.00 - Council has
been briefed on the need for plant improvements to
enhance wet weather capacity. While the project is still in
its early stages, total cost is estimated to be $35 million,
with Roanoke's share being approximately $17.5 million.
Financing details are still being discussed, but an
estimated 30% increase in sewer rates in FY 2004 will be
needed to fund the debt service payments required for this
project.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the following:
Approve the following new capital projects recommended
in the ClP update, requiring additional funding of
$49,300,000.00:
Civic Center Improvements - Phase II
$14,941,020.00
Fire/EMS Facility
$947,640.00
Improvements
Water Pollution Control (City share of
project cost $17,500,000)
35,000,000.00
152
Appropriate $757,640.00 included in the FY 2002-03 budget
to the respective capital project accounts established by
the Director of Finance for the following projects:
$150,000.00 in the FY 2002-03 Transfers to an
account to be established in the Capital
Projects Fund for Bridge Maintenance
Projects
$147,640.00 in the FY 2002-03 to Capital
Project Account (008-530-9678) for Fire/EMS
Facility Improvements Program
$150,000.00 in the FY 2002-03 to Capital
Project Account (008-530-9736) for NPDES
Phase II - Stormwater Management
$310,000.00 in the FY 2002-03 Transfers to an
account to be established in the Capital
Projects Fund for Transportation Projects
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35849-051302) A RESOLUTION endorsing the update to the Capital
Improvement Program submitted by the City Manager and Director of Finance by
letter of May 13, 2002.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 23.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35849-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY CODE-BUDGET-TAXES-ROANOKE CiViC CENTER: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that funding for Phase II of improvements of
the Civic Center facility is recommended in the FY 2002-03 budget, including
construction of 32,000 square feet of new exhibit space, dressing rooms, kitchen
facilities and other improvements that will attract new events and increase
attendance; and total cost of Phase II is approximately $14.9 million and a $14.3
million bond issue is recommended to fund the project.
153
It was further advised that in order to generate adequate revenues to service
debt on a future $14.3 million bond issue that will support Phase II improvements to
the Civic Center, a 1.5 per cent increase in the City's Admissions Tax rate city-wide
is being recommended in the 2002-03 budget; and the City administration further
recommends that Council request the 2003 General Assembly to allow a higher tax
on civic facilities only.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a ordinance amending
Section 32-217 of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979) as amended, increasing the
admissions tax to 6.5%.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35850) AN ORDINANCE amending §32-217, Levied rate, of Article IX,
Admissions tax, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
as amended, in order to increase the admissions tax on the stated admission charge
to any place of amusement or entertainment from five (5) per cent to six and one-half
(6.5) per cent; dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance and providing
for an effective date.
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35850. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Harris and lost by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder and Harris ................... -4.
NAYS: Council Member Hudson and Mayor Smith ..................................... -2.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
Mr. Carder moved that Ordinance No. 35850 be amended by deleting the
following words, "dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance". The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted, Mayor Smith and Council
Member Hudson voting no.
Mr. Carder moved that the following ordinance be placed upon its first
reading:
(#35850) An Ordinance amending §32-217, Levied rate, of Article IX,
Admissions tax, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
as amended, in order to increase the admissions tax on the stated admission charge
to any place of amusement or entertainment from five (5) percent to six and one-half
(6.5) percent; and providing for an effective date.
154
The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, and Harris .................. -4.
NAYS: Council Member Hudson and Mayor Smith .................................. -2.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
ZONING-BUDGET-SUBDIVISIONS-FEE COMPENDIUM: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that in developing the budget for Fiscal Year
2002-2003, City departments were asked to reduce their budgets to help make up for
the losses in state aid and find ways to re-engineer services to generate cost
savings for their departments; departments were also asked to look at their fee
structures and, where feasible, propose fee schedule changes that recover the cost
of providing services and maintain uniformity between Roanoke and other localities;
and accordingly, an increase in various fees administered by the Planning Building
and Development Department is proposed.
It was further advised that the Planning Building and Development Department
has recently completed a benchmarking effort to compare fees for services with
other communities, along with a review of estimated labor costs for services; current
fees do not cover all expenses and have not been adjusted for approximately ten
years; and the recommended fee schedule attempts to recover costs of providing
services and be competitive with other municipalities.
It was stated that along with increases in current fees to cover costs
associated with providing these services, the Planning Building and Development
Department is also recommending a new fee regarding requests for zoning
classifications, allowed uses, and zoning compliance verification at a rate of $150.00
per request; currently, when financial lending institutions request information
regarding zoning and building violations on certain properties they are preparing to
close on, the City conducts the research and prepares a written report free of
charge; and other localities charge a fee as high as $200.00 to cover the costs
associated with the verification process.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to amend
the City's Fee Compendium to reflect changes in various fees.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35851) AN ORDINANCE amending certain fees and charges, establishing
certain new fees and charges with regard to subdivision and zoning fees, and
amending the Fee Compendium, dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance, and providing for an effective date.
155
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35851. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
Mr. Hudson advised that based upon the volume of e-mails and concerns that
have been expressed to him, he could not support the proposed increase in fees
because to do so will have an adverse effect on economic development.
· ~ Upon question, the City Manager advised that fees have not been increased
in the City of Roanoke for approximately 10-15 years. She stated that the gist of the
expressed concerns suggest that the increases will impact affordable housing in the
City of Roanoke; however, she stated that she did not believe that was an accurate
statement inasmuch as the City has more than sufficient affordable housing and the
assumption that the increase in fees will cause the elimination of jobs in the
construction industry, or the implication that a first time home buyer will not be able
to purchase a home, is unfounded. She explained that the larger fees pertain to
subdivision development and since the bulk of the City is already developed,
subdivision fees would not be an issue. She stated that staff has responded to the
direction of Council that the City's fees should be in line with neighboring
jurisdictions; and in view of the fact that there have been no increases in fees over
the last 10 - 15 years, that is a reasonable explanation for the proposed increases.
The Mayor advised that Roanoke City is different from Roanoke County in that
Roanoke City needs development, the increased rates will be a burden on land
development, and to support the ordinance would be an anti-development vote. He
stated that staff time required to service the applications should be funded through
the City's economic development funds. He added that the City is challenged for
revenue, and inquired if a compromise can be reached on proposed fees, because
adjusting the fees all at one time will send a negative message to potential
developers.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that from his perspective, the Roanoke Valley Home
Builders Association does not appear to have a negative impression of the fees
charged by Roanoke County and the City of Salem, and the fees that Roanoke City
is being requested to approve are in line with the fees in Roanoke County and
Salem. He stated that there are a number of instances in Roanoke City, where,
rather than address the fees on an incremental basis over a three to five year period
and enact moderate adjustments, the City has allowed the fees to remain at the
status quo for a number of years and then enacted a large change all at once. He
advised that it is hoped the City is moving in a direction which will preclude placing
this Council and future Councils in similar positions. He explained that when
considering the proposed fees as a percentage of the total cost of the product that
is to be ultimately offered to the consumer, the proposed increases are minuscule.
156
The City Manager advised that the fees before Council address special
conditions and exceptions, such as applications to the Board of Zoning Appeals for
processing certain items, applications for variances, amendments to conditions of
conditional rezoning, appeals to the Board of Zoning Appeals of the Zoning
Administrator's decision, and applications for rezoning to a single residential district
designation, etc. She stated that while the fees help to balance the budget, they are
not the major balancer of the City's revenues, but were intended to bring the City
more into conformity with surrounding jurisdictions; and it is proposed to assess
fees hereafter on an annual basis. She advised that she does not view the
recommended fees as a disincentive to economic development in the City of
Roanoke, and as City Manager, she would not make a recommendation to Council
that would be against economic development.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Ordinance No. 35851 be amended to delete the
language "and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance". The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted, Mayor Smith and Council Member Hudson
voting no.
Mr. Harris advised that Council has been in the budget process for
approximately 60 days and the time to have proposed changes or compromises was
during budget study workshops. He stated that the Mayor did not make his
concerns known during that time; therefore, on that basis, he called for the question.
Mr. Carder moved that the following ordinance be placed upon its first
reading:
(#35851) AN ORDINANCE amending certain fees and charges, establishing
certain-new fees and charges with regard to subdivision and zoning fees, and
amending the Fee Compendium, and providing for an effective date.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted bythe following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder and Harris ................... -4.
NAYS: Council Member Hudson and Mayor Smith ................................... -2.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-SIGNS/BILLBOARDS/AWNINGS-FEE COMPENDIUM: Mr. Carder
offered the following resolution amending certain fees and charges with regard to
sign permits, and amending the Fee Compendium, as follows, effective July 1,2002:
157
Permanent Sign
$50.00
Temporary Sign
$30.00
(#35852-051302) A RESOLUTION amending certain fees and charges with
regard to sign permits, amending the Fee Compendium, and providing for an
effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 24.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35852-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY CODE-BUDGET-TAXES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that in the process of developing the Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget, each
department was asked to consider means by which they could reduce their overall
budget by decreasing expenditures and/or increasing revenues, which would help
to mitigate the impact of decreases in state aid and generate needed savings
throughout the organization; in addition, departments were asked to review current
revenue structures and determine if alterations would be possible or feasible to
generate additional revenue and more closely mirror other localities; and a number
of proposed revenue changes are incorporated in the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 budget,
and are reflected in budget ordinances presented for adoption for Fiscal Year
2002-03.
Elimination of Seller's Discounts
The City Treasurer and Manager of Billings and
Collections have recommended the elimination of the
Seller's Discount on Cigarette Taxes as well as the Seller's
Discount on Prepared Food and Beverage Tax. Currently,
Roanoke provides a seven per cent discount on the
Cigarette Tax and a three per cent discount on the
Prepared Food and Beverage Tax. This discount
originated as an incentive to vendors to help offset the
158
administrative cost of remitting tax collections to the City
Treasurer. This incentive to vendors is no longer deemed
to be necessary to promote vendor compliance. Based on
a review of seven designated benchmark localities,
Roanoke is one of five localities that offers a discount on
the Cigarette Tax and one of four localities that offers a
discount on the Prepared Food and Beverage Tax.
New Fees Authorized by the 2002 General Assembly
Senate Bill Number 693 has authorized localities to assess
a sum not to exceed $5.00 as part of the costs in each
criminal or traffic case in which the defendant is convicted
of a violation of any statute or ordinance. This sum is to be
used to support courthouse security; however, these
provisions expire on July 1, 2004.
Senate Bill Number 406 has authorized localities to charge
a processing fee not to exceed $25.00 to any individual
admitted to a county or city jail following conviction. The
funds are to be used by the local sheriff's office to defray
the costs of processing arrested persons into local jails.
The General Assembly of Virginia has amended and
reenacted the Code of Virginia to provide for required
collection and DNA analysis of blood, saliva, or tissue of
every person convicted of a felony offense. A fee of $25.00
will be assessed as part of the costs of the criminal case
resulting in the felony conviction and one-half of the fee
will be paid to the General Fund of the state treasury. No
action by the City is necessary for this fee to be
implemented.
New Fees Authorized by the Code of Virginia
The Code of Virginia provides than any city may collect
administrative costs associated with debts submitted to
the Department of Taxation for the Set-off Debt Collection
Program. The Code provides for a fee of $25.00 per claim.
Roanoke submits 31,000 claims per year to the State
Department of Taxation as part of the set-off debt
159
collection program, however, payment of the claims is
dependent on whether the debtor files a tax return and has
a refund that is not "offset" by other creditors or localities.
The $25.00 fee per claim will offset the four per cent
administrative fee charged by the Commonwealth of
Virginia for the set-off debt collection program. The
Department of Billings and Collections recommends the
institution of a fee of $25.00 per claim.
The Code of Virginia also provides that any locality may
collect a fee to cover the administrative costs of tax
collection. The Code sets the fee at $25.00 for taxes
collected subsequent to judgment and at $20.00 for taxes
collected subsequent to filing a warrant or other legal
document prior to judgment. The Department of Billings
and Collection recommends the institution of the $20.00
and $25.00 fees for offset of administrative costs of
delinquent tax collection.
Weed Lien Administrative Fee
Currently the City of Roanoke charges a $100.00
administrative fee for the necessary abatement of weeds
on private lots. The Code of Virginia allows for a fee of
$150.00 or 25% of the cost, whichever is less. The
Department of Billings and Collections recommends that
the Weed Lien Administrative Fee be adjusted to be in
accordance with the Code of Virginia.
Interest Accrual Date for Delinquent Real Estate Tax
A change in the interest accrual date for delinquent real
estate tax is recommended to be consistent with personal
property tax. Currently, the first installment of current
fiscal year Real Estate Tax is due October 5. A ten per
cent late payment penalty is applied on October 6 if the tax
remains unpaid, and interest charges begin accruing on
July 1 of the next year. The second installment for the
current fiscal year is due April 5 of the next year. A ten
per cent late payment penalty is added on April 6 and
interest charges do not begin until July 1. With personal
160
property tax, interest begins accruing the first of the
month following the tax due date. It is recommended that
interest be applied to delinquent payments of real estate
tax to begin accruing the first of the month following the
tax due date, consistent with the method used for
personal property.
Late Payment Penalty for Parking Tickets
Currently the late payment penalty for parking violations
is $10.00 and has remained at this level for a minimum of
20 years. The late payment penalty is added to violations
paid ten days or more after issuance of the notice of
violation. Since 1993, the fine for parking violations has
increased twice with no parallel increase in the late
payment penalty for those fines. The Department of
Billings and Collections recommends the increase of the
Late Payment penalty for Parking Tickets from $10.00 to
$15.00.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt ordinances amending the
City Code to reflect the above described changes in various discounts, fees, interest
accrual dates and fines.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35853-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending §32-192, Preparation and sale of
stam_r)s qenerally, of Article VIII, Ciqarette tax, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, in order to eliminate the discount for
local cigarette dealers with respect to the purchase of tax stamps as currently
provided in that section; dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance; and
providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 25.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35853-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith .................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
161
CITY CODE-BUDGET-TAXES: Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance
repealing §32-291, Discount, of Article XlV, Tax on Prepared Food and Bevera~le, in
order to eliminate the discount currently provided for sellers as compensation for
the collection of taxes imposed by Article XlV, effective July 1, 2002.
(#35854-051302) AN ORDINANCE repealing §32-291, Discount, of Article XlV,
Tax on Prepared Food and Beverage, in order to eliminate the discount currently
provided for sellers as compensation for the collection of taxes imposed by this
Article; dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance; and providing for an
effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 26.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35854-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson and Harris .......... 5.
NAYS: Mayor Smith ................................................................................ 1.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY CODE-BUDGET-FEE COMPENDIUM-COURTS FACILITY: Mr. Carder
offered the following ordinance amending Chapter 1, General Administration, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new §1-21,
Courtroom security assessment, providing for assessment by the City of a fee to
provide funding of courthouse security personnel, pursuant to §53.1-120, Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended, effective July 1, 2002.
(#35855-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 1, General Administration,
of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new
§1-21, Courtroom security assessment, providing for assessment by the City of a fee
to provide funding of courthouse security personnel, pursuant to §53.1-120, Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended; dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance; and providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 27.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35855-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
162
CITY CODE-BUDGET-CITY SHERIFF-FEE COMPENDIUM: Mr. Carder offered
the following ordinance amending Chapter 1, General Administration, of the Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new §1-22, Jail
processing fee, providing for assessment by the City of a fee to provide funding to
defraythe costs incurred bythe Sheriff's Department in processing arrested persons
into local jails, pursuant to §15.2-1613.1, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
effective July 1, 2002.
(#35856-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 1, General Administration,
of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new
§1-22, Jail processing fee, providing for assessment by the City of a fee to provide
funding to defray the costs incurred by the Sheriff's Department in processing
arrested persons into local jails, pursuant to §15.2-1613.1, Code of Virginia (1950),
as amended; dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance and providing for
an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 28.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35856-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY CODE-BUDGET-BILLINGS AND COLLECTIONS-FEE COMPENDIUM-SET-
OFF DEBT COLLECTION: Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance amending
Chapter 2, Administration, Article VIII, Finance generally, of the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new §1-178.3, Recovery of
administrative costs, providing for collection by the City of certain administrative
costs associated with collection pursuant to the Setoff Debt Collection Act on any
debt owed the City, such fee not to exceed $25.00, pursuant to §58.1-520.1, Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended; effective July 1, 2002.
(#35857-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article
VIII, Finance generally, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the
addition of a new §1-178.3, Recovery of administrative costs, providing for collection
by the City of certain administrative costs associated with collection pursuant to the
Setoff Debt Collection Act on any debt owed the City, such fee not to exceed $25.00,
pursuant to §58.1-520.1, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended; dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance and providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 28.)
163
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35857-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
,.' AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY CODE-BUDGET-TAXES-DELINQUENT TAXES-REFUSE COLLECTION-
WEED ABATEMENT PROGRAM: Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance
amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article VIII, Finance generally, of the Code of
the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of a new §2-178.4,
Assessment of delinquent taxpayers for administrative costs, providing for
collection by the City of certain administrative costs to be assessed against
delinquent taxpayers to defray costs associated with the collection process
pursuant to §58.1-3958, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended; amending §33-22,
Accounting for abatement costs, Article II, Weed and trash abatement, of Chapter 33,
Vegetation and Trash, with respect to charges for administrative costs incurred in
trash abatement, effective July 1, 2002.
(#35858-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 2, Administration, Article
VIII, Finance generally, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the
addition of a new §2-178.4, Assessment of delinquent taxpayers for administrative
costs, providing for collection by the City of certain administrative costs to be
assessed against delinquent taxpayers to defray costs associated with the collection
process pursuant to §58.1-3958, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended; amending
§33-22, Accountincj for abatement costs, Article II, Weed and trash abatement, of
Chapter 33, Vegetation and Trash, with respect to charges for administrative costs
incurred in trash abatement; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance and providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 29.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35858-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
164
CITY CODE-BUDGET-TAXES-DELINQUENT TAXES-REAL ESTATE
VALUATION: Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance amending §32-19, Penalty
and interest on delinquencies -Generally, of Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally,
of Division II, Generally of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, in order to change the time of commencement for calculating
interest on delinquent real estate taxes from July first of the tax year next following
that for which such taxes are assessed to the first day of the month following the
month in which such taxes are due, effective July 1, 2002.
(#35859-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending §32-19, Penalty and interest on
delinquencies. Generally, of Article II, Real Estate Taxes Generally, of Division II,
Generally of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, in order to change the time of commencement for calculating interest on
delinquent real estate taxes from July first of the tax year next following that for
which such taxes are assessed to the first day of the month following the month in
which such taxes are due; dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance and
providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 31.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35859-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY CODE-BUDGET-FEE COMPENDIUM-DISABLED PERSONS-PARKING
FACILITIES-TRAFFIC: Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance amending and
reordaining subsection (e) of §20-76, Parking spaces reserved for persons with
disabilities, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and §20-89,
Penalties for unlawful _~arkin_~, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, the amended sections to provide for an increase of certain penalties, and
adjustment of certain other penalties, for unlawful parking within the City of
Roanoke, effective July 1, 2002.
(#35860-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (e) of
§20-76, Parking spaces reserved for persons with disabilities, of the Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and §20-89, Penalties for unlawful _~arkin_~, of the
165
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, the amended sections to provide
for increase of certain penalties, and the adjustment of certain others, for unlawful
parking within the City of Roanoke; and providing for an emergency and for an
effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 32.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35860-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-FEE COMPENDIUM: The City Manager submitted
a communication advising that in developing the budget for Fiscal Year 2002-03, City
departments were asked to reduce their budgets to help make up for the losses in
state aid and find ways to rs-engineer services to generate cost savings for their
departments; and departments were also asked to look at their fee structures and,
where feasible, propose fee schedule changes that maintain fee uniformity between
Roanoke and other localities, while recovering the cost of providing services.
It was further advised that the recommended Fiscal Year 2002-03 budget
incorporates a number of proposed fee structure changes recommended by the
Department of Planning Building and Development, Fire-Emergency Medical
Services, Solid Waste Management, and the Water Department, which proposed
changes are reflected in budget ordinances presented for adoption for fiscal year
2002-03.
Fire-EMS Fees:
Based on the results of a recent cost audit, the Fire-EMS
Department has recommended changes to fire safety
inspection fees, fireworks and bonfire permits and system
false alarm fees; fire safety inspections are performed to
ensure the safety of the building occupants and the
general public; routine fire safety inspections are
performed free of charge; however, a fee is charged
whenever a re-inspection is required to ensure corrections
166
of safety violations; and adjustments to the fee schedule
will enable the department to improve services and
maintain fee uniformity between the City and its
surrounding localities.
The revised permit fee schedule also allows Fire-EMS to
recover costs associated with the enforcement of the
fireworks and bonfire permits; a permit is required for
firework displays and a bond may be required for a
bonfire; an Assistant Fire Marshal, who may also conduct
an on-site inspection, reviews each fireworks permit
application; and Fire-EMS also has personnel on standby
at bonfire events to ensure proper extinguishments.
A revised fee schedule is also recommended for system
false alarms; and after conducting an analysis throughout
the State of Virginia, Fire-EMS has developed the revised
fee schedule in an attempt to encourage building owners
to be more proactive in repairing system malfunctions,
resulting in less repeat alarms from automatic electronic
alarm systems.
Solid Waste Manaqement
The current solid waste management fee structure for
commercial and central business district customers
generates $40,000.00 to $50,000.00 in annual revenue for
a service that costs over $300,000.00 for the City to
provide; in an effort to be more representative of the cost
of the solid waste collection services provided for
commercial and central business district customers, a
revised commercial collection fee is being recommended;
this proposed fee structure would provide businesses one
free collection perweek, charge for additional collections,
and partially recover the cost of additional pickups; and
these businesses would then be provided a similar level
of "free" service as residential customers.
Elevator Inspection Fees
After completing benchmarking with other localities and
a review of estimated labor costs for conducting elevator
inspections, the Department of Planning, Building and
Development is recommending that the City discontinue
167
providing elevator inspections; many other localities in the
surrounding areas have already moved away from
providing this service due to rising insurance costs
related to the liability associated with certifying the
inspection; this new system would require private building
owners to have elevator inspections performed by
approved outside agencies or individuals - an elevator
inspection permit will be issued authorizing this
inspection; a certificate of inspection prepared by the
inspector will be submitted to the department, as
verification of inspection and a database will be
established to monitor compliance with state mandates;
and city inspection staff would continue to inspect
elevators in city-owned buildings.
Water Division Carvins Cove
With the rising recreational use of Carvins Cove, the Water
Department is recommending several new fees for
FY 2003 to offset increased maintenance costs related to
increased usage; a new fee is recommended for all uses
of the Carvins Cove facility, including hiking, biking, bank
fishing, picnicking, horseback riding, and bird watching;
and the new fee structure will enhance the vitality of the
widely used natural reserve and reflect the actual cost of
providing boat launch and boat rental services.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution and amend
the City's Fee Compendium to reflect the changes in various fees.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35861-051302) A RESOLUTION amending certain fees and charges with
regard to fire safety reinspections, amending the Fee Compendium, and providing
for an effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 34.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35861-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
168
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-SPECIAL PERMITS-FEE COMPENDIUM:
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution amending certain fees and charges with
regard to fireworks and bonfire permits, amending the Fee Compendium, effective
July 1, 2002.
(#35862-051302) A RESOLUTION amending certain fees and charges with
regard to fireworks and bonfire permits, amending the Fee Compendium, and
providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 35.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35862-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-FEE COMPENDIUM: Mr. Carder offered the
following resolution amending certain fees and charges with regard to fire system
false alarms, and amending the Fee Compendium, effective July 1, 2002.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35863-051302) A RESOLUTION amending certain fees and charges with
regard to fire system false alarms, amending the Fee Compendium, and providing
for an effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 36.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35863-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
169
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-REFUSE COLLECTION-FEE COMPENDIUM: Mr. Carder offered the
following resolution amending certain fees and charges with regard to refuse
collection service for the Central Business District and Commercial Districts outside
the Central Business District, and amending the Fee Compendium, as follows,
effective July 1, 2002:
Central Business District
Monthly Fees
Restaurant/Office/Financial
Specialty RetaillHealthlChurchl
Nonprofit
$50.00
$3O.O0
Commercial Districts outside the
Central Business District
Monthly Fees
Restaurant/Office/Financial
Specialty RetaillHealthlChurchlNonprofit
$10.00
$10.00
(#35864-051302) A RESOLUTION amending certain fees and charges with
regard to refuse collection service for the Central Business District and Commercial
Districts outside the Central Business District, amending the Fee Compendium, and
providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 37.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35864-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that there are questions in regard to how the
refuse collection fees will apply to larger offices versus smaller offices in the Central
Business District; whereupon, the City Manager advised that between now and
July 1, individual contacts will be made with downtown business owners. She
stated that if a small business can place all of their trash in one toter, they will be
entitled to the same once per week free collection that residents currently receive.
She added that there are approximately 700 businesses in the Central Business
170
District and staff will contact each business owner to set up the appropriate
arrangement. She called attention to a trash compactor pilot program for downtown
Roanoke which will allow businesses to compact garbage, and, over time, it is
hoped that some businesses will not be subject to the fee schedule. She stated that
the City's interest lies in ensuring that there is equity in the cost of refuse collection.
Resolution No. 35864-051302 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-SPECIAL PERMITS-EQUIPMENT-ELEVATOR PERMITS: Mr. Carder
offered the following resolution establishing a new fee and charge of $25.00 with
regard to elevator permits, and amending the Fee Compendium, effective
July 1, 2002:
(#35865-051302) A RESOLUTION establishing a certain new fee and charge
with regard to elevator permits, amending the Fee Compendium, and providing for
an effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 38.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35865-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-FEE COMPENDIUM-WATER RESOURCES: Mr. Carder offered the
following resolution amending certain fees and charges, and establishing certain
new user fees and charges, in connection with use of the Carvins Cove Natural
Reserve, and amending the Fee Compendium, as follows, effective July 1, 2002:
171
Service Charge:
Boat Launch Fees
Annual Permits
w/o motor -
< 10 hp motor
$75.00
$90.00
Daily Permits
w/o motor- $5.00
< 10 hp motor $9.00
Boat Rental:
14' Boats $ 4.00 per hr.
$ 8.00 (1/2 day- 5 hrs.)
$14.00 per day
12' Boats $ 3.00 per hr.
$ 7.00 (1/2 day - 5 hrs.)
$13.00 per day
Inspection Fees for Privately Owned Motors:
Electric $1.00
Gasoline $2.00
2. New user fees for all uses of the facility, with the exception of boating,
charged at Carvins Cove Natural Reserve:
Service Charge:
Annual Permits per person
$30.00 (non-Roanoke City Residents)
$15.00 (Roanoke City Residents)
Daily Permits Per Person
$ 2.00 (non-Roanoke City Residents)
$1.00 (Roanoke City Residents)
(#35866-051302) A RESOLUTION amending certain fees and charges,
establishing certain new user fees and charges, in connection with use of Carvins
Cove Natural Reserve, amending the Fee Compendium, and providing for an
effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 38.)
172
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35866-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-FEE COMPENDIUM-EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL: Mr. Carder
offered the following ordinance amending the fee for review of erosion and sediment
control plans, and amending the Fee Compendium, effective July 1,2002, as follows:
Review of erosion and sediment control plan
$100.00,
Plus $50.00 per acre,
or any portion thereof
(#35867-051302) AN ORDINANCE amending the fee for review of erosion and
sediment control plans, amending the Fee Compendium, dispensing with the second
reading of this ordinance, and providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 40.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35867-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES-PENSIONS: The City Manager and the Director of
Finance submitted a joint communication advising that eligible members of the City
of Roanoke Pension Plan received a 3.0% cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) on
July 1,2001, which was the seventh consecutive COLA provided to eligible retirees;
and following discussions with other municipal retirement systems, it is
recommended, effective July 1, 2002, and payable on July 31, 2002, that a 2.6%
increase be provided to a member's or surviving spouse's annual retirement
173
allowance; the increase does not apply to any incentive payments made under the
Voluntary Retirement Incentive Program established by Ordinance No. 30473-4~. 591,
adopted April 15, 1991, or to the retirement supplement established by Ordinance
No. 35327-050701, adopted May 7, 2001; and the increase applies to those retirees
who retired on or before July 1, 2001.
It was explained that approximately 1,392 of the 1,454 retirees, or 96% of those
receiving benefits as of April 30, 2002, will be eligible for the increase; average
annual increase in retirement allowance is $259.00, costing the pension fund an
additional $360,182.00 annually; actuarial cost of a 2.6% permanent COLA is
estimated at $3.2 million to be funded over the next 20 years through the annual
payroll contribution rate; and all City operation funds, along with the Roanoke Valley
Airport Commission, School Board, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, Roanoke
Valley Detention Commission, and the Commonwealth of Virginia will assume their
pro rata share of cost for funding the COLA.
The City Manager and the Director of Finance recommended that Council edopt
an ordinance granting a 2.6% cost of living raise for qualified retirees, effective
July 1, 2002, and payable on July 31, 2002.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35868-051302) AN ORDINANCE providing for certain supplemental benefits
under the City of Roanoke Pension Plan to certain members of such Plan and certain
of their surviving spouses; providing for an effective date; and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 41.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35868-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
174
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Mr. Harris introduced a resolution paying
tribute to the town and the townspeople of Crescent City, Florida, who, on Thursday,
April 18, 2002, assisted passengers on an Amtrak Auto Train carrying 452 people
which derailed just south of Crescent City, Florida, killing four and injuring many.
He advised that Mr. William B. Robertson, founder of Camp Virginia Jaycee, Inc., in
Blue Ridge, Virginia, and a friend to City Council, was one of the passengers injured;
and residents, merchants and students of Crescent City responded en masse to the
scene of the crash, by offering comfort, relief and aid to Mr. Robertson and to the
other victims in their hour of need.
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35869-051302) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to the town and the
townspeople of Crescent City, Florida.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 43.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35869-051302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, White, Carder, Hudson, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the special meeting
adjourned at 3:05p.m. ~~ / ~/~ ~
Mary F. Par~(er Ralph K. Smith
City Clerk Mayor
175
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 20, 2002
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, May 20,
2002, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber, fourth
floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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, Re.cjular Meetin_~s,
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
PRESENT: Council Members Linda F. Wyatt, William White, Sr., W. Alvin
Hudson, Jr., William H. Carder, William D. Bestpitch, and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ..... 6.
ABSENT: Council Member C. Nelson Harris ................................................ 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 meeting was opened with a prayer by The Reverend Marion G. Harris,
Director, Virginia Evangelizing Fellowship.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-COMMITTEES-WAR MEMORIAL: Council
Member Bestpitch advised that the Roanoke Valley War Memorial Committee has
voted to donate $5,000.00, or almost one half of its surplus, in support of the
National D-Day Memorial Foundation's fund raising campaign, with the hopes that
its donation will inspire others to keep faith with those who beached the line of Nazi
domination in Europe and pointed the way to victory over the Axis powers, as well
as with those responsible for building the Memorial to honor this event. Also, he
advised that the National D-Day Memorial Foundation is seeking contributions to
retire its substantial outstanding debt from construction of the D- Day Memorial.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
176
(#35871-052002) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to the Roanoke Valley War
Memorial Committee for its donation to the National D-Day Memorial.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 49.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35871-052002. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
Sloan Hoopes, Chair, Roanoke Valley War Memorial Committee, presented a
check, in the amount of $5,000.00, to representatives of the National D-Day Memorial
Foundation.
Council Member Bestpitch advised that a Roanoke native, the late Donald
McArthur Young, was one of the victims of the September 11, 2001, attack on the
Pentagon. He stated that Mr. Young's widow, Felicia Young of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, along with other members of Mr. Young's family, will be in attendance at the
Memorial Day Ceremony to be held in Lee Plaza on Monday, May 27, 2002;
whereupon, Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution memorializing the late
Donald McArthur Young, a long time resident of the City of Roanoke:
(#35872-052002) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Donald McArthur
Young, a Iongtime resident of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 50.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35872-052002. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith 6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
177
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-COMMITTEES-HOTEL ROANOKE
CONFERENCE CENTER-VlRGINIATECH: Mr. Hudson offered the following resolution
expressing gratitude to John H. Parrott for his years of service as a Commissioner
of the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission.
(#35870-052002) A RESOLUTION expressing gratitude to John H. Parrott for
his years of service to the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 47.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35870-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. White and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
The Mayor advised that Mr. Parrott has served on the Hotel Roanoke
Conference Center Commission since July 1, 1996, he was elected as Chair on
November 20, 1997, and continued to serve in that capacity until April 2002 when his
term expired. On behalf of the Members of Council, he commended Mr. Parrott, who,
without any financial remuneration or incentive other than his commitment to the
Commonwealth of Virginia, took countless hours away from his construction
consulting firm to review and reform a highly complex rededication plan for the
Conference Center designed by the Commission's engineers and assisted the
Commission's attorneys in their multi-party litigation against those responsible for
the building's defects; and Mr. Parrott's counsel contributed to the Commission's
resounding success in 2001 when its construction litigation climaxed in a large
financial settlement and the Conference Center rededication project concluded
ahead of schedule and under budget.
On behalf of the Members of Council, the Mayor presented Mr. Parrott with a
ceremonial copy of the above referenced resolution, with the appreciation of Council
for his years of service.
PROCLAMATIONS -FIRE DEPARTMENT- EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES:
The Mayor presented a proclamation declaring the week of May 19-25, 2002, as
Emergency Medical Services Week.
178
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CLEAN VALLEY COUNCIL: The City Manager
introduced Ann Masters, Executive Director, Clean Valley Council, for presentation
of an award.
Ms. Masters advised that the Clean Valley Council is an environmental,
educational, not-for-profit agency serving all five of the Roanoke Valley
municipalities with conservation, preservation, appropriate waste reduction
practices, lifter prevention and recycling management, and is about to embark on
its 25th year of service to the Roanoke Valley. She further advised that the Clean
Valley Council receives nominations each year for Clean Valley awards and six
awards are given annually for stellar performance for the previous year, covering
stewardship and teaching by example. She stated that individual businesses and
non profits in local governments are eligible to receive the awards which are
unwritten by businesses, individuals and non-profit organizations; whereupon, she
presented the highest award for excellence, sponsored by The Kroger Company, to
the City of Roanoke Solid Waste Management Department, under the direction of
Frank Decker, Operations Superintendent, Solid Waste Collection. She advised that
the award is based on the City's program to keep neighborhoods looking cleaner,
to make solid waste collection and recycling more efficient and customer friendly,
with the goal of improving neighborhood appearance and simplifying residential
waste collection by involving citizen participation in a recycling program. She
explained that the City of Roanoke also designed a new no call route-based brush
and bulk collection system in which items remain on the curb for a shorter period
of time, and 10,000 households are now receiving co-mingled recycling collection.
She stated that clean up and neighborhood initiative create positive action, change,
a power of place and community pride; therefore, for the year 2001, she presented
the City of Roanoke Refuse Collection Department with The Kroger Company bench
in recognition of the City's achievements for excellence in mission, implementation
and spirit.
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.
179
COMMITTEES- FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION: A communication
from Evelyn S. Lander submitting her resignation as a member of the Roanoke
Valley-Alleghany Regional Commission, effective immediately, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the communication be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES-HOTEL
ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER-VIRGINIA TECH: A report of qualification of
Darlene L. Burcham as a Commissioner of the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center
Commission, for a term ending April 12, 2006; and James C. Hale for a term ending
March 31,2003, Mark S. Lawrence and David Nixon for terms ending March 31,2004,
and Brian M. Shepard for a term ending March 31, 2005, as members of the Parks
and Recreation Advisory Board, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
180
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
WATER RESOURCES-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that Mid Eastern Builders, Inc., was awarded a contract in
the amount of $4,477,000.00 at the October 1, 2001, meeting of Council for building
construction and equipment installation at the Crystal Spring Water Treatment
(Filtration) Plant, as defined in contract documents prepared by Wiley & Wilson, Inc.;
Change Order No. 1 was administratively approved in the amount of $14,902.00, for
a total contract amount of $4,491,902.00; Change Order No. 2 provides for relocation
of the raw water pump manhole and strainer box ($111,033.00), addition of a sink
and cabinets in the control room ($11,136.00), and credits for reduced quantities of
driven piles (-$13,953.00); total cost value of Change Order No. 2 is $108,216.00, with
a contract time extension of two days; and the construction administration
consultant, Construction Dynamics Group, Inc., recommends approval of Change
Order No. 2.
Summary of Chanties:
Contract Amount
Change Order No. 1
Proposed Change Order No. 2
Total
$4,477,000.00
14,902.00
108,216.00
$4,600,118.00
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute Change
Order No. 2, in the amount of $108,216.00 and two additional days of contract time,
to the contract with Mid Eastern Builders, Inc.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35873-052002) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager's issuance of
Change Order No. 2 to the City's contract with Mid Eastern Builders, Inc., for the
relocation of the raw water pump manhole and strainer box, modifications to thre®
restrooms for ADA compliance, and credits for reduced quantities of driver piles in
connection with the Crystal Spring Water Treatment (Filtration) Plant Project; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 52.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35873-052002. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
181
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
FLEET MAINTENANCE FUND-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the need to evaluate contracting for operation of the
Fleet Parts Warehouse was identified by the City's Fleet Management Division;
proposals were requested and after due and proper advertisement, one response
was received from NAPA Auto Parts; a cost analysis of the NAPA Auto Parts
proposal indicated that contracting operation on the Fleet Warehouse would not
result in any cost savings, but would result in an incremental cost of approximately
$32,300.00; contracting for operation of the Fleet Management function is being
considered, and management of the Parts Warehouse would be a part of the scope
of services to ensure control; and it is the intent of the City Administration to not
foreclose any opportunities with respect to contracting for operation of the Fleet
Management function.
The City Manager recommended that Council reject the proposal of NAPA
Auto Parts for turnkey parts operation in the Fleet Management Division.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35874-052002) A RESOLUTION rejecting the proposal for Turnkey Parts
Operation for the City's Fleet Division.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 53.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35874-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
182
CITIZEN SURVEY-PROCUREMENT CODE: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that as part of its commitment to service excellence for all
citizens, in the year 2000 the City of Roanoke began contracting with an outside
vendor to conduct an annual citizen survey; the City wishes to continue the survey
process and desires the opportunity to enter into a contractual agreement with a
qualified firm or independent professional specializing in telephone survey services;
the successful offeror shall provide assistance to the City by Conducting surveys to
receive public input in order to improve City services and to help guide the use of
City resources; and it is the City's intent to award a one-year contract, with the
option to renew under the same terms and conditions for two additional years,
subject to funding availability.
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 procuring the above service; the experience, qualifications, and references of
individuals or firms that can provide the above referenced services are of equal, if
not greater, importance than the cost; therefore, the process of competitive
negotiation using the request for proposal has been identified as the best method
for procurement of the services; the City Code provides, as an alternate method of
procurement to using the bid process, a process identified as "competitive
negotiation", which requires prior approval by Council before the alternate method
may be used; and this method will allow for negotiations with two or more providers
to determine the best qualified at the most competitive price or rate.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the use of competitive
negotiation as the method to secure vendors to provide appropriate services as
above described.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35875-052002) A RESOLUTION designating the procurement method known
as competitive negotiation, rather than the procurement method known as
competitive sealed bidding, to be used for the procurement of telephone survey
services to conduct an annual citizen survey; and documenting the basis for this
determination.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 53.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35875-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
183
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
TRAFFIC-STREETS AND ALLEYS-OUTDOOR DINING: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that Council at its meeting on April 1, 2002,
adopted an ordinance to amend the conditions for outdoor dining on public property
and within the public right-of-way; and regulations for the outdoor dining program
make available the use of certain streets between 6:30 p.m. and 3:00 a.m. on Market
Street, S. E. from Salem Avenue, S. E. to Church Avenue, S. E. (including the Market
Square area south of Campbell Avenue, S. E.) as well as Wall Street, S. E. from
Salem Avenue, S. E. to Campbell Avenue, S. E.
It was further advised that closure of the streets to vehicular and pedestrian
passage during certain hours of the day on a frequent basis for an extended period
of time requires authorization of Council; and in anticipation that some
restauranteurs will soon apply for outdoor dining permits to include street areas, it
would help to expedite the approval process if Council approved an ordinance
closing to vehicular and pedestrian use the above identified streets during specified
hours and under certain circumstances.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance declaring
that Market Street, S. E., from Salem Avenue, S. E. to Church Avenue, S. E. (including
the Market Square area south of Campbell Avenue, S. E.), as well as Wall Street, S. E.
from Salem Avenue, S. E. to Campbell Avenue, S. E. will be closed to the public as
a right-of-way for vehicular and pedestrian traffic from 6:30 p.m. to 3:00 a.m., if the
street, or any portion thereof, is subject to an outdoor dining permit issued by the
City Manager, pursuant to Section 30-9.1, Code of the City of Roanoke, (1979) as
amended.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35876-052002) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the temporary closure, as
needed, by barricade of certain public rights-of-ways for outdoor dining in the City
of Roanoke, Virginia, as is more particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 55.)
184
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35876-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
CITY PROPERTY-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in January, 2001, the City finalized the drilling and
testing of a well on the Muse Spring property, Official Tax No. 4360601, located at
the intersection of Mount Pleasant Boulevard and Riverland Road, S .E., which well
was a result of the groundwater development project initiated during the 1999
drought; final phases of using the well as a water supply were put on hold pending
completion of the Crystal Spring Treatment Plant and evaluation of the impact of 1-73
construction passing near the well site; on February 4, 2002, Council declared that
a water supply emergency existed and the use of this water supply was revisited;
and 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.
It was further advised that the Health Department requires that the City
dedicate the portion of the parcel that the well site occupies; to establish the area
for water supply use only; an area 200' by 200' feet, centered on the well, needs to
be dedicated for this purpose; the Health Department has agreed to permit
construction of the facilities required to operate the well site, however, the Health
Department will not give final approval to use the water until the site is surveyed and
platted; and the Water Division has initiated the process as of April 26, 2002, for
possible completion in approximately three weeks.
The City Manager recommended that Council approve dedication of the
portion of real estate of the Muse Spring property that will be used as a well site for
a water supply system for the City, and authorize the City Manager to execute a well
dedication document and to take such further actions and to execute such additional
documents as may be necessary to obtain approval by the Health Department.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
185
(#35877-052002) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute a
Well Dedication Agreement and any related and necessary documents providing for
the dedication of a portion of certain City owned property located at the intersection
of Mount Pleasant Boulevard and Riverland Road, S. E., containing an area
approximately 200 by 200 feet and being a portion of Official Tax Map No. 4360601,
upon certain terms and conditions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 56.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35877-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
BUDGET-GRANTS-TREES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that in March, 2002, Urban Forestry staff at the Department of Parks and
Recreation applied for a $15,000.00 grant from the Urban and Community Forestry
program at the Virginia Department of Forestry to be used for the purpose of
preparing an Urban Forestry Plan; and on April 17, 2002, the City received a letter
from the Virginia Department of Forestry stating that the $15,000.00 grant will be
awarded as soon as paperwork to activate the grant is provided by the City.
It was further advised that the project is needed in order to devise a
systematic method of managing the City's urban forest to the maximum benefit of
the community and the environment and to allow citizens to participate in the
planning process; the City's Urban Forester has presented information to Council
indicating a decrease in tree canopy cover from 40 per cent in 1973 to 35 per cent
in 1997; and with the current tree planting budget (for trees maintained by the City
on streets and in parks), there is a net loss of approximately 50 trees each year.
It was explained that the Urban and Community Forestry Grant is a Federal
grant, sponsored by the U. S. Forest Service and administered by the Virginia
Department of Forestry; funds are awarded on a reimbursement basis after
verification of the 50 per cent local match; the required $15,000.00 in City matching
funds will include $7,432.00 in FY 2002 temporary wages for an Urban Forestry
Planner, $4,400.00 in staff time provided by the Urban Forester and $800.00 in staff
time from cooperating departments, such as Public Works and Planning and Code
Enforcement; and time spent by Task Force members on the project will count as
the remainder of the match at the grantor's approved rate of $15.39 per volunteer
hour.
186
It was noted that major elements of the Urban Forestry Plan will include an
assessment of trees along streets and in parks, a review of tree management
practices, prioritization of criteria for tree planting projects, urban forestry goals,
recommendations (including education and incentives for better management of
trees on private property), and an implementation strategy; and coordination is
underway with other City departments (such as Engineering, Planning, and Public
Works) in regard to several plan elements.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the Urban and
Community Forestry Grant, in the amount of $15,000.00, and authorize the City
Manager to execute an agreement with the Virginia Department of Forestry and any
other forms necessary to accept such grant, to be approved as to form by the City
Attorney; appropriate $15,000.00 in Federal funding to accounts to be established
in the Grant Fund by the Director of Finance and establish corresponding revenue
estimates in the Grant Fund.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35878-052002) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 58.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35878-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, and
MayorSmith ................................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35879-052002) A RESOLUTION accepting the Urban and Community Forestry
Grant from the Virginia Department of Forestry, and authorizing the execution of the
necessary documents.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 59.)
187
Mr, Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35879-052002. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
CITY CODE-CITY EMPLOYEES-PENSIONS: The City Manager and the Director
of Finance submitted a joint communication advising that Internal Revenue Service
Regulations (IRS) require that all qualified Pension Plans be amended to include
revisions made to the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) over the past several years;
amended Plans must be submitted for an updated IRS Determination Letter by
June 30, 2002; and the IRS Determination Letter provides a statement that the Plan
has been reviewed by the IRS and determined to be in compliance with all applicable
IRC provisions governing qualified retirement plans.
It was further advised that the Plan has evolved over the years to provide for
administration of three retirement systems: the original police and fire system, the
Employees' Retirement System (ERS), and the Employees' Supplemental Retirement
System (ESRS), which amended and restated the ERS in 1984; numerous
amendments and additions have been made to Chapter 22.1 of the City Code to
incorporate various Plan revisions through the years; and the required IRS
amendment has provided an opportunity to restate the Plan to improve its
organization, as well as to increase both ease of understanding and administration.
It was noted that as outlined at the City Council briefing on May 6, 2002,
restated Chapter 22.2 addresses issues relative to the Plan's evolution into a
multiple employer plan encompassing three retirement systems; it provides
significant administrative clarification and flexibility, is in compliance with all
required IRS regulations, and includes no changes in benefits as existed prior to the
Plan's amendment and restatement; and the required IRS Determination Letter filing
deadline is June 30, 2002.
The City Manager and the Director of Finance recommended that Council
adopt an ordinance repealing Chapter 22.1, Pensions and Retirement, and enacting
new Chapter 22.2, Pensions and Retirement, such new chapter recodifying the City's
pension systems.
Mr. Hudson offered the following ordinance:
188
(#35880-052002) AN ORDINANCE amending the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, by repealing Chapter 22.1, Pension and Retirement, consisting
of §§22.1-1 through 22.1-82, and enacting new Chapter 22.2, Pension and
Retirement, consisting of §§22.2-1 through §§22.2-75, such new Chapter
consolidating, reorganizing, and recodifying pension systems of the City,
specifically: Police and Fire System, the Employees' Retirement System and the
Employees' Supplemental Retirement System; providing for an effective date; and
dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 59.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35880-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith .6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
PUBLIC WORKS-ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the City of Roanoke has been working with the Virginia
Department of Environmental Quality (VDEQ) to appropriately remediate the area of
the Middle Lot at the Public Works Service Center, in accordance with a Consent
Order dated March 21, 2000; two areas of the property, Unit Number 1 and Unit
Number 2, are under consideration; Unit Number 2 contains approximately 0.26 acre;
and in order to complete work and obtain VDEQ closure of the site, the VDEQ has
requested that the City of Roanoke limit future uses of Unit Number 2 to industrial
uses through a Notice of Use Limitation that will be recorded in the City of Roanoke
Circuit Court Clerk's Office.
It was further advised that the restriction allows the use of Unit Number 2 for
construction and grading of a stadium/amphitheater and parking area; it also allows
other uses which must meet the following requirements: that in the opinion of an
independent Registered Professional Engineer and with the approval of the VDEQ,
such other uses shall present no greater risk of harm to health, safety, public welfare
or the environment than the stadium/amphitheater or parking area uses; additional
restrictions, which will require consultation with VDEQ, would apply if Unit Number
2 might be used for purposes other than those set forth above; however, uses that
are listed as not allowed by the restriction are construction and occupancy of
residences, playgrounds, childcare centers or public gardens.
189
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute and record
a Notice of Use Limitation and any related and necessary documents, upon certain
terms and conditions as required by the Virginia Department of Environmental
Quality and to take such further action and to execute such other documents as may
be necessary to obtain VDEQ approval for the closure plan for said property.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35881-052002) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute a
Notice of Use Limitation and any related and necessary documents regarding a
portion of City owned property located at 1802 Courtland Road, N. E., containing
approximately 0.260 acre, and being a portion of Official Tax Map No. 3070316, upon
certain terms and conditions; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 113.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35881-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
TRAFFIC-CITY CODE-FEE COMPENDIUM: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that on May 13, 2002, Council approved an increase in the
late payment penalty for certain parking tickets from $10.00 to $15.00; the late
payment penalty is added to violations paid ten days or more after issuance of the
notice of violation, as recommended by the Department of Billings and Collections;
and late payments of decal violations and current fee for decal violations is $43.00,
with a fee of $53.00 imposed if payment is not made within ten days of issuance of
notice of violation.
It was further advised that late payment penalties should be consistent for all
late payments; after further review, it was noted that the decal violation late payment
penalty had not been increased from $10.00 to $15.00; and to make the late payment
penalties consistent, the decal violation fee would be $58.00 rather than $53.00 if
payment is not made within ten days.
190 -
The City Manager recommend that Council adopt an ordinance amending the
City Code to reflect changes in the late payment penalty as above referenced.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35882-052002) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (e) of
§20-33.1, Same-Requirements; obtaininq license plate, ta~l or decal a condition
precedent to discharge of violation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, the amended section to provide for the increase of certain penalties for
decal violations within the City of Roanoke; and providing for an emergency and for
an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 114.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35882-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ......................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Harris was absent).
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET- SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting appropriation of the following:
$752,295.00 from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment
Replacement Fund. The monies will be used for replacement of
obsolete instructional technology equipment, Magnet School
technology equipment, replacement of school buses,
replacement of facility maintenance equipment, replacement of
School Plants vehicles, construction of the Blue Ridge Technical
Academy Bio-Medical laboratory, and replacement of food
services equipment at various schools.
$199,191.00 for the Fleming-Ruffner Community Learning Center,
which is a continuing program that will be one hundred per cent
reimbursed by Federal funds.
$5,400.00 for the Statewide Compulsory Attendance Law Workshop
which is a new grant to be funded with Federal funds.
191
$6,395,000.00 for improvements to Roanoke Academy for
Mathematics and Science; and improvements are funded with 1999
Bond funds, a Literary Fund loan, and City capital funds.
$1,276,260.00 for improvements to Roanoke Academy for
Mathematics and Science; funding is being provided by Qualified
Zone Academy Bond (Q7_.AB) funds and will be used to purchase
furniture and equipment for the facility.
$163,671.00 for the Title I Summer program to provide remedi=l
reading, language arts and mathematics instruction for students in
targeted schools, to be one hundred per cent reimbursed by Federal
funds.
$7,700.00 for the Roanoke Adolescent Health Partnership to provide
for medical services to the Schools in conjunction with the City of
Roanoke Health Department and Carilion Health Systems, to be
reimbursed by donations from Carilion Health Services and various
grants.
$90,000.00 for the Juvenile Detention Home program to provide
funds for the salary and expenses of six educational coordinators
and the principal position, which will be one hundred per cent
reimbursed by State funds.
$35,671.00 for the Adult Basic Education program to provide funds
for the education of adults who have not completed high school,
which will be reimbursed by Federal funds; and matching funds of
$22,700.00 have been provided.
$4,000.00 for the Regional Education Specialist program to provide
ancillary and support services for the Adult Literacy and Basic
Education program in the planning district, to be funded with
member fees.
$40,639.00 for the Regional Adult Literacy program to provide funds
for administration of adult literacy programs, which will be funded
with Federal funds.
$16,647.00 for the Regional Adult Basic Education program to
provide funds for administration of adult literacy programs, which
will be funded with Federal funds.
192
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request, was before the body.
Mr. Hudson offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35883-052002) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 General, School, and School Food Services Fund Appropriations, and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 116.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35883-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN- COMMUNITY PLANNING- DOWNTOWN ROANOKE,
INCORPORATED: Acommunication from the City Manager advising that amendment
to the Comprehensive Plan to include the Outlook Roanoke Plan, was tabled by
Council at its meeting on February 12, 2002; whereupon, she requested that the
matter be removed from the table.
Mr. Carder moved that the matter be removed from the table. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted.
A communication from Downtown Roanoke, Inc., in support of adoption nfthe
Outlook Roanoke Update, dated September 2001, was before Council.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35884-052002) A RESOLUTION amending Vision 2001-2020, the City's
adopted comprehensive plan, to include Outlook Roanoke Update as an element of
the comprehensive plan.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 121.)
193
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35884-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson.
Ms. Wyatt requested that the record reflect that she is not in favor of making
the First Street Bridge a vehicular bridge, instead the First Street Bridge should
remain a pedestrian bridge; however, in the spirit of cooperation, she will vote in
support of the Outlook Roanoke Plan as a part of the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. White concurred in the remarks of Ms. Wyatt.
Resolution No. 35884-052002 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
ZONING: Ordinance No. 35818, on second reading, amending, repealing or
replacing proffered conditions authorized by Ordinance No. 32294-121994 presently
binding upon Official Tax No. 2761409, rezoning 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 petitioner, having been tabled at the May 6, 2002,
meeting of Council, the matter was before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that the item be removed from the table. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance for its second reading and final
adoption:
(#35818) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City Roanoke (1~)79),
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.
194
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35818. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Hudson.
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that he recently met with Mr. Wells and reviewed
the original application for rezoning, at which time it was discovered that there is a
mistake in the Official Tax Number which does not match with the original
application; therefore, the ordinance before Council is incorrect.
Mr. Carder offered a substitute motion that the matter be referred back to the
City Planning Commission for clarification and further report to Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson.
In explanation, the City Attorney advised that there are three different
descriptions of the property to be rezoned and expressed concern that the City
Planning Commission and City Planners may not have referenced the same property
in the recommendation to Council that the applicant intended to rezone. He stated
that a correct description of the property is necessary for inclusion in the ordinance
to provide for a clear and concise understanding of the property to be rezoned. He
joined in the request that the matter be remanded back to the City Planning
Commission to enable the applicant and the City Planning Department to arrive at
a correct definition of the property to be rezoned.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that it is regrettable that there has been an error in the
property description; however, Council is familiar with Mr. Wells request, the
location of the property, and Mr. Wells future plans; therefore, he did not understand
the point in referring the matter back to the City Planning Commission if there are
not sufficient votes from the Council to support the request. He stated that further
incursion of Mr. Wells current facility is too much for the neighborhood, and
regardless of whether the tax numbers are clarified, he would not vote to support the
request. He advised that he was not in favor of asking the City Planning
Commission to expend extra time and effort on a request that he does not intend to
support, and would hope that Council will vote against referring the matter back to
the Planning Commission.
The substitute motion to refer the matter back to the City Planning
Commission lost by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Hudson and Mayor Smith
.3.
NAYS: Council Members Wyatt, White and Bestpitch
.3.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
195
The City Attorney offered a suggestion that the matter be tabled indefinitely
by Council which would allow the applicant to refile the application with a corrected
description. He explained that the matter would again be considered by the City
Planning Commission since the propertywas not properly advertised with a correct
legal description.
Ms. Wyatt questioned the chain of events that brought the process to this
point only to discover that there were errors in the legal description of the property.
She advised that to table the matter at this time and to place the community in a
quandary is not the proper thing to do, and she does not intend to vote for further
encroachment into the neighborhood. She spoke against referring the matter back
to the City Planning Commission because it is a disrespect to residents of the area
when they must repeatedly take time out of their schedule to attend meetings of the
City Planning Commission and City Council in order to protect their neighborhood.
The question was raised as to the consequence if the ordinance, as drafted,
is defeated; whereupon, the City Attorney advised that the ordinance is based Upon
the application filed by the petitioner, therefore, whatever the petitioner applied for
would be denied. He explained that any rezoning that has been denied by Council
cannot be reconsidered for one year, unless the position is taken that the
description of the property has changed, in which case the applicant could refile.
He reiterated that the description as contained in the ordinance before Council is
inaccurate.
The Mayor spoke in support of clarifying the property description without
having to go back to the City Planning Commission, and that Council Members cast
their votes accordingly so as to eliminate any inconvenience to Mr. Wells and to
residents of the area.
There was further discussion as to how Council could legally vote on a
measure that is technically incorrect; whereupon, the City Attorney recommended
that Council either table the matter, or refer the request back to the City Planning
Commission to revise the legal description of the property.
Mr. Hudson offered a substitute motion that the matter be tabled. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted, Council Members White and Wyatt voting
no,
Following further discussion, Ms. Wyatt moved that the matter be removed
from the table. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted.
196
Ms. Wyatt moved that the matter be referred back to the City Planning
Commission for proper description of the property and report to Council. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted.
Ms. Wyatt requested that property owners in the area receive timely
notification of City Planning Commission/City Council meetings regarding the
matter.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS: None.
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
JAMISON/BULLITT PROJECT.HOUSING AUTHORITY: Vice-Mayor Carder
called attention to a meeting that was held on Thursday, May 16, 2002 at Belmont
Christian Church in which City staff previewed the Bullitt/Jamison Pilot Project,
which was attended by approximately 100 residents from the southeast section of
the City. He stated that the scope of the Bullitt/Jamison Pilot project is exciting,
representatives from numerous City departments were in attendance, and the
southeast neighborhood is excited about serving as the pilot project. He expressed
appreciation to the City Manager for involving citizens in the process.
TAXES-LEGISLATION: Vice- Mayor Carder referred to the issue of land value
taxation, the premise of which is that the value of real property lies in the land and
not in improvements to the land, and in view of the fact that the State basically cut
most of the funds for revitalizing urban areas, site value taxation is worth looking
into by the City of Roanoke. He explained that the concept is that the value of the
land is the most important thing, therefore, persons with vacant lots are incented
to develop empty lots, and the concept also incents infill building and construction
versus speculation that land values will increase in the future. He asked that the
matter be referred to a committee to be composed of Council representatives, the
Director of Real Estate Valuation, persons from the business community, and the
Director of Finance to review the impact of land value taxation.
GENERAL SERVICES LEGISLATION-PROCUREMENT CODE: Vice-Mayor
Carder called attention to meetings with business owners who expressed concern
regarding the process in which the City awards contracts for services and products;
and one specific business indicated that it lost a $500,000.00 contract by two cents
to a company in the State of Michigan to supply the City with waste water chemicals.
197
He pointed out that when looking at economic development dollars, $500,000.00
represents $2.5 million out of the City's local economy, as well as the loss of
revenue to a local company. He requested that the matter be referred to the
Legislative Committee, and that the City Manager appoint a committee to review
enabling legislation that would allow the City to place some type of priority on local
businesses in the City's bidding or request for proposals process.
Council Members Wyatt and White spoke in support of the concept; however,
before appointing a committee, they suggested that the matter be referred to the City
Attorney to address the legality.
WATER RESOURCES-STATE HIGHWAYS: Council Member Bestpitch
commended the City Manager for adding information to the City's web-site
regarding the rain barrel option for collecting rain water as it drains from the roof of
residential housing units. He stated that there are four companies, one of which is
located in the local area, that will design a system for collecting rain water.
Council Member Bestpitch advised that he attended a briefing on Wednesday,
May 15, 2002, at the Salem District Office of the Virginia Department of
Transportation (VDOT) with regard to changes in the Six Year Program by VDOT; and
the new Commissioner of Highways participated in the meeting via video
conference from Richmond to the nine district offices throughout the state. He
stated that Six Year Program goals have been reviewed to ensure that VDOT uses
more realistic revenue projections, i.e.: that the actual amount of money that can
realistically be expected to be received over the next six years be projected, that
more realistic cost estimates be used and that projects be paid off in the year of
completion, (allocations should match the schedule for projects, and removal of
those projects that have no foreseeable source of funding within the next six years).
He explained that the amount of funding for the Six Year Plan has been reduced by
approximately one-third, or $2.9 billion less in this years' Six Year Plan than in last
years' plan, which removes 179 projects throughout the State from the Six Year
Program. He noted that this does not mean that the 179 projects will not continue
to be considered and perhaps added back into future Six Year Programs, but the
projects are not currently in the Six Year Program. He stated that about one-third of
the $2.9 billion represents revised cost estimates in the amount of $950 million
(projects that are currently under construction in which VDOT believes that the cost
estimates are $950 million less than the actual cost of the projects). He noted that
of particular significance to the City of Roanoke is the removal of the bridge from
13t" Street, S. E., to Hollins Road, N. E., which project has been in the VDOT plan for
longer than six years, but has not been built and is a good example of what the new
198
Commissioner is attempting to move toward. In total, from the Roanoke Metropolitan
Area, he advised that $529 million in projects have been removed, or moved back
from the construction to the development phase. He stated that the question was
asked as to whether the Six Year Program now includes any support for the
TransDominion Express Rail Passenger service, to which VDOT responded that it
is committed to passenger service by rail, but there are no funds included in the Six
Year Program.
CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Hudson inquired about the status of
photographs of former Mayors which were previously on display in the City Council
Chamber, and asked that the photographs be appropriately displayed.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
CITY MANAGER-SPECIAL EVENTS: The City Manager commended the Local
Colors Festival, which was held on Sunday, May 19, 2002, that celebrated the
diversity of cultures represented in the Roanoke Valley.
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.
There were no requests by citizens to speak.
At 3:50 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, May 20, 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 Linda F. Wyatt, William White, Sr., W. Alvin
Hudson, Jr., William H. Carder, William D. Bestpitch and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ....... 6.
ABSENT: Council Member C. Nelson Harris .............................................. 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.
199
The reconvened meeting was opened with a prayer by Council Member
William D. Bestpitch.
' The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
PARKS AND RECREATION-LEASES- GOLF PROGRAM: Pursuant to notice of
advertisement for bids for lease of East Gate Park for construction, maintenance
and operation of a golf facility for use by the general public, the matter was before
Council.
The Mayor advised that bids were to be received in the City Clerk's Office until
12:00 noon on Monday, May 20, 2002, and to be held by the City Clerk, unopened,
until the 7:00 p.m. session of the Council, at which time the bids would be opened
and read before the Council. He inquired if there was any person in attendance who
had a question or objection to the opening of the bids. Hearing none, the Mayor
instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening and reading of the bids.
The City Clerk reported that one bid had been received prior to the deadline
from The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund.
In connection with the opening of bids, the Mayor advised that a public
hearing was advertised in The Roanoke Times on May 5, 2002 and May 12, 2002, with
regard to the lease of certain property in East Gate Park for construction,
maintenance and operation of a golf facility for use by the general public, subject to
certain terms and conditions, for Monday, May 20, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., on as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, the matter was before the body.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report finding that the
proposal for a golf facility, including the First Tee Junior Golf Program, is
substantially in accord with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
· A report of the City Manager advising that East Gate Park, located on North
Avenue, N. E., between 13th Street and Tinker Creek is composed of approximately
59 acres; park amenities include a playground, shelter with restroom and one-half
basketball court; and the Parks and Recreation Master Plan does not identify, any
additional public investment in the park because of the challenges of locating
recreational facilities on a landfill, since athletic fields cannot be installed due to
lighting requirements which would require disturbing the landfill, was before
Council.
200 -
It was further advised that The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund is a charitable
organization that has conducted annual golf tournaments, summer golf camps and
scholarships to area youth and is ready to embark on a project that will introduce
golf and mentoring opportunities to youth, while creating a public golf facility; in
order to accomplish its goal, the Memorial Fund is working with the First Tee
Program which is a 501 (c) (3) corporation that helps create affordable and
accessible golf facilities through its local chapters, and has requested a 15 year
lease of an approximately 29 acre portion of East Gate Park to implement a First Tee
Golf Program; the partnership will provide recreational opportunities, which are not
currently offered, to a wide spectrum of Roanoke's citizens of all ages; and the main
objective of the First Tee Program is to provide youth with a learning opportunity.
The City Manager explained that East Gate Park is ideally suited for this
endeavor; existing park amenities and 30 acres of the Park will remain after leasing
and will continue to serve neighbors and visitors as a neighborhood park for
recreational opportunities outside of golf; this effort will be the City's first i~t the
redevelopment of a known landfill; because of this relatively unfamiliar process,
great care will be taken to see that the development, architectural, and engineering
plans and construction are completed with heightened awareness of environmental
impacts; as a local chapter responsibility, The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund is
actively considering professional services firms, many of which have extensive
experience in designing and constructing golf facilities on existing landfill sites; and
the Memorial Fund has agreed to assist the City in securing environmental
consultation and legal services if the need should arise.
The City Manager advised that this opportunity is a model for how
public/private partnership is expected to work; because of this partnership, the
Parks and Recreation Department will be the recipient of a state of the art golfing
facility with clubhouse, driving range, teaching areas and several golfing holes, in
addition to a capital investment in excess of $400,000.00 and maintenance provided
by The Scoff Robertson Memorial Fund; The Scott Robertson Memorial Fund reatizes
the goal of being able to provide instruction, and introduce the game of golf to all
youth in the community at little or no cost to each participant; and this project also
utilizes a park site with limited development opportunities and transforms a brown-
field into a renewable community resource.
Mr. Hudson offered the following resolution:
201
(#35885-052002) A RESOLUTION finding that the proposed use of a portion of
East Gate Park by a private entity for a golf facility, subject to certain terms and
conditions which encourage young people to learn how to play golf, is substantially
in accord with Vision 2001-2020, the City's adopted Comprehensive Plan.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page122.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35885-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. White.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
address the matter. There being none, Resolution No. 35885-052002 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Bestpitch and Mayor Smith---5.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)(Vice-Mayor Carder abstained from voting
inasmuch as he serves as a member of The Scoff Robertson Memorial Fund
Committee.)
The Mayor advised that the City Manager has requested that the bid of The
Scott Robertson Memorial Fund be referred to the City Manager for study, report and
recommendation to Council; therefore, without objection by Council, it was so
ordered.
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the
City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public
heari'ng for Monday, May 20, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, on the request of Cape Town, L.C., and Steven W. Morris that two
tracts of land located on the southwest side of Roberts Road, S. W., identified as
Official Tax Nos. 1290212 and 1290211, be rezoned from RS-3, Residential Single
Family District, to C-1, Office District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the
petitioners, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Saturday, May 4, 2002 and Saturday, May 11, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
202
A report of the City Planning Commission recommending that Council deny
the rezoning request and advising that issues considered by the Planning
Commission included the transitional nature of the properties, impact of adjacent
commercial development, availability of other commercially zoned properties, and
objection by neighborhood residents, was before Council.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
"AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3 Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended and Sheet No. 129, 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."
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of the ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Ms. Wyatt.
Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney, representing the petitioner, addressed
Council in support of the request of his client. He stated that his client has proffered
the condition that the brick home on the larger of the two lots will remain
substantially as it appears today, even if rezoned, and the other lot is so small that
it cannot be developed by itself, therefore, the proffer essentially means that the
homes will remain in their present form until there is further petition to Council. He
added that the two lots have been so profoundly affected by their surroundings that
they are no longer viable as residential properties. He advised that across Roberts
Road is the former Moore's Franklin Road location, now owned by Carilion and
operated as a kitchen and laundry facility for the entire hospital system, which is a
24 hour per day/seven day a week operation; if one stands on the front porch of the
brick home on the larger of the two lots and looks across the Carillon property, one
would see the fronts of those buildings, the access drive from Roberts Road into the
facility, the upper portion of the parking lot, and there is continuous activity in the
area around the clock, seven days a week. He stated that the two homes in
question serve as a buffer area for the remainder of the neighborhood. He noted
that the City Planning Commission, by a 3 - 3 vote, did not recommend the rezoning
to Council and two of the three Planning Commissioners who voted against the
rezoning stated the position that Franklin Road frontage should not incur further
commercial rezoning. He referred to streets in the Beechwood Subdivision that have
already been rezoned to C-1, Office District, therefore, the request of his client does
not set a precedent, but more importantly when one looks at the size of the Carillon
facility, the vast majority of which is hundreds of feet off of Franklin Road,
commercial encroachment already exists. He stated that Mr. Charles Helms,
property owner in the area, has argued against the rezoning on the basis that
enough has already been done to the neighborhood; however, that argument~
203
disregards the fact that what has already been done to the neighborhood affects the
two lots in question more than any other lot because they act as a buffer for Mr.
Helms' adjoining property and for other lots in the neighborhood. He presented
letters from four of the six property owners closest to the property requested to be
rezoned which either do not object to, or support the rezoning application, and
these property owners recognize that the lots in question as office uses will be
more effective buffers for the neighborhood than as residential uses, and such
properties are serving as buffers all over the City between intensive C-2 uses and
residential uses.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the request for rezoning.
Mr. Charles B. Helms, 2954 Roberts Road, S. W., advised that he has lived at
his residence for 44 years and owns four houses in the area. He called attention to
disruptions in the neighborhood in years past as a result of operations by Cycle
Systems, Franklin Heights Apartments which were later razed, the Carilion facility,
undersirable activity in and around the facility, a gay and lesbian bar on Franklin
Road, a used car lot, and General Imports. He advised that the two houses in
question should remain as rental property because of the lack of good rental
property close to the downtown area, and requested that Council deny the petition
for rezoning.
Ms. Maggie Snyder, 2930 Roberts Road, S. W., advised that she lives directly
across from the Carilion facility and she has been disturbed during the early
morning hours by loud noise, music, and flashing lights. She stated that traffic has
increased since Carilion opened its facility, and she plans to move from the area to
escape undesirable living conditions.
Mr. John Hall, 558 Dillard Road, S.W., property owner in the area, advised
that the petitioner has improved the two houses, and inasmuch as the Carilion
facility is already located in the area, the requested rezoning would not be
detrimental to the neighborhood. Therefore, he spoke in support of the request for
rezoning.
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that the request before Council is a classic
example of encroachment into the neighborhood; therefore, he could not support
the request for rezoning.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that as a general rule for these types of rezoning
requests, two basic questions need to be answered; i.e.: does the City need more
of this particular type of zoning in this area, and if the answer is yes, the second
question becomes, is the property a good candidate for rezoning to C-1. He
explained that there is currently a large area of C-1 zoned property next to this
neighborhood that is essentially undeveloped at this point, but more significc, ntly,
204
there is a considerable amount of C-1 property in the area and in most areas of the
City that is currently vacant; therefore, it appears that if Council, as a governmental
body, continues to rezone additional property to C-I, it is artificially interfering in the
free market system that would otherwise regulate the supply and demand for C-1
property. He stated that if the rezoning is approved, the City will be adding to the
surplus which can only further depress the rental that C-1 property owners receive
which, in turn, depresses the value of the property since appraisal of this type of
property is based primarily on the type of rental income it can generate.
Mr. White advised that from a practical point of view, rezoning of the Carilion
property impacted the residential use of the two parcels of land in question. He
stated that Council has a responsibility to resolve the matter, and inasmuch as the
request was defeated by a 3 - 3 vote of the City Planning Commission, it would be
appropriate to refer the matter back to the Planning Commission to work with the
petitioner and the neighborhood on the highest and best use of the property.
Mr. White offered a substitute motion that the matter be referred back to the
City Planning Commission for further study, report and recommendation to Council.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted.
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
ZONING- ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: Pursuant to provisions of Resolution No.
25523 adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the
City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday May 20, 2002, at 7:00 p.m.,
or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of the City of
Roanoke, Calvin W. and Mary C. Powers, and Theodore J. and Judy P. Sutton, that
a tract of land lying generally west of Courtland Avenue, N. W., north of Orange
Avenue and south of Sycamore Avenue, comprised of approximately 24.5 acres,
more or less, and designated as Official Tax Nos. 3070301-3070310, inclusive,
3070313-3070316, inclusive, 2041816 and 2041817, currently zoned LM, Light
Manufacturing District; and Official Tax Nos. 3070501, 3070318 and 3070319,
currently zoned C-2, General Commercial District, be rezoned to C-3, Central
Business District, the matter was before the body.
A report of the City Planning Commission recommending approval of the
request for rezoning, was before Council. The Planning Commission advised that
development of the property for a stadium/amphitheater will encourage economic
development of the area, provide a regional entertainment attraction near
downtown, redevelop an underutilized area, and incorporate shared parking; and
development of the site will also create a better linkage between downtown Roanoke
and the Williamson Road area and support an "entertainment complex approach by
grouping with the existing Civic Center".
205
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35886-052002) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet Nos. 204 and 307, Sectional 1976 Zone Map,
City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City; and dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance.
(For full text Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 124.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35886-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
The City Manager advised that staff was to present a briefing; whereupon,
James M. Evans, Director, Roanoke Civic Center Facilities, advised that after several
years of study and review of multiple locations, 18 different sites were considered
for the stadium/amphitheater complex and the location presently before Council at
Orange Avenue was considered to be the most appropriate site for a multi-purpose
facility for a number of reasons, i.e.: the property is centrally located, the property
joins with the Roanoke Civic Center to make a sports and entertainment complex,
the property has the ability to be more accessible than any of the other sites that
were studied, and the site provides an opportunity to provide sufficient parking for
stadium events and to share parking for large events within the two facilities. He
added that the area consists of approximately 25 acres, most of which is currently
owned by the City.
Charles M. Anderson, Architect, II advised that the stadium/amphitheater
project is bounded by Carver Avenue on the south, Courtland Avenue on the east,
the City's Public Works Service Center on the north, and 1-581 on the west, and
encompasses approximately 25 acres of land, most of which is owned by the City
of Roanoke. He stated that the project will consist of two elements, the first being
a stadium which will provide seating for approximately 8,000 persons, the
amphitheater is the second element and will be designed as a permanent facility that
will consist of concessions and restroom facilities designed for 12,000 persons,
however, the amphitheater will have the capability to seat as many as 16,000 - 18,000
persons. He reviewed a plan for on site parking which will be in the range of 700 -
1000 vehicles and as a part of the project, the City has retained an
architectural/engineering consultant to design the work for the facility, and
subconsultants will prepare food service designs, acoustics, operation of the
amphitheater portion of the facility, engineering, signage, graphics, etc. He stated
that as a part of the study, the consultant will provide the City with a traffic study,
looking at not only the impact of traffic in and around the stadium, but the studywill
extend from Elm Avenue, 1-581 at the south to Hershberger Road, 1-581 to the north
206 -
as far east as the Gus Nicks/Orange Avenue intersection and to the west at 13th
Street and Orange Avenue. He explained that the traffic study includes
approximately 37 intersections and is intended to accomplish two major goals; i.e.:
to identify a true traffic management plan that will address the movement of traffic
in and around both the Civic Center and the stadium/amphitheater functions, both
at the Civic Center as well as at the stadium during a normal function that may have
5000 - 6000 persons in attendance, as it relates to the impact of additional traffic on
those intersections around the stadium and the civic center, and to also look at
those unusual events where there may be as many as 15,000 persons at a single
event. Over the short term, he advised that the City will receive a management plan
that utilizes traffic cones and uniformed police officers to direct traffic in and about
the area during a performance. He stated that the second component of the project
relates to long term infrastructure improvements and costs which is a two phase
approach, with short term information relative to the management plan anticipated
to be received in mid July and infrastructure improvements information to be
received in late August.
Mr. Bestpitch inquired if acoustics involving noise from 1-581 traffic that could
interfere with certain types of concerts, etc., will be taken into consideration;
whereupon, Mr. Anderson advised that the study involves both noise to and from the
site.
Ms. Wyatt inquired if the traffic study surrounding and impacting the area will
be completed before the design of the stadium is undertaken; whereupon, Mr.
Anderson advised that the intent is to have the short term management plan
completed by mid July; long range infrastructure improvements will be built into
future plans in terms of funding; and infrastructure improvements will not be
completed before the stadium is constructed. He explained that a traffic
management plan will be developed that reviews present infrastructure, identifies
problem areas, and by using variable messaging boards, persons coming into the
facility will be able to identify available parking areas, and uniformed police officers
will be used to direct traffic, both in and out of the site, all of which are proposed to
be used to manage traffic flow.
Ms. Wyatt stated that it is imperative that the traffic problem be solved before
the stadium/amphitheater is constructed, and she will not support any plan for
construction until traffic issues are addressed.
The City Manager advised that the City would be foolish to design and build
a facility if it did not have a design in place to address traffic. She stated that the
difference is in semantics, i.e.: the City will have a traffic management plan that will
allow for good ingress and egress from the site, although the plan may not involve
207
the construction of new infrastructure and may consist of managing existing
infrastructure. For example, she advised that the plan may suggest variable signs
over the roadway with two lanes of left turn traffic off of Orange Avenue onto
Williamson Road at certain times of the day, as opposed to one left turn lane and one
straight lane. She explained that if the traffic plan calls for two additional lanes over
the long term which would take longer to design and construct than openin~ the
facility, a plan will be in place that will manage traffic into and out of the facility
before the final design is completed and clearly before the project is constructed.
Ms. Wyatt spoke in support of a plan that will create a quick and easy ingress
and egress out of both facilities that will not negatively impact the Williamson Road
area and surrounding areas. She requested a plan that will demonstrate that the City
administration has addressed traffic flow for those persons attending events and for
those persons living in the neighborhoods. Minus that, she advised that she could
not vote in favor of the proposed construction.
· ~Mr. White raised a question with regard to intersection studies; whereupon,
Mr. Anderson advised that the consulting team met with City staff and discussed
where intersection studies should occur and there was a concern that the study go
beyond 10th Street and Orange Avenue to ensure that the adjacent residential area
is included, and 10th Street is a part of the traffic study.
Mr. Hudson expressed concern that rezoning of the property is occurring
before the traffic study is completed. He inquired as to the impact on surrounding
businesses related to overflow parking for the facility. He called attention to a 4 - 3
vote by the City Planning Commission, which body raised the same questions that
have been raised by Council Members with regard to traffic issues. He stated that
he was not opposed to the project, but it appears that the City is, "placing the cart
before the horse", and Council would never consider approving a rezoning for a
private developer without receiving answers to these types of questions, yet,
because it is a City project, it appears that favoritism is being shown by the City. He
advised that the traffic study is one of the most important components of the project.
Mr. Anderson advised that when the City retained the design consultant for
the facility, the contract included the traffic study. He stated that the traffic study
has been expedited and the initial piece of the management plan will be received by
mid July and infrastructure improvements recommendations are due at the end of
August. He further stated that the consulting team has been running traffic counts
at the two affected intersections, data will be loaded into a computer program, along
with information relative to performances at the civic center and anticipated
performances at the stadium/amphitheater, with base line data reviewing rush or
non-rush hour traffic and how these events will impact traffic, and from that
analysis, the consultant will make recommendations relative to a traffic management
plan and infrastructure improvements. In regard to parking issues, he explained that
208 -
the Civic Center wishes to link the two facilities via a bridge that would cross over
Orange Avenue and provide an opportunity to utilize parking at the Civic Center that
would help to support events at the stadium/amphitheater and vice versa. He noted
that there are approximately 1800 spaces at the Civic Center, 800 - 1000 spaces are
anticipated at the new stadium/amphitheater site and there is an agreement to park
400 - 500 vehicles at Civic Mall. He added that design of the facility is proposed to
be coupled with the traffic study since one component cannot get in front of the
other because there is a need to know how the facility lays on the site, the location
of main entrances for vehicle ingress and egress, and location of ingress and egress
for service vehicles.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
speak to the matter.
Wendy Jones, President, Williamson Road Area Business Association,
(WRABA), advised that WRABA is supportive of locating the stadium/amphitheater
in the Williamson Road area to revitalize businesses, especially at the lower end of
Williamson Road; however, they want to ensure that the area can handle the
additional traffic and parking that will be generated. She encouraged the City to
address the issue in a proactive manner and "not place the cart before the horse".
She advised that the Williamson Road Area Business Association would like to work
with the City to see the project come to fruition, but they would like for the
stadium/amphitheater to be designed in such a way so as to accommodate
businesses and residents of the area, as well as patrons of the two facilities.
Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney, representing Farrell Properties and Bergland
Automotive, advised that for 25 years he has represented petitioners with rezoning
requests before the Council, and he would never ask Council to act on a rezoning
petition without the appropriate study to address issues of concern. As it relates
to the stadium/amphitheater project, he stated that the City is using different and
much less stringent standards than it would require of any of its citizens. Secondly,
he stated that the zoning process is carefully defined by statute/ordinance to ensure
that all major issues are addressed at the staff level, at the City Planning
Commission level, and at the City Council level for public hearing and public
discussion and that solutions are identified and become part of the proposal. He
noted that if a surrounding property owner is aggrieved by the ultimate decision of
Council, there is a process for appeal to the Circuit Court so that an impartial judge
can decide if the City acted properly. He stated that the City's answer to the request
for delaying the proceeding is that there will be public hearings at which time
citizens will be heard, and the City Planning Commission will review plans once the
traffic study is completed; however, he explained that there is no right of appeal
from that process. He added that the appeal right is from the Council process and
once the rezoning is approved, there is no opportunity for a court to become
involved and a citizen can only express an opinion at one of the public hearings. He
209
stated that his clients are not opposed to the stadium/amphitheater project, but they
are opposed to the rezoning at this time based on the above stated facts; therei=ore,
he requested that Council refer the matter back to the City Planning Commission for
further public hearings and to conform with the process that is required by the City
of Roanoke regarding requests for rezoning.
Ben Burch, President, Airlee Court Neighborhood Association, 923 Curtis
Avenue, N. E., advised that he was proud to live in the City of Roanoke and to
observe City leaders as they take care of business.
Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that the City has placed
the "cart before the horse". She spoke on behalf of those residents and citizens
who have little voice and advised that there were no public hearings for residents
who live in the area to provide comments. She spoke with regard to possible
encroachment into the historical graveyard; additional traffic lanes being added to
1-581, both north and south; encroachment into the neighborhoods, specifically
Lincoln Terrace where over $20 million have been expended in rehabilitz, ting
housing; encroachment of light and noise from the stadium/amphitheater and the
effect on the surrounding neighborhood; and environmental issues as to whether
the ground is suitable for constructing and/or sustaining a stadium/amphitheater.
She stated that there are questions that should be considered and answered in the
proper documents before consideration is given to the rezoning. She added that
citizens have very little way to provide input once a decision is made, therefore,
important decisions like traffic problems and business concerns should not be taken
lightly, but more importantly, the average citizen needs to be given consideration.
Mr. Bill Tanger, 257 Dancing Tree Lane, Roanoke County, advised that traffic
on 1-581 this evening at the end of the work day was backed up into the intersection
which was a reminder of civic center traffic that sometimes backs up 1-581, and with
each event, the probability that there will be a serious accident on 1-581, or one of
the other streets that makes up the local gridlock situation increases. He
encouraged Council to table its vote on rezoning of the property until the traffic plan
is developed. He stated that the City of Roanoke requires and the intent of the
zoning ordinance calls for traffic and parking plans to be developed prior to
presenting projects for rezoning, and with a vote of 4 - 3 by the City Planning
Commission, there is good reason to refer the matter back to the Planning
Commission for further study. He added that a deferral of approximately two months
will not delay plans for the project, but will allow citizens from the neighborhoods
to provide their input, all of which will result in a better facility. He stated that voting
on the rezoning is untimely, and the rezoning should occur in the proper sequence
so that Council will not be criticized if the project results in a disaster for traffic, for
citizens and for businesses in the area.
210
The City Manager advised that the problems that currently exist at the
intersection of Orange Avenue and Williamson Road did not arise since the decision
of Council to construct the stadium/amphitheater at that location, but instead those
problems have existed for a long period of time. She stated that the
stadium/amphitheater project provides the impetus for the City to deal with a traffic
situation that has existed for some time and there are measures that could be taken
that would start to better manage the traffic flow and could reduce the line of
vehicles going into and out of the civic center. She added that managing what the
City has is a different technique and one that has not always been used, without
necessarily having to construct new roads or widen roads in the traditional way that
traffic has been addressed in the past. Therefore, she advised that those problems
that exist today that have gone unaddressed in the past, will be addressed through
the traffic study.
Vice-Mayor Carder requested that the City Manager comment on the statement
made by a previous speaker that the City is treating itself different from private
business developers on rezoning issues; whereupon, the City Manager advised that
it has been determined that there is no requirement in the City Code or the zoning
ordinance for development of a traffic plan or study. She explained that at the time
a rezoning request comes to the City, it is reviewed by a number of City departments,
additional information may be requested and the information is helpful in
determining the recommendation. She stated that the last time the City made a
formal request for a traffic plan was when the Super Wal-Mart was to be constructed
on Valley View Boulevard; however, it should be noted that the traffic impacts of a
Super Wal-Mart are different than those for a stadium/amphitheater project. She
advised that as the entity responsible for infrastructure, the City of Roanoke will hear
from citizens who are satisfied or dissatisfied; and there are numerous examples
wherethe City did not impose requirements on others in the past, particularly the
private sector, and the City has had to take responsibility for certain improvements.
She stated that a community-wide forum will be held in June to share ideas about
the stadium/amphitheater project.
Mr. Hudson moved that action on Ordinance No. 35886-052002 be tabled.
The motion failed for lack of a second.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that a civic center cannot be constructed anywhere in
the City, or anywhere in the world without traffic issues that need to be addressed.
He stated that it is difficult to understand why anyone would assume that Council is
not completely committed to doing everything possible through the study process
and through every other available method to mitigate the traffic problem as much as
211
possible, and to provide for improvements that will benefit not just ingress and
egress to the stadium/amphitheater facility, but improve traffic flow throughout the
area 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. He added that the only action being taken by
Council at this time is rezoning of the property to provide for a location for
construction of the stadium/amphitheater.
Mr. Bestpitch called for the question.
Ordinance No. 35886-052002 was lost by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Carder and Bestpitch ....................... .4.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
PRESENT: Council Member Hudson and Mayor Smith ................................ 2.
(Council Member Harris was absent.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
Vice-Mayor Carder raised a point of order; whereupon, he moved to amend
Ordinance No. 35886-052002 to delete the following words: "and dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance by title." The motion was seconded by Mr. White.
The Mayor again ruled that the public hearing was closed.
Ms. Wyatt challenged the ruling of the Chair based on the fact that the Mayor
closed the public hearing before the Vice-Mayor was allowed to complete his
comments.
The City Attorney was called upon for a ruling; whereupon, he advised that
five members of Council may alter or suspend the rules of Council. He stated that
the challenge to the ruling of the Chair is addressed by Roberts Rules of Order;
whereupon, the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to provide time for the City
Attorney to research Roberts Rules of Order.
The Council meeting reconvened at 9:12 p.m., with all Members of the Council
in attendance, including Council Member Harris, Mayor Smith presiding.
212 -
The Mayor advised that pursuant to Roberts Rules of Order, there is a process
for over ruling the Chair, which provides that if a motion is made, duly seconded and
adopted by a majority vote of the Council, the decision of the Chair may be over
ruled.
Ms. Wyatt respectfully challenged the ruling of the Chair. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Carder, Bestpitch, Harris and Mayor
Smith ....................................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: Council Member Hudson--
The Mayor reopened the public hearing.
The City Attorney advised that the ordinance as drafted did not pass inasmuch
as five affirmative votes of the Council are required for passage; however, Council
may move to reconsider the ordinance.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Council reconsider the vote on Ordinance No. 35886-
052002. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted bythe following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Harris and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None .........
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35886-052002) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet Nos. 204 and 307, Sectional 1976 Zone Map,
City of Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City; and dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Book No 65, page 124.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35886-052002. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
213
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Harris and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... -0.
Mayor Smith and Council Member Hudson advised that they voted in favor of
the rezoning; however, there are numerous unanswered questions that should be
addressed before proceeding with the stadium/amphitheater project.
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
LEASES-PARKS AND RECREATION: Pursuant to previous instructions by
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, May 20, 2002,
at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the
City of Roanoke to lease an 8.5 acre, more or less, parcel of land located on top of
Mill Mountain, as described in Exhibit A to a Lease and Agreement dated January 1,
2002, to the Blue Ridge Zoological Society of Virginia, Inc., for a period of five years,
ending December 31, 2006, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
TimeS on Sunday, May 12, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
A communication from the City Manager advising that the Blue Ridge
Zoological Society of Virginia, Inc., (BRZSV), formerly know as Mill Mountain Zoo,
Inc., was created in 1976 by the Roanoke Jaycees, Inc., to take over operation of the
Zoo; and the original lease of the property for zoo purposes to Mill Mountain Zoo,
Inc., was authorized on September 7, 1976, was before Council.
It was further advised that the current five-year lease with Blue Ridge
Zoological Society of Virginia was authorized by Ordinance No. 33231-012197, and
expired on December 31, 2001; BRZSV has requested that the revised lease be
continued for a term of five years, ending December 31, 2006; the lease will provide
for termination at any time with 60 days written notice by either party and a total
lease area of approximately 8.5 acres, which includes an additional 2.9 acres to
complete the Mill Mountain Zoo's Master Plan; and rental rate of $10.00/yr is
contingent upon the Mill Mountain Zoo continuing full accreditation from the
American Zoo and Aquarium Association.
214
The City Manager recommended, following the public hearing, that Council
authorize execution of a Lease Agreement with Blue Ridge Zoological Society of
Virginia Inc., for land occupied by the Zoo for a term of five years, ending
December 31, 2006, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35887-052002) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of certain City-owned
property to the Blue Ridge Zoological Society of Virginia, Inc., upon certain terms
and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinace.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 125.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35887-052002. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
address the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35887-052002 was adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Harris
and Mayor Smith .......................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS:
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
CITY CODE-BUDGET-TAXES-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: Ordinance No. 35850
amending Section 32-217, Levied rate, Article IX, Admissions tax, Chapter 32,
Taxation, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to increase the
admissions tax on the stated admission charge to any place of amusement or
entertainment from 5 per cent to 6.5 per cent, effective July 1, 2002, having
previously been before the Council for its first reading on Monday, May 13, 2002, and
adopted on its first reading and laid over, was again before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that the following language be added to the title paragraph
of the above referenced ordinance: "and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance." The motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance, as amended:
215
(#35850-052002) AN ORDINANCE amending §32-217, Levied rate, of Article IX,
Admissions tax, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
as amended, in order to increase the admissions tax on the stated admission charge
to any place of amusement or entertainment from five percent to six and one-half
percent; dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance; and providing for an
effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 44.)
Mr,
amended.
vote:
Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35850-052002, as
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Carder, Bestpitch, and Harris ............. 5.
NAYS: Council Member Hudson and Mayor Smith ...................................... -2.
ZONING-BUDGET-SUBDIVISIONS-FEE COMPENDIUM: Ordinance No. 35851
amending certain fees and charges, establishing certain new fees and charges with
regard to subdivision and zoning fees, and amending the Fee Compendium, effective
July 1, 2002, having previously been before the Council for its first reading on
Monday, May 13, 2002, read and adopted on its first reading and laid over, was again
before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that the following language be added to the title paragraph
of the above referenced ordinance: "and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance." The motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance, as amended.
(#35851-052002) AN ORDINANCE amending certain fees and charges,
estabfishing certain new fees and charges with regard to subdivision and zoning
fees, and amending the Fee Compendium, dispensing with the second reading of
this ordinace and providing for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 45.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35857- 052002, as amended.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Carder, Bestpitch, and Harris .......... -5.
NAYS: Council Member Hudson and Mayor Smith ...................................... -2.
216
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.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-COMPLAINTS: Ms. Josephine Rouse, 3038 Melrose
Avenue, N. W., addressed Council in connection with the closing of the police
satellite station on Lafayette Boulevard, N. W., which building was leased for $1.00
by Ms. Vernice Law to the City of Roanoke Police Department. She expressed
concern for not only the neighborhood, but for the children because the credibility
of the Police Department has long been an issue. She stated that the Police
Department abandoned the community and did not tell the truth about the condition
of the building; and after the Police Department closed the substation, drug dealers
came back to the area. She asked that the issue be resolved in such a way that the
community will understand that Council cares about the children and that the City's
Police Department can be trusted.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-COMPLAINTS: Ms. Vernice Law, 1509 Lafayette
Boulevard, N. W., owner of the building that housed the police satellite station on
Lafayette Boulevard, advised that her family's integrity is at stake, because they
have never allowed their property to deteriorate as was reported in a recent
newspaper article. She stated that residents of the area requested help and the
building was offered as a potential site for a police substation because it provided
an opportunity to have police in the neighborhood. She stated that residents had
great hopes that the substation would make a difference and it did for a short time;
however, it was discovered that the building was never staffed from day one,
although the police substation on Williamson Road is staffed. She noted that
following numerous complaints, "dummy" cars were placed at the substation on
Lafayette Boulevard, a police vehicle was placed in front of her residence where it
remained for 14 days without being moved and another car was placed on Florida
Avenue, also unmoved, for ten days. She called attention to repeated complaints by
residents of the area that the station was not staffed, meetings were held with
Council members, City staff and the Chief of Police and questions were raised on
how to solve the problems, as well as neighborhood concerns. She stated that the
condition of the building has not deteriorated as was stated by City staff; however,
her main concern is not about the building, but about the fact that the Police
Department has not given proper service to the community.
COMPLAINTS -HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue,
N. E., advised that it has been stated that it is not whether one wins or loses, but
how one plays the game; and it has also been stated that one should avoid the
217
appearance of doing anything wrong; however, this evening, Council has shown
citizens throughout the Roanoke Valley that it does not matter as long as one gets
what one wants. She expressed concern with regard to earlier actions wher~ the
meeting was recessed in order to research Roberts Rules of Order and when the
Council meeting reconvened, all seven Council members were in attendance and
voting to avoid a second reading of the ordinance rezoning the property on Orange
Avenue.
She also spoke on behalf of those persons who do not have a strong voice,
but have requested screen doors on housing units at the Lincoln Terrace housing
development for safety reasons, and expressed concern over the hesitation and/or
refusal of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority to provide screen
doors for both front and back of Lincoln Terrace housing units.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 9:40 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
218
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
June 3,2002
12:15 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, June 3,
2002, at 12:15 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber, fourth
floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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, Reqular Meetinqs,
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
PRESENT: Council Members W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, William H.
Carder, William White, Sr., William D. Bestpitch, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K.
Smith ............................................................................................................ 7.
ABSENT: None ...................................................................................... 0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member
C. Nelson Harris, Chair, City Council's Personnel Committee, requesting a Closed
Session to discuss the performance of five Council-Appointed Officers, pursuant
to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of Council Member Harris
to convene in 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. The motion was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
At 12:25 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for one Ck, sed
Session.
219
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, June 3, 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 H.
Carder, William White, Sr., William D. Bestpitch, 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 reconvened meeting was opened with a prayer 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 Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS: None.
CONSENTAGENDA
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. The Mayor called attention to two requests for Closed Session.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday April 15,
2002, and recessed until Thursday, April 18, 2002; and a special meeting of Council
held on Monday, April 29, 2002, were before the body.
(For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
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. Harris and
adopted by the following vote:
220 -
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .7.
NAYS: None ............................................................................... ~---0.
CITY PROPERTY-LEASES-MARKET SQUARE PARKING GARAGE-PARKING
FACILITIES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke currently leases 3,000 square feet of retail space to Orvis Roanoke, Inc.;
current lease agreement of property located at 11 Campbell Avenue S. E., commonly
known as the Market Square Parking Garage, will expire on August 31,2002; Orvis
Roanoke, Inc., has expressed an interest in continuing the lease of space beyond the
current term; and in order to continue the lease, a new lease agreement is required.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize a public hearing on the
above referenced matter.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the recommendation to hold a public
hearing. The motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ......................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(A public hearing was advertised for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the City Council Chamber.)
ELECTIONS-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Gilbert E. Butler, Jr.,
Secretary, Roanoke City Electoral Board, transmitting the following Abstract of Votes
cast in the General Election held in the City of Roanoke on May 7, 2002, was before
the Council.
221
"ABSTRACT OF VOTES
cast in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, at the May 7, 2002 General Election, for:
MEMBER
CITY COUNCIL
AT LARGE
ENTER AT LARGE OR APPROPRIATE DISTRICT OR WARD NAME
Names of Candidates as shown on Ballot TOTAL VOTES
RECEIVED
(IN FIGURES)
Mark H. Hurley ........................................... 3,310
Steve J. Mabry .......................................... 3,016
John H. "Jack" Parrott ................................... 4,227
M. Rupert Cutler ......................................... 4,335
Alfred T. Dowe, Jr ........................................ 4,506
C. Nelson Harris ......................................... 4,905
Don L. Hogan ........................................... 445
Total Write-In Votes [See Write-Ins Certification] .............. 774
Continue Candidates on Page 2, If Necessary
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 gh day of May, 2002.
A copy test:
si Carl T. Tinsley, Chairman
si Frances V. Garland, Vice Chairman
si Gilbert E. Butler, Secretary
si Gilbert E. Butler, Secretary, Electoral Board
222 -
City of Roanoke
Member, City Council
AT LARGE
ENTER AT LARGE OR APPROPRIATE DISTRICT OR WARD NAME
NAMES OF CANDIDATES AS SHOWN ON BALLOT
TOTALVOTES
RECEIVED
(IN FIGURES)
M. Doug Trout ........................................................ 916
WRITE-INS CERTIFICATION
ROANOKE x General
Town/County x City
MEMBER CITY COUNCIL
Office Title
Special Election
May 7, 2002
Page 1 or I
District Name or Number, If Applicable
WRITE-INS - SUMMARY [REQUIRED]
TOTAL VOTES
RECEIVED
(IN FIGURES)
Invalid Write-Ins ......................................... 4
ENTER TOTAL INVALID
Valid Write-Ins .......................................... 770
ENTER TOTAL VALID
3. Total Write-Ins .......................................... 774
[ENTER THIS FIGURE ON LiNE FOR TOTAL WRITE-IN VOTES ON ABSTRACT FOR THIS OFFICE.] ADD LINES I AND 2
VALID WRITE-I N S - D ETAI L [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, TOTAL VOTES
AS NEEDED. ALL VALID WRITE-INS WHEN ADDED TOGETHER MUST EQUAL TOTAL ENTERED RECEIVED
ON LINE 2 ABOVE. (iN FIGURES)
Evelyn Bethel ............................................ 1_
Chris Craft ............................................... 1_
Bev Fitzpatrick ........................................... 2
223
Angela M. Norman ....................................... 765
Georgia C. Reeves ....................................... 1_
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 8~ day of May, 2002.
A copy teste:
si Carl T. Tinsley, Chairman
si Frances V. Garland, Vice Chairman
si Gilbert E. Butler, Secretary
si Gilbert E. Butler, Secretary, Electoral Board"
Mr. Carder moved that the Abstract of Votes be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith .................................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor Ralph K. Smith
requesting a Closed Meeting to discuss a personnel matter with regard to 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.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ..................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY: 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, was before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
224 -
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... 0.
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-YOUTH: The
following reports of qualification were before Council:
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.
Mr. Carder moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: None.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
CITY CODE-BUDGET-CITY COUNCIL-LEGISLATION: A communication from
Council MemberWilliam D. Bestpitch advising that 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.
He further advised that the Legislative Committee is not included as a
permanent committee; City Code Section 2-299 requires that the Budget and
Planning Committee meet "on the third Monday of each month at 2:00 p.m.",
however, this committee has not met in at least ten years; and City Code Section
225
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.
Mr. Bestpitch endorsed an ordinance to conform the City Code to current
practices of Council, and to provide for greater consistency among the Audit, Budget
and Planning, Personnel, and Legislative Committees. He proposed 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.
He further proposed that Section 2-303. Personnel Committee, be amended
as follows:
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.
He further proposed 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.
226 -
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35888-060302) AN ORDINANCE amending Chapter 2, Administration, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending §2-299, Budget and
;)lanninq committee, and §2-303, Personnel committee, and bythe addition of a new
§2-304, Legislative committee, and dispensing with the second reading by title of
this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 127.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35888-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: None.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-FDETC: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that
the Fifth District Employment and Training Consortium (FDETC) administers the
Federally funded Workforce Investment Act (WlA) for the region, which
encompasses the Counties ofAIleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke, as
well as the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and Salem; and 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.
It was further advised that 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 received by the FDETC; and the FDETC has received a
Notice of Obligation from the Virginia Employment Commission authorizing the
Workforce Area to spend $383,916.00 for WIA Youth Programs.
227
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate FDETC funding
totaling $383,916.00 and increase the revenue estimate by $383,916.00 in accounts
to be established in the Consortium Fund by the Director of Finance.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35889-060302) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Fifth District Employment and Training Consortium Fund
Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 129.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35889-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
BUDGET-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that following proper advertisement, three bids for the 2002
Street Paving Program were received by the City of Roanoke, with Adams
Construction Company submitting 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; and a time frame of 180 days was specified for completion of the
project.
It was further advised that City staff evaluated the three bids and
recommended that a contract in the amount of $2,034,202.55 be awarded to Adams
Construction Company which includes the base bid and Alternate No. 1 (raising
manholes); 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; asphalt quantities total 26,800 tons of asphalt, which will enable the
resurfacing of streets listed on the 2002 Paving Program List of Streets, and funding
in the amount of $2,074,202.55 is available to cover all associated costs of the
paving program, which include contract expense and replacement of traffic signal
detectors.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of Adams
Construction Company and that she be authorized 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; and increase the
revenue estimate for Highway Maintenance revenues by $273,218.00 and appropriate
$273,218.00 to the FY 02 Paving Program account.
228 -
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35890-060302) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 General Fund Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 131.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35890-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ....................
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#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.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 132.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35891-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .7.
NAYS: None.
WATER RESOURCES-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication with regard to bids received by the City for ductile iron water pipe
for the period of July 1,2002 to June 30, 2003; whereupon, it was recommended that
Council accept the Iow bid of Griffin Pipe Products Company for a period of one year
on a unit cost basis, in an amount not anticipated to exceed $148,688.50, and reject
all other bids received by the City.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
229
(#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.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 134.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35892-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a communication with
regard to the bids for water and wastewater treatment chemicals for fiscal year
2003; whereupon, the City Manager recommended that Council authorize acceptance
of the lowest responsible bids for the above referenced chemicals; reject all other
bids received by the City; and authorize the Manager of the Purchasing Division to
issue requisite purchase orders for the above mentioned chemicals.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35893-060302) A RESOLUTION accepting the bids for water and wastewater
treatment chemicals for fiscal year 2002-2003, and rejecting all other bids.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 135.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35893-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................ 0.
PARKS AND RECREATION-EQUIPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement
Program (CMERP) has identified the need to replace one tractor and articulated
boom mower system and one rotary mower for the Department of Parks and
Recreation; due to pricing of the tractor and the articulated boom mower system
230 -
being substantially over anticipated budget, current bid specifications will need to
be updated to ensure procurement of the highest quality equipment as economically
as possible; and as such, the one bid received for the tractor and articulated boom
mower, in the amount of $95,867.33 from Boone & Becker Implement, Inc., should
be rejected.
It was further advised that the lowest bid for one 16-foot rotary mower was
submitted by Smith Turf & Irrigation Co., meeting all specifications at a cost of
$68,107.00; and funding for the mower is available in Lease of Vehicle, Account
#017-440-9852-9015.
The City Manager recommended that Council award the bid for one 16-foot
rotary mower to Smith Turf & Irrigation Co., at a total cost of $68,107.00, and reject
all other bids received by the City.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35894-060302) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Smith Turf & Irrigation
Co. for the purchase of one new 16 foot mower, upon certain terms and conditions;
rejecting the bid received for a tractor and articulated boom mower; and rejecting
all other bids.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 136.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35894-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor advised that it has been reported that specifications provided for
extensive factory training on the use of the articulated boom mower and an
attachment for the equipment in the price range of $8,000.00 - $10,000.00 was to be
included, therefore, after all of the extras were included, the bid total exceeded the
amount of funds budgeted for the equipment. He expressed concern that only one
bid was received and asked that the City take the necessary steps to ensure that
more than one bid is received in the future for equipment purchases.
Ordinance No. 35894-060302 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith 7.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
231
POLICE DEPARTMENT-TRAFFIC-BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles
(DMV) is the administering agency for pass through funds provided by the Uhited
States Department of Transportation for highway safety projects in Virginia; and the
DMV offers these funds to successful applicants for activities which improve
highway safety in Virginia.
It was further advised that in September 2001, the DMV awarded $15,000.00
to the Roanoke Police Department to conduct selective enforcement activities which
target Driving Under the Influence (DUI), speeding, and motor vehicle occupant
safety; and this is the sixth year that the City of Roanoke has received funds under
this program.
It was explained that 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 per cent of Roanoke's
motor vehicle accidents; and this program allows officers to concentrate on alcohol
impaired drivers and speeders at times when such violations are most likely to
occur.
The City Manager recommended that Council establish a revenue estimate and
appropriate $15,000.00 to grant fund accounts to be established by the Director of
Finance; and authorize the City Manager to execute the requisite grant agreement
and any related documents, such documents to be approved as to form by the City
Attorney.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35895-060302) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 137.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35895-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
232 -
(#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.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 139.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35896-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ................................................................................. -0.
BUDGET-COMMITTEES-HOTEL ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that 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, and the City of Roanoke and Virginia Tech are participating
entities in the Commission; in 1992, Council authorized establishment of an Agency
Fund known as, "Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission"; the
Commission's enabling legislation allows for 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 proper purposes; the
budget must be approved by each of the participating entities; and Council included
funds in the fiscal year 2002-2003 General Fund adopted budget to be used for such
purposes.
It was further advised that the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission
recommends the fiscal year 2002-2003 operating budget for Council's consideration;
whereupon, the City Manager recommended that Council approve the Hotel Roanoke
Conference Center Commission Budget for fiscal year 2002-2003, appropriate
$250,000.00 to Conference Center Agency Fund accounts and establish revenue
estimates of $125,000.00, each, for City of Roanoke and Virginia Tech contributions.
Mr. White offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35897-060302) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission Fund Appropriations,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 140.)
233
Mr. White moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35897-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
Mr. White offered the following resolution:
(#35898-060302) A RESOLUTION approving the annual operating budget of the
Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission for Fiscal Year 2002-2003.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 141.)
Mr. White moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35898-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
The Vice-Mayor presided over the next item on the agenda.
BUDGET-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The City Manager and the Director
of Finance submitted a joint communication advising that Series 2002 bonds have
been issued, and funding of $7.5 million is available for the Roanoke River Flood
Reduction Project, which project has been in existence for a number of years with
several project accounts established throughout the years to fund the 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; and 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.
It was further advised that an analysis has been made of the status of project
accounts, initial source of funding, and the extent to which Series 2002 bond funds
can be substituted for other funding; and based on the analysis, reallocation of $7.5
million of previously appropriated local funding is recommended which will allow
the City to receive reimbursement from bond funds to the extent allowable to remove
the funds from exposure to arbitrage.
234
It was explained that all expenditures within the prior 18 months of Council's
approval of the reimbursement request may be reimbursed (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 20 per cent of the issue price of the bonds; and 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 City Manager and Director of Finance recommended the following transfer
of funds:
Adjustments:
Appropriated from Appropriated from
Project Name Account General Revenue Series 2002
Bonds
RR Corridor Plan 008-052-9614 (66,375.00) 66,375.00
Surveying RRFR 008-056-9618 (413,433.00) 413,433.00
RRFR Land
Acquisition 008-056-9619 (754,408.00) 754,408.00
RRFR 008-056-9620 2,687,803.00 4,812,197.00
RRFR Phase II
Environmental 008-056-9623 (1,213,587.00) 1,213,587.00
RR Utility
Relocation 008-530-9765 (240,000.00) 240,000.00
Series 2002
Public
Improvement
Bonds 008-530-9711-9185 (7,500,000.00)
Net of Adjustments -
Itwas explained that 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 total funding to the Roanoke River
project to $17.8 million; and with approximately $5.0 million expended or obligated,
funding of $12.8 million will be available for future project costs, with construction
on the first phase of the project expected to begin in 2003.
The City Manager and the Director of Finance recommended that Council
adopt an ordinance that will transfer funds between various accounts within
Roanoke River Flood Reduction Projects and Series 2002 Public Improvements Bond
reserve account.
235
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35899-060302) 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. 66, page 142.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35899-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch and
Wyatt .............................................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
(Mayor Smith abstained from voting due to a potential conflict of interest.)
The Vice-Mayor relinquished the Chair to the Mayor.
ARTS MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that on October 2, 2000, Council adopted Resolution No.
35091-100200 which authorized execution of an Agreement between the City of
Roanoke and the Art Museum of Western Virginia providing for the City to make
certain appropriations to the Art Museum, upon certain terms and conditions; and
said appropriations are to be used to partially fund construction of a new Art
Museum and IMAX Theater.
It was further advised that $300,000.00 was paid to the Art Museum shortly
after 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); total appropriations from the
City of Roanoke to the Art Museum were also limited by the Agreement to no more
than 20 per cent of total project cost; and Council has previously concurred,
conceptually, in the issuance of $3.7 million in General Obligation Bonds at a future
date to fund the project.
It was explained that 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, which 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; and at a future date, the Art Museum
will also request that the City close that portion of the street cutting between Norfolk
236
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.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized 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;
and the second appropriation of $1.2 million would not be required under the
amended Agreement until June 30, 2006.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#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 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.
(For=full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 144.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35900-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ..................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of
Finance submitted the Financial Report for the City of Roanoke for the month of
April, 2002.
Mr. White called attention to a recent announcement that State revenue for
the month of April was less than projected, and inquired as to the impact on the
City's revenue for fiscal year 2003; whereupon, the Director of Finance advised that
the City will not notice any impact, because the State previously placed the City on
notice of reductions for the current year, and the budget that was adopted by
Council for fiscal year 2003 will have the impact of State revenue short falls already
included.
237
Vice-Mayor Carder advised that the legislature is in the process of preparing
another tax study, but before the State will agree to the study, the result must be
revenue neutral; however, it seems unusual to order a study and to have the
conclusion and result pre-set. He expressed concern that the City of Roanoke does
not know the impact of the State's departmental cuts; and called attention to
projections next year of a $3.8 billion State shortfall, the State has raided all of its
funds for one time fixes, and even if the economy improves by six per cent next year,
a $3.2 billion shortfall will remain. He expressed concern that citizens of the City of
Roanoke need to be educated now in terms of what the potential will be next year
when the shortfall could be much worse insofar as what the State passes on to
localities. He added that State leadership needs to let the localities know where they
stand and what kind of contingency plans need to be made for next years' budget.
The Director of Finance advised that in August, the Department of
Management and Budget and the Finance Department will compile a multi year
budget plan, reviewing the City's revenue with projections and garnering all possible
information from the State.
The City Manager advised that one of the few opportunities for a community
such as the City of Roanoke rests in coming together with other communities that
are experiencing similar problems, using a multiplier effect and using a number of
jurisdictions and delegates from those jurisdictions to review and address mutual
issues of concern. She called attention to a meeting of the Virginia's First Cities
Coalition on June 19, and advised that the sense of the Executive Committee is one
of urgency and that member localities need to begin addressing issues head on this
summer and not wait until the next session of the General Assembly, or the next
study to be completed. She stated that it is contemplated that the delegates to the
14 cities comprising the First Cities Coalition will meet this summer to discuss
budget issues and meet with the Governor to address matters of concern to First
Cities localities. She further stated that even though the 2003 budget year was
difficult, the next two years will be equally as difficult if not more so unless there is
a major tax restructuring that takes place at a level that will save money. She
stressed the need to involve citizens and the City's delegation to the General
Assembly as soon as possible in the process.
Mr. White concurred in the remarks of Vice-Mayor Carder and suggested that
Council, through the Mayor's Office, convene informal meetings during the summer
months with the City's delegation to the General Assembly to discuss funding
issues. He recommended that the Mayor, or his designee, and at least two Members
of Council begin to meet with the City's delegation to the General Assembly.
238 -
The City Manager advised that the newly elected Members of Council who will
take office on July 1 will attend an orientation sponsored by the Virginia Municipal
League on July 10 - 12, in Charlottesville, Virginia, and as a part of orientation,
Virginia's First Cities Coalition will host a workshop for all City Council Members
from the First Cities Coalition who are interested in receiving a more indepth
understanding of the purpose of the First Cities Coalition, its agenda, etc. She
encouraged as many Members of Council as possible to attend the workshop on
July 10.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that citizens need to understand that for some time the
State has not provided its share to fund the Standards of Quality for public schools,
and there are problems with school construction funds throughout the
Commonwealth of Virginia. He called attention to a technology-related business
near Virginia Tech that is relocating to another state because that state offered a
better deal than they received from the State of Virginia. He stated that this action
not only takes jobs away from the Roanoke Valley region, but inhibits the ability to
attract similar types of companies, economic development and jobs. He added that
support for higher education, particularly in terms of a research and development
program at the higher education level, is lacking in the State of Virginia, and called
attention to significant cuts in the Six Year Plan for transportation projects, and
public safety needs that are not being addressed. He stated that unless the
Commonwealth of Virginia comes up with additional revenue to address these
issues, the problems will continue to get worse year by year.
The Mayor advised that much of corporate Virginia is faced with being revenue
neutral in this time of slow economic growth. He stated that whether it be the State
or the City, we are all in the dilemma together and we need to figure out a way to
solve the problems and needs of the City. He stated that the mindset of the First
Cities Coalition is that localities be allowed to raise taxes, and that may have to
happen, but first he would like to know where inefficiencies exist and how they can
be improved upon across the State. He added that if the legislature is approached
with the request to raise taxes, localities will end up with nothing, however, if
localities approach the State with an open mind after exhausting all other options,
they will be better received at the State level.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report
would be received and filed.
BUDGET-CITY COUNCIL-LEGISLATION: The Director of Finance submitted a
communication advising that 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
239
program income during the course of its administration of various projects through
the sale of land and receipt of loan repayments from project area residents; the
Housing Authority is required to transfer program income to the City of Roanoke;
and the City is required to use the income for eligible community development
activities.
It was further advised that the Housing Authority has made payments to the
City in the amount of $31,854.00 from February 1,2002 to April 30, 2002 in excess of
revenue estimates previously adopted; and of this amount, $11,100.00 resulted from
parking lot rental and $20,754.00 from various loan repayment programs.
It was explained that the City has received miscellaneous program income of
$1,703.00 in various loan payments, which represents the difference between what
was actually received and the amount that was previously adopted based on
repayment estimates; the Housing Authority also administers a segment of the City's
HOME program; 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; and as of April 30, 2002, loan repayments received in excess of the budget
estimates equals $8,463.00.
The Director of Finance recommended that Council appropriate $33,557.00 in
unanticipated CDBG program income as follows:
Unprogrammed CDBG - Other - FY02
Unprogrammed CDBG - RRHA- FY02
Unprogrammed HOME - FY02
(035-G02-0240-5189)
(035-G02-0240-5197)
(035-090-5324-5320)
1,703.00
31,854.00
8,463.0O
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35901-060302) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 145.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35901-060302. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Harris, Carder, White, Bestpitch
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was out of the Council Chamber when the vote was
recorded.)
240 --
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS: None.
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
COMPLAINTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Council MemberWhite 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 and as
funding is available, screen doom 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 doors 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.
PIPE LINES/STORAGE TANKS-COMPLAINTS-FIRE DEPARTMENT-WATER
RESOURCES: Council Member Hudson referred to the loss of water pressure in the
northwest area of the City of Roanoke 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 water tanker was out of service, and inquired as to the status of the tanker.
The City Manager explained that the water pressure issue 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 water tanker.
TRAFFIC-LEGISLATION-TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT: 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 to Council.
COMPLAINTS-SPECIAL PERMITS.DOWNTOWN ROANOKE, INCORPORATED-
FESTIVAL IN THE PARK-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Mr. Carder spoke as a citizen and
a business person working in the downtown Roanoke area. He referred to instances
241
during the past four years when the streets surrounding the Patrick Henry Hotel
have been barricaded for special 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.
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-SNOW REMOVAL-SCHOOLS-STREETS AND
ALLEYS: 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 advised 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, 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.
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-SCHOOLS: Council Member Wyatt
called attention to concerns expressed by parents with regard to City of Roanoke
high school graduation ceremonies which are held in the Auditorium at the Roanoke
Civic Center, and 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.
PAY PLAN-CITY EMPLOYEES: 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.
CITY EMPLOYEES: Council Member Wyatt requested that Council approve
July 5, 2002, as a floating holiday for City employees.
Following discussion, 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.
CITY MARKET: Council Member Wyatt referred to a communication from a
Roanoke County resident forwarding copy of a newspaper article from The Sunday
Gazette, Schenectady, New York, regarding the many assets of the Roanoke ..City
Market.
242 -
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
SCHOOLS-WATER RESOURCES: 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 provided to every
child in the Roanoke City Public School system encouraging them to participate in
a contest on water conservation and to learn at an early age the importance of water
as a natural resource.
PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-BUDGET-CITY
EMPLOYEES-SCHOOLS: 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. She further 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, and although the State has not kept pace with
educational funding and other types of funding, it has provided funds for law
enforcement.
ARMORY/STADIUM-ROANOKE CiViC CENTER: 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.
OTHER HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised
that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard; and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
report and recommendation to Council.
COMPLAINTS: Mr. Robert D. Gravely, 619 Hanover Avenue, N. W., addressed
Council with regard to lack of funding for City services/programs, lack of cleanliness
in the City of Roanoke, the City's high crime rate, and the need for more jobs for
young people.
243
ZONING-COMPLAINTS-REFUSE COLLECTION: 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 requested that Council help citizens, specifically,
Mr. Michael Wells, a small businessman, who wishes to expand his car washing
facility, and if there are issues of concern in connection with Mr. Wells' business,
they should be brought to the attention of the appropriate City departments.
COMPLAINTS-ARMORY/STADIUM-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-ROANOKE CiViC
CENTER: 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 of
Roanoke 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 provide 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.
BONDS/BOND ISSUES-BUDGET-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL-WATER
RESOURCES: M. Rupert Cutler, Council Member-Elect, addressed Council in
connection with a 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. 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 presently discussing the issue of creating a Regional Water Authority, and
asked that regional flood reduction planning be included, within the purview of the
Water Authority, to provide citizens with the most efficient, least environmentally
damaging means of addressing all of the City's water related responsibilities.
At 4:35 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for continuation of one
Closed Session and two additional Closed Sessions.
244
At 5:50 p.m., the meeting reconvened in the Council Chamber, with Mayor
Smith presiding and all Members of the Council in attendance.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Mr. Bestpitch
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. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor
Smith .................................................................................................... 5.
NAYS: None ................................................................................ -0.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor advised that there is a
vacancy on the Fair Housing Board created by the resignation of Mary A. Rogers,
and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the name of Sherman V. Burroughs, IV.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Burroughs was appointed as a
member of the Fair Housing Board, for a term ending March 31, 2003, by the
following vote:
FOR MR. BURROUGHS: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT: The Mayor advised that the terms
of office of Edward L. Crawford, Jr., I. B. Heinemann and Lylburn D. Moore, Jr., as
members of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission will expire on
June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of I. B. Heinemann and Lylburn D.
Moore, Jr.
245
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Heinemann and Moore were
reappointed as members of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission,
for terms ending June 30, 2005, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. HEINEMANN AND MOORE: Council Members Hudson, Carder,
Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................... 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The Mayor advised that the
terms of office of Frank J. Eastburn, Anna S. Wentworth, Mary S. Neal, Brook E.
Dickson and Susan W. Jennings as members of the Roanoke Arts Commission will
expire on June 30, 2002, Ms. Dickson is ineligible to serve another term, and called
for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of Frank J. Eastburn and Anna S.
Wentworth.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Eastburn and Ms. Wentworth were
reappointed as members of the Roanoke Arts Commission, for terms ending
June 30, 2005, by the following vote:
FOR MR. EASTBURN AND MS. WENTWORTH: Council Members Hudson,
Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ........................................................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of
Margaret M. Grayson and Harriet S. Lewis as members of the Virginia Western
Community College Board will expire on June 30, 2002, Ms. Grayson is ineligible to
serve another term, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the name of Harriet S. Lewis.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Lewis was reappointed as a member
of the Virginia Western Community College, Board of Directors, for term ending
June 30, 2006, by the following vote:
FOR MS. LEWIS: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
246
POLICE DEPARTMENT-COMMITTEES-TOWING CONTRACT: The Mayor
advised that the terms of office of Robert R. Young and Christine Proffitt as
members of the Towing Advisory Board will expire on June 30, 2002, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of Robert R. Young and Christine
Proffitt.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Young and Ms. Proffitt were
reappointed as members of the Towing Advisory Board, for terms ending
June 30, 2005, by the following vote:
FOR MR. YOUNG AND MS. PROFFITT: Council Members Hudson, Carder,
Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................... 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-PENSIONS: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of
David C. Key, D. Duane Dixon and Cyril J. Goens as members of the City of Roanoke
Pension Plan, Board of Trustees, will expire on June 30, 2002, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of David C. Key, D. Duane Dixon
and Cyril J. Goens (position rotates between Police and Fire Department).
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Key and Dixon were reappointed
for.terms ending June 30, 2006, and Mr. Goens was appointed for a term ending
June 30, 2004, as members of the City of Roanoke Pension Plan, Board of Trustees,
by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. KEY, DIXON AND GOENS: Council Members Hudson, Carder,
Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................... 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
FIRE DEPARTMENT-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the terms of office
of Harry F. Collins and John C. Moody, Jr., as members of the Board of Fire Appeals
will expire June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names Harry F. Collins and John C.
Moody.
247
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Collins and Moody were
reappointed as members of the Board of Fire Appeals, for terms ending
June 30, 2006, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. COLLINS AND MOODY: Council Members Hudson, Carder,
Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................... 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The Mayor advised that the term of office
of Barry W. Baird as a member of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission will
expire on June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the name of Barry W. Baird.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Baird was reappointed as a member
of the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission for a term ending June 30, 2005, by
the following vote:
FOR MR. BAIRD: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-LIBRARIES: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of
JoAnn F. Hayden, Roland H. Macher and Stanley G. Breakell as members of the
Roanoke Public Library Board will expire on June 30, 2002, Ms. Hayden has declined
to serve another term, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of Roland H. Macher and Stanley G.
Breakell.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Macher and Breakell were
reappointed as members of the Roanoke Public Library Board for terms ending
June 30, 2005, by the following vote:
MESSRS. MACHER AND BREAKELL: Council Members Hudson, Carder,
Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................... 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
248
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the terms of
office of The Reverend Frank W. Feather, Pam Kestner-Chappelear, Margaret C.
Thompson, Evelyn F. Board, Judy O. Jackson, Cynthia S. Bryant, and Glenn D.
Radcliffe as members of the Human Services Committee will expire on
June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of Margaret C. Thompson, Evelyn F.
Board, Judy O. Jackson, Cynthia S. Bryant and Glenn D. Radcliffe.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Thompson, Ms. Board, Ms. Jackson,
Ms. Bryant and Mr. Radcliffe were reappointed as members of the Human Services
Committee for terms ending June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
FOR MS. THOMPSON,
MR. RADCLIFFE: Council
and Mayor Smith.
MS. BOARD, MS. JACKSON, MS. BRYANT AND
Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt
5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The Mayor advised that the
terms of office of R. H. Bennett, Bill Tanger, Lucian Y. Grove, Kathy S. Hill, Mack D.
Cooper, II, E. L. Noell, Dennis Tinsley, Read A. Lunsford, and Edgar V. Wheeler as
members of the Flood Plain Committee will expire on June 30, 2002, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of 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.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Grove, Cooper, Noell, Tinsley,
Lunsford, Wheeler, and Ms. Hill were reappointed and Ms. Kelly was appointed as
members of the Flood Plain Committee for terms ending June 30, 2003, by the
following vote:
FOR MESSRS. GROVE, COOPER, NOELL, TINSLEY, LUNSFORD, WHEELER,
MS. HILL AND MS. KELLY: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
249
COMMITTEES-WAR MEMORIAL: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of
Chris Slone, Robert O. Gray, Harold H. Worrell, Jr., Sloan H. Hoopes and Alfred C.
Moore as members of the War Memorial Committee will expire June 30, 2002, and
called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the name of Alfred C. Moore.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Moore was reappointed as a member
of the War Memorial Committee for a term ending June 30, 2003, by the following
vote:
FOR MR. MOORE: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the terms
of office of E. C. Pace, III, William R. Dandridge, Carl H. Kopitzke, Steven Higgs,
Richard Clark, Eddie Wallace, Jr., Betty Field and Michael A. Loveman as members
of the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee will expire on June 30, 2002, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of Steven Higgs, Richard Clark,
Eddie Wallace, Jr., Betty Field and Michael A. Loveman.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Higgs, Clark, Wallace, Loveman
and Ms. Field were reappointed as members of the Mill Mountain Advisory
Committee for terms ending June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. HIGGS, CLARK, WALLACE, LOVEMAN AND MS. FIELD: Council
Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ............................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-SPECIAL EVENTS: The Mayor advised that the terms of office
of Sharon Metzler, 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 as members of the Special Events Committee will expire on June 30, 2002, and
called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
250
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of 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.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Davis, Parsons, Lewis,
Ms. McCadden, Ms. Bull, Ms. Peck, Ms. Gravely, Ms. Stuart, Ms. Wilson, Ms. Law,
Ms. Muddiman, Ms. Jennings and Ms. Elliot were reappointed as members of the
Special Events Committee, for terms ending June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. DAVIS, PARSONS, LEWIS, MS. MCCADDEN, MS. BULL,
MS. PECK, MS. GRAVELY, MS. STUART, MS. WILSON, MS. LAW, MS. MUDDIMAN,
MS. JENNINGS AND MS. ELLIOT: Council Members Hudson, Carder, Bestpitch,
Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................................ 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
COMMITTEES-METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT: The Mayor
advised that the terms of office of William D. Bestpitch and Sherman A. Holland as
members of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization will expire
on June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Ms. Wyatt placed in nomination the names of William D. Bestpitch and
Sherman A. Holland.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Bestpitch and Holland were
reappointed as members of the Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning
Organization for terms ending June 30, 2005, by the following vote:
MESSRS. BESTPITCH AND HOLLAND: Council Members Hudson, Carder,
Bestpitch, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ................................................................... 5.
(Council Members Harris and White were absent.)
251
FIRE DEPARTMENT-COMMITTEES-SPECIAL EVENTS: It was the consensus
of Council 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.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 5:55 p.m.
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
APPROVED
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
252 -
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
June 17, 2002
2:00 p.m.
NOTE: Some agenda items were addressed out of sequence, either because
the Mayor was not present, or due to a 5:00 p.m., meeting which caused some
agenda items listed on the 2:00 p.m., docket to be considered at the 7:00 p.m.
session. Notation will be made, as needed.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
June 17, 2002 at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber,
fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, Virginia, with Vice-Mayor William H. Carder presiding for a portion of the
meeting and Mayor Ralph K. Smith presiding over the remainder of the meeting,
pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of
Procedure, Rule 1, Re~lular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, Linda F. Wyatt, William
White, Sr., W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., C. Nelson Harris and Vice-Mayor William H.
Carder--- 6.
ABSENT: Mayor Ralph K. Smith ..............................................................1.
(Mayor Smith arrived at 3:15 p.m.)
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 The Reverend George L. Edwards,
Pastor, Melrose Christian Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Vice-Mayor Carder.
253
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENTS-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Harris offered the
following resolution paying tribute to the Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, Jr., for his
service as a Member of Roanoke City Council from July 1, 1998 through June 30,
2002, and expressing to him the appreciation of the City of Roanoke and its people
for his exemplary public service:
(#35902-061702) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to the Honorable W. Alvin
Hudson, Jr., and expressing to him the appreciation of this City and its people for
his exemplary public service.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 149.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35902-061702. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Hudson abstained from voting.)
The Mayor presented Mr. Hudson with a ceremonial copy of the above
reference measure.
(Resolution No. 35902-061702 was considered out of sequence.)
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Harris offered the
following resolution paying tribute to the Honorable William White, Sr., for his
service as a Member of Roanoke City Council from July 1, 1990 through June 30,
2002, and expressing to him the appreciation of the City of Roanoke and its people
for his exemplary public service.
(#35903-061702) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to the Honorable William
White, Sr., and expressing to him the appreciation of this City and its people for his
exemplary public service.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 150.)
254
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35903-061702. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, Hudson, Harris, Carder
and Mayor Smith .................. --6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member White abstained from voting.)
(Resolution No. 35903-061702 was considered out of sequence.)
The Mayor presented Mr. White with a ceremonial copy of the above
referenced measure.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT: The Vice-Mayor Carder recognized Dr. John
McKenna, CEO, Environmental Training Services, Inc., who introduced 17 special
guests from Russia, who are visiting the United States to further their learning about
oil and gas development projects and the impact on the environment, in order to
translate this experience into a similar democratic Russian process. He advised that
training as been provided by Environmental Training Services, Inc., since June 4 and
the delegation will leave the Roanoke area on June 5.
Dr. McKenna and Ms. Natalia Kee, Interpreter, assisted the Vice-Mayor in
presenting City lapel pins and Honorary Citizenship Certificates to each guest.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-COMMITTEES-DISABLED PERSONS:
Christene A. Montgomery, Chair, Mayor's Committee for People with Disabilities
presented a plaque of appreciation to Council Member Hudson for his service as a
member of the Mayor's Committee for People with Disabilities.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Harris offered the
following resolution memorializing the late Right Reverend William Henry
Marmion, D.D., Third Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Southwestern Virginia of
Roanoke:
(#35904-061702) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late The Right Reverend
William Henry Marmion, D.D., Third Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of
Southwestern Virginia, of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 152.)
255
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35904-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and Vice-
Mayor Carder ............................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
The Vice-Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure
to Roger N. Marmion, son of the late Bishop Marmion.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Harris offered the
following resolution memorializing the late Carl E. Stark, a physician and former
Mayor of Wytheville, Virginia:
(#35905-061702) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Carl E. Stark, a
physician and former Mayor of Wytheville, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 154.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35905-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ........................................................................................ ---6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
AIRPORT-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Harris
offered the following resolution memorializing the late Martha Anne Woodrum
Zillhardt, a Iongtime resident of Roanoke and Fincastle, Virginia:
(#35906-061702) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Martha Anne
Woodrum Zillhardt, a Iongtime resident of Roanoke and Fincastle, Virginia.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 155.)
256
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35906-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ............................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
The Vice-Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure
to Clifton A. Woodrum, III, nephew of the late Ms. Zillhardt.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Vice-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 called specific attention to one request for a closed session to
discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees
appointed by Council.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, May 6,
2002, and the special meeting held on Monday, May 13, 2002, were before the body.
Mr. Harris 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 Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder .............................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
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 Council.
257
Mr. Harris moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to convene
in Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions
and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(I), Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice- Mayor Carder .......................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
COMMITTEES-COMMUNITY PLANNING-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD
PARTNERSHIP: Acommunication from Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., tendering his resignation
as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership Steering Committee and the
City Planning Commission, was before Council.
Mr. Harris moved that the communication be received and filed and that the
resignation be accepted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and Vice-
Mayor Carder ................................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES-YOUTH:The
following reports of qualification were before Council:
Sherman A. Holland as a member of the Youth Services Citizen
Board for a term ending May 31, 2005; and
Geraldine LaManna for a term ending March 31,2003, and Carl H.
Kopitzke for a term ending March 31, 2004, as members of the
Parks and Recreation Advisory Board.
Mr. Harris moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
258
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and Vice-
Mayor Carder ..................................................................................... --6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
CITY CODE-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor Ralph K. Smith
requesting approval by Council of a minor revision in the order of the City Council
agenda; whereupon, he transmitted an ordinance to provide that Comments by the
City Manager will be heard immediately following the Hearing of Citizens Upon
Public Matters section of the agenda, was before Council.
Ms. Wyatt offered the following ordinance:
(#35907-061702) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Rule 7, Order of
business; hearing of citizens, of §2-15, Rules of procedure, of the Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to provide for reversing the order of item 11,
Comments of the City Manager, and Item 12, Hearing of Citizens, in order to have the
City Manager's comments follow the Hearing of Citizens, effective July 1,2002; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 157.)
Ms. Wyatt moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35907-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris and Vice-
Mayor Carder ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
BUDGET-CIRCUIT COURT-EQUIPMENT: A communication from the Honorable
Arthur B. Crush, III, Clerk of Circuit Court, advising that the Clerk of the Circuit Court
259
is responsible, by statute, for the recordation of legal instruments which include:
Land Records, Marriage Licenses, Financing Statements, Assumed Names, Wills
and other Probate Records, and Law, Chancery and Criminal Orders; and these
records must be maintained and be available to the public, was before Council.
It was further advised that the Optical Character Recognition System, also
known as the Records Management Indexing/Scanning System, currently being used
to record the above-mentioned records can no longer facilitate the volume of
records being scanned; there is a need for additional, compatible equipment that will
allow several operators to perform like tasks simultaneously; such equipment is
available through the Supreme Court of Virginia at a cost of $63,424.00; and funding
in the amount of $63,424.00 is available from the Compensation Board of Virginia-
Technology Trust Fund.
It was explained that the Clerk of Circuit Court has been granted $63,424.00
from the Compensation Board of Virginia-Technology Trust Fund for upgrades to
and maintenance of current recordation equipment, which Grant does not require
a local match.
The Clerk of Circuit Court recommended that the City Manager be authorized
to execute the requisite documents to obtain funding from the Compensation Board-
Technology Trust Fund, and that the Director of Finance be authorized to establish
a revenue estimate in the amount of $63,424.00 in the Grant Fund and appropriate
funds to the appropriate Furniture and Equipment account.
A communication from the City Manager concurring in the recommendation
of the Clerk of Circuit Court, was also before Council.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35908-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 158.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35908-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ............................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
260 -
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35909-061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the grant offer made to the City by
the Compensation Board of Virginia and authoring execution of any required
documentation on behalf of the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 159.)
. Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35909-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder .............. 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
SCHOOLS-CITY EMPLOYEES: Lissy Meranda, Director of Community
Relations, Roanoke City Public Schools, expressed appreciation for the numerous
collaborations between Roanoke City government and the Roanoke City Public
Schools this past year which supported School Board priorities and student
achievement. She also expressed appreciation for the partnership with the Office
on Youth, specifically related to Student Government Day, and tours of the Municipal
Building which have provided students with an increased understanding regarding
the operation of City government. She called attention to an upcoming event, "Back
to School Extravaganza," in which students and families will be provided with a
multitude of services under one roof to help ensure that students experience a
successful start for the school year. She advised that the HERO'S Program (Help
Encourage Roanoke's Outstanding Educational Students") re-enforced the pillars
of character education and served as career development opportunities for students,
and the RISK Watch Instructional program benefitted hundred's of elementary
school children. She expressed appreciation for the opportunity to showcase the
fine arts talents of students by displaying their work throughout the Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, and called attention to new initiatives with the Parks and
Recreation Department, the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, the
Health Department, and the Police Department. She expressed appreciation for the
partnership and support of the City of Roanoke in connection with the HOSTS
Program, "Helping One Student to Succeed", and introduced Shirley Thomason,
Reading Resource Teacher, Lincoln Terrace Saturn Network.
261
On behalf of HOSTS students at Lincoln Terrace Saturn Network, Ms.
Thomason expressed appreciation to the Members of Council and to the City
Manager for permitting City employees to volunteer in the program, and advised that
during the last school year, 52 HOSTS volunteers, 40 from the City of Roanoke and
12 from the community, worked with 26 students in grades two and three, four days
each week from 9:30 to 10:30 a.m., and each mentor worked with the same two
students each week, contributing a total of 690 volunteer hours from September 17 -
May 1. She stated that each child read between 50 - 65 textbooks with their mentor,
students were tested at the beginning and at the end of the school year to obtain
their reading level, all students advanced and their self-esteem was raised through
interaction with their adult mentors. In addition to the reading program, she advised
that the mentors went the extra mile by collecting funds which enabled each child
participating in the program to receive four books during the holiday season and
another four books at the end of the school year. She explained that separate from
the HOSTS Program, a school mail delivery program, "We Deliver", was
implemented, every hallway in the school building was provided with a street name,
and the City's Director of Public Works, Robert K. Bengtson, assisted in acquiring
street signs that made the program more realistic. She commended the City of
Roanoke for helping students at the Lincoln Terrace Saturn Network to succeed.
Chelsea Dyer, student at Lincoln Terrace Saturn Network, advised that she
enjoyed working with her mentors each week, the program helped her to become
a better reader and improved other learning skills, and requested that the program
be offered to fourth and fifth graders.
Along with Ms. Thomason and Freida Hines, Principal, Lincoln Terrace Saturn
Network, Ms. Meranda presented the City Manager with a plaque of appreciation.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: None.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-COMMUNITY PLANNING-GRANTS: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that ESG funds are allocated under
the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act and must be used to provide
assistance to the homeless or those at risk of becoming homeless; and Council
authorized filing an ESG application through submission of the Annual Update to the
Consolidated Plan to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD)
for FY 2002-2003 on May 13, 2002, pursuant to Resolution No. 35848-051302.
262
It was further advised that HUD's approval letter, granting the City access to
its 2002-2003 ESG entitlement of $76,000.00 is completing the routine release
process and is forthcoming; and acceptance of the entitlement and appropriation of
all funds to the accounts is needed to permit projects to proceed.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution accepting
$76,000.00 in 2002-2003 ESG funds, contingent upon receipt of the approval letter
from HUD; authorize the City Manager to execute the required Grant Agreement,
Funding Approval, and other forms required by HUD in order to accept the funds,
approved as to form by the City Attorney; and appropriate $76,000.00 entitlement to
revenue and expenditure accounts in the Grant Fund to be established by the
Director of Finance.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35910-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 160.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35910-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ................................................................................... --6.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... '--.0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35911.061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the Fiscal Year 2002-2003
funds for the Emergency Shelter Grant Program, and authorizing the City
Man~iger to execute the requisite Grant Agreement with the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 161.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35911-061702. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
263
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that HOME is a housing assistance program of the U. S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); the City has received a
HOME entitlement grant each year since FY 1992 and must reapply annually to HUD
to receive such funding; and on May 13, 2002, Council authorized filing the 2002-
2003 HOME application as part of approving the submission of the Annual Update
to the Consolidated Plan to HUD.
It was further advised that the funding release process is underway, and
HUD's letter of approval is forthcoming, granting the City access to its 2002-2003
HOME entitlement of $751,000.00; in addition, $286,204.00 unexpended from prior
year accounts and $10,000.00 in anticipated program income are included in the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002-2003 activities; and acceptance of funds, and
acceptance of the 2002-2003 entitlement requires $93,875.00 in local match;
however, no outlays of City funds will be needed to meet the requirement.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution accepting
$751,000.00 in 2002-2003 HOME funds, contingent upon receipt of the approval letter
from HUD; authorize the City Manager to execute the required Grant Agreement,
Funding Approval, and any other documents required by HUD in order to accept the
funds, such documents to be approved as to form by the City Attorney; appropriate
$761,000.00 to revenue and expenditure accounts in the Grant Fund to be
established by the Director of Finance; and transfer $286,204.00 in HOME accounts
from prior years to projects included in the 2002-2003 HOME program.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35912-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 162.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35912-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
264
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White,
Vice-Mayor Carder .........
Hudson, Harris, and
6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35913-061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the Fiscal Year 2002-2003 funds
for the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), and authorizing the proper
City officials to execute the requisite Grant Agreement with the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 164.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35913-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ........ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
BUDGET-COMMUNITY PLANNING-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that CDBG is a program of the U. S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development (HUD) which offers assistance to the community in many
ways; the City has received CDBG entitlement grants each year since inception of
the program in 1974 and must submit an action plan annually to HUD to receive such
funding; and on May 13, 2002, pursuant to Resolution No. 35848-051302, Council
authorized filing the 2002-2003 CDBG application through submission of the Annual
Update of the Consolidated Plan to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) for FY 2002-2003.
It was further advised that HUD's routine release process is underway, and the
HUD approval letter is forthcoming, granting the City access to its 2002-2003 CDBG
entitlement of $2,241,000.00; in addition, $663,994.00 unexpended from prior year
accounts and $440,034.00 in anticipated program income are also included in the
appropriation for fiscal year 2002-2003 programs; and acceptance of the entitlement
and appropriation of all funds is needed to permit projects to proceed.
265
The City Manager recommended adoption of a resolution accepting
$2,241,000.00 in 2002-2003 CDBG funds, contingent upon receipt of the approval
letter from HUD; that the City Manager be authorized to execute the required Grant
Agreement, Funding Approval, and other forms required by HUD in order to accept
the funds; appropriate $2,241,000.00, entitlement, and $440,034.00 in anticipated
program income to revenue and expenditure accounts in the Grant Fund to be
established by the Director of Finance; and transfer $663,994.00 in CDBG accounts
from prior years to projects included in the 2002-2003 CDBG program.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35914-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 164.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35914-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder .......................................................................................... 5.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
(Council Member Bestpitch abstained from voting inasmuch as his spouse is
employed bythe YMCAwhich is one of the organizations recommended for funding.)
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35915-061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the fiscal year 2002-2003 funds for
the Community Development Block Grant program, and authorizing the City Manager
to execute the requisite Grant Agreement with the United States Department of
Housing and Urban Development (HUD).
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 168.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35915-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
266
AYES: Council Members Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris,
and Vice-Mayor Carder ................................................................................. 5.
NAYS: None. 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
(Council Member Bestpitch abstained from voting inasmuch as his spouse is
employed bythe YMCAwhich is one of the organizations recommended for funding.)
BUDGET-COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT-TELEPHONE -EQUIPMENT: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City currently has a fiber
optic based metropolitan area network, which was implemented in 1998-99; the
current equipment was installed at that time to support a token ring environment,
however, the City is currently migrating to an all Ethernet and TCP/IP network
environment; and upgrading to a Symmetrical Optical Network (SONET) will
position the City to better utilize the investment made in the fiber network and allow
for implementation of new technologies over the fiber infrastructure such as faster
data transmission, video conferencing and voice transmission capabilities on the
network for a telephone system solution that will be implemented in October.
It was further advised that an Invitation for Bid for Metropolitan Area Network
SONET Ring Equipment was issued on March 20, 2002; six bids were received with
The Presidio Corporation submitting the Iow bid, in the amount of $683,905.67;
funding in the amount of $487,000.00 is available in Account No. 013-430-9854-9003,
Expansion of Network Capacity, and in the amount of $196,905.00 in Account No.
013-430-9860-9003, Network Storage Management.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept the bid of
The Presidio Corporation in the amount of $683,905.67; reject all other bids received
by the City; and transfer $196,906.00 from Account No. 013-430-9860-9003 to
Account No. 013-430-9854-9003.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35916-061702) 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 168.)
267
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35916-061702. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35917-061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of The Presidio
Corporation for the purchase and installation of the Metropolitan Area Network
SONET Ring Equipment, upon certain terms and conditions; and rejecting all other
bids.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 169.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35917-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder .......................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
BRIDGES-SIGNS/BILLBOARDS/AWNINGS-CONSULTANTS REPORTS: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the 1978 Surface Transportation
Act enacted by Congress requires that all bridges, including "off Federal Aid
System" structures, must be included in the annual inspection program; Bridge
Inspection Reports are required on 66 structures in the City of Roanoke this year;
31 structures are inspected annually while 35 structures are inspected bi-annually;
the Federal Highway Administration has established a new requirement that
overhead sign structures are to be inspected, 15 of which exist within the City of
Roanoke; and one tunnel is in need of inspection.
It was further advised that a Request for Proposals for technical inspection
and reports were publicly advertised and received from Hayes, Seay, Mattern &
Mattern, Inc., L.A. Gates Company, and Mattern & Craig, Inc.; and a selection
committee conducted interviews with all three firms.
268
It was further advised that the complexity of bridge inspections led staff to
select two qualified firms to complete the work by apportioning the work among two
firms; negotiations were conducted with the two most qualified firms, Hayes, Seay,
Mattern & Mattern, Inc., and Mattern & Craig, Inc., both firms have agreed to
contracts for the first year with up to two additional one year extensions; Hayes,
Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. has agreed to inspect 30 bridges and 15 overhead
signs at a cost of $71,200.00; Mattern & Craig, Inc., has agreed to inspect 36 bridges
and one tunnel at a cost of $60,600.00; and funding in the amount of $131,800.00 is
available for first year contracts in Account No. 001-530-4310-3072 in the Fiscal Year
2002-03 budget.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute separate
Contracts for Consulting Services with Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc. and
Mattern & Craig, Inc., in the amounts of $71,200.00 and $60,600.00, respectively, for
the first year (2002) for bridge and overhead sign structure and tunnel inspection
services, which contracts may be extended for two additional one-year terms at the
option of the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35918-061702) A RESOLUTION authorizing a contract with Hayes, Seay,
Mattern & Mattern, Inc., for engineering services for the inspection of 30 bridges and
15 overhead signs and related work in connection with the Three Year Bridge
Inspection Program (2002 -2004).
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 170.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35918-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ..... . ............... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#35919-061702) A RESOLUTION authorizing a contract with Mattern & Craig,
Inc., for engineering services for the inspection of 36 bridges, one tunnel, and
related work in connection with the Three Year Bridge Inspection Program (2002 -
2004).
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 171.)
269
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35919-061702. The motion
was seconded by Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder .................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... -,---0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
BUDGET-GRANTS-YOUTH: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the City of Roanoke continues to provide for the nutritional needs of
children and youth during the summer months through its Office on Youth
supervised Summer Nutrition Program; breakfast and lunch are provided to children
throughout the City from mid-June through early August; and more than 2,300
children/youth received lunch and/or breakfast on a daily basis at 18 sites during
the summer of 2001.
It was further advised that funds for the program, now in its ninth year, are
provided through the United States Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition
Service; the program is similar in concept to the National School Lunch Program
with eligibility requirements much like those used to determine eligibility for free or
reduced priced meals during the school year; the purpose is to provide nutritionally
balanced healthy meals to children ages one through 18; adult, summer staff
manage the program and youth are hired to assist at feeding locations, with the City
reimbursed on a per meal basis; and local cash match in the amount of $15,000.00
was appropriated in the fiscal year 2003 General Fund budget, Human Services
Support, Account No. 001-630-1270-2010.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept projected
Federal funds in the amount of $151,193.00 from the United States Department of
Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service; decrease fiscal year 2003 Human Services
Support Account No. 001-630-1270-2010 by $15,000.00 and increase fiscal year 2003
budget estimate for the Transfer to Grant Fund Account No. 001-250-9310-9535 by
$15,000.00; transfer $15,000.00 local cash match to the grant fund; and authorize the
Director of Finance to establish a revenue estimate, in the amount of $151,193.00,
and appropriate funds to expenditure accounts.
Mr. Hudson offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35920-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 General and Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 172.)
270
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35920-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ....... 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
Mr. Hudson offered the following resolution:
(#35921-061702) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of reimbursement
from USDA Food and Nutrition Service on behalf of the City for program costs for the
implementation of the summer program, and authorizing execution of any and all
necessary documents to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant and
applicable laws, regulations, and requirements pertaining thereto.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 173.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35921-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ......... 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
BUDGET-CONSULTANTS REPORT-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the Utility Department staff has identified
four projects to improve water system reliability and increase service conditions to
the citizens of Roanoke, which projects include a pump station and associated water
main improvements to increase service to Mill Mountain and the neighborhoods
bounded by Walnut Avenue and Hamilton Terrace, water transmission main
improvements to Orange Avenue, N.W., Hollins Road, N.E., and Brambleton Avenue,
S.W.
271
It was further advised that proposals were received from ten engineering
firms, three of which were short listed and interviewed; Mattern & Craig, Inc., was
selected; City staff has negotiated acceptable agreements for the above referenced
work in the form of a lump sum fee for the four projects as follows: Mill Mountain
Service Line-$58,876.00, Orange Avenue -$30,265.00, Hollins Road -$70,055.00, and
Brambleton Avenue -$33,310.00; funding is available from retained earnings in the
Water Fund, and needs to be appropriated by Council; and the City Manager has
authority to execute each contract inasmuch as each is within the authority as set
forth in the City Code.
The City Manager recommended appropriation of $192,506.00 from Water
Fund retained earnings to accounts to be established by the Director of Finance to
provide design and consulting services for the above referenced Water System
Distribution Improvement projects.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35922-061702) 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 174.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35922-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, and
Vice-Mayor Carder ...................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Mayor Smith was absent when the vote was recorded.)
(The Mayor entered the meeting at 3:15 p.m.)
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the procedure for preparing a
project for construction is a lengthy process due to the time required to complete
the design, finalize construction documents and acquire the necessary property or
easements; funding of $2.0 million for construction of storm drain projects is
planned in the next general obligation bond issue expected to be issued in
approximately fiscal year 2004; and in order to be proactive, the Engineering
Division is moving forward with design of numerous storm drain projects so that
construction may begin soon after funding is available.
272
It was further advised that a Request for Proposals was sent to 12 engineering
firms inviting them to submit their qualifications; eight firms were interviewed and
six firms were selected to provide design services; and the CIP Storm Drainage
Projects List has been reviewed, and the following highest rated priority projects
have been selected for design:
Draper Aden Associates, Inc.
1528 Cove Road 2206 South Main Street
Trevino Drive Phase II Blacksburg, Virginia 24060 $ 30,000.00
Anderson & Associates of Virginia, Inc.
Westover Avenue (2500 Block) 100 Ardmore Street
Harvest Lane Drainage Project Blacksburg, Virginia 24060 $ 30,000.00
4457 Ohio Street
3132 Courtland Avenue Caldwell-White Associates, PLC
(800 Block Queen Avenue, 4203 Melrose Avenue, N.W.
3100 Block Lyndhurst Street) Roanoke, Virginia 24017 $ 30,000.00
LMW, P.C.
102 Albemarle Avenue, S.E.
4501 & 4513 Narrows Lane Roanoke, Virginia 24013 $ 15,000.00
Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, Inc.
1315 Franklin Road, S.W.
Ore Branch Channel Stabilization Roanoke, Virginia 24016 $ 30,000.00
RCIT Detention Maintenance at Engineering Concepts, Inc.
Cooper Industries 20 South Roanoke Street
RCIT Detention Maintenance at Fincastle, Virginia 24090
OrvislElizabeth Arden $ 30,000.00
LMW, P.C.
Moomaw Heights 102 Albemarle Avenue, S.E.
738 Windsor Avenue Roanoke, Virginia 24013 $ 30,000.00
It was explained that the cost to fund the design of the above listed of storm
drain projects is $195,000.00; and funding is available in Public Improvement Bonds-
Series 1999, Account No. 008-052-9709-9176.
The City Manager recommended transfer of $195,000.00 from Account No. 008-
052-9709-9176, Public Improvement Bonds-Series 1999, to new capital projects
accounts to be established by the Director of Finance.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
273
(#35923-061702) 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 175.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35923-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
RAILSIDE LINEAR WALK: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that Breakell, Inc., was awarded a contract, in the amount of $645,969.00, for
construction of Phase V of the Railside Linear Walk Project; Phase V will erect the
elevated walkway along Warehouse Row; Change Order No. 1 was administratively
approved, in the amount of $343.00, with a contract time extension of three days; and
Change Order No. 2 was requested to assist future development of eight Warehouse
Row properties west of the InSystems Technologies building located along Norfolk
Avenue, S.W.
It was further advised that while this area is under construction, this is the
appropriate time to provide the necessary utility and telecommunication upgrades;
the capacity will be provided for each building to be utilized as a restaurant or high-
tech office space; the waterline to each building will be upgraded in order to supply
adequate water service; placement of conduits to each building will allow for future
access of various cable companies, telephone services, internet service, etc., as
needed by the tenant; and as each building is remodeled, the fire code will require
the building to have a sprinkler system and a six inch waterline installed to each
building will be provided to support fire protection demands; and total cost of
Change Order No. 2 is $683,952.00, and funding is available in Account No. 008-530-
9759, Railside Linear Walk-Phase V.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute Change
Order No. 2 in the amount of $37,640.00, with Breakell, Inc., with a contract time
extension of three days.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
274
(#35924-061702) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager's issuance of
Change Order No. 2 to the City's contract with Breakell, Inc., for upgrading the
existing %" water service to 2" water service, installing waterlines, and installing two
4" and one 2" schedule 80 PVC conduits to each of the eight buildings west of the
InSystems Technologies building, located along Norfolk Avenue, S. W., along
Warehouse Row, in connection with Phase V of the Railside Linear Walk Project; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 177.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35924-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith .7.
NAYS: None ................................................................................... --0.
WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising
that Mid Eastern Builders, Inc., was awarded a contract, in the amount of
$4,477,000.00, at the October 1, 2001 meeting of City Council for building
construction and equipment installation at the Crystal Spring Water Treatment
(Filtration) Plant, as defined in contract documents prepared by Wiley & Wilson, Inc.;
Change Order No. 1 was administratively approved in the amount of $14,902.00 and
Cha~nge Order No. 2 was approved by Council at its meeting on Monday, May 20,
2002, in the amount of $108,216.00, with a contract time extension of two days;
Change Order No. 3 addresses changes in the proposed construction due to plan
review comments provided by the Virginia Department of Health (VDH); and total
cost of Change Order No. 3 is $41,224.00, for a total contract amount of $4,641,342.00.
It was explained that funding for Change Order No. 3, in the amount of
$41,224.00 ,is available in Account No. 002-530-8397, Crystal Spring Water Treatment
Plant Construction.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute Change
Order No. 3, in amount of $41,224.00, with Mid Eastern Builders, Inc.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35925-061702) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager's issuance of
Cha~ge Order No. 3 to the City's contract with Mid Eastern Builders, Inc., in
connection with the Crystal Spring Water Treatment (Filtration) Plant Project; and
providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 178.)
275
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35925-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith. .7.
NAYS: None 0.
ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the City's current agreement for the provision of ticketing services at
the Roanoke Civic Center expires on July 31,2002; in order to secure a ticket service
provider, Council authorized the process identified as "competitive negotiation" at
its meeting on January 7, 2002; sealed proposals were received from four vendors
and a selection committee reviewed the proposals and selected two finalists that
were interviewed in accordance with City Code Section 23.1-4.1 (c); and selection
criteria included experience, ability and capacity to perform required duties and
responsibilities, equipment, service and maintenance, marketing, price, and revenue
opportunities for the City.
It was further advised that the selection committee selected Tickets.com, Inc.,
as the companywhose proposal best meets the interests of the City; on May 20,.2002,
the Civic Center Commission authorized the Chair of the Commission to forvv, ard a
letter to Council recommending a five year agreement between the City and
Tickets.com, Inc., for ticketing services at the Roanoke Civic Center, and other City
Civic Facilities, as Council may deem appropriate, and subject to receipt of a contract
from with terms acceptable to the Director of Civic Facilities and the City Manager;
a contract has been received and is acceptable which contains a mutual indemnity
clause; and there are no funding issues.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the proposal of
Tickets.com, Inc. and authorize the City Manager to execute a five-year contract, with
an option to renew for up to five additional years, to provide ticketing services at
Roanoke Civic Facilities and to take such further action and/or to execute such
further documents as may be necessary to implement and administer the contract.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35926-061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the proposal of Tickets.com, Inc.,
to provide ticketing and related services for the City's Civic Facilities for a five year
period with an option to renew for up to an additional five years upon mutual
agreement by parties, and upon other terms and conditions; authorizing the proper
City officials to execute the requisite contract for same; and rejecting all other
proposals made to the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 179.)
276
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35926-061702.
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The motion
Council Member Wyatt inquired as to the composition of the selection
committee; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the committee was composed
of the following City employees: Alicia Stone, James Evans, Christine Powell, Sheila
Hairston and May Huff.
Ms. Wyatt raised questions with regard to seasonal account storage;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would respond later in the meeting.
She inquired about an initial $10,000.00 and an additional $10,000.00 everyfive years
for start up costs for marketing support; whereupon, the City Manager responded
that Tickets.com, Inc., has committed to marketing the system and will use the funds
toward marketing efforts.
Ms. Wyatt inquired about local maintenance support to which the City Manager
advised that Tickets.com will employ a full time person in the Roanoke area who will
be responsible for maintaining machines.
Ms. Wyatt addressed the issue of exclusivity and its impact on the NBDL, the
Roanoke Steam, and the Express Hockey that sell season tickets directly to patrons;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that the proposed contract does not affect
season tickets, the proposed contract, was reviewed by representatives of those
franchises currently operating at the Civic Center, and no concerns were expressed
regarding the method of selling season tickets.
Ms. Wyatt referred to the cost of tickets, for example: if a patron purchases a
$9.00 hockey ticket, under the Ticket.com, Inc., contract, she inquired if there be an
additional $3.00 added as a handling fee and will the $3.00 be a part of the $9.00
ticket, or will there be a higher cost ticket. The City Manager advised that she would
respond to the question later in the Council meeting.
In view of numerous questions that need to be answered, Ms. Wyatt requested
that action on the matter be tabled until the City Manager has had an opportunity to
respond.
It was the consensus of Council to table the matter until the end of the Council
meeting at which time City staff will respond to Council Member Wyatt's questions.
BUDGET-SIGNSIBILLBOARDSIAWNINGS-ROANOKE CiViC CENTER: The City
Manager called attention to a project that will provide a new freestanding sign
("marquee") for the Roanoke Civic Center that will be visible to vehicular traffic using
Interstate 1-581 along the western edge of the multi-building complex; there is
currently no means to announce upcoming events or events taking place that day at
the facility along that side of the facility, and the sign will serve to supplement an
existing sign that is installed along the Williamson Road side of the building
277
complex; the project will also provide for the interface of computer software used by
both signs to permit separate or simultaneous display of message and graphics for
the two signs; and the new sign has received preliminary approval from the Virginia
Department of Transportation and will comply with the requirements of the City's
zoning ordinance.
It was further advised that after proper advertisement, four bids were received,
with Acken Signs, Inc., submitting the Iow bid, in the amount of $139,373.00; and a
construction of 120 consecutive calendar days.
It was explained that funding in the amount of $150,000.00 is needed for the
project; additional funds that exceed the contract amount will be used for
miscellaneous project expenses, including landscaping around the base of the sign,
advertising, printing, testing services, minor variations in bid quantities, and
unforeseen project expenses; and funding in the amount of $43,500.00 is available
from Civic Facilities Capital Outlay, Account No. 005-550-2108-9015, and $106,500.00
is available from Account No. 005-550-8616, Civic Center Expansion/Renovation
Phase II, from the fiscal year 2003 adopted budget.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of Acken Signs,
Inc., the amount of $139,373.00, with 120 consecutive calendar days contract time;
reject other bids received by the City; transfer $43,500.00 from Account No. 005-550-
2108-9015 to Civic Center Expansion/Renovation Phase II, Account No. 005-550-8616.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35927-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2002-2003 Civic Center Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 180.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35927-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith 7.
NAYS: None 0.
Mr. Harris offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35928-061702) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Acken Signs, Inc., for the
new freestanding sign ("marquee") for the Roanoke Civic Center that will be visible
to vehicular traffic using Interstate 1-581 along the western edge of the multi-building
complex, and providing for the interface of computer software used by the new sign
278
and the existing sign to permit separate or simultaneous display of message and
graphics for the two signs, 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 184.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35928-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............... 7.
NAYS: None-
The City Manager advised that some persons might question the need for a
marquee on both sides of the civic center complex, and noted that in the past, the
Virginia Department of Transportation has denied the City's requests to install a
marquee on the 1-581 side of the building. She called attention to the persistence of
the Roanoke Civic Center Commission and through continuing dialogue with VDOT,
the request for a marquee has been approved which will allow the City to promote not
only events at the Roanoke Civic Center, but other activities in and around the City
of Roanoke.
Ms. Wyatt called attention to the dedication of Vernon M. Danielsen, member
of the Roanoke Civic Center Commission, who will leave his position on
September 30, 2002, and requested that he be invited to dedication activities.
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS -BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-
COMMITTEES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the
Human Services Committee budget, in the amount of $484,264.00, was established
by Council, pursuant to adoption of the General Fund budget for fiscal year 2002-03
on Monday, May 13, 2002; requests from 42 agencies, totaling $1,058,648.55 were
received; committee members studied each application prior to an allocation meeting
which was held on April 9, 2002; and agencies were notified of tentative allocations
and advised they could appeal the recommendations.
It was further advised that appeals of Committee recommendations were
received after notification to each agency of its tentative recommended allocation;
appeals were filed and heard from Blue Ridge Legal Services, Bradley Free Clinic,
TAP-IDA Program, and National Multiple Sclerosis Society; following the hearing of
279
appeals, Blue Ridge Legal Services was allocated $3,000.00, Bradley Free Clinic was
increased from $5,000.00 to $30,000.00, the National Multiple Sclerosis Society was
allocated $1,495.00 and the TAP- IDA Program was denied funding; and performance
audits will be conducted by the Council of Community Services to evaluate
effectiveness and efficiency of funded programs.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize transfer of $484,264.00
from Human Services Committee, Account No. 001-630-5220-3700, to new line items
to be established within the Human Services Committee budget by the Director of
Finance; that the City Manager be authorized to execute contracts with The Salvation
Army for the Homeless Housing Program - Red Shield Lodge, ($14,000.00) and
Abused Women's Shelter - The Turning Point, ($14,000.00), St. John's Community
Youth Program, Inc., ($5,000.00), and the Council of Community Services for
performance audits to be conducted, ($11,000.00).
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35929.061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2002-2003 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 183.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35929-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
Council Member Bestpitch asked if he is required to abstain from voting on the
matter since his spouse is employed by the YMCA; whereupon, the City Attorney
responded in the negative, advising that funds represent General Fund
appropriations which are covered by State law and Mr. Bestpitch has no conflict of
interest under the Code of Virginia.
Ordinance No. 35929-061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
280
(#35930-061702) A RESOLUTION concurring in the recommendations of the
Human Services Committee for allocation of City funds to various nonprofit agencies
and performance audits for Fiscal Year 2002-2003, and authorizing the City Mapager,
or her designee, to execute a contract with The Salvation Army for provision of
services under the Homeless Housing Program and/or Abused Women's Shelter, to
execute a contract with St. John's Community Youth Program, Inc., for provision of
services, and to execute a contract with the Council of Community Services to
perform the necessary audits.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 185.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35930-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith .7.
NAYS: None 0.
If additional funds become available, Ms. Wyatt requested that consideration
be given to the Boys and Girls Clubs and Apple Ridge Farms, both of which provide
services to many of Roanoke's most disadvantaged children.
BUDGET-COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the Roanoke Arts Commission budget for
funds to be allocated to cultural agencies, in the amount of $289,112.00, was
established by Council, pursuant to adoption of the General Fund budget for fiscal
year 2002-03; requests from 15 agencies totaling $456,410.00 were received; and
Committee members studied each application prior to an allocation meeting which
was held on April 10, 2002; agencies were notified of tentative allocations and
advised that they could appeal recommendations, however, no appeals were filed.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize transfer of $289,112.00
from Account No. 001-310-5221-3700, to new line items to be established within the
Roanoke Arts Commission budget by the Director of Finance for fiscal year 2002-03.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35931-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2002-2003 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 187.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35931-061702.
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
281
The motion
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-GRANTS-YOUTH: The City Manager submitted
a communication advising that the Department of Criminal Justice Services notified
the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County in May, 2002 of an allocation of funds under
the Juvenile Accountability Incentive Block Grant Program (JAIBG); and allocation
of $48,493.00 in Federal funds was awarded jointly to the two jurisdictions, with a
local match of $5,388.00 being required.
It was further advised that the allocation formula provides $34,706.00 Federal
and $3,856.00 match for Roanoke City and $13,787.00 Federal and $1,532.00 match
for Roanoke County; staff from the jurisdictions have met and developed program
proposals for use of the funding; Roanoke County will provide a substance abuse
intervention education program through the schools; Roanoke City, in collaboration
with the Boys & Girls Club, will provide services to students suspended or otherwise
absent from school during the day; funding for the City's match of $3,856.00 is
included in Account No. 001-631-3330-8005, Outreach Detention; and Roanoke City
will serve as fiscal agent for the funds.
The City Manager recommended that she, or her designee, be authorized to
accept the grant allocation of $34,706.00 (Roanoke City) and $13,787.00 (Roanoke
County), totaling $48,493.00; authorize appropriation of $3,856.00 from Account No.
001-631-3330-8005, Outreach Detention, to an account for allocation to be established
by the Director of Finance; and that the Director of Finance be authorized to
establish appropriation amounts and revenue estimates for the grant.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35932-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 188.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35932-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
282
AYES: Council Members
and Mayor Smith
Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
'7,
NAYS: None 0.
Mr. Hudson offered the following resolution:
(#35933-061702) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of a Juvenile
Accountability Incentive Block Grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice
Services on behalf of the City, authorizing execution of any and all necessary
documents to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant and applicable laws,
regulations, and requirements pertaining thereto.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 190.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35933 -061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith 7.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) established in
1993, provides residential and non-residential treatment services to troubled and at-
risk youths and their families through a collaborative system of state and local
agencies, parents, and private service providers; such services include mandated
foster care, certain special education services, and foster care prevention; CSA also
provides services to certain targeted non-mandated populations; CSA expenditures
are projected at $8,999,119.00; which expenditures exceed the CSA appropriation of
$8,400,000.00 by $599,119.00, and require an additional local share in the amount of
$184,049.00; and expenditures are over budget due to increased Special Education
referrals for private day and residential placements.
The City Manager recommended that Council:
increase the General Fund Revenue estimate by $415,070.00 to CSA
Revenue Account No. 001-110-1234-0692,
transfer funds in the amount of $184,049.00 from Transfer to School
Fund (001-250-9310-9530) for educationally mandated placements,
283
appropriate funding in the amount of $599,119.00 to the following
accounts:
001-630-5410-3185 Special Education-Residential
001-630-5410-3187 Special Education-Private
Day Facilities
001-630-5410-3188 Special Education-Public
Day Facilities
$191,718.00
371,454.00
35,947.00
$599,119.00
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35934-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 191.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35934-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU-TOURISM: The City Manager submitted
a communication advising that the City of Roanoke has annually entered into an
agreement with the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau (RVCVB) to
provide funding for marketing the Roanoke Valley as a convention and destination
tourism site; as part of the fiscal year 2002-2003 Annual Operating budget adopted
by Council, the Memberships and Affiliations budget included funding of $541,440.00
specifically designated for the RVCVB; with an additional $285,714.00 designated
for marketing efforts; and the additional $285,714.00 will be adjusted up or down in
subsequent years based on an amount equal to the actual revenues collected from
the one per cent increase in the transient occupancy tax.
It was further advised that the City has negotiated a one year agreement
commencing July 1,2002 with the RVCVB detailing the use of funds; in addition, the
City of Roanoke will have one less appointment this year to the RVCVC Board of
Directors, in accordance with the City Manager's recommendation and the consultant
284
report suggestion that the Board be reduced in size; and the RVCVB submitted a
detailed report listing the accomplishments made through April 2002, and an annual
budget and work plan for fiscal year 2002-03 will be submitted to the City Manager
for review and approval, upon approval by the RVCVB Board of Directors.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an
agreement, in the amount of $827,154.00, with the Roanoke Valley Convention and
Visitor Bureau, upon form approved by the City Attorney, for the purpose of
marketing the Roanoke Valley as a regional destination for convention and
destination tourism, and authorize the Director of Finance to make the necessary
adjustments as set forth in the agreement.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35935-061702) A RESOLUTION authorizing an agreement with the Roanoke
Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau for the purpose of increasing tourism in the
Roanoke Valley.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 193.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35935-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None
CITY CODE-REFUSE COLLECTION: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that at the May 9, 2002, budget-briefing session, Council
Member Hudson raised a question regarding responsibility of landlords for setout of
bulk items when tenants are evicted; and typically, evictions that are scheduled
through the Sheriff's Department are coordinated with Solid Waste Management for
collection of bulk item materials placed at the curb for collection.
It was further advised that on a larger scale, there continues to be a problem
of bulk item and brush setouts by homeowners and landlords that exceed the limits
prescribed by the City Code, or which are not in conformance with the regularly
scheduled collection day, which is an issue that the Enforcement Officer of Solid
Waste Management must contend with on a routine basis; most residents are
cooperative when advised of the need to remove items from the curb that are
excessive in quantity, or are placed too early for collection, however, some citizens
285
are not cooperative when directed to comply; while those in violation can be charged
with a criminal violation, the process can require more time than is desired to effect
the removal of excessive bulk items and brush from public view; and it is also
important to note that citizens currently have the option to take 12 loads of bulk and
brush to the Transfer Station each year free of charge and landlords have the option
to take four loads per rental property to the Transfer Station each year free of charge.
It was explained that City staff has evaluated ordinances of benchmark
localities from the Virginia First Cities Coalition to identify methods of enforcement
for similar situations; based upon research, a revised ordinance has been prepared
which would require notification of the owner or occupant responsible for setting out
the bulk items or brush to remove the bulk items or brush materials within 24 hours;
failure to comply would cause removal of the materials by Solid Waste Management,
for which a fee would be assessed to the owner or occupant which would cover
costs of collection and disposal of any solid waste which is set out in violation of the
Solid Waste Ordinance; and a City Code amendment is also needed to prohibit the
placement of tires inside of automated collection containers (Big Blues).
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
encompassing the above referenced revisions.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35936-061702) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §14.1-3, Litterincj,
of Article I, In General, of Chapter 14.1, Solid Waste Mana~lement, of the Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by adding new subsections (f) and
(g), and amending and reordaining §14.1-21, Certain solid waste not to be
collected - Generally, of Article I, In General, of Chapter 14.1, Solid Waste
Mana~lement, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 194.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35936-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................ 0.
286
CITY CODE-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that Council would like to recognize employees for efforts and
accomplishments during fiscal year 2002 related to Council's goals; to do so, a one
time floating holiday is recommended that will be earned for Friday, July 5, 2002; City
offices will be open on Friday, July 5, 2002, and all non-temporary employees on the
payroll as of said date will earn eight hours of holiday leave (12 hours for Fire'EMS
24-hour scheduled employees); the holiday may be taken on Friday, July 5, 2002, with
appropriate supervisory approval, or at a later date; and Personnel Operating
Procedures that limit the carry over of holiday time to 24 hours per year remain in
effect.
The City Manager recommended that Council approve the additional floating
holiday for July 5, 2002.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35937-061702) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (c) of
§2-37, Office hours, work weeks and holidays, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended; the amended subsection providing for a floating holiday, Friday, July 5,
2002, for the year 2002 only; and providing for an emergency and an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 196.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35937-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the fiscal year 2001-2002 General Fund Budget includes funds in the
nondepartmental expenditure category for several personnel related accounts; which
accounts are budgeted at estimated amounts in the nondepartmental cost center
because annual charges of each department are difficult to accurately predict; and
actual costs are charged to departments in anticipation of year-end budget transfers
to cover the costs.
287
It was further advised that salary lapse is one of the items included in the
nondepartmental category and represents the difference in budgeted City employee
salaries and actual salaries; it is created through normal employee attrition and
managed hiring and re-engineering efforts undertaken during the year by City staff;
at year-end, salary lapse created in departments is credited against the budgeted
total salary lapse figure, and any excess salary lapse generated is spread throughout
the various departments to cover additional personnel and operational needs; and
the largest operational allocation is recommending an additional $223,000.00 of
salary lapse to fund the remaining portion of the Solid Waste Management funding
shortfall which was brought to the attention of Council on April 1, 2002.
It was further advised that Workers' Compensation is also initially budgeted
in the nondepartmental category; and has been budgeted as a lump sum in the non-
departmental category in the General Fund to cover workers' compensation wages
and medical expenses; like other personnel related budgets, workers' compensation
budgets are established non-departmentally due to the difficulty of predicting which
departments will incur these expenses and to what extent; and a proposed budget
ordinance allocates the amount in the nondepartmental cost center to departments
that have incurred actual costs.
It was explained that the fiscal year 2001-2002 General Fund Budget also
included funds in the non-departmental category to cover annual expenditures for
unemployment wages, extended illness leave payments, and termination leave
wages, as well as anticipated increases in health and dental insurance; these
budgets should be allocated to appropriate departmental accounts in the same
manner as salary lapse and workers' compensation; a proposed budget ordinance
accomplishes the necessary transfers by adjusting each department's regular
salaries line rather than adjusting all individual line items; an adjustment is also
needed to decrease the revenue estimate for the change in salary estimates for
employee salaries reimbursed by the State Compensation Board; after all required
allocations are made to personal services and revenues, a balance of $422,510.00 is
available for appropriation to the Transfers to Capital Projects Fund for
miscellaneous construction projects.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the transfer of funds
between accounts and the use of excess budgeted personal services as more fully
set forth in an attachment to the report.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35938-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 197.)
288
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35938-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith .7.
NAYS: None---
BUDGET-INTERNAL SERVICE FUND: The City Manager and the Director of
Finance submitted a joint communication advising that the City of Roanoke's Internal
Service Funds account for certain services provided to departments of the other
funds of the City; Internal Service Funds recover costs by charging receiving
departments for services provided; budgeted funds for internal services are allocated
in the General Fund in each fiscal year's budget throughout various departments
based on estimated usage and usage sometimes varies from original estimates; at
this time each fiscal year, it is necessary to make transfers between General Fund
departments to provide sufficient funds for internal services for the fiscal year;
additionally, budget amounts in the Internal Service Funds are established based on
expected transactions for the year; and based on certain higher than anticipated
expenses in the area of Risk Management, additional expenses have been incurred
and budget adjustments will be needed for said items.
It was further advised that the City accounts for self-insured liabilities in its
Risk Management Internal Service Fund, which has incurred costs in excess of
budget during fiscal year 2002, and has billed user funds and departments at
amounts exceeding original revenue estimates to recover said costs; and to properly
balance the budget to actual accounting for the year, the following budgetary
adjustments to Risk Management are recommended, and corresponding revenue
adjustments will also be made:
Expenditure Accounts
An increase of $72,000.00 is needed in Miscellaneous Claims due to the
high level of claims paid for water and sewer line breaks.
An increase in Settlements and Judgments of $101,000.00 is needed due
to the settlement of a large claim.
Workers' compensation medical expenses need an increase of
$228,000.00 due to a higher than typical level of medical claims paid.
This is due to several fairly severe medical conditions that have resulted
in costly medical expenses.
289
An increase $35,000.00 is needed to cover the rising costs of insurance
policies. The cost of policies has increased as a result of the events of
September 11, 2001.
It was advised that the City accounts for its materials warehouse activity in the
Materials Control Fund; increases of an equal amount in the Materials Control Fund's
revenue and expense estimates are needed for fiscal year 2002 due to a change in
accounting method, which grosses rather than nets sales transactions; the change
in accounting method was made to more clearly track revenues and expenses
resulting from warehouse transactions; and the additional amount of $165,911.00
required to fully fund the Internal Service Fund charges will be transferred to various
departmental internal service accounts from the City Manager's contingency account.
The City Manager and the Director of Finance recommended adoption of a
budget ordinance transferring funds.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35939-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 General, Risk Management and Materials Control Funds Appropriations,
and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 200.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35939-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: The City Manager and the
Director of Finance submitted a joint communication advising that Capital Projects
of all types have been approved by Council for construction over the past years;
projects have included construction in major categories for buildings, parks, streets,
bridges, sanitary sewers, water projects, storm drains, flood reduction, and various
technology related projects; funding was established for each project when Council
approved the project based on bids for various project costs, as well as extra funding
for possible contingencies; some projects have contingency funds remaining after
the final expenditures are made because projects are completed within established
budgets; a number of projects have been completed and can be closed and
290
remaining funds may be transferred from the completed projects to capital projects
still under construction or to capital improvement reserve accounts for other future
construction.
The City Manager and the Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt
a budget ordinance, which will transfer funds from completed capital projects into
recommended accounts, as more fully set forth in Attachment A of the report.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35940-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 Civic Center, Capital Projects and Department of Technology Funds
Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 206.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35940-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith .7.
NAYS: None
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Bulletproof Partnership Grant Act of 2001, enacted
by the 107t' United States Congress, provides funds to eligible law enforcement
agencies for purchase of bulletproof vests; the grant program is managed by the
Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, Bureau of Justice Assistance; on
May 29, 2001, the City of Roanoke was reimbursed in the amount of $5,182.75 for
vests purchased by the Police Department in Fiscal Year 2001-02; and 27 bulletproof
vests were purchased; bulletproof vests are essential equipment for Police Officer
safety; all Roanoke Police Officers are issued bulletproof vests and reimbursements
of this type ensure that additional vests can be procured in the future for new Police
Officers and to replace worn out equipment.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the Bulletproof Vest
Partnership reimbursement of $5,182.75, authorize execution of agreements related
to the grant, and appropriate funds in the amount of $5,182.75 to an account to be
established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund for said purpose.
Mr. Hudson offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
291
(#35941-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 212.)
Mr. Hudson moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35941-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith. .7.
NAYS: None 0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35942-061702) A RESOLUTION accepting the grant made to the City by the
Department of Justice for the reimbursement of the cost of bulletproof vests, and
authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City.
(For. full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 213.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35942-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Hudson and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith 7.
NAYS: None ......................................
FEE COMPENDIUM-OUTDOOR DINING: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that on April 1, 2002, Council adopted an ordinance to
provide for an outdoor dining permit program and amended the Fee Compendium;
fees per square foot of area approved for outdoor dining were as follows: $6.50 per
square foot for 2002, $7.00 per square foot for 2003, and $8.00 per square foot for
2004; to date, concerns regarding the fee structure have limited interest by applicants
in applying for an outdoor dining permit; in an effort to jump-start restaurant
applications for outdoor dining, a reduction in fees for calendar year 2002 should be
considered; and the annual permit fee after calendar year 2004 will be reconsidered
and established by Council as it deems appropriate.
The City Manager recommended that Council amend the Fee Compendium to
provide that the original fee of $6.50 per square foot will be reduced to $3.25 per
square foot for calendar year 2002, with a three month commitment by the applicant,
and with the annual permit fee after calendar year 2004 being reconsidered and
established by Council as it deems appropriate.
292
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35943-061702) AN ORDINANCE directing amendment of the Fee
Compendium; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 214.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35943-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
The City Manager advised that on April 1,2002, Council adopted an ordinance
that provided for an outdoor dining program and amended the Fee Compendium by
requiring an application fee, in addition to a per square footage rate, for the leasing
of City property, with a requirement that certain start up costs will be absorbed by
prospective users of the outdoor dining activity. She further advised that as staff
engaged in dialogue with a number of restauranteurs in the downtown area, concern
was expressed that initial start up costs, purchase and/or lease of outdoor dining
furniture, and the need to identify a suitable storage location for those functions
when not in use has caused concern to potential applicants. She noted that the City
would like to jump start the outdoor dining activity and an incentive for the first year
only would be to reduce the square footage rate by one-half from $6.50 per square
foot to $3.25 per square foot, with the restaurant making a commitment to be
available and open for business at least three months out of the remainder of this
calendar year. She stated that if Council approves the request, there is a potential
for at least two applications within the next 24 hours for outdoor dining, and asked
that Council approve the request as a one time start up for calendar year 2002 only.
Following discussion, Mr. Bestpitch requested that the matter be placed on the
Council's Pending Items List for review at the end of the calendar year as to whether
the square footage rate should remain at $3.25. He expressed concern that the
proposed square footage charges are considerably higher than those charged by
other localities that encourage outdoor dining. In addition, he called attention to
discussions by Council in regard to bringing the City's various fees in line with other
localities.
The City Manager responded that the City of Roanoke is addressing outdoor
dining differently from other communities to which Roanoke has been compared.
She advised that Roanoke does not have the width of sidewalk that many other
communities have which allows outdoor dining to spill out onto the sidewalks, and
because the City of Roanoke is not closing streets on a permanent basis and creating
a mall or plaza, certain additional expenses will be incurred due to the need for
barricades on those evenings that outdoor dining occurs, and special solid waste
293
collections, both before and after, to ensure that the area is attractive for City market
merchants and for restaurant use will be necessary. She explained that at either the
$6.50 or the $3.25 per square foot rate, the City will be subsidizing outdoor dining
which was the rationale behind a phased in approach up to a rate that would cover
the City's costs. She stated that outdoor dining should be reviewed as frequently as
necessary, particularly if there is considerable response to the concept.
When the rate structure is reviewed, Ms. Wyatt advised that the length of time
that a restaurant commits to renting the space and the actual fees should be taken
into consideration; for example: if the rate is $8.00 per square foot for the year and
the restaurant rents the space for only six months, that equals $4.00 per square foot
which is confusing and misleading.
Mr. White inquired about the maximum gross potential if all outdoor dining
space is rented; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the figure would be in the
range of $30,000.00.
Mr. Harris advised that the original fees were based upon an estimate of cost
recovery for a City service, and if the original rates do not bring the outdoor dining
program to full recovery of costs, it then becomes a program that is subsidized by
taxpayers. He stated that Council has asked a number of businesses to bear certain
additional costs because of the financial condition of the City, the City has adopted
the necessary ordinance for outdoor dining, and if the original fees were based on
actual cost recovery, the fees should remain as stated in the Fee Compendium to
avoid the appearance of favoritism of one industry over another. He stated that he
would vote against the City Manager's recommendation based on that premise.
Mr. Bestpitch encouraged Council to review the matter following the first
summer of outdoor dining because there will be a much better understanding of
actual costs, at which time Mr. Harris' point should be taken into consideration. He
stated that he would hope that there will be at least five affirmative votes of the
Council in support of the ordinance on the premise that if outdoor dining is to be
successful, a jump start may be needed, and the City may have to make more of an
investment up front in order to realize a better return in terms of actual cost issues
and quality of life.
The City Manager clarified her recommendation to provide that the $3.25
square foot is with the agreement that the restaurant will guarantee a minimum of
three months of operation.
294
Council Member Harris advised that in order to continue with the Council's
business, and based upon the comments that have been made by the City Manager
and his fellow Council Members, he will vote for the measure inasmuch as it is
applicable to the year 2002 only, and to jump start the program, but after 2002,
outdoor dining should be based on cost recovery.
The Mayor spoke in support of the farmers who have made the City Market the
success it is today, and they should not be inconvenienced as a result of outdoor
dining.
Ordinance No. 35943-061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY CODE: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that since
1982, Council has reenacted and recodified the City Code on an annual basis, in
order to properly incorporate in the City Code those amendments made by the
General Assembly at the previous Session to State statutes that are incorporated by
reference in the City Code; the procedure ensures that ordinances codified in the City
Code incorporate the most recent amendments to State law, and this incorporation
by reference is frequently utilized in local codes to preclude having to set out lengthy
provisions of State statutes in their entirety; in addition, the technique ensures that
local ordinances are always consistent with State law as is generally required; and
that the procedure whereby a local governing body incorporates State statutes by
reference after action of the General Assembly has been approved by the Attorney
General.
The City Attorney recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to readopt
and reenact the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), advising that if the ordinals, ce is
not adopted, City Code sections incorporating provisions of the State Code amended
at the last Session of the General Assembly may not be deemed to include the recent
amendments and may be impermissibly inconsistent which could result in the
dismissal of criminal prosecutions under these City Code sections.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency ordinance:
295
(#35944-061702) AN ORDINANCE to readopt and reenact the Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended; and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 215.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35944-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
(Ordinance No. 35944-061702 was considered out of sequence at the 7:00 p.m.
session of Council.)
(Mr. Hudson was absent.)
COUNCIL-BUDGET: The City Attorney submitted a written report transmitting
a measure, at the request of Council Member Bestpitch, establishing annual salaries
for the Mayor, Vice-Mayor and Council Members for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2004, which will provide that the Mayor will receive an annual salary of
$19,189.00 and the Vice-Mayor and Members of City Council will receive $14,925.00.
It was explained that on November 19, 2001, to be effective July 1, 2002,
Council adopted an ordinance establishing the salary of the Mayor at $18,000.00 per
year and the salaries of the Vice-Mayor and Members of Council at $14,490.00 per
year; Section 15.2-1414.6, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, permits Council to
establish the annual salaries of Members of Council, but provides that any increase
in such salaries must be adopted at least four months prior to the date of the next
municipal election, and no increase can take effect until July 1 after such election;
the next regularly scheduled general election of Council Members will take place in
May, 2004, thus any ordinance adopted by Council at this time increasing the salaries
of Members of Council cannot take effect until July 1, 2004.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that action on the matter be tabled until the next regular
meeting of Council on Monday, July 1,2002. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder
and adopted.
(The item was considered out of sequence at the 7:00 p.m. session of Council. Mr.
Hudson was absent.)
296
AIRPORT-CITY CODE: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising
that in order to make all parking fines consistent, various sections of the City Code
have been updated; whereupon, he transmitted an ordinance amending and
reordaining City Code sections relating to parking at the Roanoke Regional Airport,
to provide that penalties for all parking violations throughout the City of Roanoke are
consistent.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
'*- (#35045-061702) AN ORDINANCE adding a new §4-5. Re~lulation of vehicular
and pedestrian traffic - Powers and duties of city mana.qer; amending and
reordaining §4-6. Regulation of vehicular and pedestrian traffic - Violations -
Generally; amending and reordaining §4-7. Same-Parkin~l violations, of Article I, In
General, of Chapter 4, Airport, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended,
by the addition of a new subsection (b) and (c); and providing for an emergency and
for an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 217.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35945-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith 6.
NAYS: None
(Ordinance No. 35945-061702 was considered out of sequence at the 7:00 p.m.,
Council session. Mr. Hudson was absent.)
CITY CODE-CITY CHARTER-PROCUREMENT CODE: The City Attorney
submitted a written report advising that as requested by Council, the General
Assembly, at its 2002 Session, amended the City Charter to increase the threshold
for formal competitive procurement from $30,000.00 to $50,000.00, which amendment
is effective July 1, 2002, and will be applied to City procurement after that date;
whereupon, he transmitted an ordinance conforming the City Code to the new Charter
provision by amending the threshold for competitive procurement from $30,000.00
to $50,000.00; and said amendment also conforms the City Code to the Virginia
Public Procurement Act.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance: __
297
(#35946-061702) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §23.1-4(a) and
(b),Requirement of bidding; power to reject bids, and §23.1-6(g) Exceptions to
requirement of competitive procurement, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
as amended, to increase the threshold amounts for competitive procurement from
$30,000.00 to $50,000.00 consistent with amendments to the City of Roanoke Charter;
and providing for an emergency and for an effective date
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 220.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35946-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The City Manager advised that the City Charter amendment brings the City
Code and the City Charter into conformance with State Code which has, for several
years, provided $50,000.00 as the threshold at which competitive procurement must
be provided. She explained that the City of Roanoke has abided by a lower threshold
than is provided by the Code of Virginia.
Mr. White encouraged equitable distribution for purchase of goods and
services by the City from a wide range of small businesses.
The Mayor expressed concern about the" good old boy network" which opens
the door when raising the threshold from $30,000.00 to $50,000.00. He stated that he
will support the City Manager's recommendation, but all vendors should have an
equal opportunity to provide goods and services, a wide range of goods and
services are needed by the City, however, it appears that the same vendors receive
the business; therefore, he looks to management to solve the problem.
The City Manager advised that she understands the Mayor's concern and,
noted that with greater responsibility comes greater accountability for those
departments that work under her supervision. She stated that significant strides
have been made in recent months to expand the City's vender list which will be
carefully monitored by City staff and by Council.
Ordinance No. 35946-061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ................................................................................. ~ O.
(Ordinance No. 35946-061702 was considered out of sequence at the 7:00 p.m.
session. Mr. Hudson was absent.)
298
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
BUDGET-GRANTS-SCHOOLS: The Director of Finance submitted a written
report summarizing appropriation of the following School Board grants for fiscal
year 2002-03:
$150,000.00 for the Title I Even Start Family Literacy Grant to provide staff and
funding for parental and preschool workshops for family literacy efforts at the
preschool and adult education levels.
$3,393,239.00 for the Title I Program to provide remedial reading, language
arts and mathematics instruction for students in targeted schools.
$1,173,825.00 for the Governor's School Program to provide instruction in
science and math to high school students from seven feeder school districts.
Local match in the amounts of $443,210.00 and $47,740.00 will be provided
from Account Nos. 030-062-6001-6346-0588 and 030-065-6007-6998-0588,
respectively.
$39,000.00 for the Summer Youth Employment program which provides
training and hands-on experience for disadvantaged or handicapped youth
from the inner city, with the goal of enhancing employment potential,
developing employment competencies, and enabling students to earn
academic credit toward high school.
$1,913,671.00 for the Flow Through Program to provide aid for the education
and guidance of handicapped students.
$69,755.00 for the Child Specialty Services Program to provide funds for the
salary and expenses of the educational coordinator.
$73,460.00 for the Child Development Clinic Program to provide funds for the
salary and expenses of the educational coordinator at the Clinic.
$222,391.00 for the Juvenile Detention Home Program to provide funds for the
salary and expenses of the educational coordinators.
$135,979.00 for the Preschool Incentive Program to provide orientation and
evaluation for handicapped students who will be entering the public school
system for the first time during the fall.
$170,173.00 for the Special Education Jail Program which provides funds for
the salary and expenses of the staff providing special education instruction
and screening services to inmates of the Roanoke City Jail.
299
$163,604.00 for the Adult Basic Education Program to provide funds for the
education of adults who have not completed high school. Local match in the
amount of $22,700.00 will be provided from Account No. 030-062-6001-6450-
0588.
$131,211.00 for the Apprenticeship Program to provide on-the-job and
classroom vocational instruction for students in the apprenticeship program.
$49,960.00 for the Jobs for Virginia Graduates Program which follows the
curriculum of the Jobs for America's Graduates program, to provide classroom
training and work experience to assist at least 25 economically disadvantaged
students to prepare for high school graduation or to sit for the General
Education Development (GED) examination. Assistance will be provided to
students to find employment in a job which will allow for transition from school
to work. Local match in the amount of $28,960.00 will be provided from
Account No. 030-062-6001-6100-0204.
$397,251.00 for the Perkins Act Program to provide funds for vocational
equipment.
$35,000.00 for the Regional Adult Education Specialist Program to provide
ancillary and support services for the Adult Literacy and Basic Education
Program in the planning district which includes the Cities of Roanoke, Salem,
Covington and Clifton Forge and the Counties of Roanoke, Craig, Botetourt
and Alleghany.
$150,098.00 for the Regional Adult Literacy (TAP) Program to provide funds for
the administration of adult literacy programs in Alleghany County, Roanoke
County and the Cities of Covington, Clifton Forge and Salem.
$18,612.00 for the General Education Development (GED) Testing Program to
provide instructors for GED preparation classes and for administration of the
GED examinations. The source of funds is student fees.
$26,913.00 for the Workplace Education Program to provide instructional
programs developed with area business establishments for employees at the
work sites. Programs include the development of knowledge and skills, in
areas including preparation for the GED examination, reading comprehension,
telephone usage, other work skills, and English as a second language.
Funding for the program is provided through the assessment of fees.
$35,222.00 for the Regional Adult Basic Education Program to provide funds
for administration of adult literacy programs in Botetourt County and Craig
County. Roanoke City serves as the regional coordinating agency for Adult
Basic Education. Funds pass through the school district to the jurisdictions
indicated for adult literacy programs.
300
$21,341.00 for the Adult Education in the Jail Program to provide for
instruction to inmates in the Roanoke City Jail to aid in acquisition of the
General Education Development (GED) certificate.
$75,000.00 for the Grants Management Program to provide funding for
operating expenses of the Office of Grants.
$35,000.00 for the Homeless Assistance Program to provide instructional
services to homeless students.
$1,472,708.00 for the Alternative Education Program to provide alternative
curriculum and training for high risk students at the Noel C. Taylor Learning
Academy, with a focus on improving the total self concept of the student.
Local match revenue in the amount of $1,402,082.00 will be provided from
Account No. 030-063-6001-6300-0588.
$212,232.00 for the Title V-A Program to provide funds for implementation of
innovative instructional programs in the school district and to provide visiting
teacher services. Local match in the amount of $27,308.00 will be provided
from Account No. 030-061-6001-6000-0202.
$122,107.00 for the Eisenhower Title II Professional Development program
which provides funds for development of innovative math, science and
technology teaching strategies to implement Virginia's Standards of Learning.
$760,522.00 for Title VI Class Size Reduction initiative which provides funds
for the placement of 12 classroom teachers to be placed in grades one through
three throughout the district to reduce class size in those grades to no higher
than 18. Local match in the amount of $145,566.00 will be provided from
Account No. 030-061-6001-6000-0201.
$159,071.00 for the Roanoke Adolescent Health Partnership to provide for
medical services to the Roanoke City Schools, in conjunction with the City of
Roanoke Health Department and Carilion Health Systems. The program
expenses are reimbursed by donations from Carilion Health Services.
$525,000.00 for the Blue Ridge Technical Academy to provide an educational
training program for students at risk of academic failure and dropping out of
school. The "regional high school" will provide 200 at-risk youth with the
academic competencies and technical skills required to obtain substantial
employment in the local labor market by focusing on skill development in the
301
areas of manufacturing, technology, computer science and electronics, health
and medical services, optics, and consumer services. The Technical Academy
is chartered by the Roanoke City Public Schools, and is housed in the Roanoke
Higher Education Center. Local match in the amount of $150,000.00 will be
provided from Account No. 030-062-6001-6143-0588.
The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance
establishing the above referenced School Board grants.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35947-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2002-2003 School Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 222.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35947-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council
and Mayor Smith
Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
NAYS: None ................................................................................... -0.
(Ordinance No. 35947-061702 was considered out of sequence at the 7:00 p.m.
session. Mr. Hudson was absent.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
ANNUAL REPORTS-COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Brenda A. Powell,
Chair, Fair Housing Board, presented a written report of the Fair Housing Board
advising that in October, the Board presented copies of a study in connection with
an Analysis of the Impediment to Fair Housing, which was prepared by Housing
Opportunities Made Equal (HOME), at the request of the Fair Housing Board and the
City of Roanoke, and the following requests were submitted:
Financial assistance for fair housing discrimination awareness which
has been accomplished by a grant received from the City's Community
Development Block Grant, for the period July 2002 - June 2003.
302
Assistance from the City Attorney's Office in revising the fair housing
ordinance to comply with both Federal and State laws, which will be
presented to Council at a later date.
Ms. Powell advised that some persons do not know what fair housing
discrimination includes, or the effects it can have on an entire community; and the
more knowledge that citizens have of fair housing laws, the more they will be able to
benefit from the laws and learn to comply, and the analysis of the impediments study
is more than a summary of illegal acts, but a study of barriers to housing choice.
She called attention to a recent visit by HOME representatives to Roanoke for
a press conference, which restated and further staked claim that fair housing issues
are indeed alive and well in the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley; therefore,
the Fair Housing Board and the City of Roanoke must begin at the beginning;
housing discrimination affects the entire community and no act of discrimination is
more or less significant than another; and from the 42 impediments, three main areas
have been identified for discussion with Council.
Ms. Powell advised that first is Education and Outreach which is the most
critical step in helping individuals to understand fair housing laws and may be
accomplished by the following aggressive campaign that will begin during the next
fiscal year involving the Fair Housing Board, the Fair Housing Administrator and
other staff from the Housing and Neighborhood Services Department to perform the
following:
Workshops, Training Session and Seminars that will be geared toward
all segments of the community, including Council, City staff, Fair
Housing Board Members, realtors, home builders, appraisers,
developers, lenders, landlords, tenants, neighborhood leaders, youth,
religious groups, citizens and other home providers and concerned
individuals in the community;
Media Blitz Campaign which will include advertising in newspapers, on
television and radio, billboards, buses, etc.;
Fair Housing Booklet which is a comprehensive booklet that will be
developed to address all facets of fair housing laws, including
information on landlord-tenant rights and how some practices may be
discriminatory; and
303
Conference - work is already underway to include a session on fair
housing in the Third Annual Housing Symposium sponsored by the
Roanoke Regional Housing Network in the fall of 2002; and
Fair Housing Administrator It is requested that Housing and
Neighborhood Services continue to provide the current Fair Housing
Administrator with adequate time to carry out the projects that have
been identified in the report in order for this year long campaign to be
successful.
Second, Ms. Powell requested that there be regional cooperation and that the
Members of Council begin dialogue with Roanoke County, Salem and Vinton to
address housing discrimination and its impact on the quality of life for all citizens and
the economic impact on the Roanoke Valley, since everyone must recognize and
acknowledge the need for regional cooperation to eliminate barriers to housing
choice and actively support development of a co-operative mechanism to eradicate
unfair housing practices; and one suggestion is a Regional Fair Housing Council with
the ability to address fair housing issues in the Roanoke Valley.
Third, Ms. Powell referred to the issue of public transportation which is an
important impediment that was identified in the study because severe limitations are
placed on housing choice by the lack of a metropolitan area-wide public
transportation system; without adequate transportation, some citizens cannot find
work that would provide them with the financial base needed to seek housing to
expand their housing choices in the Roanoke Valley; whereupon, she offered the
following suggestions:
Hold a regional meeting of government representatives
and business leaders to discuss and identify a source of
funding to extend transportation, including public and
para-transit into surrounding areas.
Conduct a regional comprehensive study or review past
studies on a valley-wide transportation system. One such
group is the Regional Network for Transportation, created
in 1997, which is not currently meeting but could be the
basis for beginning dialogue.
The City should consider the way it spends public
transportation money and should aim to use the money for
business, routes and times that attract the widest ridership
or best meets ridership population.
304
In summary, Ms. Powell advised that the above referenced suggestions will
address fair housing discrimination issues in the City of Roanoke and increase public
awareness, help eliminate impediments to fair housing, create an open housing
market, improve the quality of life for many citizens, and enhance the economic
health of the Roanoke Valley.
BONDS/BOND ISSUES: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting appropriation of funds to the following school accounts, was before
Council.
$92,700.00 from reallocated VPSA Bond funds from Fishburn Park and
Fairview renovations to be used for installation of a limited use/limited
application elevator at Ruffner Middle School.
$95,780.00 from reallocated VPSA Bond funds from Fishburn Park and
Fairview renovations to be used for renovation of the Lincoln Terrace Saturn
Network School.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35948-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
2001-2002 School Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 224.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35948-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Hudson, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: None.
At 5:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened at
7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
(Following dinner, the Members of Council and City staff attended the Southeast
Community Celebration Rally to kick off the process to revitalize the Bullitt-Jamison
corridor at the corner of Jamison Avenue and 11t~ Street, S. E.)
3O5
At 7:00 p.m., the regular meeting 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 William D. Bestpitch, Linda F. Wyatt, William
White, Sr., C. Nelson Harris, William H. Carder and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ................ 6.
ABSENT: Council MemberW. Alvin Hudson, Jr.- ........................................ 1.
The reconvened meeting was opened with a prayer by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-CITY CLERK-BUDGET-CITY ATTORNEY-CITY
MANAGER-REAL ESTATE VALUATION-MUNICIPAL AUDITOR: Mr. Carder offered the
following emergency ordinance established the salaries of the six Council Appointed
officer's effective July 31,2002:
(#35949-061702) AN ORDINANCE establishing compensation for the City
Manager, City Attorney, Director of Finance, Director of Real Estate Valuation,
Municipal Auditor and City Clerk as of July 31, 2002, for the fiscal year beginning
July 1, 2002; and providing for an emergency and an effective date.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 225.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35949-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
306
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: In view of the resignation of Sherman P. Lea as a
Trustee of the Roanoke City School Board, Council Member Harris requested that the
City Attorney review the procedure for filling an unexpired term on the School Board.
The City Attorney advised that prior to the filling of a vacancy on the School
Board created by other than the ordinary expiration of a term, Council shall, at least
seven days prior to the appointment, hold a public hearing to receive the views of
citizens; at least ten days prior to any such hearing, public notice shall be given by
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City; and before any person
is appointed to the School Board, the individual's name shall be considered at a
public hearing.
It was the consensus of Council that the City Clerk would begin the process
of advertising for applications for appointment to fill the unexpired term of office of
Mr. Lea, ending June 30, 2003.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-DECEASED PERSONS-WAR MEMORIAL:
Council Member Bestpitch referred to a communication from Ms. Loretta A. Young,
sister of the late Donald McArthur Young, who was killed during an attack on the
Pentagon on September 11,2001, in which she expressing appreciation by the Young
family for the recognition her brother received at the Roanoke Valley Memorial Day
Ceremony on Monday, May 27, 2002 in Lee Plaza in downtown Roanoke.
ARMORY/STADIUM-SPECIAL EVENTS: The Mayor encouraged citizens of the
Roanoke Valley to attend and participate in numerous July 4th activities, i.e; the
celebration at Victory Stadium, the Williamson Road parade sponsored by the
Williamson Road Area Business Association, and the Roanoke River Clean-up
sponsored by the Kiwanis Club.
TRAFFIC-COMPLAINTS-YOUTH-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council Member
Wyatt referred to continuing concerns of business owners in the area of Williamson
Road/Trinkle Avenue, N. W., regarding teenagers congregating from dusk until
midnight. She advised that business owners support the gating/barricading of that
portion of Williamson Road to vehicular traffic, and requested that the matter be
referred to the City Manager to contact effected businesses.
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-LIBRARIES: The Mayor advised that there
is a vacancy on the Roanoke Public Library Board created by the resignation of
JoAnn F. Hayden, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. White placed in nomination the name of Pamela S. White.
There being no further nominations, Pamela S. White was appointed as a
member of the Roanoke Public Library Board, for a term ending June 30, 2005, by the
following vote:
307
FOR MS. WHITE: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder and
Mayor Smith ................................. -6.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
WATER RESOURCES: In view of the current water shortage, the City Manager
advised that as of Tuesday, June 18, 2002, the City of Roanoke will begin the
purchase of water from the City of Salem, and the purchase of water from Roanoke
County on Friday, June 21, 2002. She further advised that the City will observe
mandatory water restrictions beginning Tuesday, June 18, with no outdoor water
usage permitted; it is anticipated that the Crystal Spring Reservoir will be online in
early October as opposed to November; on a temporary basis, it is hoped to
implement a micro filtration system at the Crystal Spring Reservoir, which, if
approved, could be in effect in 30-45 days; two additional wells are online for water
production; locations where citizens any obtain non-potable water for yards and
garden purposes will be announced; and there will be continuing public education
on the use of available water sources.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard 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., addressed Council with regard to providing screen doors for housing units at
the Lincoln Terrace housing development. She stated that although it is regrettable
that screen doors will not be furnished by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority, it was hoped that City Council would demand that the Housing Authority
install screen doors on both the front and back doors of residences.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-COMPLAINTS-PARKS AND RECREATION-FIRE
DEPARTMENT-COMMITTEES-ARMORY/STADIUM-REFUSE COLLECTION-
HOUSING/AUTHORITY-CITY EMPLOYEES: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue,
N. E., advised that it is with much sadness that the following items are to be passed
from the current Council to the Council that will take office on July 1, 2002:
Inappropriate expenditure of taxpayers' money to award bonuses to
certain select City employees without regard to established personnel
guidelines.
308
The proposed closing of several fire stations in predominantly black
neighborhoods with little information regarding replacement stations,
locations, dates, etc.
Despite the City Manager's efforts regarding refuse collection service in
the northwest section of the City, there have been no improvements, and
conditions have deteriorated since curbside refuse collection service
was initiated.
The police satellite station in the northwest section of the City, although
improperly manned, was closed and no relocation plans were
announced.
Citizens of Roanoke have not been fairly represented (residents of
Lincoln Terrace housing development presented petitions to Council
regarding the need for screen doors on both the front and back of
residences).
Will Victory Stadium be demolished and a smaller complex constructed
on contaminated land in a well established commercial and residential
area; and will additional testing be done with regard to noise and light
filtering into the neighboring area?
The need to immediately schedule a City-wide meeting to inform citizens
with regard to the Volunteer Committee's recommendations for
improvements to Booker T. Washington Park.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Baker Avenue Properties,
Ltd., that a portion of an alley extending in a westerly direction from 31't Street, N. W.,
between Baker Avenue and Breckinridge Avenue, for a distance of approximately
209.5 feet through the middle of property bearing Official Tax No. 2510104, be
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, May 31, 2002, and Friday, June 7, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
309
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the portion of alley
requested for closure lies in a redevelopment area; recently, the Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority Board of Commissioners voted to discontinue
it as such, but an official amendment has yet to be processed; the alley that the
petitioner requests a portion of which to be closed is entirely unimproved; and the
unimproved portion of alley splits the petitioner's property and closure will reduce
impediments for development, was before Council.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
closure, contingent upon certain items listed in the report, and advised that the
portion of alley in question divides the petitioner's parcel and has no utilitarian value
to the City.
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
(#35950-061702) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more
particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 207.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35950-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
The Mayor inquired if there are persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35950-
061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith 6.
NAYS: None- 0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public
hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, on the request of Carilion Medical Center and the City of Roanoke
310
Redevelopment and Housing Authority that six parcels of land lying on the south side
of Jefferson Street, S. E., between the Norfolk Southern right-of-way and the Roanoke
River, bearing Official Tax Nos. 4040501 -4040503, inclusive, and 4040506 -4040508,
inclusive, be rezoned from HM, Heavy Manufacturing District, to INPUD, Institutional
Planned Unit Development 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 Saturday, June 1, 2002, and on Saturday, June 8, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the South Jefferson
Redevelopment Plan was approved by Council on March 19, 2001; the South
Jefferson Redevelopment Area, located east of the Roy L. Webber Expressway, west
of the Roanoke River, south of the Elm Avenue interchange with Interstate 581, and
north of Wiley Drive, is expected to provide up to two million square feet of building
space, attract up to $300 million in private capital expenditures, and provide up to 500
new, technical jobs for the region; the Plan identified three general areas for
redevelopment: (1) the Jefferson Street Corridor, (2) Campus and Institutional area
in the vicinity of Reserve Avenue, and (3) the Crossing, in the vicinity of railroad
development and warehouses; four classifications of land uses were identified:
institutional mixed use (i.e. research, biomedical and support uses), commercial
support use (i.e. office, business support), commercial and residential mixed use (i.e.
flexible, combination business and residential space), and public use (i.e. greenways
and open space); and public improvements are proposed, including upgraded
transportation corridors, new public open spaces, and improved interstate access,
was before Council.
It was further advised that Riverside Centre for Research and Technology, an
institutional mixed-use complex, is proposed for the Jefferson Street/Reserve Avenue
corridor; phase 1 of the facility includes construction of a parking garage and support
services east of Jefferson Street toward the Roanoke River on approximately 7.5
acres of land; initially, the facilities will serve Carillon Roanoke Memorial Hospital,
but in the future, use will be expanded for the proposed Carillon Biomedical Institute,
a planned facility for Riverside Centre.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the request
for rezoning, and advised that the proposed development is in accordance with the
comprehensive plan inasmuch as it will support development of a sustainable,
diverse economic base and redevelops an underutilized industrial site.
311
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35951-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 404, 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
by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 229.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35951-061702. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt.
The Mayor inquired if there are persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35951-
061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, Harris, Carder, and Mayor Smith---5.
NAYS: None ......................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.) (Council MemberWhite abstained from voting
inasmuch as he serves on the Carilion Medical Center Board of Directors.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public
hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, on the request of Matthew T. and Sally G. O'Bryan that a portion of
property located at 902 Penmar Avenue, S. E., being a 0.0324 acre portion, more or
less, of Official Tax No. 4130410, be rezoned from RM-1, Residential Multi-Family Low
Density District, to C-2, General Commercial District, subject to certain conditions
proffered by the petitioners, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, May 31, 2002, and on Friday, June 7, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
312
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the purpose of the
request for rezoning is to allow the existing accessory building on Ninth Street, S. E.,
to be used for a commercial business, and there is also an existing house on the lot,
was before Council.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the request
for rezoning, and advised that the petitioner has amended his initial petition to better
accommodate the neighborhood area, zoning for the proposed property will be
contiguous to existing C-2, General Commercial District, and the primary building on
the property will continue to be residential in use.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35952-061702) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 413, 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
by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 231.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35952-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor inquired if there are persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the matter.
Mr. Robert E. Zimmerman, 1510 Langhorne Street, S. E., advised that he did not
appear before Council either for or against the rezoning. He stated that he owns
property across the street from the arsa proposed to be rezoned and he has lived in
the neigborhood for 40+ years, and asked that thers be some assurance that no
alcoholic beverages, either on or off premises, will be permitted. He called attention
to two public schools within a two blocks of the area in question, and three churches
within a two block radius. He spoke in support of any use for the building that will
help the neighborhood. Later during the meeting, it was noted that the petitioner has
proffered that no alcoholic beverages will be permitted.
Mr. Bestpitch spoke in support of finding an appropriate use for the building
and advised that based on the history of the building, it appears that the best use is
some type of commercial enterprise. However, he expressed concern as to whether
C-2 zoning is the appropriate classification. He explained that Council is being ~.sked
to take another tax parcel and divide it into two separate sections and for two
313
different zoning classifications on the same tax parcel. He stated that C-2 zoning
requires, among other things, a 20' side yard, or a 20' setback on the side of the
property to the adjacent property; the portion of the property that Council is being
requested to rezone is a building that was originally constructed as a two-car garage,
which is located at the sidewalk with essentially no set back; and the side of the
house is attached to the top edge of the roof of the garage and there is no separation
between the portion that would consist of the building that Council is being asked to
rezone to C-2 and the house which will remain residential, RM-1. He explained that
when the rezoning process began, the initial intent was to request CN rezoning for
the property; whereupon Mr. Bestpitch questioned the rationale of City Planning staff
by encouraging the petitioner to move in a different direction. He stated that CN
zoning requires only a 15' setback on the side yard which is closer to meeting the
setback than splitting the tax parcel into part C-2 and part RM-1, CN zoning provides
for a dwelling unit above a non- residential use; and the top of the garage is level
with the bottom of the house, therefor, the house is above the garage. He expressed
support for rezoning the entire property because at some time in the future, the
present owners may wish to subdivide the property and they will have to request
variances on two portions of the property. He stated that there should be a way to
rezone the entire tax parcel to CN and create a waiver or variance in connection with
the side yard requirement. He requested that proffers to the rezoning clarify that
existing residential structures will continue to be used for residential purposes and
not converted to commercial use. He inquired as to what is required, procedurally,
to achieve a CN zoning classification.
The City Attorney advised that the applicant would be required to file an
amended petition to rezone the portion of the property that they propose to leave as
residential, and owners of the property would be required to file the proffers to
rezoning. He stated that any variance would have to be granted by the Board of
Zoning Appeals which is usually done contemporaneously, with one subject to the
other.
Mr. Natt advised that on September 6, 2001, he filed a petition requesting that
the property be rezoned to CN, Neighborhood Commercial District, and appeared
before the City Planning Commission on two occasions. He read portions of a letter
from City Planning staff which stated that C-2 zoning exists across the street, and
an alterative to CN zoning may be to extend the C-2, General Commercial District, and
zone only a portion of the property, which approach would provide the petitioner
with a rezoning that is more consistent for the area and would maintain the
residential structure and residential zoning. Mr. Natt stated that one of the concerns
of City staff was the fact that if the property is rezoned to CN, the residential use
would then become nonconforming. He explained that he started the rezoning
process by requesting a CN zoning classification, but was advised that that was not
314
the way to go, and it took nine months to reach this point. He stated that he did not
disagree with Mr. Bestpitch, but his client worked with City Planning staff, who
suggested C-2 zoning, and he was reluctant to go back to his client with the message
that Council intends to go back to his original request of nine months ago, and with
the knowledge that his client will incur additional expenses.
The City Attorney was asked to respond as to whether there is a way to move
through the zoning ordinance revision process to include property under similar
circumstances, (one parcel that has two different zoning designations); whereupon,
the City Attorney suggested that City Planners review those instances where
conditions have been placed on conditional rezonings. He stated that it is
permissible to have a lot with two different zoning classifications, although such is
not the intent of the zoning ordinance. He advised that he did not know if an overall
solution could be reached through the zoning ordinance revision, but it is something
that should be kept in mind when working on the new zoning ordinance.
Mr. Bestpitch requested that such instances be flagged by City Planning staff
for review as a part of the zoning ordinance revision. He stated that he is against the
practice of continuing to bring these types of rezonings to Council.
Ordinance No. 35952-061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Robert Evan, L.L.C., that a
portion of Hite Street, S. W., extending from the southerly end of the existing
cul-de-sac in a southerly direction for approximately 371.06 feet, more or less, to the
northerly line of the right-of-way of U. S. Route 220 in the City of Roanoke, the matter
was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Saturday, June 1, 2002 and on Saturday, June 8, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
315
A report of the City Planning Commission recomending approval of the request
for closure, upon certain conditions, and advising that the portion of right-of-Way in
question has no utilitarian value to the City, and the City Planning Commission does
not recommend sale of the portion of right-of-way, was before Council.
Mr. White offered the following ordinance:
"AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing certain
public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described
hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title."
Mr. White moved the adoption of the ordinance. The motion was seconded by
Mr. Carder.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that the area in question has recently been graded, trees
and other vegetation have been removed and gravel spread on City property;
whereupon, Robert Freeman, Principal, Robert Evans, LLC, advised that the area will
be reseeded, should the City choose not to vacate the right-of-way.
The City Manager called attention to correspondence that was recently
provided to Council in which she recommended that the City offer the property for
purchase only and not for donation. She stated that City Planning staff discussed the
matter with Mr. Freeman, who is not willing to purchase the property, and noted that
Council could either donate the property, or deny the request for right-of-way.
She called attention to concerns of residents of the area with regard to
increased traffic which has been generated by the recently opened gymnasium. She
stated that Mr. Freeman advises that he intends to use the land for parking since he
owns an adjacent parcel of land on which he plans to construct a building that will
house a clothing wholesale operation that involve some retail sales, and such use
will also have a traffic impact since delivery trucks will be accessing the area via
Hite Street. She recommended that Council table the matter for 30 days to provide
City staff with an opportunity to assess the traffic impact and whether or not other
traffic accommodations will need to be made to address additional development.
Mr. Carder offered a substitute motion that action on the matter be tabled for
30 days, or until the regular meeting of Council on Monday July 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m.,
as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Bestpitch and adopted.
316
CITY CODE-ZONING-COMMITTEES: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted
by the Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to
consider amendment and revision to Chapter 36.1, Zoninq, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, to increase the number of members of the Board of
Zoning Appeals for the City of Roanoke, and to increase the number of concurring
votes necessary for the Board to act, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, May 31, 2002, and on Friday, June 7, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
A report of the City Planning Commission recommending that Council amend
the Zoning Ordinance to provide for appointment of seven members to the Board of
Zoning Appeals and increase the number of concurring votes necessary for the
Board to take action to four, was before the body.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35953-061702) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §36.1-650,
Continued; composition; appointment and terms of members, etc., and subsection
(a) of 36.1-653, Exercise of powers qeneral; administration of oath and compelling
attendance of witnesses, of Division 3, Board of Zoning Appeals, of Article VII,
Administration, of Chapter 36.1, Zoning, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
as amended, to increase the number of members of the Board of Zoning Appeals for
the City of Roanoke, and to increase the number of concurring votes necessary to
take action; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 232.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35953-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor inquired if there are persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the matter; whereupon, Ms. Joel M. Richert, 415 Allison
Avenue, S. W., advised that she was speaking as a private citizen and not as a
member of the Board of Zoning Appeals. She requested background information on
the decision of Council to increase membership at the Board of Zoning Appeals from
five to seven, and advised that in the past there was a concern with regard to
attendance by the five members of the Board; however, in the past year, new
members have been appointed and attendance has improved. She stated that all five
members of the Board of Zoning Appeals are certified, the five members work well
as a body, with a good attendance record and membership balance.
3'17
Mr. Carder advised that the recommendation was included in the boards and
commissions reorganization process that was approved by Council last year and
also related to an attendance issue. He stated that following research by the City
Attorney regarding Boards of Zoning Appeals in other localities, it was determined
that seven in numbers would provide better representation in the future.
Ms. Wyatt advised that the committee that reviewed boards and commissions
also looked at overall consistency on boards and commissions, and noted that the
School Board, City Planning Commission, Architectural Review Board, Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority and Industrial Development Authority consist
of seven members, which correspond with the seven members of City Council,
therefor, consistency would be achieved by increasing the membership to seven on
the Board of Zoning Appeals,
Ordinance No. 35953-061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public
hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to consider amendment and
revision to Chapter 36.1, Zoning, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to
provide for towing services and wrecker services under certain conditions in General
Commercial, Light Manufacturing, and Heavy Manufacturing Districts, the matter was
before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, May 31, 2002, and on Friday, June 7, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
A report of the City Planning Commission recommending that Council approve
the proposed amendments to the Zoning Ordinance, advising that the amendments
will further define, clarify and distinguish, for regulation and code enforcement
purposes, tow truck operations and will promote public welfare and safety relative
to such land uses, was before the body.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
318
"AN ORDINANCE amending the reordaining §36.1-25 Definitions, by deleting
the definition of tow truck operation and adding the definitions of towing services
and wrecker services; §36.1-206, Permitted uses, C-2, General Commercial District;
§36.1-249, Permitted uses, LM, Light Manufacturing District; §36.1-250, Special
exception uses, LM, Light Manufacturing District; §36.1-270 Permitted uses, HM,
Heavy Manufacturing District; and §36.1-271, Special exception uses, HM, Heavy
Manufacturing District, of Chapter 36.1, Zoning, of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, to provide for towing services and wrecker services under
certain conditions in those zoning districts; and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance."
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of the ordinance. The motion was seconded
by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor advised that since advertisement of the public hearing staff has
determined that there should be further revisions to the proposed ordinance which
will require further consideration by the City Planning Commission.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons in attendance who would like to
address Council in connection with the matter.
Mr. Robert Young, 210 Carver Avenue, N. E., advised that representation of
the towing industry would like to be involved in the proposed revisions. He stated
that it would be illegal to operate a service station that sells gas, and performs
vehicle repairs and towing services. He spoke in support of an enclosed fence
around vehicle areas and asked that the City cooperate with the towing industry.
Mr. Rodney Graham, 413 Rorer Avenue, S. W., questioned the type offence that
will be required by the City around facilities where vehicles are stored.
The City Manager clarified that the intent of referring the matter back to the City
Planning Commission is not to necessarily modify City Code sections pertaining to
towing operations, but to bring forward simultaneously those changes that are
necessary for other sections of the City Code not related to towing that will be
impacted by the proposed amendments.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the matter would be
referred back to the City Planning Commission for further study, report and
recommendation to Council.
319
LEASES-MARKET SQUARE PARKING GARAGE: Pursuant to instructions by
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, June 17, 2002,
at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the
City of Roanoke to lease 3,000 square feet of retail space in the Market Square
Parking Garage, 11 Campbell Avenue, S. W., to Orvis Roanoke, Inc., for a period of
no more than five years, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Sunday, June 9, 2002.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke currently leases 3,000 square feet of retail space to Orvis Roanoke, Inc.;
current lease agreement of the property located at 11 Campbell Avenue S. E,
commonly known as the Market Square Parking Garage, expires on August 31,2002;
Orvis Roanoke, Inc., has expressed interest in continuing the lease of space beyond
the current term; and to continue the lease of property, a new lease agreement is
required; currently, Orvis pays $876.81 per month ($10,521.72 per year) base rent; the
current agreement also requires Orvis to pay an additional rent amount based on a
percentage of gross sales generated from the leased premises; the amount paid for
the current fiscal year was $11,390.00; and total rents paid for fiscal year 2002 equal
$21,911.72.
It was further advised that negotiations for a new agreement include a start
date of September 1, 2002, for a term of five years; rent for the new agreement will
increase to $900.00 per month ($10,800.00 per year), plus an annual increase based
on the Consumer Price Index; in addition to the base fee for rent, Orvis will pay an
additional amount based on sales; Orvis will pay one percent of the first $500,000.00
in gross revenue from sales made from the leased premises each year, three percent
of gross revenue of $500,000.00 to $1,000,000.00, and four percent of gross revenue
over $1,000,000.00, which sum shall be payable within 60 days of the end of each
calendar year.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to offer and execute
a new lease agreement between the City of Roanoke and Orvis Roanoke, Inc., for a
term of five years.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
320
(#35954-061702) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to enter into an
agreement with Orvis Roanoke, Inc., for the lease of retail space of property located
at 11 Campbell Avenue, S. E., for use by Orvis Roanoke, Inc., upon certain terms and
conditions, and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 234.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35954-061702. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt.
The Mayor inquired if there are persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35954-
061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None .................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
EASEMENTS-PARKS AND RECREATION-UTILITY LINE SERVICES: Pursuant
to instructions by Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, June 17, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter m=y be
heard, on a request of the City of Roanoke to grant an easement across City-owned
property located between Wasena Park and 13th Street, to Appalachian Power Co.,
d/b/a American Electric Power, to relocate and reconstruct existing electrical
transmission and distribution lines and to vacate existing easements, in connection
with the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Sunday, June 9, 2002.
(See* publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
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 Wasena Park and 13th Street; along portions
of the project, Appalachian Power Company (AEP) has existing easements for various
overhead electrical transmission and distribution lines located in the path of the
project; the City has requested that AEP relocate several of the lines located on City-
owned property to accommodate the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project; since
AEP holds existing easements on the properties, they do not fall under the City's
standard franchise agreement; existing easements will be vacated as a condition of
321
granting new easements; and new easements across City-owned property are
required for AEP to relocate its electric transmission and distribution lines,
communication lines and associated above ground equipment, in, on, along, through,
over, across and under certain City property.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the
appropriate documents granting easements across City-owned property to
Appalachian Power Company, dlb/a American Electric Power, and vacating existing
easements, for the purpose of relocating, reconstructing, owning, and operating
electrical transmission and distribution lines and associated above ground
equipment.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35955-061702) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to grant an
easement to Appalachian Power Company, d/b/a American Electric Power ("AEP") for
the relocation of existing overhead electrical transmission and distribution lines;
vacating of the easement within such existing lines on City property; upon certain
terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinar;ce by
title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 235.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35955-061702. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor inquired if there are persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35955-
061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... .-, .... 0.
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard; and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
322
COMPLAINTS-CITY EMPLOYEES-WATER RESOURCES: Mr. Robert Gravely,
1617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., addressed Council with regard to the water shortage
and insufficient wages for City employees.
ROANOKE CiViC CENTER: The City Manager advised that earlier in the
meeting, Council Members raised specific questions with regard to the proposed
contract with Tickets.com; whereupon, she called upon James M. Evans, Director,
Civic Facilities, to address the matter.
Mr. Evans advised that the primary questions were related to franchise
circumstances and the ability to sell tickets. He stated that in the course of
negotiations for the contract, it was clear to both parties that the intent is that ticket
sales at the franchise locations would be considered the same as ticket sales at the
box office, which means that there is no customer service charge of any kind for
such services. He further stated that the proposed contract with Tickets.com Inc., is
an improvement over the current arrangement for season tickets which requires a
$3.00 service charge for billing paid by season ticket consumers. He explained that
the current agreement with Ticketmaster will expire in 45 days and a commitment is
required on the part of Tickets.com, Inc., in terms of ordering data lines, equipment,
training and the transition process.
In response to a previous question raised by Council Member Wyatt, Mr. Evans
advised that the intent is to limit the civic center's ability to sell tickets that are not
on the Tickets.com system through an exclusive arrangement which is not intended
to prohibit any sales through selected box office facilities that would include any and
all franchise facilities. He advised that the agreement with Tickets.com, Inc., reduces
the cost for tickets due to elimination of the $3.00 charge for setting up the season
ticket process, there is no charge to the customer for tickets purchased at the box
office or any of the franchise offices, and a service charge would apply to tickets
purchased at an outlet, over the telephone using a credit card, or on the Internet.
Mr. Carder moved that Resolution No. 35926-061702 be removed from the table.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted.
Resolution No. 35926-061702 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Member Bestpitch, Wyatt, White, Harris, Carder, and
Mayor Smith. 6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Hudson was absent.)
323
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at
9:00 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
324
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
July 1, 2002
12:15 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday, July 1,
2002, at 12:15 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber, fourth
floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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, Repular Meetinqs,
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris and Mayor Ralph K. Smith---6.
ABSENT: Council Member Linda F. Wyatt .............................................. 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.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor Ralph K. Smith
requesting that Council meet in Closed Session 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.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to
convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss personnel matters relating to 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. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
At 12:20 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened in
the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, for a briefing on
water issues.
325
At 12:25 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, with Mayor Smith
presiding, and all Members of the Council in attendance, with the exception of
Council Member Wyatt.
WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager introduced a briefing on water
issues. She advised that in January 2002, when Council received a major update on
the water situation, several Members of Council requested specific information, and
City staff was instructed to report back to Council after the staffs of Roanoke City
and Roanoke County had met to discuss valley-wide water issues. She noted that
Council and staff have worked diligently on behalf of all residents of the City of
Roanoke through meetings of the Mayor, the City Manager and Chief of Utilities and
their Roanoke County counterparts; the relationship and spirit of cooperation
between the City and the County is at its best, particularly as it relates to the two
utility systems; and regional cooperation with regard to the two water systems has
existed for a number of years.
Michael McEvoy, Director, Department of Utilities, advised that the City is
currently on phase four of the water conservation measures plan which requires
residential customers to refrain from outside irrigation, the climate forecast for the
next six months, according to the United States Weather Service, is average
conditions with no indication if there is to be a significantly dryer or wetter period;
and Roanoke City is currently purchasing water from the City of Salem, averaging
1.1 million gallons per day, purchasing approximately four million gallons of water
from Roanoke County, and the City continues to engage in the traded water concept.
He explained that costs average approximately $310,000.00 per day, and
commencing today a surcharge will be instituted on water bills of City customers
that will generate approximately $65,000.00 per month. He stated that other area
jurisdictions on water restrictions are Greensboro, Richmond, James City County,
Henry County and state wide water restrictions are in effect in Maryland.
He advised that the Crystal Springs Filter Plant is six weeks ahead of
schedule; an ultra violet treatment system was approved by the Health Department
for Crystal Springs; however, the Environmental Protection Agency intervened and
advised of concerns in regard to regulatory issues in Virginia in granting a waiver
to filtration, and opposed the ultra violet treatment method. He explained that the
City did not continue to pursue ultra violet treatment; however, another temporary
filtration option was explored using a disposable filter system which is designed for
temporary service and is a new system that has been tested in the State of Texas.
He stated that the temporary filtration option has been approved by the Health
Department and can be operational by August 1, 2002, at a cost of $350,000.00 for
a three month lease, which will add three million gallons of additional water per day
to the City's water system through the Crystal Springs Filtration site.
326
The City Manager advised that at the 2:00 p.m. session, Council will be
requested to adopt an ordinance authorizing transfer of funds which were
previously approved for the ultra violet treatment option to be used for the lease of
the temporary filtration system at the Crystal Springs site.
There was discussion in regard to the City's water rate and quality of life
issues in which the City Manager pointed out that while it is true that the City of
Roanoke has the lowest water rate in the Roanoke Valley in terms of water and
sewage treatment, the City also has the largest customer base, therefore, demand
on the City's water system is greater than in neighboring jurisdictions. She advised
that quality of life is clearly important and there has been unparalleled support by
the citizens of Roanoke to conserve water.
Mr. McEvoy advised that other projects include the Muse Spring well, offering
one million gallons per day, which will be operational by August 10; Crystal Springs
area wells which are intended to increase capacity at the Crystal Springs Filtration
Plant; and two new locations have been made available for citizens to obtain non-
potable water for irrigation purposes. He noted that from the Muse Spring and
Crystal Springs area wells, it is anticipated to generate two million gallons of
additional water by October 1 that is not currently available.
He advised that Black and Veach Engineers was selected by the Long Range
Water Supply Study Committee to review existing water sources and demands for
projecting future water needs, as well as the feasibility and development of area
sources; i.e.: James River, New River, Smith Mountain Lake, groundwater and
reservoir optimization. He explained that consideration of a regional authority was
eliminated from the scope of the contract because only Roanoke City and Roanoke
County are interested in pursuing a regional authority. He stated that the City of
Salem, Town of Vinton, Botetourt County, Bedford County, Roanoke County and
Roanoke City are participants in the Long Range Water Supply Study Committee.
Mr. McEvoy advised that in connection with a regional water authority, current
City needs are drought protection/infrastructure, current County needs are rate
relief/infrastructure expenses, and significant differences include rates, level of debt
and condition of assets. He stated that both the City and the County systems bring
in about $10 million in revenue from the two systems, approximately one-half of the
County's revenue goes to debt payment because the Spring Hollow Reservoir was
an expensive project and, in addition to assets, the County has a newer water
system and the City of Roanoke has an older distribution system.
Mr. McEvoy explained that the 1999 water agreement allows for trading of
water and use of water lines up to three million gallons per day, current trading is
at 1.5 million gallons per day, the agreement allows the City to purchase four million
327
gallons per day of additional water from Roanoke County, and does not require
either jurisdiction to implement water conservation measures, even if such action
is taken by the other locality.
There was discussion in regard to whether Roanoke County has been
approached in regard to implementing voluntary water restrictions; whereupon, the
City Manager advised that a request was made of the County Administrator when
complaints were registered by citizens who are using City water but reside in
Roanoke County. She explained that the issue for Roanoke County is one of rates
because those persons in Roanoke County, regardless of the source of water, are
paying the County water rate and Roanoke County officials believe that as long as
their customers are paying a much higher rate they should not be subject to
restrictions or voluntary conservation.
Mr. McEvoy advised that the 1994 agreement provides for a regional water
pollution control plant, all five jurisdictions are actively involved in management of
the plant, and monthly meetings are held to discuss operational issues.
When comparing the City and County water systems, it was pointed out that
the City's average production is 15.5 million gallons per.day, compared to Roanoke
County's at 7.5 million gallons per day; Roanoke City serves an equivalent
population of 170,000, compared with Roanoke County at 75,000; Roanoke City's
effective residential rate of $2.20 is based on usage of 5000 gallons per month,
compared to Roanoke County at $4.45 based upon a usage of 5000 gallons per
month; both Roanoke City's and Roanoke County's revenue is $10 million; and
Roanoke City's debt is $30 million, while Roanoke County's is $80 million.
Mr. McEvoy reviewed the benefits of a regional authority which include
economies of scale favorable for infrastructure financing and utilization; Virginia law
is favorable for formation of authorities; to maximize resources for the benefit of the
most number of people; and water supply development requires regional
cooperation. He reviewed the types of authorities, i.e.: full service which is a
completely separate operating unit with its own governing board;
wholesale/resource management which controls sources, with each jurisdiction
maintaining distribution and billing; and a "paper" authority which exists to support
bonding of joint projects and systems operate separately.
He reviewed the benefits to the City, i.e: operational savings due to shared use
of equipment and personnel; optimization of area reservoirs for drought protection
and advised of the need to develop the ability to transfer eight million gallons of
water per day between City and County systems; the City of Roanoke could utilize
Roanoke County's permit to fill Carvins Cove with a new pipeline; increased
customer base and access to new customers; and benefits associated with waste
water and storm water management.
328
There was discussion as to whether the City of Roanoke would be on water
restrictions if the Spring Hollow and Carvins Cove reservoirs were connected with
an $18 - 20 million pipeline; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the Citywould
most likely not be on the same level of water restrictions; however, everyone should
practice water conservation measures given the situation on the East Coast,
regardless of whether or not they have water, and the City should continue to pursue
additional wells even if it participates in a water authority. She called attention to the
need for a water system that is not reliant on one single source and the City should
continue to drill wells and get them permitted so that they are available when
needed.
In regard to cost impacts pertaining to an authority, Mr. McEvoy advised that
some assumption of the County's Spring Hollow Reservoir debt will be required on
a mass balance basis and City water rates could go from an effective rate of $2.20
to approximately $3.00; reduced transfers to the General Fund for support services
and realignment of additional staff would be needed; in addition to Spring Hollow
costs, additional infrastructure costs would be needed; a difference in connection
fees; the net impact will be to inflate rates (same rate with varying base charges); a
rate schedule that would converge to a single rate over some period of time; and a
combination of wholesale and retail rates by jurisdiction.
He explained that alternatives to a water authority are to continue with the
existing system:
*Carvins Cove has a good operating history,
*Crystal Springs is returning to service,
*City's population is stable,
*Could still participate in future regional projects,
*Purchase water when needed,
*Negative impact on service delivery.
He noted that other alternatives to an authority include attempting to buy a
portion of Spring Hollow directly from Roanoke County (four million gallons per day
capacity has been priced at $10 to $20 million plus operating costs); and contract
for a portion of the capacity at the new plant being constructed by the City of Salem.
He addressed groundwater development and advised that resources are
available in the southwest and southeast parts of the City to provide five to six
million gallons of water per day, most sites would require filtration, most sites are
private, groundwater exploration is a gamble, investment could be compromised by
droughts, pollution and overuse, and could supplement with purchased water.
329
In summary, Mr. McEvoy advised that a regional authority provides operational
savings, better long term drought protection, potential for customer growth, and the
greatest impact on rates and options for improvements in wastewater operations
and storm water management. He further advised that ground water development
provides lesser impact on rates, a lesser degree of certainty to solve drought
protection issues, unforeseen projects could invalidate investment such as
droughts, pollution, "mining", could make future regional projects difficult, and the
City can still purchase water as needed. He explained that the City could wait for a
future regional project; recognize the current drought condition and set aside funds
to purchase water and to make a future investment when available; there would be
minimal impact on rates; invest in conservation projects through home fixture
replacements, wastewater reuse, well irrigation for City parks and other large users;
and invest in aggressive leak detection/repairs to minimize losses.
There was discussion in regard to waste water reuse in which Mr. McEvoy
advised that Virginia lags behind other states, but it is a concept that is well
developed in Arizona, North Carolina, California and Florida, which essentially
involves taking treated water from the water treatment plant and using the water for
industrial and irrigation purposes. He stated that the Commonwealth of Virginia has
recently received regulations and waste water reuse has been allowed on smaller
demonstration projects. The City Manager spoke in support of including the issue
of waste water reuse in the City's 2003 Legislative Program, and advised that the
Commonwealth of Virginia has only in the last eight to ten months looked at waste
water reuse seriously because of existing drought conditions.
Mr. McEvoy advised that City staff is looking to Council for guidance in regard
to how to proceed on ground water, a regional authority, and other miscellaneous
issues.
Vice-Mayor Harris advised that he would prefer that the City of Roanoke move
in the direction of a water authority which would not exclude the exploration of
ground water development. He stated that over the long term, the City needs to
move toward a regional strategy regarding its water system, and advised that if a
pipeline were in place today that would link the Spring Hollow and Carvins Cove
reservoirs, City residents would not be on the same level of water restrictions.
The Mayor advised that the authority will merit long term economics and with
a water authority and an additional four to five million gallons of water per day, City
customers would not be looking at the same level of restrictions as are currently in
effect.
330 -
Council Member Bestpitch advised that the City of Roanoke made a mistake
by not participating in the Spring Hollow project, the City should assume part of the
debt and step up to the plate and do what is right over the long term. He also spoke
in support of addressing waste water and storm water management issues through
a regional authority.
Council Member Cutler advised that from the standpoint of water level in the
Roanoke River and the ability to pump into Spring Hollow from the Roanoke River,
it would be advantageous if, up stream from the Spring Hollow pumping plant, that
water shed management be in place to prevent water from washing off too quickly
in Montgomery and Floyd Counties and the head waters of the Roanoke River. He
stated that soil and water conservation practices on the watershed, vegetation along
the streams, reforestation, assessment to protect vegetation along the streams,
small impoundments with excess storage capacity which will reduce floods,
increase water quality, provide a better water supply and work together in waste
water treatment, should all be a part of the package eventually.
Council Member Carder advised that water issues have been discussed by
Council since its first planning retreat in July 2000 and in every planning retreat
since that time, and the Council has been diligent in its work. He called attention to
the quality of information provided by the City Manager and the amount of time
required to produce the information, all of which is necessary for Council to make
an informed decision. He stated that the citizens of Roanoke are willing to pay the
price to have sufficient water to fulfill their needs; therefore, his vote is to look
toward the water authority while also pursuing ground water efforts.
Council Member Dowe advised that immediate steps toward the solution are
obvious, and encouraged that City staff continue to be as proactive as possible
toward larger projects such as Smith Mountain Lake over the long term.
The City Manager advised that upon hearing the support expressed by Council
for a regional authority, City staff felt an obligation to investigate all possibilities and
to provide Council with a detailed presentation so that the citizens of Roanoke will
understand that Council has based its decision on facts and not on emotion. In
order to best serve the citizens of Roanoke, she explained that there is a need to
immediately engage a third party consultant to assist with issues of evaluating
assets and determining rates so that citizens will have the assurance that Council
has proceeded with the knowledge that the City's assets are being fairly evaluated.
Secondly, she called attention to the need to set up a meeting with Roanoke County
officials to develop a memorandum of understanding which would be a clear
indication to proceed with the time, money and effort to address legal issues (four
months), operations/employees (nine months), assets/rates (12 months), billing (18
331
months) and additional interconnections (36 months). She advised that if Council
is agreeable to leasing the temporary filtration system at the Crystal Springs Filter
Plant, another discussion can take place in 30 days with regard to use of the
additional three million gallons of water per day, City staff will continue to pursue
the Wells that have been identified, and a consultant will be engaged to address the
next steps to be taken.
At 1:58 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened
immediately following the Organizational Meeting of Council, scheduled to convene
at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
On Monday, July 1, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., the Council of the City of Roanoke held
its Organizational Meeting in the Roanoke City Council Chamber, fourth floor,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with
Mayor Ralph K. Smith presiding, pursuant to Section 10, Meetings of Council, of the
Charter of the City of Roanoke, at which time the newly elected Members of the
Council will officially take their seats.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris and Mayor Ralph K. Smith .... 6.
ABSENT: Council Member Linda F. Wyatt ................................................ 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.
CITY CLERK-CITY COUNCIL: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the
Organizational Meeting was for the newly elected Members of City Council to
officially take their seats; whereupon, he referred to a report from the City Clerk
advising of the qualification of M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred Dowe, Jr., and C. Nelson
Harris as Members of the Roanoke City Council, for terms of four years, each,
commencing July 1, 2002, and ending June 30, 2006.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the reports of
qualification and the report of the City Clerk would be received and filed.
CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Carder offered the following resolution recognizing the
Honorable C. Nelson Harris to be a Member of the City Council and Vice-Mayor of the
City of Roanoke, for a term commencing July 1, 2002, and continuing for a period of
two years and until his successor has been elected and qualified:
332 "
(#35956-070102) A RESOLUTION recognizing the HONORABLE C. NELSON
HARRIS to be a member of the City Council and Vice-Mayor of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 238.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35956-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor
Smith ....................................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Harris offered the following resolution recognizing the
service of the Honorable William H. Carder as Vice-Mayor of the City of Roanoke
from July 1, 2000 to June 30, 2002:
(#35957-070102) A RESOLUTION recognizing the services of the HONORABLE
WILLIAM H. CARDER as Vice-Mayor of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66. page 238.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35957-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor Smith .... 5.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.) (Council Member Carder abstained from
voting.)
.. As outgoing Vice-Mayor, Mr. Carder expressed appreciation to Council
Members, Council Appointed Offices and other City staff for their hard work and
diligence to make the City of Roanoke a better place to live and work. He highlighted
some of the accomplishments of the City of Roanoke over the past two years
through established goals relating to a healthy economy, quality services, working
together as a City, developing strong neighborhoods, a vibrant downtown and
enhancing the environment.
333
Mr. Carder stated that Council set goals for the City Manager to accomplish
and gave her the ability to do her job to make those things happen; i.e.: 1-73 was an
issue that was debated, and Council continued to advise the Virginia Department of
Transportation that it did not want 1-73 going through the southeast neighborhood;
air service was an issue and an announcement was recently made regarding a
Regional Alliance which is charged with the responsibility of bringing additional air
service to the Roanoke Valley; tourism/marketing efforts with increased funding of
$276,000.00 appropriated unilaterally to fund and increase tourism/marketing in the
Roanoke Valley; retention of the business base through monthly meetings with
businesses over breakfast where businesses are encouraged to advise the City of
their concerns and the City has reacted to many of those concerns; numerous
announcements in terms of economic development; the City of Roanoke took the
lead with the regional branding effort in terms of what the Roanoke Valley wants to
project as its image; Victory Stadium was an issue and a decision was made that the
sports and entertainment venue of the future will be an amphitheater that will be
located on Williamson Road which will be a tremendous economic boon for the
Williamson Road area; civic center improvements have been authorized to bring the
civic center into the 21st century, a contract has been signed with the NBDL and
there will be more concerts and events; market rate housing will be addressed by
a master planner looking at areas of the City for new market rate housing; the use
of current technology leading to more efficient and faster delivery and management
of City services; City services are bench marked through a citizen survey and as a
result of the most recent survey, 90 per cent of Roanoke's citizens stated that they
are happy with the services they receive from the City of Roanoke; implementation
of the new zoning and planning process; approval of the Fire/EMS Business Plan;
methods to improve fleet management; the City has worked with other localities
toward regional communication; a committee of Council revamped the City's
authorities, boards, commissions and committees; Council has acted in a bi-partisan
manner with governing first and politics second, and the Council has acted in the
best interests of the citizens of the City or Roanoke; Council has been inclusive of
all voices in order to generate increased citizen input into various issues; Council's
relationship with the School Board was excellent and a joint retreat was held last
year; the City enjoys strong neighborhoods; adoption of the Vision 2001
Comprehensive Plan in which thousands of citizens took part in the process; the
BullittJJamison Avenue Pilot Project continues to move forward and Council took a
bold step when it decided to consolidate Community Development Block Grant and
HOME funds and focus on and address one neighborhood at a time, resulting in a
comprehensive neighborhood revitalization project such as the City has never seen
before which can be used as a blue print for neighborhood revitalization for the next
20 years as the City leaps from neighborhood to neighborhood; preserving
Roanoke's history; support of village centers; revitalization of the Grandin Theatre
in partnership with the community through matching funds; developing
334 -
neighborhood leadership, with a goal to revamp the Roanoke Neighborhood
Partnership; efforts to make downtown Roanoke efforts more vibrant; completion
of the update to the Outlook Roanoke Plan; improved residential living space in
downtown Roanoke with 150 families living in the area; investment in public/private
partnerships, such as the passenger rail station, the O. Winston Link Museum, IMAX
Theater, e-town, warehouses, fiber optics, and outside dining; downtown housing
has been made easier for builders to build downtown; facade grants; two way traffic
on Salem Avenue; the "Big Lick" street cleaning machine which is a partnership
between the City and Downtown Roanoke, Inc., to keep downtown streets clean;
enhancing the environment; Roanoke River cleanup; the regional storm water
management plan; the bulk trash removal program has led to cleaner City streets;
the recycling program has been broadened throughout the City; the graffiti
ordinance was adopted by Council; the Urban Forestry Program was implemented;
and regional discussion in connection with a regional water supply, storm water
runoff, waste water and river maintenance and cleanup.
Mr. Carder advised that it has been an honor to serve as Vice-Mayor for the
past two years and he looks forward to working with the Council over the next two
years to continue to address the needs of the City of Roanoke.
CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution establishing a
meeting schedule for City Council for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1,2002, and
terminating June 30, 2003:
(#35958-070102) A RESOLUTION establishing a meeting schedule for City
Council for the Fiscal Year commencing July 1,2002, and terminating June 30, 2003.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 239.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35958-070102. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ......................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: The Mayor presented a communication
advising that by tradition, the Mayor has assigned Members of Council to the various
committees of the City of Roanoke; on May 26, the Mayor's Office sent a letter of
335
invitation to the Members of Council who would make up the Council as of J~ly 1,
2002~ asking that they indicate their committee preferences; all Members of Council
resp.onded; and virtually all requests were honored, with one exception.
The Mayor advised that he has been in the process of building relationships
with General Assembly Members for a number of years and those relationships can
serve as a benefit to the City of Roanoke and to the mutual satisfaction of all
Members of Council; many of his friends in Richmond shars his political philosophy;
and just as they reach many compromises in the legislature for the benefit of
Virginia, he seeks to compromise with the Council realizing that they, too, do not all
share the same political philosophies.
The Mayor advised that the one exception above referenced is a proposal that
all Members of Council serve on the Legislative Committee, with the Mayor serving
as Chair; and since he presently attends a majority of all Mill Mountain Advisory
Committee meetings and Council Member Cutler will serve on the Mill Mountain Zoo
Board, he requested that the Mayor serve as the Council's liaison to the Mill
Mountain Advisory Committee.
Council Member Bestpitch presented a communication signed by the six
Members of Council proposing the following list of committee assignments for
Council Members:
Audit Committee - Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris,
Ms. Wyatt (Chair) and Mayor Smith
Budget and Planning Committee -Council Members Bestpitch (Chair), Carder,
Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and Mayor Smith
Human Services Committee - No Council Members serve on the Committee
Personnel Committee - Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe,
Harris (Chair), Wyatt and Mayor Smith
Legislative Committee - Council Members Bestpitch, Carder (Chair), Cutler,
Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and Mayor Smith
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority - Council Member Harris
Mill Mountain Advisory Committee - Council Member Cutler
Roanoke Valley-Allegheny Regional Commission - Council Members
Bestpitch, Carder and Cutler
336 -
Total Action Against Poverty, Board of Directors - Council Member Bestpitch
War Memorial Committee - Council Members Bestpitch and Carder
Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee - Council Member Dowe
Roanoke Civic Center Commission - Council Member Wyatt
City of Roanoke Transportation Safety Commission, Board of Directors -
Council Member Bestpitch
Roanoke Arts Commission - Council Member Cutler
Mill Mountain Zoo, Inc. - Council Member Cutler
Mayor's Committee for People with Disabilities - Council Member Wyatt
Virginia Museum of Transportation, Board of Directors - Council Member
Wyatt
Virginia CARES Board of Directors - Council Member Wyatt
Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, Board of Directors - Council
Member Carder
Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership Steering Committee - Council Member
Bestpitch
Virginia's First Regional Industrial Facility Authority - Council Member
Bestpitch and Elizabeth Neu
New River Valley Commerce Park Participation Committee - Council Member
Bestpitch and Elizabeth Neu
Roanoke Valley Long-Range Water Supply Study Committee - Council Member
Cutler
Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership Steering Committee Ad Hoc STudy
Committee - Council Members Bestpitch and Carder
Special Events Committee - Council Member Carder
Roanoke Valley Area Metropolitan Planning Organization - Council Member
Bestpitch and Sherman Holland
337
Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission - Mayor Smith and William
White, Sr.
Virginia Municipal League Policy Committees:
Environmental Quality - Council Member Cutler
Finance. Jesse A. Hall
General Laws -William M. Hackworth
Human Development and Education -Council Member Wyatt
Transportation - Council Member Carder
Virginia Municipal League Legislative Committee - Council Member Carder
Virginia Recreation Facilities Authority - Council Member Bestpitch
Revenue Practices Committee - Council Member Bestpitch.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Council approve the above listed committee
assignments, as contained in a letter dated June 20, 2002, and signed by the six
Members of City Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor
Smith ................................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
The Mayor advised that it was not necessary for the Mayor to serve as Chair
of the Legislative Committee; however, it would be a vehicle to ensure that all parties
work together for the overall good of the City of Roanoke when dealing with issues
surfacing at the State level.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Organizational
Meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
On Monday, July 1, 2002, immediately following adjournment of the
Organizational Meeting, the regular meeting of Roanoke City Council reconvened at
2:45 p.m., 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.
338 -
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris and Mayor Ralph K. Smith,---6.
ABSENT: Council Member Linda F. Wyattm
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 The Reverend J. David
Fuller, Missions Pastor, Church of the Holy Spirit.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
PROCLAMATIONS-PARKS AND RECREATION: The Mayor presented a
Proclamation declaring the month of July as National Parks and Recreation Month.
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.
MINUTES: Minutes of the work session of City Council held on Monday,
April 29, 2002, were before the body.
(For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
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 Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
339
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: Sherman P. Lea having previously submitted his
resignation as a trustee of the Roanoke City School Board, a communication from
Mr. Lea advising that as he reflected on his original letter of resignation, he became
concerned that his decision to resign at the end of June would have a negative
impact on the work of the School Board and the progress of the school system;
therefore, he requested that his effective date of resignation be changed from
June 30, 2002, to August 15, 2002, or until a new Trustee is appointed, whichever
occurs first, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the communication be received and filed and that the
resignation be accepted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: A communication from Robert J.
Sparrow tendering his resignation as a member of the City of Roanoke Fair Housing
Board, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the communication be received and filed and that the
resignation be accepted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP-PENSION: A
communication from William E. Skeen tendering his resignation as a member of the
Board of Trustees, City of Roanoke Pension Plan; and the Roanoke Neighborhood
Partnership Steering Committee, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the communication be received and filed and that the
resignation be accepted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted
by the following vote:
340
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY-HOUSING/AUTHORITY:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that property located at
1224 Rorer Avenue, S. W., and 719 Dale Avenue, S. E., was acquired by the City of
Roanoke to establish a housing assistance program for City employees; and
pursuant to requirements of the Code of Virginia, the City of Roanoke is required to
hold a public hearing on the proposed conveyance of property rights to the t31ue
Ridge Housing Development Corporation, which will renovate the two properties
using CDBG funds and oversee the housing assistance program, was before
Council.
The City Manager requested that Council authorize a public hearing to be held
on Monday, July 15, 2002.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor
Smith ................................................................................................. -6'
NAYS: None ................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-AUDIT COMMITTEE: Minutes of the meeting of the Audit
Committee held on Monday, June 3, 2002, were before Council.
The following items were considered by the Audit Committee:
Internal Audit Reports:
Fleet Management - Parts
Purchasing Cards
Retirement
341
KPMG External Audit for year ending June 30, 2002
Status Report - Roanoke City Public Schools
Report of Peer Review on Municipal Auditing Department
Management Assistance Audit - Solid Waste Management
Request for 30 minute Audit Committee Meeting -June 17, 2002
Mr. Carder moved that the minutes be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT-LIBRARIES-
PENSIONS-SCHOOLS-WAR MEMORIAL: The following reports of qualification were
before Council:
William E. Skeen and Robert J. Sparrow as Trustees of the Roanoke
City School Board, for terms of three years, each, commencing July 1,
2002, and ending June 30, 2005;
Roland H. Macher as a member of the Roanoke Public Library Board for
a term ending June 30, 2005;
D. Duane Dixon as a member of the Board of Trustees, City of Roanoke
Pension Plan, for a term ending June 30, 2004;
Alfred C. Moore as a member of the War Memorial Committee for a term
ending June 30, 2003;
Brenda L. McDaniel as a member of the Roanoke Public Library Board
for a term ending June 30, 2004; and
I. B. Heinemann as a member of the Personnel and Employment
Practices Commission for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Mr. Carder moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
342
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
CITY PROPERTY-INDUSTRIES: Pursuant to notice of advertisement for bids
for lease and renovation of certain City-owned buildings located at 117 and 119
Norfolk Avenue, S. W., the matter was before Council.
The Mayor advised that bids were to be received in the City Clerk's Office until
1:30 p.m., on Monday, July 1,2002, and to be held by the City Clerk, unopened, until
the 2:00 p.m. session of Council, at which time the bid would be opened and read
before the Council. He inquired if there were persons in attendance who had
questions or objections to the opening of the bids. Hearing none, the Mayor
instructed the City Clerk to proceed with the opening and reading of the bids.
The City Clerk reported that one bid had been received prior to the deadline
from Warehouse Row, L. P.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the bid of Warehouse
Row, L. P., would be referred to the City Manager for report to Council at the regular
meeting on Monday, July 15, 2002.
Pursuant to notice of advertisement, the Mayor also advised that a public
hearing was advertised in The Roanoke Times on Monday, June 17 and Monday,
June 24, 2002, with regard to the lease and renovation of certain City-owned
buildings located at 117 and 119 Norfolk Avenue, S. W., for Monday, July 1,2002, at
2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the matter was before
the body.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the matter, to which inquiry no person responded.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the public hearing would
be continued until the regular meeting of Council on Monday, July 15, 2002, at 7:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard in the City Council Chamber.
343
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
TAXES-VIRGINIA TRANSPORTATION MUSEUM: A petition from the Virginia
Museum of Transportation requesting exemption from taxation of 1.4 acres of land
located adjacent to 303 Norfolk Avenue, S. W., in the City of Roanoke, pursuant to
Section 30-19.04(B), Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the petition be referred to the City Manager for study,
report and recommendation to Council. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and
adopted.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS:
CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager introduced Jeffrey H. Powell, Director,
General Services, who assumed his position on June 17, 2002.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
SPECIAL PERMITS-LICENSES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that Joan S. Edwards, property owner at 3745 Forest Road, S. W, has
requested permission to retain, in place, a basketball goal, which encroaches into
the public right-of-way; the property owner has also requested that Council
designate a portion of Forest Road as an area where play is permitted in the right-of-
way, pursuant to provisions of Sec. 46.2-932A, Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended;
and the encroachment extends approximately three feet into the right-of-way of
Forest Road, which is approximately 12 feet in height; the right-of-way of Forest
Road at this location is approximately 50 feet in width; and liability insurance and
indemnification of the City by the property owner shall be provided by the property
owner, and evidence of such coverage shall be approved bythe City's Risk Manager.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to be
executed by the property owners, John S. and Catherine D. Edwards, and recorded
in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the City of Roanoke granting a revocable
license to the property owners at 3745 Forest Road, S. W., to allow a basketball goal
that encroaches into the right-of-way of Forest Road, S. W., to remain; and
designating a portion of Forest Road as a play area, restricted to usage during
daylight hours, and defined by a minimum of four temporary traffic cones, said play
area shall be described as an area beginning on a point at the location of the
basketball goal, extending with a radius of 30 feet within the right-of-way of Forest
Road, S. W., and terminating at the property line of Official Tax No. 1390514.
344 -
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35959-070102) AN ORDINANCE granting a conditional permit to allow for the
encroachment of a basketball goal approximately three feet into the public right-of-
way in front of the property located at 3745 Forest Road, S. W., and bearing Official
Tax No. 1390514; designating a play area pursuant to the provisions of §46.2-932.A,
Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended, upon certain terms and conditions; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 241.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35959-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
Council Member Cutler advised that this type of ordinance is potentially
available to any citizen as long as they provide the necessary insurance and meet
other specific provisions, and does not represent a special consideration for the
individual involved.
Council Member Carder referred to the circumstances of another individual
who installed a permanent basketball goal on a cul-de-sac on City property;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would address the inquiry.
Ordinance No. 35959-070102 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None--.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
SPECIAL PERMITS-LICENSES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that James V. Revercomb, property owner at 2908 Carolina Avenue, S. W.,
has requested permission to maintain a retaining wall currently under construction
along his driveway, which encroaches into the public right-of-way; the
encroachment extends approximately 24 feet into the right-of-way of Carolina
Avenue, and varies in height between 12" and 48"; and the right-of-way of Carolina
Avenue is approximately 80 feet in width; there are several similar retaining walls on
this side of Carolina Avenue; and liability insurance and indemnification of City of
Roanoke by the property owner shall be provided by the property owner as
specified, subject to approval by the City's Risk Manager.
345
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance, to be
executed bythe property owners, James V. and Denise C. Revercomb, and recorded
in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court for the City of Roanoke, granting a revocable
license to property owners at 2908 Carolina Avenue, S. W., to allow a retaining wall
that encroaches into the right-of-way of Carolina Avenue, S. W., to remain.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35960-070102) AN ORDINANCE granting a revocable license to permit an
encroachment of a retaining wall approximately twenty-four feet into the public right-
of-way in front of the property located at 2908 Carolina Avenue, S. W., and bearing
Official Tax No. 1070502, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with
the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 244.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35960-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-BUDGET-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the Lick Run Greenway is a part
of the City-wide greenway system which was identified in the City's Comprehensive
Plan, Roanoke Vision 2001, as a potential greenway corridor and is supported bythe
citizens of the City of Roanoke; each portion is being constructed as funds become
available and two phases of construction have been completed; the final phase will
extend the greenway from Court Street to The Hotel Roanoke; and design of the
project is sufficiently complete to identify those property rights necessary for
construction.
It was further advised that authorization is needed to move forward with
procurement of title work, appraisals, and document preparation related to
acquisition of the necessary property rights; and projected cost for acquisition of
the necessary property rights is approximately $100,000.00, which will be funded
through two VDOT TEA-21 grants totaling $875,000.00.
346 -
The City Manager recommended that she and the City Attorney be authorized
to take all necessary steps to acquire all property rights, said property rights may
be acquired by negotiation or eminent domain, and may include fee simple,
permanent easements, permanent access easements, temporary construction
easements, rights-of-way, licenses or permits, etc., subject to a satisfactory
environmental site inspection; and that Council appropriate $875,000.00 to the Lick
Run Greenway Project, Account No. 008-530-9754, and establish a revenue estimate
in the amount of $875,000.00 for VDOT TEA-21 grant funds.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following emergency budget ordinance:
(#35961-070102) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 245.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35961-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#35962-070102) AN ORDINANCE providing for the acquisition of certain
interests in property needed by the City for the final phase of the Lick Run Greenway
Project; setting a certain limit on the acquisition costs of such property rights;
providing for the City's acquisition of such property rights by condemnation, under
certain circumstances; authorizing the City to make motion for the award of a right
of entry on the property for the purpose of commencing the project; all upon certain
terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by
title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 246.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35962-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
347
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
Council Member Cutler inquired if the ordinance addresses reimbursement to
the Western Virginia Land Trust of $6,000.00 which was used to purchase property
on Syracuse Avenue to enable the Lick Run Greenway to go across open land;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would investigate the inquiry and
address the matter accordingly.
TAXES-DOWNTOWN ROANOKE, INCORPORATED: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that on July 2, 2001, the City of Roanoke
authorized the City Manager to execute a Downtown Service District Services
Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Downtown Roanoke, Inc., for a period
of five years; and paragraph 3.7, Disbursements to DRI, states the net revenue
collected from the additional service district tax, less the City's annual direct costs,
will be presented to DRI in return for providing promotional services within the
downtown district.
It was further advised that the proposed amendment will eliminate the City's
annual direct costs fee, which is currently $2,000.00, allowing additional funds for
promotion and development; such amendment will be effective for the 2001-2002
fiscal year and in the future; and Section 32-102.3 (a), Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, needs to be amended to eliminate the requirement that the,
"Costs of collecting, accounting for and administering the tax provided for by this
division shall be a charge against revenues derived from such tax."
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an
amendment to the Downtown Service District Services Agreement between the City
of Roanoke and DRI for a period ending June 30, 2006; such amendment to be
approved as to form by the City Attorney; that the City Manager be authorized to take
such further action as is necessary to implement and administer such amendment;
and that Council amend Section 32-102.3(a), Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, by deleting the last sentence, which reads, "Costs of collecting,
accounting for and administering the tax provided for by this division shall be a
charge against revenues derived from such tax."
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
348
(#35963-070102) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (a) of
§32-102.3, Purposes of tax, of Division 6, Downtown Service District, of Article II,
Real Estate Taxes Generally, of Chapter 32, Taxation, of the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, to eliminate the requirement of charging the costs of
collecting, accounting for and administering the tax against the revenues derived
from such tax; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance, effective
retroactively to July 1, 2001.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 248.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35963-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None .....
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35964-070102) A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of an amendment
to the Downtown Service District Services Agreement between the City of Roanoke,
Virginia, and Downtown Roanoke, Inc. (DRI), that will provide for the elimination of
the City's annual direct costs fee, which is currently $2,000.00; and authorizing the
City Manager to take such further action as is necessary to implement and
administer the terms of such amendment.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 249.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35964-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6'
NAYS: None
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
349
PERSONNEL DEPARTMENT-MUNICIPAL BUILDING-EQUIPMENT: The City
Manager submitted a communication calling attention to a multi-phase project to
replace copiers, desktop printers, and fax machines throughout the Municipal
Building and certain remote locations with digital multi-functional devices, which
devices will be capable of attaching to the City's network infrastructure for
distributive printing directly from the Department of Technology's data center, print
and fax from a desktop computer, and perform advanced functions for copying and
scanning; and this solution provides the latest technology to City departments for
increased functionality and efficiency of operations.
It was further advised that Phase one includes replacement of equipment in
Municipal Building South, along with the Human Resources department; additional
phases of the project to replace equipment in other departments will be implemented
as funds become available; after proper advertisement, two bids were received on
November 19, 2001, with the XEROX Corporation submitting the Iow bid to lease the
equipment over a five year (60 month) period at $10,024.00 per month, for a total of
$601,460.00; funding has been included in the fiscal year 2002-2003 budget for lease
payment and initial network setup; and a justification study providing validation of
cost savings was made in the departments proposed to receive the equipment.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of the XEROX
Corporation, in the amount of $601,460.00, with a contract date commencing on
July 1, 2002 for 60 months; and that all other bids received by the City be rejected.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35965-070102) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Xerox Corporation and
authorizing the City Manager to execute an agreement with Xerox Corporation for
the lease of multi-functional printer/copiers to be placed throughout the municipal
building, upon certain terms and conditions; and rejecting all other bids made for
such items.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 250.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35965-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................ 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
35O
PARKING FACILITIES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising
that the City currently contracts with Central Parking Systems of Virginia Inc. dlbla
AIIright Roanoke Parking, Inc. (AIIright) for management and operation services for
six city owned and/or operated parking garages and four surface parking lots, under
a five year contract which is effective until July 31,2002; on April 9, 2002, A Request
for Proposal was issued seeking qualified management firms to operate the
facilities for the next three years, commencing on August 1, 2002, with up to one
additional year at the option of the City; four responses were received, each
proposal was carefully reviewed and each firm was granted an oral interview in the
selection process.
It was further advised that in order to provide for the professional
management of parking facilities, the firm of LANCOR Parking, L.L.C. was selected
to be the most qualified to provide management and operational services; the
proposed contract contains additional requirements of the management firm as
compared to the current management contract, including an increased responsibility
for preventative maintenance and general upkeep of each facility, development of
an effective public relations and marketing plan, and increased emphasis on
customer service and revenue enhancement; and a three year management contract
has been negotiated with LANCOR Parking, L.L.C. with up to one additional year
at the option of the City, at a management fee of $584,029.00 for year one,
$584,225.00 for year two, $601,752.00 for year th ree and $52,792.00 per month for the
option period; said fees are more costly than those fees being paid to the operator
under the current contract and are reflective of the increased level of requirements
and responsibilities being placed upon the new operator; and funding is available
in operating accounts for City owned and/or operated facilities in the Parking Fund
to pay for said fees.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the proposal of LANCOR,
L.L.C., to provide management and operating services for ten City owned and/or
controlled parking facilities, and authorize the City Manager to enter into a contract
with LANCOR Parking, L.L.C., for provision of management and operation services
for said City owned and/or controlled parking facilities, for the fees set forth above;
and that the City Manager be authorized to take such further action and to execute
such further documents as may be necessary to implement and administer such
contract. (Church Avenue Parking Garage, Century Station Parking Garage,
Gainsboro Parking Garage, Market Square Parking Garage, Tower Parking Garage,
Williamson Road Parking Garage, Gainsboro Surface Parking Lot, Salem Avenue
(Warehouse Rowe) Parking Lot, Norfolk Avenue (Viaduct) Parking Lot, and
Williamson Road Parking Lot)
Mr. Carder offered the following emergency ordinance:
351
(#35966-070102) AN ORDINANCE accepting the proposal of Lancor Parking,
L. L. C., to provide management and operation services for certain City of Roanoke
owned and/or controlled parking garages and surface parking lots for a term of three
years with an option to renew for up to one additional year, upon certain terms and
conditions; awarding a contract therefor, authorizing the proper City officials to
execute the requisite contract; rejecting all other proposals made to the City; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 251)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35966-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ............................................................................................ 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
PUBLIC WORKS-EQUIPMENT-CMERP: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement
Program (CMERP) has identified the need to purchase one hydraulic excavator to
replace two older excavators, one being a rubber tired machine that has already
been sold and the other a track machine that is approximately 30 years old; and the
item will be purchased from proceeds of the 2002 Capital Lease Program.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of Mitchell
Distributing Co., for one Komatsu PC150LC-6 hydraulic excavator, at a total cost of
$107,570.00, and reject all other bids received by the City.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35967-070102) A RESOLUTION accepting the bid of Mitchell Distributing Co.,
for the purchase of one new hydraulic excavator, upon certain terms and conditions;
and rejecting all other bids made for such items.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 252.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35967-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
352 -
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith .......................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS-BUDGET: The Director
of Finance submitted the Financial Report for the City of Roanoke for the month of
May, 2002.
Council Member Carder inquired as to how the eight per cent in State cuts will
be addressed; whereupon, the Director of Finance advised that the first seven per
cent in reductions were incorporated into the State's adopted fiscal year 2003
budget; however, he did not have detailed information on how the cuts will be
allocated. The City Manager advised that additional State reductions or impacts that
have not yet been identified are anticipated, and the Director of Finance, City
Manager and Director of Management and Budget will continue to monitor the
situation closely and manage the City's resources, extraordinarily, until there is a
clear indication of what will happen at the State level.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the financial report
would be received and filed.
The City Manager advised that as a part of the water briefing at the 12:15 p.m.,
session of Council, she stated that a funding action item would be submitted to the
Council at its 2:00 p.m., session, in order to provide for the lease or purchase of
equipment to institute a temporaryfiltration treatment system for the Crystal Springs
Filter Plant which will allow approximately three million gallons of Crystal Springs
water on line on August 1, at a cost not to exceed $350,000.00.
The City Manager explained that approximately two months ago, Council
appropriated $300,000.00 for the purchase of an ultra violet treatment option at the
Crystal Springs Filter Plant which was not approved by the Environmental Protection
Agency; however, the City has now received approval by the Health Department to
use a temporary filtration option that will allow the temporary system to be in place
by August 1, which is two months in advance of the estimated completion date of
October 1 of the new filtration system at the Crystal Springs Filter Plant.
353
The City Manager was requested to elaborate on future plans with regard to
the City's water situation; whereupon, she advised that at the 12:15 p.m., Council
Work Session, current water systems, and the status of the water systems and
improvements were discussed. She further advised that Carvins Cove Reservoir is
just a little below 27 feet, below spillway, and daily demand on Carvins Cove is down
from 15 million gallons per day to 10 million gallons per day, which is the result of
recent rain fall and the purchase of water from the City of Salem and Roanoke
County. She explained that it is expected that the Crystal Springs Filter Plant will be
fully operational by October 1, which is six weeks ahead of schedule, the ultra violet
treatment option was not approved by the Environmental Protection Agency,
however, the City proposes to pursue a temporary filter option that will provide
approximately three million gallons of water per day by August 1; Council has not
as yet decided how it wishes to use the additional three million gallons of water per
day, although one option is to reduce the amount of purchase that the City is
currently making from Roanoke County, or to use the additional capacity to raise
the level of Carvins Cove to ensure against some of the more difficult months to
come, or to look at some mitigation of water restrictions, all of which are matters
that Council will address later in the month. She stated that the Muse Spring well
is expected to begin production on August 1 and another well will be on line on
October 1 in conjunction with the Crystal Springs Filtration Plant, which means that
by October 1, two million gallons of additional water will be available as a resource
to the City. She called attention to two additional locations that were made available
last week for citizens to obtain non-potable water, one off of Tenth Street and one
in Wasena Park; an engineering firm has been retained for a regional long range
water supply study and the report is expected to be completed in January, 2003. She
advised that there is a need to concentrate on long term water solutions along with
short term conditions that localities face as a result of the drought. She called
attention to various options that are available to the City; i.e.: a regional authority in
which both the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County are interested in participating;
the issue of additional wells as a resource for water; and Council reviewed the cost
of taking no action while waiting for opportunities and living through the drought
which is facing not only the State of Virginia, but the entire East Coast. She advised
that Council, following its discussion of the pros and cons of the various issues,
authorized City staffto proceed with a memorandum of understanding with Roanoke
County, with the goal of producing a water authority agreement and in the next four
to twelve months, the services of a third partywill be engaged to review rate m-".king
issues and evaluation of assets of the City and the County systems when moving to
a water authority; and the Council also gave its support to continue to investigate
and explore other resource development such as additional wells. She explained
that it is estimated that the City will need an additional eight million gallons of water
per day on a recurring basis in order to be drought proof which will be the goal in
working toward creation of a regional authority. She stressed that if an authority
354
were created tomorrow, it would not diminish the present drought conditions
because it would take from $10 - $18 million in order for a pipeline to be built to
connect the Spring Hollow and Carvins Cove Reservoirs in order to draw more water
today than the City is currently drawing from Roanoke County. She assured Council
and the citizens of Roanoke that City staff has been pursuing all options and advised
that as a state and a locality, we do not have the advantage of using technology and
some of the opportunities that other states, particularly the western states, have
become familiar with over the years in terms of maximizing both the availability of
non-potable water to address situations that are produced by a drought, and the
opportunity for additional resources relative to potable water. She advised that it is
hoped to better educate and inform the public, there is a need to create
opportunities to have an integrated water system without total reliance on rain water
and that wells and other activities be addressed to deal with the situation. She
stated that as a community, as a valley and as a state, all persons need to become
better conservators of water, both in times of plenty and in times of drought.
The City Manager called attention to a significant amount of regional
cooperation in the Roanoke Valley's water systems, even without an authority, and
prior to the City's purchase of water from Roanoke County, there was an exchange
of 1.5 million gallons of water per day between the two jurisdictions in those
instances where a decision was made that it was in the financial best interest of one
jurisdiction or the other for the customers to be served by the other jurisdiction;
therefore, situations exist today where County residents are being served by City
water and City residents are being served by County water; and the Town of Vinton
has an arrangement whereby the City sells water to an industry in the Town
because of the quality of City water. She referred to meetings of the City Manager,
the Mayor and City staffwith their respective Roanoke County counter parts over the
past year to discuss water issues. She advised that water issues can be emotional
and it is necessary to make decisions based upon facts; there are costs associated
with going to an authority and there will be significant increases in water rates
charged to citizens as opposed to what they are currently paying, and the sentiment
of the community appears to be that they are prepared to pay those rates in order
to enjoy quality of life and to accommodate the activities that citizens have come to
enjoy in the Roanoke Valley, and City staff is prepared to move as quickly as
possible to make that happen on behalf of the citizens of Roanoke.
The City Manager explained that because of the interconnections that
currently exist which are the limiting factor, as of today, five and one-half million
gallons of water are flowing through those lines, and one and one-half million is the
trading of water that was occurring long before the drought, therefore, the City is
purchasing four million gallons of water which is the maximum. She explained that
if an authority were created tomorrow, it would not be possible to get more water
355
immediately because significant investments are required in a number of options,
one of which would be a direct connection of the two reservoirs by a pipeline,
another might be to create a mid point at which there would be a pipeline and a
treatment facility, and additional interconnections might be another option which will
be explored. She advised that there will be a price to become a part of the authority
which is the investment that the City of Roanoke would have made back in the early
1990's into the Spring Hollow Reservoir had it made the decision at that time to
participate and certain infrastructure improvements will be necessary to access
those waters. She stated that the City of Roanoke has the lowest water rate in the
Roanoke Valley, as well as a Iow rate in comparison to the State, and an increase in
rates will be necessary in order for the City to be drought proof.
The City Manager commended the Roanoke community for pulling together
in these unusual situations and advised that that spirit of cooperation will see
citizens through these difficult times.
Mr. Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#35968-070102) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Water Fund Appropriations; and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 253.)
Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35968-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35969-070102) AN ORDINANCE declaring the existence of an emergency in
connection with obtaining certain design services, the lease and/or purchase of
equipment, and construction work for a certain project to try to obtain additional
sources of water to try to increase the City's water supply to help with the City's
water to help with the City's water supply emergency that was declared on February
4, 2002, Ordinance No. 35741-070102; providing that due to the need to expedite
356 -
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 dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 254.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35969-070102. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: None.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS:
BUDGET-CITY COUNCIL: The City Attorney submitted a report advising that
at the request of Council Member Bestpitch, he has prepared a measure which
would establish annual salaries for the Mayor, Vice-Mayor and Council Members for
the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2004, which will provide that the Mayor would
receive an annual salary of $19,189.00, and the Vice-Mayor and Members of City
Council would receive $14,925.00.
He further advised that Council adopted an ordinance on November 19, 2001,
effective July 1,2002, establishing the salary of the Mayor at $18,000.00 per year and
the salaries of the Vice-Mayor and Members of Council at $14,490.00 per year;
Section 15.2-1414.6, Code of Virginia, (1950), as amended, permits Council to
establish the annual salaries of Members of Council, but provides that any increase
in such salaries must be adopted at least four months prior to the date of the next
municipal election, and no increase can take effect until July 1't after such election;
and the next regularly scheduled general election of Council Members will be in May
of 2004, thus any ordinance adopted by Council at this time increasing the salaries
of Members of Council cannot take effect until July 1, 2004.
357
Mr. Bestpitch moved that the ordinance be referred to the Council's Budget
and Planning Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted.
Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that the timing for a pay
increase for Council Members is wrong in view of recent budget cuts, the water
crisis and many other critical issues facing the City of Roanoke. She further
advised that she stands with Roanoke's school teachers who believe that teachers
are always placed on the back burner when it comes to pay raises. She stated that
a message is being sent that the City of Roanoke is insensitive, and Roanoke is a
city that is in turmoil, both inside and outside of City Hall. She asked that Council
Members respect each other and advised that where a Member of Council lives
should not be an issue in determining a pay increase, each Member of Council has
a right to their own personal opinion, and it does not reflect well on the City v.'hen
Council Members criticize each other through the news media.
Ms. Anita Price, 3101 Willow Road, N. W., President, Roanoke Education
Association, representing 700 members, advised that on behalf of the REA, she
would like to go on record stating that educators do not begrudge equal
compensation for the hard work that Council Members endure in conducting the
affairs of the City and that Council Members should be compensated adequately.
However, she stated that given the budgetary constraints dictated by the General
Assembly that placed more restrictions on the decisions of Council, REA members
would like to know that they could depend on a three per cent pay increase each
year, but they are required to bow to the dictates that come from the General
Assembly and City Council, therefore, educators receive what is left over. She
stated that educators are patient people, but they deserve what is right and not what
is left over. She called attention to the fact that salaries for Roanoke City School
teachers are becoming less and less competitive, the City has lost ground in th~ last
two years, and it is becoming increasingly difficult to attract and retain the brightest
and best teachers, given the sacrifices and the current budgetary situation. She
asked that Members of Council concur that voting upon a pay increase at this time
will send the wrong message to the public and cause educators to wonder what truly
is the highest priority of City Council.
Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that when Roanoke City
files for bankruptcy, a detailed studywill show that City Council failed to be excellent
stewards of taxpayers' money and their trust. She further advised that Council can
be accused of allowing abusive and mis-use of taxpayers' money because it has not
demanded an investigation of the mis-use of funds within the bowels of City Hall;
Council has not kept campaign promises, pledges or statements to not seek a pay
increase; Council has failed to properly represent citizens in the predominantly black
neighborhoods with respect to Washington Park, screen doors for Lincoln Terrace
residents, fire stations within the black neighborhoods, and police substations
358 --
within those neighborhoods; and Council has failed to support Roanoke's teachers.
She stated that these are items that should be considered during Council's Budget
and Planning Committee meeting, because there are persons in the City of Roanoke
who have lost their jobs due to no fault of their own and yet City Council is
considering a pay increase. She asked that Council think about the overall big
picture and not their individual situations.
Mr. Robert Gravely, 617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., advised that Council is
charged with the responsibility of looking at the entire City of Roanoke, and one-half
of the City is prospering, while the other half is failing. He referred to a pay scale for
City workers that is not favorable for the average worker to earn a decent living. He
advised that the black community has no businesses because they are considered
last in receiving City funds and in receiving promotions in the workplace, and racism
prevails in the City of Roanoke. He advised that the answer to the City's water
problems is contained in the Holy Bible.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS: None.
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
CITY CLERK-CITY COUNClL-INTERNET: Council Member Bestpitch requested
that the City Clerk summarize the following information to be placed on the Internet;
i.e.: Commencing July 1, 2002, five years of information will be available to citizens
and City departments with regard to City Council action agendas, reports,
communications, ordinances and resolutions, along with the Clerk's
correspondence as a result of Council actions; information will be updated with
each Council meeting; and, as time permits, information prior to July, 1997 will be
posted on the Internet for review and research purposes.
PARKS AND RECREATION: Council Member Bestpitch referred to the annual
giving campaign for the Mill Mountain Zoo, and encouraged Council Members to
make their individual contributions. He also encouraged attendance at the Mill
Mountain Zoo's major fund raising event, "Zoo Do 2002", which will be held on
Friday, July 26, 2002, from 6:30 p.m. until 10:30 p.m.
BUDGET-TAXES-CITY COUNCIL: Council Member Bestpitch responded to
recent public remarks of the Mayor with regard to the proposed salary increase for
Members of Council. He stated that he wished the Mayor would demonstrate the
same level of concern on the revenue side of the budget as he seems to have
regarding the expenditure side, and noted while six Members of Council drive a
359
vehicle for which they purchase a City decal and pay 30 per cent of the vehicle tax
and the City of Roanoke receives 70 per cent reimbursement for the vehicle tax from
the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Mayor chooses to excuse himself from the need
to purchase a decal, or to pay the 30 per cent vehicle tax. Therefore, he questioned
the message that the Mayor may be sending to the citizens of Roanoke.
The Mayor responded that Mr. Bestpitch was referring to the dealers' license
tag on his personal vehicle. He stated that in the State of Virginia, one must obtain
an automobile dealers' license in order to sell automobiles or trailers, he is a trailer
dealer, and having paid for an automobile dealers' license, he is permitted to display
a dealers' tag on his personal vehicle. He explained that a number of other vehicles
within his company display City decals, along with a State license, all of which
substantially contribute to the City's coffers. He advised that he pays 100 per cent
in taxes and receives zero rebate from the State.
SPECIAL EVENTS: The Mayor encouraged citizens to attend July 3 and July
4 activities in the City of Roanoke, i.e.:
Old Fashioned Cruising Night on Williamson Road (July 3 at 7:00 p.m.)
Kiwanis Club River Clean Up at 9:00 a.m. (Participants will meet at the
Wasena Park Picnic Pavilion)
Farmers' Market Car Show - 10:00 a.m. - 2:00 p.m.
Old Fashioned Neighborhood Parade on Williamson Road - 2:00 p.m.
(Parade starts as Civic Mall)
Music for Americans at Victory Stadium - 7:00 p.m.
Council Member Dowe wished all citizens of the Roanoke Valley a happy
Independence Day. He stated that this is a day that Americans fought for and a day
that affords all citizens the opportunity to enjoy the freedom that comes from being
an American.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, report and
recommendation to Council.
360
COMPLAINTS-TELEPHONE COMPANIES: Mr. Hume Powers, 2641 Nottingham
Road, S. E., expressed concern with regard to telephone service. He referred to a
specific instance in which it took approximately 30 minutes to place a long distance
telephone call from Roanoke to Richmond, and after listening to over 30 recordings
from the telephone company before his call was completed. He asked that City
Council inquire as to why the telephone monopoly cannot perform in a more
satisfactory manner.
Later during the meeting, the Mayor announced that his office had received
a telephone call from Senator George Allen's Office in which it was reported that any
citizen with a concern regarding telephone issues should contact the Senator's
Office to obtain the name of the appropriate State agency.
BUDGET.COMPLAINTS.HOUSlNGIAUTHORITY-CITY EMPLOYEES-WATER
RESOURCES: Mr. Robert Gravely, 617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., expressed concern
with regard to the water shortage, the high cost of housing in the City of Roanoke,
and Iow wages for City employees.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
BUDGET-PARKS AND RECREATION: Council Member Cutler requested that
the City Manager report on the status of improvements to Booker T. Washington
Park; whereupon, the City Manager advised that approximately 12-18 months ago,
the City, in conjunction with residents of the Washington Park area, appointed a
committee to develop plans for improvements to Washington Park. She stated that
her commitment to the neighborhood was that if a plan could be developed that is
supported by the neighborhood and City staff, she would submit the plan to Council
with a recommendation that it receive the highest priority for park improvements.
She advised that the plan has been addressed for at least 12-18 months, an element
of which calls for an appropriate memorial to Booker T. Washington; the committee
recommended that the memorial be designed by a representative of the minority
community, however, there are procurement complications under the Virginia
Procurement Code, therefore, progress has been delayed on that particular aspect,
although the City continues to be willing to make funds available to assist in the
procurement of a design if certain issues are resolved. She called attention to
portions of the Booker T. Washington Park that were previously used as a landfill
site, and an engineer has been engaged to evaluate proposed plans for the
neighborhood, versus landfill conditions, and to address potential reuse of some of
the park areas before a public meeting is held. She stated that the Director of the
Department of Parks and Recreation has met with the Washington Park Committee
and made certain commitments in terms of time lines; and improvements are not
funded at this time, however, it is her commitment to bring the matter forward with
361
a recommendation that it be funded out of the first set of monies that have been
placed in the capital improvements plan for park improvements. She stated that
improvements which were included in the first phase of the parks and recreation
master plan are ongoing, although there have been some delays inasmuch as a
decision was made to design all rest room facilities for all of the parks according to
one design.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL-CITY GOVERNMENT: The City
Manager advised that she appreciated the summary remarks of Council Member
Carder at the Council's Organizational Meeting earlier in the day in which he
referenced many good and lasting decisions and improvements that have taken
place in the Roanoke community over the past two years. She stated that Roanokers
have much to be proud of and much to celebrate on July 4th.
PARKS AND RECREATION-SPECIAL EVENTS: The City Manager advised that
the 50th Anniversary of the Mill Mountain Zoo will be celebrated on July 4~ at a
ceremony to be held at 10:00 a.m., on Mill Mountain. She stated that there are a
wealth of opportunities in the City of Roanoke for citizens to participate in special
events and Roanoke is a community that offers many opportunities for its residents.
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES: In regard to earlier remarks of Mr. Robert
Gravely, the City Manager advised that in 2002, Council authorized a maximum rate
of pay for City employees at $8.00 per hour, therefore, no City employee earns less
than $8.00 per hour. She stated that pay ranges have been extended in the City's
Pay and Classification Plan in order to provide maximum opportunities.
At 4:50 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened in
Closed Session in the Council's Conference Room.
At 5:05 p.m., the meeting reconvened in the Council Chamber, with Mayor
Smith presiding, and all Members of the Council attendance, with the exception of
Council Member Wyatt.
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. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
362
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The Mayor advised that there is a
vacancy on the City Planning Commission, created by the resignation of Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Fredrick Williams.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Williams was appointed as a member
of the City Planning Commission, to fill the unexpired term of Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
resigned, ending December 31, 2004, by the following vote:
FOR MR. WILLIAMS: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU: The Mayor advised that
the one-year term of office of Sunny Shah as a City representative to the Roanoke
Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, Board of Directors, expired on June 30, 2002,
and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Sunny Shah.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Shah was reappointed as a City
representative to the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, Board of
Directors, for a term ending June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
FOR MR. SHAH: Council Members Bestpitch. Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................................ -6'
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the terms of
office of Frank W. Feather and Pamela Kestner-Chappelear as members of the
Human Services Committee expired on June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to
fill the vacancies.
363
Mr. Bestpitch place in nomination the names of Frank W. Feather and Pamela
Kestner-Chappelear.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Feather and Ms. Chappelear were
reappointed as members of the Human Services Committee, for terms ending
June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
FOR MR. FEATHER AND MS. CHAPPELEAR: Council Members Bestpitch,
Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor Smith ..................................................... -6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The Mayor advised that the
term of office of Bill Tanger as a member of the Flood Plain Committee, expired on
June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Bill Tanger.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Tangerwas reappointed as a member
of the Flood Plain Committee, fora term ending June 30, 2003, bythe following vote:
FOR MR. TANGER: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved that the City residency requirement be waived in this
instance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted.
COMMITTEES-WAR MEMORIAL: The Mayor advised that the terms of office of
Robert O. Gray, Harold H. Worrell, Sr., and Sloan H. Hoopes as members of the War
Memorial Committee, expired on June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the
vacancies.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the names of Robert O. Gray, Harold H.
Worrell, Sr., and Sloan H. Hoopes.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Gray, Worrell and Hoopes were
reappointed as members of the War Memorial Committee, for terms ending June 30,
2003, by the following vote:
364
FOR MESSRS. GRAY, WORREL, HOOPES: Council Members Bestpitch,
Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor Smith .................................................. -6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the terms
of office of E. C. Pace, III, Carl H. Kopitzke and William R. Dandridge as members of
the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee expired on June 20, 2002, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the names of Messrs. Pace, Kopitzke and
Dandridge.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Pace, Kopitzke and Dandridge
were reappointed as members of the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee, for terms
ending June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. PACE, KOPITZKE AND DANDRIDGE: Council Members
Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris and Mayor Smith .................................. 6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The Mayor advised that the
term of office of Susan W. Jennings as a member of the Roanoke Arts Commission
expired on June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Susan W. Jennings.
There being no further nominations, Susan W. Jennings was reappointed as
a member of the Roanoke Arts Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2005, by the
following vote:
FOR MS. JENNINGS: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
COMMITTEES-YOUTH: The Mayor advised that the term of office of Jamaal
Jackson as a member of the Youth Services Citizens Board expired on May 31,2002,
and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
365
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Jamaal Jackson.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Jackson was reappointed as a
member of the Youth Services Citizens Board, for a term ending May 31,2005, by the
following vote:
FOR MR. JACKSON: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
(Council Member Wyatt was absent.)
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 5:05 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
July 15, 2002
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
July 15, 2002 at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber,
fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., (arrived late) C. Nelson Harris, Linda F. Wyatt,
and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ................................................................................. 7.
ABSENT: None ....................................................................................... 0.
366
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 The Reverend D. Keith Beasley,
Pastor, Good Shepherd Lutheran Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Ralph K. Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution
memorializing the late Murray A. StOller, who passed away on July 4, 2002:
(#35970-071502) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Murray A. Stoller, a
former City Council member and Mayor of the City of Roanoke.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 257.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35970-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-PENSIONS-FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Mayor advised
that for the past 28 years, the City of Roanoke has been the recipient of an award for
excellence in financial reporting awarded by the Government Finance Officers
Association of the United States and Canada to government units and public
employee retirement systems whose comprehensive annual financial reports
achieve the highest standards in governmental accounting and financial reporting.
He presented a plaque to Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance, for the City's
367
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001, and
a certificate to Anne Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance, with congratulations and
appreciation to the entire Department of Finance. He also presented a certificate of
financial reporting achievement to Harold Harless, Retirement Plans Accountant.
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 called specific attention to one request for a Closed Session to
discuss vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees
appointed by Council.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday, May 20,
2002, and Monday, June 3, 2002, were before the body.
Mr. Harris moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed with and that
the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Dowe 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 Council
Mr. Harris 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. Cutler
and adopted by the following vote:
368
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ....... ---6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION-FIFTH
PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSlON-GREENWAY SYSTEM-PENSIONS: The following
reports of qualification were before Council:
William D. Bestpitch as a member of the Roanoke Valley
Area Metropolitan Planning Organization, for a term
ending June 30, 2005;
Sherman V. Burroughs, IV, as a member of the Fair
Housing Board, for a term ending March 31, 2003;
Cyril J. Goens for a term ending June 30, 2004, and
David C. Key for a term ending June 30, 2006, as members
of the City of Roanoke Pension Plan, Board of Trustees;
Frank J. Eastburn and Anna S. Wentworth as members of
the Roanoke Arts Commission, for terms ending
June 30, 2005; and
Barry W. Baird as a member of the Roanoke Valley
Greenway Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2005.
Mr. Harris moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council
Mayor Smith--
NAYS: None-
Members Bestpitch Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt and
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
369
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that historically, Total Action Against Poverty (TAP), has
received Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the City of
Roanoke to provide emergency home repair services for elderly and disabled
homeowners; on May 13, 2002, Council authorized funding for emergency home
repair services to elderly and disabled homeowners, pursuant to Resolution No.
35848-051302, which approved submission of the City's 2002-2003 Consolidated
Plan Action Plan to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD);
and on June 17, 2002, Council accepted 2002-2003 CDBG funds, pursuant to
Ordinance No. 35914-061702 and Resolution No. 35915-061702.
It was further advised that in order to provide funding for TAP to provide
emergency home repairs to elderly and disabled homeowners approved in the City's
Consolidated Plan, authorization by Council is needed to execute a subgrant
agreement with TAP; and funding is available in Account No. 035-G03-0320-5080 in
the amount of $100,000.00; whereupon, the City Manager recommended that she be
authorized to execute a CDBG Subgrant Agreement with Total Action Against
Poverty as above described.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35971-071502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to enter into the
2002-2003 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Subgrant Agreement with
Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) and any necessary amendments thereto to
provide emergency home repair services for elderly and disabled homeowners.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 258.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35971-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
370 -
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
BUDGET-GRANTS-JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES-YOUTH: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the Aggression Replacement
Training and Education Program is an anger control program operated by Sanctuary
Crisis Intervention staff, which is designed to increase public safety and provide
accountability to assaultive youth; the pilot for the program had a 94 per cent
success rate and continues to be a valuable addition to the continuum of services
available in the treatment of juvenile offenders; and ARTEP provides a less costly
alternative than incarceration of juvenile offenders and increases options available
to juvenile court judges.
It was further advised that this is the fourth year in a five-year funding C~,cle,
with increasing local responsibility for funding; revenue from Juvenile Justice and
Delinquence Prevention Title II has decreased to 50 per cent of the project total in
the fourth year; revenues from JJDP will decrease to 25 per cent of the project total
in the fifth year, to allow for local assumption of costs; and grant local cash match
for this year is $35,143.00 and in fiscal year 2003-2004, local match will be
$52,714.00.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution accepting
$35,143.00 in Federal Funds from the Department of Criminal Justice Services, Grant
No. 03-D3256JJ02, from Sanctuary's Aggression Replacement Training and
Education Program; that the City Manager be authorized to execute the required
Grant Acceptance, Request for Funds and any other forms required by the
Department of Criminal Justice Services, in order to accept funds; and that Council
appropriate $35,143.00 in State funds to revenue and expenditure accounts in the
Grant Fund to be established by the Director of Finance, the local match for said
grant is included in the Crisis Intervention Center budget.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35972-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 259.)
371
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35972-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35973-071502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Title II Grant from the Department of Criminal
Justice Services for the City's Crisis Intervention Center (Sanctuary) Aggression
Replacement Training and Education Program; and authorizing the execution cf the
necessary documents.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 260.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35973-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
HOUSING/AUTHORITY-GRANTS-NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: Th~ City
Manager submitted a communication advising that historically, the Northwest
Neighborhood Environmental Organization (NNEO) has received Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds from the City of Roanoke to conduct
housing and other community development projects in the Gilmer neighborhood; the
original agreement for the NNEO "McCray Court Senior Living" project was executed
on September 26, 2000, and provided $300,000.00 in CDBG funds; on May 7, 2001,
Council authorized funding for continued architectural and engineering and
construction costs associated with the "McCray Court Senior Living" project,
pursuant to Resolution No. 35319-050701, which approved submission of the City's
372
Annual Update to the Consolidated Plan to the U. S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD); and on June 18, 2001, Council accepted 2001-2002
CDBG funds, pursuant to Ordinance No. 35406-070201 and Resolution No. 35407-
061801.
It was further advised that on May 13, 2002, Council authorized funding for
continued architectural, engineering and construction costs associated with the
"McCray Court Senior Living" project, pursuant to Resolution No. 35848-051302,
which approved submission of the City's Annual Update to the Consolidated Plan
to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); and on June 17,
2002, Council accepted 2002-2003 CDBG funds, pursuant to Ordinance No. 35914-
061702 and Resolution No. 35915-061702.
The City Manager advised that a second amendment to the Agreement with
NNEO is necessary in order to provide additional funds for NNEO to continue to
develop the McCray Court Senior Living project; funding is available in Account No.
035-G03-0337-5297, in the amount of $277,750.00, which allocation will fulfill the
City's financial commitment to NNEO in support of the McCray Court Senior Living
Program; whereupon, the City Manager recommended that she be authorized to
execute Amendment No. 2 to "McCray Court Senior Living" Subgrant Agreement
with NNEO.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35974-071502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of Amendment No.
2 to a Subgrant Agreement dated September 26, 2000, between the City and the
Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization, Inc., for additional funding
to develop the McCray Court Senior Living Project.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 261.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35974-071502.
motion was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
The
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith- . ....... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
373
LEASES-TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT-WATER RESOURCES-EQUIPMENT: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that Council approved and
adopted the City of Roanoke Policy with regard to Wireless Telecommunications
Facilities located on City property dated January 21, 1997, in accordance with a
recommendation set forth in a report of the Water Resources Committee dated
February 3, 1997; the City currently has lease agreements with two wireless
communication providers: Triton PCS Property Company, L.L.C., and Virginia PCS
Alliance, L.C., also doing business as NTELOS, which allows placement of
equipment on the City's water tanks and the following property: Triton and Virginia
PCS have leases for the following three water tanks: (1) the Grandin Court (also
called Creston Avenue) Elevated Water Tank No. 1, (2) the Summit Water Tank, and
(3) the Washington Heights Water Tank, Triton also has a lease for the ~ount
Pleasant Water Tank; and the term of each initial lease expires on July 31,2002, and
each lease provides for up to two five year renewals, upon mutual agreement of the
parties.
It was further advised that the monthly rental was established in the terms of
the first five year lease period at $750.00 per month, plus the increase in the
Consumer Price Index for each subsequent year; City staff conducted a market
survey in the fall of 2001 and found the current market value of these sites to be
considerably higher; the new rate schedule average over the five year lease is
$1,445.00 per month; as required by lease agreements, the companies were
contacted in writing by the City, provided a new rate schedule, and requested to
respond by advising the City if they desired to renew their leases under the new
rental rate terms; each provider has responded and expressed a desire to renew the
lease agreements in accordance with the new rate structure, which will be effective
August 1, 2002; and each lease renewal will be for a period of five years, ;rom
August 1, 2002, through July 31, 2007, with a provision for up to one additional five
year renewal upon mutual agreement of the parties, with other terms and conditions
of the leases to continue in force as currently set forth.
The City Manager recommended that Council approve lease renewals as set
forth above that will provide for increased rental payments to the City, and authorize
the City Manager to execute such lease renewal agreements with Triton PCS
Property Company, L.L.C., and Virginia PCS Alliance, a Virginia Limited Liability
Company, also dlblal NTELOS, such agreements to be in a form approved by the City
Attorney; and that the City Manager be authorized to take such further actions or
execute such additional documents as may be necessary to implement and
administer such agreements.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
374
(#35975-071502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to enter
into Lease Renewal Agreements between the City and Triton PCS Property
Company, L. L. C. (Triton) for use of a portion of the following four City owned water
tanks and sites on which those water tanks are located: the Washington Heights
Water Tank; the Summit Water Tank; the Mount Pleasant Water Tank; and the
Grandin Court Elevated Water Tank No. 1 (also known as Creston Avenue Elevated
Water Tank No. 1); providing that such use shall be for the placement, operation, and
maintenance of personal communication system antennas and related equipment,
upon certain terms and conditions; authorizing the City Manager to take such
further actions and execute such additional documents as may be necessary to
implement and administer such Agreements; and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 262.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35975-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........... --6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#35976-071502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to enter
into Lease Renewal Agreements between the City and Virginia PCS Alliance, L. C.,
a Virginia Limited Liability Company also d/b/a NTELOS (Virginia PCS) for use of a
portion of the following three City owned water tanks and sites on which those water
tanks are located: the Washington Heights Water Tank; the Summit Water Tank; and
the Grandin Court Elevated Water Tank No. 1 (also known as Creston Avenue
Elevated Water Tank No.1); providing that such use shall be for the placement,
operation, and maintenance of personal communication system antennas and
related equipment, upon certain terms and conditions; authorizing the City Manager
to take such further actions and execute such additional documents as may be
necessary to implement and administer such Agreements; and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 264.)
375
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35976-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
SWIMMING POOLS-LEASES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that Roanoke Valley Swimming, Inc., (RVSI) was created in 1988 as a
501(c)(3) non-profit corporation to develop and promote a local competitive
swimming team; on June 10, 1991, RVSI leased 1.366 acre from the City for
construction and operation of an indoor swimming pool; the facility was
subsequently named the Gator Aquatic Center ("Facility"); a ten-year Deed of Lease
Agreement with RVSl was authorized by Council, pursuant to Ordinance No. 30534-
52891, which expired on June 10, 2001; following considerable discussion and
negotiations, the parties have agreed to amend the lease by executing a Deed of
Lease Extension, to provide for two additional five year terms, upon certain
additional terms and conditions; the proposed extension provides for continued use
of the facility by RVSl and the Roanoke City School System "Learn to Swim
Program;" and extension also allows the Gator Swim Team to use City outdoor
pools up to 290 hours per summer for practice and increases the City's use of the
facility from six to 12 hours per week, which usage is nearly twice the current public
use of the facility as permitted under the lease.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a Deed of
Lease Extension, approved as to form by the City Attorney.
Mr. Carder moved that the following ordinance be placed upon its first
reading:
(#35977) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to enter into a
Deed of Lease Extension between the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Valley
Swimming, Inc., for the lease and operation of certain City-owned property known
as the Gator Aquatic Center, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 266.)
The motion was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch.
376 -
Douglas Fonder, representing Roanoke Valley Swimming, Inc., 4725 Garst Mill
Road, S. W., advised that in 1991, there was considerable fanfare regarding a joint
venture to construct the Gater Aquatic Center, the future of aquatics, and the Gater
Aquatic Center serving as the center point of the Roanoke Valley. He stated that 11
years later the facility consists of an eight lane, 25 foot swimming pool, two
restrooms, two small multi-purpose rooms and a large parking area. He noted that
approximately 3500 students participate in a learn to swim program, Virginia
Western Community College swim classes are held at the facility, Cave Spring High
School, Patrick Henry High School and William Byrd High School use the facility for
their swim teams, other activities include a water aerobics program under the
auspices of the City of Roanoke Department of Parks and Recreation, scuba diving
and kayaking for the Roanoke Valley, and a masters adult swim program. He stated
that the facility is open from 5:00 a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday - Friday and from
9:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday, and approximately 70 families fund
the majority of the $250,000.00 per year operating expenses of the facility. He
advised that an expanded Gator Aquatic Center could better serve the needs of the
community; however, the Board of Directors was informed that in view of current
economic times, the City of Roanoke could not provide assistance with funding,
although shortly thereafter, it was reported by the news media that the City had
made a $2 million donation to the YMCA aquatics program. Therefore, he
questioned where the Gater Aquatic Center fits in with the overall scheme of
activities in the Roanoke Valley.
Ordinance No. 35977 was adopted on first reading by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ...................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
ARMORY/STADIUM-LEASES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the City of Roanoke and the Commonwealth of Virginia, Departm~,r~t of
Military Affairs (DMA), agreed on June 28, 1954, to construct an Armory to be utilized
by the Virginia National Guard; the original use agreement stated that upon
completion of the Armory, the National Guard was permitted to use the facility, rent
free, for 25 years; at the end of the original 25 years, the Armory became the property
of the City of Roanoke, and the National Guard was permitted to continue its use of
the facility at no charge as a condition of the original agreement; and the City has
continued to pay all maintenance and utility costs since completion of the Armory,
despite the City's limited use of the facility.
377
It was further advised that the agreement signed by the City and the
Department of Military Affairs (DMA) in 1954 expired over 20 years ago, without a
new agreement ever having been executed; DMA is exploring options to consfruct
a new facility, but desires to remain in the current City owned Armory until a new
facility may be constructed; a new agreement has been proposed that permits the
National Guard to continue its use of the Armory at no charge; the City will also be
permitted to use the facility simultaneously on an as needed basis; however, due to
the City's limited use, DMA will begin paying all utilities, custodial, and operational
maintenance costs; the City will continue to handle all capital maintenance for the
facility and maintenance of the grounds; the City will realize potential savings of
$50,000.00, with the proposed new agreement; and term of the proposed agreement
is five years, with either party having the option to terminate the agreement upon 12
months notice.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to offer and execute
a new Use Agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Commonwealth of
Virginia, Department of Military Affairs, as above described:
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35978-071502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to enter into
a permit agreement with the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Military
Affairs, for the use of City-owned property located at the National Guard Armory for
use by the Department of Military Affairs, upon certain terms and conditions; and
dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 267.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35978-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT-PARKS AND RECREATION-SCHOOLS:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the present Joint Use
Agreement between the City of Roanoke and the City of Roanoke School Board was
adopted by Council on November 11, 1957, pursuant to Resolution No. 13236
378
between the School Board and the Parks and Recreation Department; the purpose
of the proposed Joint Use Agreement is to assist in planning the development and
use of facilities in a manner which maximizes the benefits to the citizens of the City
of Roanoke; and the agreement provides for purchase of property for school
facilities, purchase of property adjacent to school facilities for community use or
school use, construction of new school facilities, expansion or renovation of
existing school facilities, and use and maintenance of school and park facilities in
a manner which will enhance the cultural, recreational, athletic and educational
opportunities for the citizens of Roanoke.
It was further advised that Council directed the City Manager to review and
update the policies for property owned by the City of Roanoke and managed by the
Department of Parks and Recreation that are jointly used by the School Board and
Parks and Recreation; the agreement covers more than property which is managed
by the Department of Parks and Recreation, updates Joint Use policies to fit today's
standards, and further emphasizes the City/School partnership, as well as the need
to maximize facility use and development; the proposed agreement may be
terminated by either party for any cause after providing 60 days written notice; and
the School Board has approved the proposed agreement.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the
proposed Joint Use Agreement with the Roanoke City School Board, subject to
approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#35979-071502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute a
joint use agreement between the City of Roanoke and the City of Roanoke School
Board which relates to practices and policies pertaining to the purchase of property
for school facilities, the purchase of property adjacent to school facilitie~ for
community use or school use, the construction of new school facilities, the
expansion or renovation of existing school facilities, and the use and maintenance
of school and park facilities, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 267.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35979-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
379
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
BONDS/BOND ISSUES-BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-RIVERSIDE CENTRE:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on March 19, 2001,
Council executed a Cooperation Agreement with the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority (RRHA) to develop the Riverside Centre for Research and
Technology; on March 19, Council also approved entering into a Performance
Agreement with Carilion Health System (CHS)and Carilion Biomedical Institute (CBI)
that stated the City's dedication to the project and CBI's intention of being one of the
first tenants of the new park; and on March 19, 2001, Council approved the
Redevelopment Plan for the South Jefferson Redevelopment Area.
It was further advised that in the past 15 months, the Housing Authority has
begun to purchase the required sites for development by CHS/CBI as a part of
Phase 1 of the project, as well as move businesses from the area to other sites; the
budget approved in the Cooperation Agreement with the Housing Authority is $14.0
million; last year $5.0 million was appropriated ($4.0 million from bond proceeds and
$1.0 million from Capital Projects Fund interest earnings) and the Housing Authority
has spent most of the funds in acquiring land and relocating businesses, as well as
environmental studies and remediation for the area; and at this time, expenses of the
Housing Authority for Phase 1 have been within original expectations of the City of
Roanoke and the Housing Authority.
It was explained that redeveloping the South Jefferson area into the Rive:'side
Centre for Research and Technology is a priority of the City of Roanoke, and in order
to keep the project on target, additional funds need to be made available to the
Housing Authority; and Riverside Centre is expected to provide one million square
feet of building space, attract $7 million of private investment and provide over 1000
new technical jobs.
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $8 million from
Series 2002 Bond Proceeds, Account No. 008-530-9711, to the South Jefferson
project, Account No. 008-052-9633, which will allow the Housing Authority to
continue the work outlined in the Cooperation Agreement dated March 19, 2001; and
these funds are a part of the $14 million approved by Council for the project on
March 19, 2001.
Mr. Harris offered the following budget ordinance:
380 -
(#35980-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 268.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35980-071502.
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
The motion
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ......................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
DONATIONS/CONTRIBUTIONS-ARMORY/STADIUM-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that pursuant to
authorization by Council, the City Manager has acquired several properties across
Orange Avenue from the Roanoke Civic Center for the purpose of constructing a
multipurpose Stadium/Amphitheater facility; and Mr. Calvin Powers has agreed to
donate a parcel of land to the City for the project containing approximately one-half
acre, identified as Official Tax No. 3070321.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept the above
described donation of property, subject to satisfactory environmental site
inspection.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35981-071502) AN ORDINANCE providing for the acceptance of certain
property rights needed by the City for the Stadium/Amphitheater Project, and
dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 269.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35981-071502. The motion
was seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
381
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Council requested that a letter of appreciation be forwarded to Mr. Calvin
Powers for his generous donation to the City.
BUDGET-FLEET MAINTENANCE FUND: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in prior years, all fuel purchases were handled by the
City's Materials Control Fund; however, at the close of fiscal year 2002, the Materials
Control Fund was closed due to discontinuation of the central warehouse function
and all responsibilities related to the purchase of fuel were reassigned to the Fleet
Management Fund; fuel for the City's underground tanks will be purchased by the
Fleet Management Fund and subsequently billed to departments through the same
billing process as in prior years; budget increases of an equal amount in the Fleet
Management Fund's revenue and expense estimates are needed for fiscal year 2003
to account for new responsibilities; and such recommended adjustments do not
have a material impact on the City's General Fund Budget.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a measure amending the
revenue and expenses of the Fleet Management Fund for fiscal year 2003.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35982-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Fleet Management Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 270.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35982-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None .......................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
382
CITY EMPLOYEES-JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITY-YOUTH: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the Roanoke Valley Detention
Commission was established by the Cities of Roanoke and Salem and the Counties
of Botetourt, Franklin and Roanoke; the Commission was created to renovate and
construct an addition to the existing City Detention Center to increase the rated
capacity to an 81 bed facility and to equip, maintain, and operate the Center; and
construction and renovation is now complete, allowing the Center to operate =t full
capacity.
It was further advised that in August 1998, the Director of Finance was
appointed by Council to serve as the temporaryfiscal agent for the Commission; the
City also contracted to provide accounting, payroll and retirement administrative
services for the Commission at a fee of $40,000.00 annually; the Commission has
acquired software and established accounting procedures to perform accounting
services in-house, effective July 1,2002, and anticipate assuming the responsibility
of processing payroll in-house effective January 1,2003; a proposed Administrative
Services Agreement provides for the City to transition accounting services and
provide payroll services for the Commission through December 31, 2002, for a fee
of $22,500.00; and the City of Roanoke will continue to provide retirement
administrative services for the Commission, to be determined by the annual Cost
Allocation Plan for years beginning on and after July 1, 2003.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an
agreement to provide for accounting, payroll and pension services for the Roanoke
Valley Detention Commission.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#35983-071502) A RESOLUTION authorizing execution of an Administrative
Services Agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley Detention
Commission, relating to the provision by the City of accounting, payroll and
retirement administrative services for the Commission.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 65, page 271.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35983-071502.
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
The
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............. 6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
383
AIRPORT-BUDGET-REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS ACT: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that prompted by a desire to enhance air
service to and from the Roanoke Regional Airport, in January, 2001, the City applied
for a $50,000.00 grant under the Regional Competitiveness Program, a State-funded
program administered by the Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance; funds were
to serve as the seed from which to grow a subsidy pool of over $800,000.00 to affract
a carrier to increase Iow-cost dailyflights between Roanoke and Dulles International
Airports and in March, 2001, the City received notice that its proposal was being
allocated $45,000.00; since that time, the City has reviewed its intended project
concept and determined that a preliminary stage was needed to help focus
development efforts; a request was made to the Regional Alliance in January, 2002,
to allow the award to be used for consultant services, which would help create the
public-private partnerships and action plans required to make progress; and final
agreement on terms of the revised use of funds was reached in May, 2002.
It was further advised that the terms of the revised agreement with the
Regional Alliance provide for a grant of $25,000.00 for consulting services, subject
to the City providing an equal amount of matching funds; to expedite air service
development activities, the City has engaged the services of Barry E. DuVal,
President and CEO of Kaufman & Canoles Consulting, LLC, Newport News, Virginia;
the one-year consulting services agreement began April 1, 2002, and provides a
monthly retainer of $4,100.00, for a total compensation of $49,200.00, plus a
maximum of $12,000.00 for normal business expense reimbursements; the
maximum total commitment of $61,200.00 for consulting services will be supported
by the $25,000.00 grant of Regional Competitiveness Program funds and a
commitment of $12,500.00 from Roanoke County, with the balance of $23,700.00 to
be provided from the City Manager's Contingency; and City and County
contributions will also fully satisfy the match requirement to receive Regional
Competitiveness Funds.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept $25,000.00 in Regional
Competitiveness Program funds and the commitment of $12,500.00 from Roanoke
County, and appropriate said funds to an account to be established by the Director
of Finance; and that Council approve transfer of $23,700.00 from the Contingency
to the newly-established account.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35984-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 272.)
384
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35984-071502.
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
The motion
AYES: Council
and Mayor Smith
NAYS: None
Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe,
Harris, Wyatt,
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
BUDGET: The Director of Finance submitted a written report advising that at
the close of fiscal year 2002, budgeted funds were obligated for outstanding
encumbrances; purchase orders or contracts were issued for goods and services
as of the close of fiscal year 2002, but delivery of the goods or performance of the
services had not been completed; and reappropriation of the funds carries forward
the unspent budgets that were originally appropriated and are contractually
obligated for the goods and services, as follows:
General Fund
Water Fund Open Encumbrances
Water Pollution Control Fund Open Encumbrances
Civic Facilities Fund Open Encumbrances
Parking Fund Open Encumbrances
Department of Technology Fund Open Encumbrances
Fleet Management Fund
School Fund Open Encumbrances
School Food Services Fund Open Encumbrances
$ 2,433,798.00
339,381.00
385,331.00
202,085.00
3,250.00
83,903.00
512,179.00
1,502,419.00
6,330.00
The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt budget ordinances
to reappropriate the above referenced funds into the current year budgets, in order
that encumbrances may be properly liquidated.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35985-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 274.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35985-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
385
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35986-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Water Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 276.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35986-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35987-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Water Pollution Control Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 277.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35987-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
386
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35988-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Civic Facilities Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 278.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35988-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35989-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Parking Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 279.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35989-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6'
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35990-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Department of Technology Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with
the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 280.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35990-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
387
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35991-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Fleet Management Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 280.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35991-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35992-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 School Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 281.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35992-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
388
Mr. BestpJtch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35993-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 School Food Service Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 282.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35993-071502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
appropriation of funds to the following school accounts, was before Council.
$54,081.00 for the Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) Grant to
provide for replication of successful intervention programs from other
school divisions at Forest Park Elementary School; Forest Park will
implement a basic skills program that includes staff development and
remedial skills instruction, which program will be one 100 per cent
reimbursed by Federal funds.
$54,081.00 for the Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) Grant to
provide for replication of successful intervention programs from other
school divisions at Highland Park Elementary School; Highland Park
will implement a basic skills program that includes international
baccalaureate math, and reading skills instruction, which continuing
program is 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds.
$54,081.00 for the Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) Grant to
provide for replication of successful intervention programs from other
school divisions at Round Hill Montessori Magnet Primary School;
Round Hill will implement a basic skills program that includes staff
development and remedial skills instruction, which continuing program
is 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds.
389
$54,081.00 for the Comprehensive School Reform (CSR) Grant to
provide for replication of successful intervention programs from other
school divisions at Preston Park Elementary School; Preston Park will
implement a basic skills program that includes staff development and
remedial skills instruction, which continuing program is 100 per cent
reimbursed by Federal funds.
$37,565.00 for the 2003 Title III Grant to provide services to students
with limited English proficiency and to immigrant children, which new
program is 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds.
The Director of Finance submitted a written report recommending that
Council concur in the request of the School Board.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#35994-071502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 School Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 283.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35994-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND
RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
CONSIDERATION
OF ORDINANCES AND
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
390
BUDGET-LEGISLATION-SCHOOLS: Council Member Wyatt distributed
information with regard to the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, the
President's "Leave No Child Behind" bill, which involves financial and other
implications for localities.
WATER RESOURCES: Council Member Bestpitch commended the Mayor for
his statement as reported in a recent article in The Roanoke Times regarding the
lack of involvement by politicians at this point in the development of an agreement
between Roanoke City and Roanoke County for a regional water authority. He
concurred in the Mayor's remarks that this is the time to trust the City Manager and
her staff and the County Administrator and his staff to work out the necessary
details and advised that in the near future, Council Members will have an opportunity
to be involved in the process.
At this point, Council Member Dowe entered the meeting.
WATER RESOURCES: Council Member Cutler referred to conversations with
elected officials from Roanoke County and Bedford County, who are supportive of
a regional approach to a water authority, and advised that he looks forward to
participating in the process at the appropriate time.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Council Member Carder requested that the City
Manager present a measure for consideration by Council in support of efforts of the
Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance: Regional Economic Strategy, with regard
to a regional economic development policy.
BUDGET.TAXES-FIRST CITIES COALITION: Council Member Carder
addressed issues facing Virginia localities and Virginia's First Cities Coalition,
specifically tax restructuring, personal property, Business, Professional and
Occupational License taxes, replacement revenues, and the importance of educating
citizens at the local level on State funding implications.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-LEGISLATION: Council Member Wyatt
referred to HB 599 revenue that the State has given and taken away on several
occasions, and advised that simply because the Commonwealth of Virginia states
that it will replace revenue does not provide a guaranteed revenue stream.
'BUDGET-SCHOOLS: Council Member Cutler advised that it was noted at the
newly Elected Officials' Conference sponsored by the Virginia Municipal League in
Charlottesville, Virginia, on July 10-12, 2002, that the States of Mississippi and
Alabama spend more per capita on education than does the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
391
BUDGET-TAXES: Council Member Bestpitch inquired as to what percentage
increase in the overall State income tax would be required to make up the difference
if the General Assembly eliminates the personal property and the Business,
Professional and Occupational License taxes.
TAXES-LEGISLATION-FIRST CITIES COALITION: Vice-Mayor Harris inquired
about the status of litigation previously discussed by Virginia's First Cities Coalition;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that the option is still in the process of
evaluation. Vice-Mayor Harris advised that Council should proactively involve the
City's legislative delegation to the General Assembly so that legislators will be aware
of the amount of funds that personal property and Business, Professional and
Occupational License taxes generate for the City of Roanoke. He suggested that the
matter be addressed by the City's Legislative Committee.
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: Vice-Mayor Harris referred to the resignation of
William E. Skeen as a Trustee of the Roanoke City School Board, effective July 24,
2002, and called attention to the following schedule proposed by the City Clerk to fill
the vacancy:
July 18
August 1
August 19
September 3
Advertise for applications
Deadline for receipt of applications
Public hearing
Appointment by Council to fill the
unexpired term
STATE OF THE CITY REPORT: The Mayor advised that on July 25, 2002, at
7:30 a.m., he will present the annual State of the City Address at the Wyndham
Roanoke Airport Hotel, sponsored by the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce,
and encouraged those persons interested in attending to call the Chamber of
Commerce or the City Clerk's Office.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard, and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessa~, and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
No citizens requested to be heard under this agenda item.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
392
WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager expressed appreciation for the
support of the Mayor and Members of Council by permitting the Administrations of
Roanoke City and Roanoke County to address the regional water authority issue,
and advised that both the City Manager and the County Administrator believe that
there will be a favorable outcome for the citizens of the Roanoke Valley.
AIRPORT-BUDGET-REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS ACT: The City Manager
referred to Regional Competitiveness Act funds which were appropriated earlier
during the meeting and advised that once again, the City of Roanoke and Roanoke
County have participated in a joint funding relationship that will provide for
engagement of a consultant to help improve air service for the Roanoke Valley
region.
CITY EMPLOYEES-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The City Manager introduced the
Director of Planning, Building and Development, R. Brian Townsend, who officially
assumed his duties on Monday, July 15, 2002.
DECEASED PERSONS: The City Manager advised of the death of
S. Elaina Loritts, who was a champion for neighborhoods and served on the City's
Fair Housing Board and the Roanoke Neighborhood Partnership Steering
Committee, on Sunday, July 14, 2002.
At 3:20 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for one closed session.
At 3:50 p.m., the meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all
Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Smith presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Mr. Dowe
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. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
At 3:55 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened at
5:00 p.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for the purpose of
holding a joint meeting of Council and the Architectural Review Board.
393
COUNCIL-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: The Council meeting
reconvened at 5:00 p.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room,
Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, for a joint meeting of Council and the Architectural Review Board, with
Mayor Ralph K. Smith and Chairman Robert N. Richert presiding.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: William D. Bestpitch, M. Rupert Cutler,
Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith---6.
ABSENT: Council Member William H. Carder ........................................... 1.
ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Kevin A. Deck,
Robert B. Manetta, and Chairman Robert N. Richert ......................................... 3.
- ABSENT: Alison S. Blanton, Donald C. Harwood, Matthew Preston and James
Schlueter ..................................................................................................... -4.
OTHERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth,
City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk; Robert B.
Townsend, Director of Planning, Building and Development; Martha P. Franklin,
Administrative Assistant, Planning Building and Development; Steven J. Talevi,
Assistant City Attorney, II; and Rolanda Johnson, Assistant City Manager for
Community Development
ZONING/HISTORIC DISTRICTS IN THE COTTON MILL/JEFFERSON CENTER AREA
AND AREA NORTH OF THE HOTEL ROANOKE:
Chairman Richert advised that the City Planning Commission will hear a
request for rezoning of property known as the Cotton Mill in the vicinity of Marshall
Avenue and Luck Avenue, S. W., which property is located in the H-2, His.:oric
District. He stated that the block that the Cotton Mill faces extends between 5th and
6th Streets, Marshall and Luck Avenues, and is surrounded on three sides by the
historic district, Jefferson Center on the north, Calvary Baptist Church and the
Cotton Mill on the west, and Marshall Avenue on the south, and in view of the
Downtown Roanoke Plan and the City's Comprehensive Plan, it would appear that
the City Planning Commission should address the entire block, as opposed to
piecemeal parcels of land. He noted that if planning is done in terms of downtown
and the City's desire to move development of downtown into "uptown" where the
Jefferson Center and the Cotton Mill are located, more property than just the Cotton
Mill should be considered in terms of planning, since whatever is constructed in that
part of the City has a direct impact on the H-2, Historic District.
394
Mr. Richert called attention to current restoration of the "Moses Building" at
the corner of Gilmer Avenue and North Jefferson Street, which is located in the
historic district, however, that part of the historic district is not listed on the State
or National Register of Historic Landmarks; therefore, property owners are not
eligible for tax credits and certain other privileges that make historic preservation
economically viable. He added that it is not clear as to which parts of the historic
district are included on the State and National Register of Historic Places.
Chairman Richert referenced the new YMCA building and whether it
compliments The Jefferson Center; whereupon, the City Manager advised that
concept designs are more modern and have been used for fund raising purposes,
but the design is not so far along in the process that any portion cannot be changed.
She stated that those persons who are engaged in YMCA project design should
understand the sensitivities of the area.
The City Manager suggested that Mr. Richert discuss his concerns regarding
the Cotton Mill and the Moses building with the City's zoning ordinance consultant.
With regard to construction of any new and large structure, Mr. Richert
expressed the fear that the City could end up with a block long, brick wall building;
the City's Comprehensive Plan refers to a pedestrian friendly environment and
cautioned that new buildings should not be designed from the inside out in such a
way as to create a pedestrian unfriendly environment. In the construction of
modern buildings within the historic district, he stated that planners should be
careful that they do not place themselves in the position of trying to re-create
buildings that were not originally there, but instead address the matter in terms of
scale and those kinds of things that make new buildings blend in and compliment
the historic district.
Mr. Bestpitch referred to the two concerns above referenced by Mr. Richert;
i.e.: inclusion of the two blocks in the area of the Cotton Mill property and any other
area where there may be potential development, which are on the periphery of the
historic district, into the historic district; and whether all properties in the historic
district that should be on the historic register are actually included. He suggested
that the Architectural Review Board and City staff review the matters and submit
recommendations to Council.
There was discussion with regard to the IMAX Threatre in which the following
observations were made:
One of the things that makes the IMAX Theatre exciting is the fact that
it will be unlike any other structure in the City. There seems to be a
goal to make sure that buildings work in cohesion with the character
of the neighborhood, and caution should be exercised to ensure that
local buildings do not all look the same.
395
It is favorable to have infusion of ideas from other parts of the state or
country. Will planners have the opportunity to "step out of the box",
because the City has the ability and the experience to plan innovative
projects?
The IMAX Art Museum complex should not be built as a background
building. Much of the fabric of the City consists of background
buildings which are not intended to catch the eye, but contribute to the
overall sense of the community. Currently, there is a need for
opportunities to construct buildings that are eye catching, and there is
an openness on the part of the Architectural Review Board for that kind
of expression.
Infill housing is a challenge in the historic district.
REGULATION OF WORK IN CITY RIGHTS-OF-WAY.
Mr. Richert advised that there has been a determination by the City Attorney's
Office that the rights-of-way within the historic districts are within the purview of the
Architectural Review Board, which creates certain opportunities as well as certain
problems for the Board. He stated that when discussing rights-of-way, which
include not only City utilities and street paving, etc., but Cox Cable, Verizon,
American Electric Power, Roanoke Gas Company, or any other party that uses the
public rights-of-way to conduct business within the City, appropriate guidelines are
needed. He added that the matter is not so much an issue in the H-1 District where
the City has already taken a position that all infrastructure will be undergroun(~, but
much more of an issue in the H-2 District since most of the utilities are above
ground, creating a visual clutter in certain areas. He stated that the Architectural
Review Board will work with City staff to develop specific guidelines, and advised
that residential areas in the historic districts suffer from ambivalence relative to
power lines, telephone lines, and the location of satellite dishes.
At this point, 6:00 p.m., Council Member Harris left the meeting.
The City Manager advised that City staff is reviewing the matter to determine
whether changes should be recommended to Council because management of what
happens in the City rights-of-way has not routinely fallen under the jurisdiction of the
Architectural Review Board, and the City has not experienced any problems to date.
She stated that the City cannot impede the progress of certain activities and while
there is a strong desire on the part of many people in the Roanoke community to
place public utilities in alleys, there have been extensive discussions with the [,tility
396
companies that have not expressed an interest in doing so. She explained that
undergrounding utilities, is expensive; therefore, rather than mandate that these
activities to be reviewed by the Architectural Review Board, another option is for
Council to consider removing the language, however, no recommendation has been
made to date by staff. She called attention to the need for an evaluation of the
matter because the City has been installing street lights, etc., in the historic district
for many years without any problem.
Mr. Manetta asked that representatives of the Architectural Review Board be
included in the discussions.
There was discussion in regard to illumination of lights and dusk to dawn
lights, in which it was pointed out that there are citizen concerns in regard to the
types of light fixtures and the way light, not only private light but public light,
trespasses on the rights of citizens.
Mr. Deck spoke in support of flexibility that would allow the Architectural
Review Board to continue to have purview over certain items that make up the street
scape, i.e.: bicycle racks, lamp posts, benches, etc., which are part of the pedestrian
experience in downtown, and asked that he be included in discussions at the
appropriate time.
Ms. Wyatt referred to the amount of light at establishments like Sheetz and Go-
Marts and inquired if the City should review the intensity of light that is allowed to
filter into adjacent neighborhoods. Concern was also expressed regarding the
height of the roof covers on such establishments.
Mr. Manetta pointed out that the matter is more of a City Planning Commission
issue, but since the City is in the process of re-writing the zoning ordinance and
certain items are being fast tracked, it would be appropriate to include those areas
as well.
It was the consensus of Council that the City Planning Commission and staff
would be requested to fast track the above referenced issues in zoning ordinance
revisions.
The City Manager advised that the City Planning Commission has also ~een
requested to fast track zoning ordinance revisions regarding regulation of cellular
telephones.
Mr. Bestpitch requested that other cities be surveyed with regard to
undergrounding and/or placing more, if not all utility lines, in alleys, where alleys are
available.
397
Mr. Cutler inquired about the status of billboards and outdoor advertising;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City currently has regulations in
effect; however, a major element of the zoning ordinance review and update should
include the City's sign ordinance. She explained that a sign ordinance is generally
one of the most difficult activities that a City Planning Commission or a City Council
will undertake, therefore, Council can expect a considerable amount of discussion.
APPLICATION FEES:
Mr. Richert advised that legal counsel for the Architectural Review Board
previously addressed the matter of application fees; however, the Board
unanimously agreed not to advocate the matter at that time. He stated that the
Board has seen an increase in the number of requests by persons who have already
started or completed a project, therefore, it would be reasonable to impose a fee for
applications in a situation where work has been started or completed without
approval of the Architectural Review Board. He requested that Council take the
suggestion under consideration.
DEVELOPING ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD GUIDELINES FOR NEW
MATERIALS:
Mr. Richert stated that the Architectural Review Board and its staff wishes to
accommodate the use of modern construction materials in the historic districts,
many of which have already been approved by the City for restoration/rehabilitation
purposes. He called attention to the importance of investing funds to engage the
services of persons who have knowledge regarding appropriate modern
construction materials. He stated that the Architectural Review Board considers its
current guidelines to be a work in progress and would like to ensure that it
continues to develop new approaches.
Ms. Wyatt expressed concern for those persons who are frustrated because
they wish to use a certain type of construction material, but Architectural Review
Board guidelines are stringently applied, therefore, houses are left to deteriorate
because property owners cannot afford repairs. She stated that some guidelines are
not engraved in stone and should be used strictly as a guide.
Mr. Manetta advised that the Architectural Review Board advocates
construction materials that blend in with the structure, provide better insulation,
value, longer life, and paint holding, etc. He stated that the issues relate to housing
protection and economic development, and the purpose of the Architectural Review
Board is to protect the neighborhood while maintaining housing stock.
398
OTHER BUSINESS:
Mr. Richert advised that the Architectural Review Board would like to have
additional jurisdiction with regard to landscaping, particularly when addressing
infill housing construction. He expressed concern about the tree canopy, especially
in the historic district, and noted that it would be advantageous to the City if the
Board had some purview over trees so as to avoid the needless destruction of trees
when some other action might be more appropriate.
Mr. Bestpitch advised that the next meeting of the Urban Forestry Task Force
is scheduled for Wednesday, July 17, 2002 at 7:45 a.m., in the Parks and Recreation
Conference Room on Reserve Avenue, S. W., and invited Mr. Richert to attend the
meeting and present information, specifically as it relates to the historic district.
There being no further business, at 6:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the City
Council meeting in recess to be reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council
Chamber.
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday July 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 William D. Bestpitch, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, Linda F. Wyatt, and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ................. 6.
ABSENT: Council MemberWilliam H. Carder ............................................ 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 Vice-Mayor C. Nelson
Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith
399
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523, adopted by
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, July 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Robert Evan, LLC, that a
portion of Hite Street, S. W., extending from the southerly end of the existing cul-de-
sac, in a southerly direction for approximately 371.06 feet, more or less, to the
northerly line of the right-of-way of U. S. Route 220, be permanently vacated,
discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, June 28, 2002, and Friday, July 5, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that Hite Street has an
existing cul-de-sac that has been dedicated to the City; the petitioner seeks vacation
of the remaining portion of Hite Street between the cul-de-sac and the southernmost
limit of the street where it abuts U. S. Route 220; Council is authorized to sell the
vacated portion of right-of-way, if it so chooses, pursuant to Section 15.2-2008, Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended, which authorizes a City to require an abutting
property owner to purchase the vacant right-of-way as a condition of vacation; under
such an arrangement, the price may be no greater than the fair market value of the
property, or its contributory value to the abutting property, whichever is greater, or
the amount agreed to by the parties; and the Department of Real Estate Valuation
quoted the valuation range for this 14,601 square foot portion of Hite Street at
$7,600.00 - $8,800.00, based on a rate of $1.30 - $1.50 per square foot, less 60 per
cent for utility easements.
The Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the requested
closure, contingent upon the following items: the portion of right-of-way in question
has no utilitarian value to the City; and the City Planning Commission does not
recommend sale of the portion of right-of-way.
The applicant shall submit a subdivision plat to the Agent for the
Planning Commission, receive all required approvals thereof, 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 right-of-way, including the right of ingress and
egress.
4OO
Upon meeting all other conditions to the granting of the application, the
applicant shall deliver a certified copy of the enabling ordinance for
recordation to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Roanoke, Virginia,
indexing the same 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 the enabling ordinance with the
Clerk of the 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 the enabling ordinance, said ordinance
shall be null and void with no further action by City Council being
necessary.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#35995-071502) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more
particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 286.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 34995-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
Council with regard to the matter.
The City Manager stated that prior to the last Council meeting, she provided
Council with correspondence advising that contrary to the recommendation of the
City Planning Commission, the City Manager, Director of Community Planning, and
administrative staff recommend that the right-of-way not be closed unless it is
closed through actual purchase of the property by the petitioner. She explained that
the Director of Real Estate Valuation has provided a range value for the property in
question; whereupon, she recommended the Iow end of the range which is
$7,600.00. She stated that it is her informal understanding that the petitioner may
be willing to purchase the property if such action represents the only recourse to
closure.
401
Edward A. Naif, Attorney, representing the petitioner, advised that his client
is willing to purchase the property, if necessary, in order to close the street. He
explained that the property has no utilitarian value as was stated in the report of the
City Planning Commission and is not needed for any public purpose; however, the
City Manager disagrees. Therefore, he noted that the City Planning Commission,
which is the body that recommends planning and zoning actions, etc., is on one side
of the issue and the City Manager is on the other side. He addressed issues of price,
property, policy and precedent. In regard to price, he stated that the City paid
nothing for the street, because it was a dedicated street; the Director of Real Estate
Valuation placed a value of 60 per cent on the easement; in most commercial
appraisals, the value of an assessment taken is in the range of 80 - 90 per cent of the
value of the property, which would, in turn, further reduce the value. In reference to
property, he stated that when a portion of a street is proposed to be closed, under
State statute, title to one-half of the property goes to each adjoining property owner.
He urged that the street be closed without the payment of any sum of money, but if
payment is required, he asked if his client will receive title to the full street, or will
the other adjoining property owner be required to pay one-half in exchange for one-
half of the title. In regard to policy, he noted that there is no established policy for
payment of fees for closing and vacation streets; however, he referred to a State
statute that allows a local government to impose a charge upon vacation, closure
or abandonment of a street, but noted that the City of Roanoke has established no
such policy or guidelines. With reference to precedent, he stated that a precedent
is being established; whereupon, he called attention to a petition recently approved
by Council for vacation of an alley at no charge to the petitioner and that petitioner
currently has an entire block of road frontage that includes industrial zoning which
does have land value. He requested that Council approve the vacation of the street
and that his client not be charged; however, if his client is to be charged, he
encouraged the City to use the 80 per cent value reduction for the ease,,lent
purchase which is the method that commercial appraisers value the taking of an
easement.
The City Manager advised that contrary to Mr. Natt's statement, Council
previously adopted a policy relative to the disposition of such properties, at which
time Council made a decision not to establish guidelines, but to deal with each
request on a case specific basis. She advised that she would provide Mr. Natt with
a copy of the enabling measure.
In regard to the concern raised by Mr. Natt regarding whether the easement
would be divided half and half between the two adjacent property owners, the City
Attorney advised that in this instance the recommendation is to follow State statute
allowing sale of the right-of-way, which provides that all of the right-of-way being
sold would go to the applicant who pays for same.
402 -
There was discussion in regard to the suggestion of Mr. Natt to use the 80 per
cent valuation reduction, which would reduce the value of the easement to
approximately $5,000.00, and whether the City would be willing to agree to a
compromise somewhere between the $5,000.00 and the $7,600.00 recommended by
the City Manager.
The Mayor spoke in support of amending the ordinance to require $6,500.00
for the easement.
Mr. Harris moved that Ordinance No. 35995-071502 be amended to provide for
$6,500.00 for purchase of the vacated right-of-way. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Cutler and adopted.
No other persons wishing to be heard, Ordinance No. 35995-071502, as above
amended, was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and Mayor
Smith ......................................................................................................... 6.
NAYS: None
(Council Member Carder was absent.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
CITY PROPERTY-INDUSTRIES-LEASES: Council at its regular meeting on
Monday, July 1,2002, having continued a public hearing with regard to the lease and
renovation of certain City-owned buildings located at 117 and 119 Norfolk Avenue,
S. W., subject to certain terms and conditions, the matter was again before the body.
The Mayor advised that the City Manager has requested that the public hearing
be continued indefinitely; whereupon, without objection by Council, it was so
ordered.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523, adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, July 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request from Structures Design/Build,
LLC, represented by Steven S. Strauss, that a 0.717 acre portion, more or less, of
excess right-of-way of Franklin Road that adjoins Official Tax No. 1300101, be
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before the body.
403
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, June 28, 2002 and Friday, July 5, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the petitioner's
property that adjoins the subject portion of right-of-way is wooded and has never
been developed; and a portion of the subject right-of-way contains a creek; staffhas
concerns about the effect of the vacation on future greenway development; the
Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, approved and adopted by Council on
December 6, 1999, designates this section of Franklin Road for a future greenway
corridor along the roadway; the greenway plan also notes the following as a strategy
for acquiring land to develop the greenway system: "Before legal interest is
abandoned in any property, evaluate the property's potential for use in the
development of greenways. This would include the vacation of easements, formal
abandonment of rights-of way and easements and the sale of surplus property.";
and the Roanoke Valley Bikeway Plan also designates this section of Franklin Road
as an on road facility and recommends a wide outside lane to accommodate
bicycles.
It was explained that Council is authorized to sell the vacated portion of the
right-of-way, if it so chooses; Section 15.2-2008 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, authorizes a City to require an abutting property owner to purchase the
vacated right-of-way as a condition of vacation; under such an arrangement, the
price may be no greater than the property's fair market value, or its contributory
value to the abutting property, whichever is greater, or the amount agreed to by the
parties; and the Department of Real Estate Valuation has quoted the valuation range
for this 31,233 square foot portion of Franklin Road as $2,700.00-$3,900.00, based
on a rate of $0.35-$0.50 per square foot, less 75 per cent for creek/drainage
easements.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council deny the request
of the petitioner.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
"AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and closing certain
public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described
hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title."
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of the ordinance. The motion as seconded by
Mr. Harris.
404
Steven S. Strauss, Manager, Structures Design/Build, L.L.C., called attention
to plans to develop the property for office use. He stated that land in the City of
Roanoke is in short supply, sites have been bypassed or re-examined, and there is
a shortage of new, quality small office space in this section of the City. He explained
that the property is currently zoned C-1, which means that the site is developable as
it currently exists; however, the reason for the requested vacation is to allow the
land to be developed in the most aesthetically pleasing manner, which can be
accomplished by reducing the degree of cuts to the current embankment, thus
retaining a large buffer of existing trees, better landscaping, and a greater degree
of flexibility in the placement of the buildings. He explained that the issue before
council is not one of rezoning the property, or what the site should be used for, but
it is an issue of whether the right-of-way should be vacated so that 'the site can be
developed in the most sensitive manner possible, given current site conditions. He
stated that without vacation of the right-of-way, a developer will be forced to remove
a greater number of trees and make more severe cuts in the rear hill side; and
regardless of whether the right-of-way is vacated, the storm water channel that
extends beside Franklin Road will be piked when the site is developed with
sidewalks and curbing.
· Mr. Strauss called attention to benefits to the City if the property is developed;
i.e.: from a safety point of view, there is a concern as the site currently exists with
regard to a large drainage ditch that extends along the heavily traveled Franklin
Road, and, in some areas, the edge of the pavement is less than 35 feet from the
open ditch, and numerous areas have substandard shoulders and vehicles cannot
pull to the side of the road in these locations. He stated that the proposed
development would improve this section of Franklin Road with an enclosed storm
drainage system that would be properly maintained, relieving the City of the burden
of maintenance, with needed improvements at no cost to the City. He added that
curb, gutter and sidewalk would be installed in this area of Franklin Road in
conjunction with development of the property at no cost to the City, and there would
be a significant increase in the City's tax base and employment opportunities. He
added that the site currently generates only $660.00 in tax revenue to the City,
however, if the property were developed with approximately 17,000 square feet of
professional office space, combined tax income for the City would be in excess of
$44,000.00 per year, with $20,000.00 coming from real estate taxes, up to $15,0P0.00
in Business, Professional and Occupational License taxes and up to $9,000.00 in
personal property taxes being generated in the first year of full build out. He advised
that the Director of Real Estate Valuation has assessed the property between
$2,700.00 and $3,900.00, and contributory value of the property would be $15,100.00;
whereupon, he expressed a willingness to pay $7,800.00 for vacation of the right-of-
way.
4O5
Mr. Strauss called attention to concerns in regard to greenway issues and
while the greenway conceptual plan which links Route 419 and Franklin Road is to
be considered when development of sites in the area occurs, the greenway concept
for this area is currently in conceptual form with no designated area having been
determined. He called attention to questions with regard to on which side of
Franklin Road would the greenway run, and advised that if this side of Franklin Road
were selected, the northern end of the property is blocked by the West Motor Sales
building which is constructed on the property line, with only the sidewalk separating
the roadway from the building. He explained that in the proposed development of the
property, the sidewalk would tie in with the sidewalk of West Motor Sales so that the
greenway would,follow the new and existing sidewalk past West Motor Sales toward
other office buildings on Franklin Road.
In cOnclusion, Mr. Strauss advised that the site is currently zoned C-1 and can
be developed, but with vacation of the right-of-way, the site can be developed in a
more sensitive manner so as to provide a needed tax boost to the City in an
aesthetically pleasing manner. He requested that Council approve vacation of the
right-of-way as recommended by City Planning staff.
· ~ Mr. David Bromm, 3267 White Oak Road, S. W., advised that some type of
sidewalk would be beneficial to the area. He stated that future development in the
City of Roanoke should take into consideration ridge line protection and erosion of
land.
Mr. Cutler concurred in the remarks of the previous speaker in that the City of
Roanoke has not done a good job of protecting its ridge lines, and some erosion
problems have been caused that are out of control because of the kind of excavation
that has taken place on hill sides. With regard to the proposal under consideration,
he advised that he intends to vote against the request because he does not believe
that this extremely steep slope can be graded without experiencing erosion
problems. On behalf of the creek, the trees and minimizing erosion, he stated that
he opposes the request of the petitioner.
Upon question as to where the storm water channel will be piked, the City
Manager advised that the subject property, absent the right-of-way closure, is
properly zoned for office development, and the petitioner intends to develop the
property whether or not the right-of-way is closed, which will have an impact on the
cut of the hillside, based upon how much land is available. If development occurs,
she stated that something will have to be done to the creek and she would ask City
staff to review whether the creek could be bridged instead of piked.
406
In response to Mr. Bromm's concern, the City Manager advised that curb,
gutter and sidewalk would be included in the project, regardless of how the property
is developed, pursuant to guidelines established by the City on January 1, 2002.
In view of information from the Director of Real Estate Valuation in regard to
potential value of the property and issues relating to the cut of the hillside, there was
discussion relative to referring the matter back to the City Planning Commission for
further report to Council.
The City Manager suggested that the matter be referred to the City
Administration if the issues pertain to price and obtainment of an agreement, with
a report to Council at its regular meeting on Monday, August 5, 2002.
Mr. Dowe suggested that regardless of whether the development is pursued
under C-1 or C-2 zoning, the Roanoke Valley Greenway Commission should be
included"in discussions and the developer should encourage input '/rom
neighborhood organizations within the area that is to be directly affected by the
proposed development.
Mr. Cutler encouraged the City Manager to engineer the project so that flood
problems are not exacerbated in the future.
No other persons wishing to be heard, Mr. Harris offered a substitute motion
that the matter be referred to the City Manager to address issues with regard to cost
of the right-of-way and incorporation of acceptable language in official documents
to provide for minimization of the cut of the land. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Bestpitch and adopted.
Following further discussion and in view of the fact that Mr. Strauss would be
unavailable to attend the August 5 City Council meeting, it was the consensus of
Council that the public hearing would be continued until the regular meeth~,g of
Council on Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter
may be heard in the City Council Chamber.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523, adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, July 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Kitina A. Gimbert and Sue
E. Harrison that an unopened portion of Whitman Street, S. E., from the southerly
boundary of Arbutus Avenue to the boundary of property acquired for the Roanoke
River Flood Reduction Project, lying between parcels identified by Official Tax Nos.
4151207 and 4160301, be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter
was before the body.
407
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, June 28, 2002 and Friday, July 5, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that Engineering staff
determined that the subject portion of right-of-way should be vacated as part of land
acquisition negotiations for the City's flood reduction project, and the petitioners
were approached by City Engineering staffwho prepared the petition on their behalf;
and the subject portion of right-of-way is unimproved and dead-ends on the bank of
the Roanoke River.
It was further advised that Council is authorized to sell this vacated portion
of alley, if it so chooses; Section 15.2-2008 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, authorizes a City to require an abutting property owner to purchase the
vacated right-of-way as a condition of the vacation; under such an arrangement, the
price may be no greater than the fair market value of the property, or its contrib:.'tory
valu~ to the abutting property, whichever is greater, or the amount agreed to by the
parties; and the Department of Real Estate Valuation quoted the valuation range for
this 3,330 square foot portion of alley at $1,700.00 - $2,300.00, based on a rate of
$.50 - $.70 per square foot.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
request of the petitioner and close, discontinue and vacate this portion of Whitman
Street, S. E., subject to the following conditions, and that the petitioners not be
charged for the portion of right-of-way, inasmuch as the City initiated the petition on
their behalf.
The applicant shall submit a subdivision plat to the Agent for the
Planning Commission, receive all required approvals thereof, 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 installation
and maintenance of any and all existing utilities that may be located
within the right-of-way, including the right of ingress and egress.
Upon meeting all other conditions to the granting of the application, the
applicant shall deliver a certified copy of the enabling 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.
408
Upon recording a certified copy of the enabling ordinance with the
Clerk of the 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 the enabling ordinance, then said
ordinance shall be null and void with no further action by City Council
being necessary.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35996-071502) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more
particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 289.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35996-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
Council with regard to the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35996-071502
was adopted by following vote.
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt, and Mayor
Smith '--'"m"6'
NAYS: None-
(Council Member Carder was absent.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25583, adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday July 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of the City of Roanoke, that a
30' public right-of-way, known as Mason Mill Road, N. E., extending from the
southerly boundary of Official Tax No. 7230101 to the northerly boundary of said
parcel, be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, the matter was before, the
body.
409
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, June 28, 2002 and Friday, July 5, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the right-of-way
proposed for closure is part of Mason Mill Road N. E. (formerly Manning Road); the
petitioner owns all of the adjacent property and wishes to vacate the right-of-way to
allow for development of an additional parcel of land in the Roanoke Centre for
Industry and Technology (RClT); the right-of-way requested for closure formerly
served as an entrance road to access Blue Hills Golf Course and a farm northeast
of the golf course; and the right-of-way has not been used for several years and is
no longer needed, as Blue Hills Drive will be extended to serve the RClT parc~,ls.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
request, inasmuch as the portion of the street will serve no purpose to the City after
Blue Hills Drive is extended.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#35997-071502) AN ORDINANCE permanently vacating, discontinuing and
closing certain public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more
particularly described hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 291.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35997-071502. The m~tion
was seconded by Mr. Harris.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
Council with regard to the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35997-071502
was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt, and
MayorSmith ........................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................... -0.
(Council Member Carder was absent.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
410
CITY PROPERTY-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-CITY EMPLOYEES-GRANTS-POLICE
DEPARTMENT: Pursuant to previous instructions by Council, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday July 15, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of the City of Roanoke to convey
City-owned property located at 1224 Rorer Avenue, S. W., and 719 Dale Avenue,
S. E., to Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation (BRHDC), in connection with
establishment of a housing assistance program for City employees, the matter was
before the body. *'
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
.'rimes on Sunday, July 7, 2002.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke receives entitlement grants each year under the Community Development
Block Grant (CDBG) and HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME) programs of the
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD); HUD approval of the
City's FY 2002-03 CDBG application is forthcoming, and the letter of approval is
pending the routine Congressional release process; and as a part of the HUD
Entitlement Consolidated Plan application, approved by Council on May 13, 2002,
pursuant to Resolution No. 35848-051302, Council authorized funding for the
Employer Assisted Housing Program.
It was further advised that in October 2001, Council authorized the City
Manager to purchase, on behalf of the City, two properties located at 1224 Rorer
Avenue, S. W., and 719 Dale Avenue, S. E., from HUD; under the Employer Assisted
Housing Program, the Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation is to renovate
these two properties and make them available for rent and/or lease-purchase by
eligible Iow/moderate income families.; through December 31,2002, the properties
will be marketed solely to Iow/moderate income Roanoke police officers and
teachers and/or other City employees, at below market rate rents, as a recruiting
inducement and to benefit an older neighborhood through the presence of positive
role models; if the properties are still available on January 1, 2003, BRHDC may
begin marketing the properties to the general Iow/moderate income public, as well;
a subgrant Agreement with BRHDC is necessary in order to provide CDBG funding
for rehabilitation of the properties involved in the program; and funding is available
in Account No. 035-G03-0320-5368 in the amount of $150,143.00
It was explained that as a part of the Subgrant Agreement, $150,143.00 in
CDBG funds will be provided to the BRHDC in the form of an interest-free, ten year
forgivable loan to assist with rehabilitation of the properties; in the event the
Employer Assisted Housing Program is discontinued prior to full forgiveness of the
loan, BRHDC is required to pay the balance remaining to the City; and a public
hearing is required to convey the two properties to Blue Ridge Housing Development
Corporation.
411
The City Manager recommended, following the public hearing, that she be
authorized to execute a CDBG Subgrant Agreement and such other documents as
may be required with Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation, to convey and
renovate the above referenced properties, with all documents to be approved as to
form by the City Attorney prior to execution.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following ordinance:
(#35998-071502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the fee simple conveyance of
properties located at 1224 Rorer Avenue, S. W., and 719 Dale Avenue, S. E., to the
Blue Ridge Housing Development Corporation; authorizing the execution of a
Subgrant Agreement between the City and Blue Ridge Housing Development
Corporation in order to provide Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds
for the rehabilitation of such properties, and to provide housing available for rent
and/or lease purchase by eligible Iow/moderate income families; and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 65, page 294.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 35998-071502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
Council with regard to the matter. There being none, Ordinance No. 35998-071502
was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
(Council Member Carder was absent.)
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard; and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
WATER RESOURCES: Ms. Teresa Minton, 1613 Kenwood Boulevard, S. E.,
expressed concern with regard to water issues; i.e.: previous Councils have not
addressed the water situation as a top priority; the prohibition of using water to
wash personal vehicles, resulting in the need to use the services of local car wash
establishments; she is not permitted to pressure wash a natural wood porch at her
412
private residence in order to prevent deterioration; she has spent hundreds of
dollars on landscaping which cannot be watered; the plight of senior citizens who
have planted gardens to supplement their food supply and their crops will be lost
without water, which translates into more money that they will be required to spend
on groceries, many of whom are on a fixed income; senior citizens and disabled
persons who cannot physically carry gallons of water from non-potable water
locations established by the City for watering purposes; and confusion by citizens
with regard to information that was contained in a recent City publication regarding
water usage exceptions.
The City Manager called attention to confusion by some citizens when they
learn that certain outdoor water use is permitted for businesses that use water as
an integral part of their operations, and a company in the pressure washing
business would be permitted to clean the porch at Ms. Minton's residence. She
explained that the brochure referred to by the speaker was published prior to the
City going to mandatory water restrictions, therefore, circumstances have changed
as the City has gone to different levels of water at the Carvins Cove Reservoir. She
stated that the City is working diligently to address a situation that is beyond its
control, which is the drought that has hit the entire East Coast, the City of Roa,~oke
has been requested by numerous jurisdictions to provide copy of its water
conservation plan as jurisdiction after jurisdiction in Virginia has been required to
go to water restrictions. She explained that by October 1, the City will have six
million gallons of additional water than has been available for the past two years,
four million gallons will be available with the opening of the Crystal Springs Filter
Plant and two million gallons from wells that the City is currently in the process of
digging. She stated that six million gallons of additional water will go a long way
toward addressing the water shortage and the City continues to have the ability for
approximately the next 17 years to purchase four million gallons of water per day
from Roanoke County. She called attention to three locations where citizens may
obtain non-potable water, and citizens have been most creative in terms of how they
conserve and transport water. She referred to ongoing discussions with Roanoke
County with regard to creation of a water authority, however, if the water authority
were created tomorrow, it would not provide any more water over the short term.
She stated that a recommendation will be submitted to Council in August as tu how
the additional water could be used to help mitigate the kinds of circumstances
referred to by Ms. Minton.
In view of the remarks of the City Manager that a commercial business
establishment would be permitted to engage in the service of pressure washing
houses, decks, etc., Mr. Bestpitch requested that the City Manager give
consideration to the question of allowing citizens to use potable water for pressure
washing purposes.
413
Ms. Wyatt referred to the comment of Ms. Minton that past City Councils have
not given top priority to water issues; whereupon, she advised that having served
on past Councils, she would be remiss if she did not respond to the statement. She
stated that as a result of the drought in 1999, an agreement was entered into with
Roanoke County to install inter-locking links between Roanoke City and Roanoke
County, in order to provide for water between the two localities, and the City and the
County entered into an agreement allowing the City to purchase water from Roanoke
County. She added that with the temporary closing of the Crystal Springs Filter
Plant, the City has had four million gallons less water per day for the past two years
and had that water been available, the City's water situation would not be as severe.
She expressed appreciation to the citizens of the City of Roanoke for their
willingness to make do in difficult times and situations.
The City Manager pointed out that the City of Roanoke's water system is
serving a significantly larger customer base than either Roanoke County or the City
of Salem, therefore, more water is used on a daily basis. She also pointed ou~. that
prior to July 1, 2001, the City of Roanoke did not have a water policy that promoted
water conservation, because prior to July 1, 2001, the more water consumed, the
less citizens paid.
COMPLAINTS: Mr. Robert Gravely, 619 Hanover Avenue, N. W., expressed
concern with regard to night clubs in the downtown Roanoke area where black
males are being searched and questioned about the style of their clothing. He
inquired as to why the Gainsboro sign reads "Southwest Incorporated" when the
Gainsboro neighborhood is located in the northwest section of the City of Roanoke,
and questioned the spelling of"Gainsboro". He called attention to the need to work
with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to purchase homes that are
in good condition for rent or purchase by Iow income persons which will generate
more revenue to the City through real estate taxes collected. He stated that wages
for employees of the City of Roanoke have fallen behind, young adults do not have
the jobs they need to earn a decent living, and the City should do more to help
citizens as opposed to businesses.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting
at 8:35 p.m.
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
ad'ourned
APPROVED ~n~
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
414-A
SPECIAL SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
July 26, 2002
12:00 noon
A special meeting of Roanoke City Council was called to order on Friday,
July 26, 2002, at 12:00 noon for a meeting of the Roanoke Valley Leadership Summit,
which meeting was held at the Vinton War Memorial, 814 E. Washington Avenue,
Vinton, Virginia. The meeting was hosted by the Town of Vinton.
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Council Members William H.
Carder, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K.
Smith ..................................................................................... -5.
ABSENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch and C. Nelson Harris ......... -2.
OTHERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager, City of Roanoke;
Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk, City of Roanoke; and representatives from
various surrounding localities.
The meeting was called to order by the Honorable Don Davis, Mayor, Town of
Vinton.
Following lunch, the business meeting convened at 12:35 p.m., with Mayor
Davis welcoming everyone in attendance.
VINTON COMMUNITY INFORMATION: A video was presented highlighting
activities and accomplishments of the Town of Vinton and the Roanoke Valley.
REGIONAL ECONOMIC STRATEGY REPORT: Dr. Victor lannello, Vice Chair,
Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance, presented a video highlighting the
following Regional Economic Strategy:
A Call to Action
Population Growth: below State and U. S. averages.
Employment:
· Total Growth: below State and U. S. averages
· Manufacturing: greater declines than State and U. S.
414-B
Educational Attainment: below State and U. S. averages.
Per Capita Income: below State and U. S. averages.
Goals for Strateqy
Establish common guiding principles for organizations and
jurisdictions in the region.
Identify critical assets and needs of our region for economic prosperity.
Build consensus on key regional priorities.
Provide a "song sheet" of agreed-upon actions for organizations and
governments.
Aooroach
Engage services of Economic Development experts:
· Eva Klein and Associates
· Center for Regional Economic Competitiveness
Build on prior studies, existing plans, and ongoing activities.
Interview leaders in business, government, education, and community.
Convene Planning Leadership Group to:
· develop strategies and tactics
· prioritize
· build consensus
Prepare Regional Economic Strategy.
Vision Statement
We will elevate regional prosperity by creating new patterns of growth
through a strategic transformation that cultivates:
· global visibility
· new and maturing knowledge-based enterprises
· competitive industry clusters
· higher-skilled people
· quality of life and environment
Visibility
Challenge: The region's economic growth is impeded by size,
self-image, and lack of identity.
Strategy: Achieve national and international visibility for the
region -- to compete successfully for advanced technology growth.
414-C
Goal: Establish the region as a competitive, desirable location for
living, visiting, and doing business.
Tactics:
· create a coalition of existing marketing organizations to develop
mutual opportunities to increase visibility for the region.
· develop an image for the region with a single brand identity.
· increase population ranking of region by pursuing an enlarged
Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA).
Connectivity
Challenge: Geographic isolation increases costs of doing business in
a global economy. Lack of connections between activity centers within
the region makes it difficult to create a sense of region and critical
mass.
Strategy: Reduce perceived or real distance -- both within the region,
between the region, and the outside world.
Goal: Improve the availability and reduce the cost of intra-regional and
inter-regional transportation.
Tactics:
· develop a broader regional process for addressing long-term
transportation issues and prioritizing regional needs.
accelerate improvements to broadband/multi-media access
throughout the region.
reduce cost of air service to Roanoke by attracting a Iow-fare
carrier thror, gh a subsidy pool.
make passenger rail service a reality.
Quality of Life Amenities
Challenge: Lack of lifestyle amenities for knowledge workers.
Strategy: AttractJretain knowledge-oriented enterprises and people,
using existing natural assets and quality of life in marketing, while
developing additional amenities that appeal to these people and
enterprises.
Goal: Develop, package, and promote lifestyle amenities for knowledge
workers while preserving environment and quality of life.
Tactics:
· package and promote
knowledge workers.
414-D
outdoor and cultural amenities for
consider lifestyles and amenity needs of knowledge workers in
community planning and development.
Knowledqe Work Force
Challenge: Collective skills/knowledge of the local work force needs to
increase, for local companies to compete globally and to attract new
companies.
Strategy: Elevate the knowledge work force at all levels by improving
skills and knowledge of individual workers, improving responsiveness
to companies, and recruiting knowledge workers from outside region.
Goal: Build knowledge work force capacity through focused training,
retraining, and attraction of new skilled workers.
Tactics:
· create a campaign that targets the region's natives and college
alumni and connects them to job opportunities.
establish permanent vehicles for K - 12/business interaction.
create a regional Higher Education Consortium to continually
identify business needs, better integrate regional resources, and
promote higher education assets.
create an easily accessible information base of higher education
resources in the region.
develop an advocacy strategy, focusing on funding for higher
education, especially workforce programs in community
colleges.
Innovation and Entrepreneurship
Challenge: Creation and growth of knowledge businesses must be
accelerated to increase the quantity of high paying jobs in the region.
Strategy: Strengthen the region's "soft infrastructure" that supports
innovation and entrepreneurship.
Goal: Stimulate creation and growth of knowledge businesses by
increasing availability of capital, innovation, intellectual property, and
entrepreneurial talent.
414-E
Tactics:
· create a regional venture capital fund of adequate size and
stature to be a force in attracting and retaining growing
businesses to the region.
· organize an advocacy strategy for Virginia Tech and the region
to achieve its research goals.
· mobilize the technology community to work with Virginia Tech to
evaluate and strengthen all aspects of its intellectual property
and technology transfer activities.
· market this region to experienced entrepreneurs and connect
them to the region's entrepreneur network.
Economic Transformation
Challenge: Regional prosperity depends on the number of high paying
jobs in the region and a diverse economy.
Strategy: Diversify the regional economy by emphasizing the cultivation
of technology-driven companies.
Goal: Identify industry clusters and develop ways to cultivate them.
Tactics:
· update the 1999 cluster studyto identify opportunities for cluster
development.
encourage local governments to use the Virginia's First Regional
industrial Facilities Authority to share costs, revenues, and risk
in developing business sites.
create industry cluster associations to identify and implement
opportunities for growth.
update tourism/convention marketing strategy to take advantage
of knowledge assets, village centers, and recreational assets.
Next Steps
Communicate the Regional Economic Strategy throughout the region.
Get endorsements from local jurisdictions and organizations.
Manage implementation of tactics.
Facilitate regional alliances for new initiatives.
Identify and monitor critical benchmarks of progress.
Mayor Davis expressed appreciation to Mr. lannello for the presentation.
414-F
ROANOKE REGIONAL AIRPORT ALLIANCE: Mayor Smith expressed
appreciation to the Town of Vinton for hosting the Leadership Summit Luncheon;
and stated that the $2 million grant to improve air service at the Roanoke Regional
Airport was not awarded by the Federal Government. He called attention to his
remarks at the last Summit Luncheon with regard to the importance of a Roanoke
Regional Airport Alliance, and advised that Mr. Barry Duvall had been retained to
coordinate efforts of the Roanoke Regional Airport Alliance.
REGIONAL WATER SUPPLY STUDY: Wayne G. Strickland, Executive Director,
Roanoke Valley Alleghany Regional Commission, advised that a contract has been
awarded to Black and Veatch Corp., to develop a long-range water supply system
study for the region, in the amount of $100,000.00; partnering with Dewberry and
Davis, the Corporation will examine the area's residential, business and institutional
water needs to determine if existing and planned resources are adequate to meet
demand through 2050; and the study is expected to take six months for completion.
He further advised that the Alliance is funding half of the cost and the remaining
portion will be funded on a per capita basis by the following seven participating
localities: the Counties of Bedford, Botetourt, Franklin, and Roanoke; Roanoke City;
City of Salem; and the Town of Vinton; and he extended an invitation to the localities
to attend a news conference on Monday, July 29, 2002, at 10:30 a.m., atthe Roanoke
Regional Commission Office, 313 Luck Avenue, S. W., to introduce the engineoring
firm.
Mr. Strickland expressed appreciation to the local governing bodies for their
participation and support.
OTHER BUSINESS OR COMMENTS:
Mr. Strickland advised that the next meeting of the Mayors and Chairs of the
Leadership Summit will be hosted by Alleghany County on August 16, 2002.
On behalf of the City of Covington, Mayor Temple Kessinger, Jr., extended an
invitation to host the next Leadership Summit Luncheon in October 2002.
Council Member Dowe encouraged the localities present to support the
Roanoke Dazzle Basketball Team.
414-G
Council Member Wyatt suggested that the state legislators be invited to attend
the next Leadership Summit meeting; whereupon, Mr. Strickland agreed to contact
them to extend an invitation.
There being no further business, the luncheon meeting was adjourned at
1:35 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
~mit~
Mayor
414-H
WORK SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
July 29, 2002
12:20 p.m.
Pursuant to Resolution No. 35958-070102, adopted on July 1, 2002, a work
session of Roanoke City Council was called to order on Monday, July 29, 2002, at
12:20 p.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, by
Vice-Mayor C. Nelson Harris.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived at 12:25 p.m.); C. Nelson Harris,
Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith (arrived during the Closed Session) ....... -7.
ABSENT: None ................................................................................... 0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager;
William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and
Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk.
Vice-Mayor Harris advised that due to a previous commitment, Mayor Smith
would be late arriving for the meeting.
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in Closed Session to discuss acquisition of real property for public
purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), [;ode
of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
414-1
Ms. Wyatt moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to
convene in Closed Session to discuss acquisition of real property for public
purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3) Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Wyatt and Vice-
Mayor Harris ................................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
(Mayor Smith had not arrived when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in Closed Session to discuss acquisition of real property for public
purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Ms. Wyatt moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to
convene in Closed Session to discuss acquisition of real property for public
purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negOtiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3) Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Counci'l Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Wyatt and Vice-
Mayor Harris .......................................................................... -6-
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
(Mayor Smith had not arrived when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in Closed Session to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
was before the body.
414-J
Ms. Wyatt moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager to
convene in Closed Session to discuss acquisition of real property for public
purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3) Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Wyatt and Vice-
Mayor Harris ................................................................................................. -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
(Mayor Smith had not arrived when the vote was recorded.)
At 12:25 p.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the meeting in recess.
At 3:15 p.m., the meeting reconvened, with Mayor Smith presiding, and all
members of the Council present, with the exception of Vice-Mayor Harris.
BRIEFINGS BY THE CITY MANAGER:
TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY: The City Manager advised that during
the 2002-03 budget study sessions, Council requested City staff to study the Dumas
Hotel proposal, in conjunction with the South Henry Street Area Plan, and to brief
Council with formal presentations. She further advised that the Gainsboro
Neighborhood Plan, which would be forthcoming for adoption as a part of the
Comprehensive Plan, would include an element of the South Henry Street
Plan. She stated that the City had invested a sufficient amount of funds for various
improvements in the south Henry Street area.
The City Manager introduced Barry L. Key, Director, Management and Budget,
to present an overview of the Dumas Center for Artistic Development Project -
Phase II. She also called attention to the proposed Dumas Center model that was
on display.
Mr. Key highlighted the following:
414-K
Project Summary:
Phase II includes construction of a 300-seat auditorium and
performance stage on the second floor, and a state-of-the-art recording
studio, rehearsal rooms, and study area for the Downtown Music Lab
on the third floor. The first floor will include exhibit space for the
Harrison Museum of African American Culture and space for
community meetings, receptions, etc.
The auditorium and performance stage will be home for the Dumas Guild and
Downtown Music Lab, and will also host a range of other performances and
concerts. The renovated Center will contain space forworkshops conducted by the
Youth on the Yard Organization, as well as a stage and audio equipment that will
enhance the quality of workshops. The Dumas Hotel will continue to be a center for
live jazz performances, making it the only place in downtown Roanoke to offer such
music.
The Roanoke Higher Education Center and Roanoke Catholic School have
expressed support for the project and an interest in using the proposed
Dumas Center for events, such as convocations, lectures, receptions, etc.
Project Cost and Funding:
Total project cost of $4,098,184.00, including a $256,136.00 operating
endowment requirement, and proposed funds from a variety of sources
including:
Capital Campaign $1,356,136.00
State Rehabilitation Tax Credits $1,077,446.00
Foundation and Private Grants $ 680,397.00
City of Roanoke $ 500,000.00
Other $ 484,205.00
414-L
Fundinq Request to City of Roanoke:
Initially the City was requested to provide $500,000.00 in project funding over
three years beginning in fiscal year 2002-03, which request was later modified
to allow funding to be phased in beginning in fiscal year 2003-04. A letter of
project support was being requested from the City so that the grant
application process could begin.
Funding Recommendation:
Staff recommends that the $500,000.00 request for the Dumas Center be
funded in a similar fashion to the Grandin Theater project, with $100,000.00
being provided each year over a period of five years, beginning with fiscal
year 2003-04. Funding would be provided by agreement as approved by City
Council, subject to the following provisions:
Certification of the availability of matching funds;
City funds will be used solely for the construction project, and not for
operation of the Dumas Center;
No future operational support for the Dumas Center will be requested
from the City;
The Dumas Center would continue to be operated as a community arts
and cultural center;
All appropriate local taxes will be paid;
The Dumas Center will not be sold or conveyed to another entity without
prior written consent of the City; and
If the Dumas Center is sold within the five years of the agreement to
other than a non-profit entity, the City will recover its capital investment
from the proceeds of the sale.
Mr. Key advised that the funding source would be the Capital Maintenance
and Equipment Replacement Program, and funds would be provided annually
over the next five years.
Mayor Smith pointed out that a variety of sources have been proposed to
fund the project, and inquired about the availability of other funding sources to
offset the cost. Theodore J. Edlich, III, President, Total Action Against Poverty,
responded that other jurisdictions have been contacted for assistance.
414-M
By using the Dumas Center for Artistic Development model, Greg Baldwin, an
architect with Balzer and Associates, Inc., explained the proposed renovations.
The City Manager advised that the purpose of the briefing is to receive
approval of the project and to discuss funding. She mentioned that Mr. Edlich has
requested a letter of support from the City to use in seeking additional support from
local jurisdictions as well as grant possibilities.
Mr. Carder inquired if there was a certification for matching funds similar to
the Grandin Theatre, and if the City has an audit function that does not include
loans, only committed money; whereupon, the City Manager responded that it
includes pledges and actual dollars.
Mr. Edlich advised that he has spoken with a financial institution regarding a
$1 million tax credit, an application for a pre-development of $100,000.00, and a
finance loan of $1.5 million.
Mr. William F. Penn, 436 Elm Avenue, S. W., expressed appreciation for the
City's support of the Dumas Center for Artistic Development project, and stated that
he believes the entire City will benefit from the support.
HENRY STREET-NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS: The City Manager
introduced Members of the Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation, and
called upon Charles Price and Melinda Payne for a presentation with regard to
revitalization of the south Henry Street area.
Mr. Price expressed appreciation to City Council and to the City
Administration for their support of the proposed project, and advised that
approximately two decades ago, former Mayor Noel C. Taylor led the charge to
revitalize the Henry Street area; the Roanoke Neighborhood Development
Corporation was created as the community component of a public-private
partnership with the City of Roanoke; and the mission of the Corporation is to
enhance the quality of life in the City of Roanoke, specifically the Henry Street area
and surrounding residential neighborhoods.
Mr. Price further advised that the Roanoke Neighborhood Development
Corporation is a non-profit, community-based organization (501)c(3) partnering with
the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority to
facilitate revitalization and development in an area referred to as the "Greater
414-N
Gainsboro Redevelopment Area"; the Corporation consists of Roanoke citizens who
are connected to the Gainsboro community through the importance that the
community played in their personal development or development of their ancestors;
and in January 2002, the Housing Authority suggested that the Corporation use a
"design built" method of construction to proceed with the project, which would
allow pre-construction activities to begin and guarantee maximum costs.
Mr. Price stated that the Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation
rejected two proposals that were submitted for the project -- Breakeil, Inc., offer of
77 per cent ownership and total control of the project; and Blue Ridge Housing
proposed extension of at least a year before construction could begin.
Ms. Payne explained that following rejection of the two proposals, discussions
were held with Calvin Powers of Blue Eagle Partnership, to pursue a business
arrangement with the Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation that would
allow the Corporation to fulfill a goal to inspire other people of color to continue to
work toward maintaining a place in the development of their communities.
Mr. Price further stated that the proposed Crewe Suites site will be located at
the corner of Henry Street, Wells Avenue and Gainsboro Road, N. W.; it is the first
catalyst project of the Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation that will be
a four-story, 40,000 square foot, Class A quality office building; and the timeline for
the project is as follows:
Complete agreement negotiations
Begin design
Begin pre-marketing
Continuation of building pre-leasing
Complete City leasing
Evaluate fast track construction opportunitySeptember 2002
Loan commitments
Loan closing
Complete City interior layout
Groundbreaking
Site work
Begin construction
Setup property management
Construction completion
July 2002
July 2002
August 2002
August 2002
September 2002
Summer 2002
Fall 2002
Winter 2002
Spring 2003
Spring 2003
Spring 2003
Summer 2003
Winter 2003
414-O
Mr. Price pointed out that the Corporation is committed to ensuring that the
Crewe Suites project is compatible with its surroundings; and the project has
received favorable endorsements from major stakeholders in the area, including
churches, the Roanoke Higher Education Authority, The Hotel Roanoke and
Conference Center, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority, and other City residents and organizations in the Historic Gainsboro area.
Mr. Price commented that the Corporation would like to request continued
support from the City as follows: the City to provide at least $300,000.00 in equity
and grant commitments, to re-enforce its commitment to lease 15,000 square feet of
office space in the building for a period of 20 years, to dedicate 45 parking spaces
at the market rate, and to complete the Henry Street infrastructure construction
program. He further commented that the City's appropriation would be used to
assist in making the office building a reality; a Letter of Intent from the Roanoke
Neighborhood Development Corporation and Blue Eagle Partnership would be
provided to the City; and the Partnership has based its negotiations with the
Corporation on the following commitments:
15,000 square feet of lease space for 20 years (City of Roanoke)
$300,000.00 contribution (City of Roanoke)
$70,000.00 cash on hand (Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation)
Land (Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority)
Completion of the infrastructure construction
Parking space on the surface lot
Mr. Price advised that the Corporation has selected Payne Construction Co.,
as its design builder. It was noted for the record that he is the Vice-President of
Payne Construction, and a minority owner in the company. Ms. Payne also clarified
that she is the ex-wife of the owner of Payne Construction Co. and has no monetary
gain to be made from development of the project.
Ms. Vernice Law stated that Mr. Price was initially reluctant to involve his
company in the project; however, the Roanoke Neighborhood Development
Corporation felt the potential conflict of interest was not as important as the need
to use a minority contractor; and Payne Construction Co. is the only local firm that
is familiar with the predominantly black heritage of Henry Street which is located in
the City's historic Gainsboro neighborhood.
414-P
Mr. Price further advised that Payne Construction Company brings experience
in construction and design build, has experience working with non-profit
organizations, has the ability to involve local and minority contractors, has the
experience in hiring employees from the project region, experience and expertise
with clients with budgetary limits, and the Company has roots in historic Gainsboro.
The City Manager stated that in December 1999, an agreement was entered
into'~vith the Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation indicating the City's
commitment to lease 15,000 square feet of office space in the Crewe Suites building,
which agreement did not specify a rate or a term; and she is of the opinion that any
arrangements made by the City to lease space in other buildings surrounding the
facility has not interfered with the City's commitment of $300,000.00 to the
Corporation. She further stated that although the agreement expired on June 30,
2001, with the Council's authority, the agreement could be reactivated unde,' the
same terms and conditions; and the previous agreement also indicated a condition
for the use of the $300,000.00 and that the project be constructed under the City's
Virginia Procurement Act requirements.
The City Manager further stated that the presentation that was given, as well
as a position supported by the City and the Housing Authority in January 2002, was
that at the appropriate time, assuming that a design built project manager could be
found, she would recommend to Council that the project be completed under the
design built concept; the advantage of the design built concept is that the
construction project manager fronts the costs, and assumes the risk of pre-
construction costs, which are included in the total loan package at the time of
consummation; and a new contract would have to be developed for approval by
Council specifying any conditions with regard to the $300,000.00 currently set aside
for the project.
The City Manager stated that it is her understanding that the Corporation
would like the availability of up to 45 spaces that would be paid for at market rate by
the tenants, which would not mean the City would necessarily set aside 45 spaces,
but the spaces would be available at the time needed for leasing. She explained that
between the 95 parking spaces on the Surface Lot and approximately 335 or 337
spaces in the Higher Education Parking Garage, there should be adequate spaces
available; and the only long term commitment that has been made is to the GOB
South Project, whereby the City has committed one parking space per apartment to
be made available, in conjunction with such leases, but to be guaranteed a space,
the lessee would have to pay to lease a vacant space.
414-Q
Council Member Carder asked if discussions were with regard to a new
agreement because it is his understanding that the original agreement was for
45,000 square feet of office space, which the City did not have a price on that is now
being listed at market rate; whereupon, the City Manager advised that nothing was
included in the agreement that stipulated a rate or a term; however, Ms. Law had
advised her that discussions with the former City Manager was for a 20-year lease
which would require the City to sign a lease for that period of time, but would also
require a public hearing.
Council Member Carder requested that a written proposal be submitted to
Council since the agreement was being modified and there is no documentation
available.
In response to Council Member Carder's inquiry with regard to the
$300,000.00, the City Manager advised that the Corporation was requesting the
$300,000.00 which was part of the previous agreement, and in addition, the
Corporation is requesting that the agreement be silent or to stipulate the ability to
use the design built concept, and she was in agreement if the Corporation could find
a project manager to front the cost. She called attention to the timeline to
consummate or to complete the lease with the City which will be difficult until a
footage cost has been determined.
At this point, Council Member Dowe left the meeting.
Mayor Smith inquired about the leased spaces that are currently being paid
for by the City; whereupon, the City Manager advised that she plans to take any
lease activity back to City Hall, with the exception of spaces previously committed
to the Crewe Suites project. Mayor Smith further inquired about the market rate per
square foot for leased space; whereupon, the Director of Real Estate Valuation
stated that the rate was between $10.00 - $14.00 per square foot.
Following discussion, the City Manager agreed to provide Council with
information on rental rates at a later date.
At this point, Council Member Bestpitch left the meeting.
Council Member Wyatt advised that removal of procurement provisions is a
positive step because it will enable the City to keep the dollars at home and the
communities will benefit.
414-R
Council Member Carder commented that the City's Virginia Procurement Act
ensures that certain procedures are followed that protect all parties involved. Mr.
Price responded that not only was his reputation at stake, but Payne Construction
Company's as well, and added that he believes there will be increased scrutiny since
it is a minority project.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting concluded at 3:15 p.m., 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 Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Cutler, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ............. -4.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ O.
(Vice-Mayor Harris and Council Members Bestpitch and Dowe had left the meeting
when the vote was recorded.)
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 4:45 p.m.
ATTEST:
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
APPROVED
Mayor
414-S -
SPECIAL SESSION ...................... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
July 30, 2002
10:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke called a special session on Tuesday,
July 30, 2002, at 10:00 a.m., to tour the Crystal Spring Pumping Station located at the
corner of McClanahan Avenue and South Jefferson Street, City of Roanoke.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder, M.
Rupert Cutler, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ................................... 5.
ABSENT: Alfred T. Dowe and C. Nelson Harris ........................................... -2.
STAFF PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; Willard N. Claytor,
Director, Real Estate Valuation; Chris L. Slone, Director, Communications; Michael
Envoy, Director, Utilities; Jesse Perdue, Manager, Water Department; and Stephanie
M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk.
WATER DEPARTMENT: The City Manager expressed appreciation to Michael
Envoy, Director of Utilities, and Jesse Perdue, Manager of the Water Department,
who had diligently worked to return the Crystal Spring Pumping Station to service.
She stated that completion of the filtration system was approximately two months
ahead of schedule, and called upon Mr. Envoy to brief Council on the $5 million
permanent upgrade of the facility.
It was advised that the filtration system would be fully installed by Aug,,st 5,
2002, and would provide an additional 3.5 million to 4 million gallons of clean water
a day, reducing the amount of water that is pumped from the Carvins Cove
Reservoir. It was advised that two of the four installed filters were pumping about
a million gallons into the City's water supply; and the other two filters, along with
three additional ones would be installed during the month of August, and would go
online soon thereafter.
414-T
In closing, it was stated that the City would have the option once Crystal
Spring is fully operational in October 2002 to consider reducing the amount of water
purchased from surrounding localities or reducing the water restrictions to
residents.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Special Meeting
adjourned at 10:30 p.m.
Stephanie M. Moon Ralph K. Smith
Deputy City Clerk Mayor
414-U
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
August 5, 2002
12:15 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
August 5, 2002 at 12:15 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber,
fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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,
Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Linda F. Wyatt and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ................................... 5.
ABSENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. and C. Nelson Harris ......... -2.
OFFICERS PRESENT: William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; and Mar,/ F.
Parker, City Clerk.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor Ralph K. Smith
requesting a Closed Session 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.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that Council concur in the request of the Mayor to
convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss personnel matters relating to 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 Ms. Wyatt and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Wyatt and Mayor Smith---5.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Members Dowe and Harris were absent.)
415
At 12:18 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be immediately
reconvened in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159, to
conduct briefings with regard to curb, gutter and sidewalk, and year end capital
maintenance and equipment replacement projects.
At 12:20 p.m., the City Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, with all
Members of the Council in attendance.
Also present were Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth,
City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
BUDGET-CMERP-TAXES: The Director of Finance introduced a briefing on the
Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program (CMERP).
Mr. Hall advised that CMERP is not unique to the City of Roanoke and it is a
fairly common practice for localities to designate fund balances at the end of the
fiscal year for one time projects, rather than build an expectation into the next years'
budget that there will be money left over to build into operations.
He advised that CMERP is determined annually as General Fund balance, ~ess
the amounts reserved for encumbrances, which carry forward into the next fiscal
year, and $250,000.00 is reserved for uninsured claims to be transferred in the next
fiscal year to the Risk Management Fund; and CMERP is created when revenues out
perform estimates and/or there are unspent appropriations at the end of the year.
He explained that CMERP is shared with the School Board using the same formula
used to share local taxes in the budget process; the School Fund also generates
CMERP to the extent that school revenues out perform budget and/or expenditures
are less than appropriation amounts; and appropriation by Council is required for
utilization of CMERP funds.
For the year ended June 30, 2002, the Director of Finance presented the
following unaudited General Fund CMERP figures:
Revenues in Excess of Budgeted Amounts
Unobligated Appropriations
Less: Reserve for Uninsured Claims
General Fund CMERP
School Allocation
City Allocation
$ 936,866.00
3,265,813.00
{250.000.00)
3,952,679.00
(723,530.00)
3.229.149.00
For the year ended June 30, 2002, he presented the following unaudited
School Fund CMERP figures:
416
Revenues in Excess of (Less Than) budget amounts
Unobligated Appropriations
Less: Increase in Workers' Comp. Trust Fund
School Fund Totals
City Allocation of CMERP
Total School CMERP
($1,263,071.00)
3,047,516.00
(5,437.00)
1,779,008.00
723,530.00
$ 2.502.538.00
The following revenue recognition methods were reviewed:
Cash Basis - Revenues are recognized only to the extent of receipt of
cash.
Full Accrual - Revenues are recorded to the extent they are earned by
the end of the fiscal year. An allowance for doubtful accounts is
established to the extent any amounts are deemed uncollectible.
Modified Accrual - Revenues are recorded to the extent they are earned
by the end of the fiscal year and that collection is made within the
period of availability as defined by the local government. Period of
availability is often 60 days, although governments may use discretion
in establishing a period of availability for revenue recognition criteria.
The following change in revenue recognition criteria was reviewed:
In fiscal year 2002, the City is changing its period of availability under
modified accrual accounting to now recognize revenues related to
taxes receivable at June 30 and received within 60 days of year end.
Most Virginia localities already record revenues using this
methodology. Roanoke is implementing this in fiscal year 2002
concurrent with implementation of GASB 34.
Prior to this, the City accrued utility, prepared food taxes and some
sales tax, but did not accrue sales taxes and certain other revenues to
the extent allowable and widely practiced.
Impact is an additional $2.7 million in fund balance (CMERP) for the
year ended June 30, 2002.
Financial statements of the City will be restated to reflect this
implementation as of July 1, 2001.
417
Information was provided setting forth the following additional revenue
accruals in fiscal year 2002:
Revenue Name
Additional
Amount
Accrued in
FY02
Basis for Accrual as FY 2002
Revenue and Accounts Receivable
Real Estate
295,000.00
Anticipated collections, net of refunds,
in July-Aug related to year end
receivables.
Personal Property
632,000.00
Anticipated collections, net of refunds,
in July-Aug related to year end
receivables.
BPOL 129,150.00
Anticipated collections, net of refunds,
in July-Aug. Related to year end
receivables.
Sales Tax
1,400,000.00
Estimate of sales tax to be received
mid Aug. relative to tax on June 2002
retail sales.
Water Utility Tax
72,875.00
Estimate of taxes due on water utility
billings related to water services
provided through June 30, but not yet
billed.
Cable TV Tax
250,000.00
Anticipated collections on tax for
quarter ended June 30.
Recordation Tax
75,000.00
Anticipated collections on tax for
quarter ended June 30.
ABC/Wine Tax
70,000.00
Anticipated collections on tax for
quarterended June 30.
$2,924,025.00
418
Mr. Hall advised that CMERP resulting from the change in revenue recognition
is as follows:
Type Additional City School
Accrual Portion Portion*
LocalTaxes
(Fully Shared with
Schools at36.42
percent)
Cable TV Tax (20
Per Cent Dedicated
to Local Govt.
Access Channel)
Grants in Aid
Commonwealth
Expenditure Accrual
$2,529,025.00
$1,607,954.00 $921,071.00
250,000.00
177,160.00
72,840.00
145,000.00 145,000.00
(176,674.00) (176,674.00)
Total $2,747,351.00 $1,753,440.00 $993,911.00
*The School Fund will also derive additional CMERP from sales tax accrual in
the School Fund of $750,000.00.
SchoolFund
It was advised that total fiscal year 2002 CMERP is as follows:
GeneralFund
Annual CMERP
Computation
$3,229,149.00
$ 2,502,538.00
Additional CMERP
1,753,440.00
1,743,911.00
Total FY02 CMERP
4,982,589.00
4,246,449.00
The City Manager pointed out that it is fairly unique that the operating budget
is scaled back to include few, if any, one time projects so that the City waits until
the end of the fiscal year, looking to the CMEP fund balance, before decisions are
made regarding reimbursement items; and the previous Council suggested that City
staff begin to look at changing the balance. She explained that if the City waits until
419
the end of one fiscal year and an audit to determine available monies, the City is
almost 18 months behind in the purchase of some items. She stated that if the
financial condition improves in the future, the City should begin to balance in and
have some portion of its one time capital needs included in the operating budget
while also having a certain amount of funds that come from the CMERP balance.
She noted that it is unusual for a community to wait for all of its one time needs until
the end of the fiscal year.
The City Manager advised that staff is not prepared today to make a
recommendation on expenditure of CMERP funds, which recommendation will most
likely be submitted to Council in early September. She called attention to
approximately $14 million in CMERP requests which will be prioritized by staff with
a recommendation to Council.
Given the fact that the City continues to hear that there will be financial
impacts from the State, and the City could end up with certain operational shortfalls
in the current fiscal year, as well as serious challenges in fiscal year 2004,
Mr. Bestpitch stated that it would be prudent for Council to consider a reserve
operating fund for the one time $1.75 million CMERP windfall in view of anticipated
budget uncertainties. He further stated that it is a question that Council needs to
seriously consider.
Mr. Carder advised that Council has sent a message that the way the City
addresses CMERP should be changed. He stated that Mr. Bestpitch's comment
holds merit, but he would like to see more details in terms of the $14 million in
CMERP requests.
Mr. Dowe concurred in Mr. Carder's remarks; however, he stated that he did
not disagree with Mr. Bestpitch's suggestion. He advised that in lieu of what is
happening from an accounting standpoint in the private sector and in view of the co-
mingling of capital and operational needs at any level, the City of Roanoke should
proceed carefully and cautiously.
The City Manager explained that part of the difficulty is in the terminology
used by the City, because it is not "capital" in the truest sense of the word, but
operational items that are in the form of capital expenditures dealing with vehicles,
small buildings, etc., therefore, the word "capital" in the CMERP definition should
be referred to as "equipment replacement and vehicular replacement". She advised
that the real issue is getting the City to the point where it has an operating budget
that has some reasonable expectation that certain routine things will happen: for
example, if vehicular fleet is placed on some type of replacement schedule with the
understanding that certain types of vehicles should be replaced every x number of
420
years, or every x number of miles, that philosophy has been built into the budget.
She explained that the City is building to that point, but it will take another four years
at the present level to reach the point in the operating budget on a permanent basis
that there is the expectation that a certain amount of equipment is paid for each
year. She noted that the City has used mass purchase on its technology needs but
not in other areas. She explained that it also means taking fairly conservative
revenue estimates, bumping those estimates up so that there is a capacity within the
operating budget to begin funding those types of items, and to not rely on deliberate
underexpenditures for certain purchases. She noted that fiscal year 2003 was not
the budget year to take such measures given what has happened with regard to the
loss of State revenues. She stated that staff would like to be able to count on a
certain amount of funds within the operating budget for those kinds of purchases;
in analyzing the numbers, less than $1 million this yearwas due to over performance
of revenue, and the bulk of CMERP for this year can be accredited to City staff
placing the "skids" on departmental expenditures.
Council Member Carder advised that with $14 million in CMERP needs, the
City should have a schedule for replacement of vehicles, and monies could be
accrued which could also serve as a "rainy day" fund in the event of an emergency.
He stated that with a valid capital replacement plan, the City would know where it
will be in five, six, seven and ten years, as opposed to the current status which is
somewhat reactive as to how expenditures and revenues come in for the previous
year.
The Mayor inquired as to whether the City routinely has money left over at the
end of the fiscal year for CMERP funds; whereupon, the Director of Finance advised
that the City has consistently had money left over at year end, and throughout the
year, the Budget Department and the Finance Department monitor the expenditure
side of the budget to ensure that there is not a deficit. He advised that hopefully,
some money will be left over at year end, although the amount is uncertain until the
end of the fiscal year.
Council Member Harris advised that if Council increases the budget by $1
million on the expenditure side and $1 million on the revenue side to create an
additional $2 million for equipment replacement, Council should ask itself if, over
the long term, it has the political discipline to ensure that that amount of money will
actually remain in the budget for equipment replacement. He stated that as Council
receives pressure from various community groups, organizations, etc., on funding
requests, one of the first things to be edged out, incrementally, is equipment
replacement which shifts over to the end of the year CMERP, thus three to four
years in the future, Council could find itself in a position where no additional money
has been dedicated to equipment replacement and there is a smaller CMERP fund,
which is a step backward.
421
There was discussion in regard to the City's bond rating, increasing the City's
population and bringing higher per capita income residents into the City of Roanoke.
Following the briefing, the Mayor advised that without objection by Council,
the briefing would be received and filed.
SIDEWALK, CURB AND GUTTER-BUDGET-CMERP: The City Manager
introduced a briefing on funds that were previously approved by Council in the
Capital Improvements Program, which is the $5 million that is to be generated bythe
additional tax on tobacco. She advised that staff will present a four year spending
plan dedicated to curb, gutter and sidewalk which is a good balance between new
construction, replacement items and special projects.
Robert K. Bengtson, Director of Public Works, advised that there are several
areas of need, i.e. maintenance and repair of existing facilities which is not typical
patch work and repairs, but pertains to larger projects where replacement of one or
two blocks of curb and sidewalk will make a difference to the entire street; new
construction of curb and sidewalk which is divided into two areas, i.e.: citizen
requests which continue to grow and neighborhood plans encompassing a
widergroup within a neighborhood that will identify a broader area of need for new
sidewalk and curbs; and special projects which are projects that do not fit into any
of the above categories. He advised that all of the above referenced needs total $20
million in identified needs; however, available funding totals $5 million as a result
of the increase in the tobacco tax of ten cents, which will provide funding for the
debt service for the $5 million of bonds that were sold in early 2002.
Examples were presented of areas in need of maintenance and repair on 14th
Street, Avon Road, and 9th Street, and examples of new construction on Princeton
Circle, Carter Road, and 5th Street.
Mr. Bengtson advised that effective January 1, 2002, all new development
plans submitted for new subdivisions or developments will require curb and
sidewalk within the public right-of-way; whereupon, the Mayor inquired as to how
much of a handicap the requirement will create when seeking new affordable
housing. The City Manager responded that if curb and sidewalk are not installed at
the time of development, that specific address will show up on a future "wish list",
which is the reason that the City has a $20 million problem today. She stated that
whatever amount, dollarwise, is contributed by the developer, the less the City will
have to fund in the future. She noted that the City has more than enough
affordable/Iow income housing at the present time and should encourage more
upper end housing.
422
It was clarified that sidewalk is not a goal for every street; whereupon, the City
Manager advised that there are some neighborhoods that do not want sidewalks, in
which case sidewalks will not be required, but there is a need for curb and gutter.
Council Member Wyatt inquired if developers will be required to address water
run off; whereupon, Mr. Bengtson advised that drainage is a serious consideration,
and many requests received by the City require the installation of a drainage system
in conjuction with curb and gutter to address water run off.
Of the $20 million in needs, Council Member Dowe inquired as to how many
sidewalks are near schools where usage is high; whereupon, Mr. Bengtson advised
that he would research the question. Mr. Dowe also inquired about the cost of brick
sidewalks versus regular sidewalks, and are there other projects that might be
considered gateway streets where brick sidewalks should be considered. Mr.
Bengtson advised that the cost ratio for a brick sidewalk is in the range of two to
three times a normal concrete sidewalk.
Council Member Cutler inquired if administration of flood water management
is fragmented among several City departments and whether the City Manager is
satisfied with the current structure for flood water management. The City Manager
responded that she is not totally satisfied with the current structure, nor is City staff,
and the topic is becoming a whole new area of responsibility as this part of the
Commonwealth comes under compliance with the storm water management
program. She called attention to regional discussions on the issue which will now
become the responsibility of the City of Roanoke as the flood reduction project goes
forth to assume ongoing maintenance responsibilities, and while this responsibility
will cost the City money, she is pleased that it will occur because it means that some
entity will take responsibility for maintenance and for other kinds of things that need
to happen.
Council Member Carder referred to special sidewalk, curb and gutter projects,
and inquired as to where the money came from in the past to fund such projects;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that funds came off the top of whatever money
the City had appropriated which meant that sometimes a project that had been listed
as a high priority was eliminated in order to complete another project. She
explained that out of the annual projected spending of $1.25 million, only
$150,000.00 is targeted for special projects, therefore, the lion's share of funds will
go to the neighborhoods.
With regard to installation of sidewalk, specifically in those instances where
a developer is constructing a new house in a neighborhood where houses currently
exist on both sides of the street, but have no sidewalk, Mr. Bestpitch inquired if ~i~ere
is a way to install sidewalk throughout the entire block, while requiring the developer
of the new house to pay only a portion of the overall cost that pertains to his/her new
construction.
423
Mr. Bengtson advised that special projects include the 100 block of Kirk
Avenue, Salem Avenue and Jefferson Street to 5th Street, including the new Roanoke
Times Building, BullittJJamison project, Hershberger Road at Valley View and
Frontage Road at WDBJ. He advised that a total of $5 million is available, annual
spending is $1,250,000.00 to be expended as follows: $200,000.00 for maintenance
and repair, $900,000.00 for new construction ($450,000.00 citizen requests and
$450,000.00 high impact neighborhood projects), and $150,000.00 for special
projects.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the briefing would be
received and filed.
At 1:55 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened at
2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
On Monday, August 5, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., 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 William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, 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 The Reverend Diane Scribner-
Clevenger, Pastor, Unity Church of Roanoke Valley.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution
memorializing the late S. Elaina Loritts, who passed away on July 14, 2002.
(#35999-080502) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Sylvian Elaina Loritts,
a citizen of Roanoke since 1977.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 296.)
424
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 35999-080502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ......................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... ~"-0-
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: The Mayor recognized the following 2002
participants in the City of Roanoke Internship Program:
Mary Cook-Moors, a 2002 graduate of National Business College, who
interned in the Department of Billings and Collections.
Shayla Evans, a rising senior at Virginia State University, who interned
in the Department of Planning, Building and Development.
Jesse Hobson, a 2002 graduate of Roanoke College, who interned in
the Fleet Management Department.
Jessica Kleinhans, a rising senior at Radford University, who interned
in the Department of Finance.
Patrice Lewis, a rising senior at the University of Virginia, who interned
in the Office of Clerk of Circuit Court.
Konaka Robinson, a 2002 graduate of the University of Virginia, who
' interned in the Department of Social Services.
Sarah Ross, a rising senior at Radford University, who interned in the
Circulation Department at the Main Library.
Donald Smith, a rising senior at Virginia Tech, who interned at the
Waste Water Treatment Plant.
David Steidle, a third year law student at Appalachian School of Law,
who interned in the City Attorney's Office.
James Toliver, a rising senior at Virginia State University, who interned
at the Roanoke Civic Center.
Andre Via, a rising senior at the University of Virginia, who interned in
the Department of Real Estate Valuation.
425
DECEASED PERSONS: The Members of Council expressed sympathy upon
the passing of former Mayor James E. Taliaferro, City of Salem, who passed away
on August 3, 2002.
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.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of City Council held on Monday,
June 17, 2002, were before the body.
(For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
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. Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS:None ................................................................................... ~.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS-EASEMENTS: A communication from the City
Manager advising that pursuant to provisions of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, Council is required to hold a public hearing on the proposed vacation of
property rights; whereupon, she requested that a public hearing be advertised for
Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, with regard to vacation and dedication of a sanitary sewer easement at
3138 Gum Spring Street, S. E., was before the body.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
426
CITY PROPERTY-TELEPHONE COMPANIES-LEASES: A communication from
the City Manager advising that Cellco Partnership, a Delaware general partnership,
dlblal Verizon Wireless, with its principal office at 180 Washington Valley Road,
Bedminister, New Jersey, has requested to lease a portion of the Washington
Heights Water Tank and ground site, which is located in the 4100 block of Wyoming
Avenue, Official Tax No. 2770406, to install directional antennas, connecting cables
and appurtenances, was before Council.
It was further advised that to lease the property, a new lease agreement is
required in conjunction with a public hearing; terms and conditions of the lease are
in accordance with the City of Roanoke policy regarding Wireless
Telecommunication Facilities located on City property dated January 21, 1997; and
proposed term of the lease will be four years and eleven months, commencing on
September 1, 2002 and expiring on July 31, 2007, which lease may be renewed for
up to two five year terms, upon mutual agreement by the parties.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the scheduling of a
public hearing to consider entering into a new lease agreement between the City
of Roanoke and Cellco Partnership, a Delaware general partnership, dlblal Verizon
Wireless.
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None .............................................................................. 0.
EASEMENTS-WATER RESOURCES: A communication from the City Manager
advising that the City of Roanoke Water Division has been contacted by a developer,
John Griffin, regarding Kingston Estates, a new subdivision to be constructed in
Roanoke County; and the main water distribution line from the Falling Creek
Filtration Plant runs through the property proposed for development, which water
line has existed in this location for approximately 100 years, was before Council.
It was further advised that the City has requested the contractor to locate the
water line in a new easement outside the lots in a dedicated water line easement; the
new line and the new easement will be in place before the existing easement is
vacated; and the contractor has requested the City to quitclaim its easement through
the roadways which the Virginia Department of Transportation requires in order to
accept the road system for maintenance; whereupon, the City Manager
recommended that Council authorize the scheduling of a public hearing to establish
a new water line easement and Deed of Quitclaim for the easement through the
roadway right-of-way.
427
Mr. Carder moved that Council concur in the request of the City Manager. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS:None ........................................................................................ --0.
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: A communication from William E. Skeen tendering
his resignation as a Trustee of the Roanoke City School Board, effective July 24,
2002, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the communication be received and filed and that the
resignation be accepted. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... -0.
OATHS OF OFFICE-FIRE DEPARTMENT-COMMUNITY PLANNING-PERSONNEL
DEPARTMENT-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE-LIBRARIES-FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION-METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT: The following reports of qualification were before
Council:
Susan W. Jennings as a member of the Roanoke Arts Commission, for
a term ending June 30, 2005;
David K. Lisk as a member of the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2003;
Stanley G. Breakell and Pamela S. White as members of the Roanoke
Public Library Board, for terms ending June 30, 2005;
Fredrick M. Williams as a member of the City Planning Commission, to
fill the unexpired term of Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., resigned, ending
December 31, 2004;
John C. Moody, Jr., as a member of the Board of Fire Appeals, for a
term ending June 30, 2006;
428
Lylburn D. Moore, Jr., as a member of the Personnel and Employment
Practices Commission, for a term ending June 30, 2005;
· Sherman A. Holland as a member of the Roanoke Valley Area
Metropolitan Planning Organization, for a term ending June 30, 2005;
and
Glenn D. Radcliffe as a member of the Human Services Committee, for
a term ending June 30, 2003.
Mr. Carder moved that the reports of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... 0.
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: Pursuant to instructions by Council, the City Clerk
having advertised a public hearing for Monday, August 5, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., or as
soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, to receive the views of citizens on the
appointment of a School Trustee, to fill the unexpired term of Sherman P. Lea,
resigned, ending June 30, 2003, the matter was before the body.
Candidates for the position are:
Edna Crabbere
David Dabay
F. B. Webster Day
John W. Elliott, Jr.
William H. Lindsey
Advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roan~ on
Friday, July 19, 2002 and in The Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, June 27, 2002.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard;
whereupon, the following persons appeared before Council.
429
Mr. Michael Urbanski, 2108 Mount Vernon Road, S. W., endorsed the
candidacy of F. B. Webster Day. He stated that Mr. Day previously served on the
School Board with distinction and his previous experience will enable him to fill the
unexpired term by immediately becoming an effective member of the School Board.
He added that careful, deliberate judgment is the hallmark of Mr. Day's character, his
decision making style is thoughtful and considerate of all viewpoints, and his
experience, skill and knowledge in public finances as a bond attorney will be
important as the School Board considers various issues in the years to come. He
stated that Mr. Day's professional and personal integrity is beyond question and he
is seeking reappointment to the School Board because he wants to improve the
quality of schools and to provide all children with a first class education. He advised
that Mr. Day is tolerant and fair, he prefers to work by building consensus rather
than stirring up controversy, he is a dedicated professional, a Sunday School
teacher, a tee-ball and soccer coach, a member of the Fishburn Park Elementary
School Site Based Council, and the parent of three children in the Roanoke City
School system. He recommended Mr. Day for appointment to the School Board
without reservation.
Mr. Charles W. Day, 1830 Grayson Avenue, N. W., endorsed the candidacy of
F. B. Webster Day. He referred to the following interpersonal skills and attributes
which are consistent in successful School Board Members; i.e.: interpersonal skills,
working cooperatively, accepting criticism, treating all School Board members with
respect, managing stress in stressful situations, taking responsibility for actions,
honoring individual differences, focusing on important issues, believing in public
schools, keeping children first, respecting and guarding the integrity of the
governance process, being honest and sincere, maintaining a sense of humor, and
valuing and seeking challenges. He stated that he served on the School Board with
Webster Day from July 1, 1997 to June 30, 2000, and he was a Board member who
was dedicated to the above listed skills and attributes. He noted that as an attorney,
Mr. Day brings the legalistic aspect to the work of a good School Board Member, he
is a member of numerous professional and civic organizations, and he has three
children in the Roanoke City Public School system. He advised that Webster Day
was a good School Board Trustee during his previous tenure on the Board and, if
appointed to fill the unexpired term of Sherman Lea, his experience will be a
valuable addition to the School Board.
Mr. Douglas Waters, 163 Zion Hill Road, Fincastle, Virginia, endorsed the
candidacy of John W. Elliott, Jr. He advised that Mr. Elliott is a stellar candidate, he
has 30 years of public service in education, municipal government and law
enforcement, and during those years he has worked with children who have excelled
as well as those who have special needs. He stated that Mr. Elliott has two children
in the Roanoke City school system, and he is thoughtful, observant, and practical
in his opinions and ideas on a wide range of problems and experiences. He
encouraged Council to support the candidacy of Mr. Elliott to the School Board.
430
Ms. Aida Martinez, 3034 Ashwood Circle, N. E., endorsed the candidacy of
John W. Eliiott, Jr. She advised that Mr. Elliott is passionate about issues of social
justice and diversity, he inspires leadership and citizenship, he is thoughtful and
creative, he is open minded to different perspectives and ensures that the voice of
everyone is heard. She stated that Mr. Elliott is current on issues of education,
especially in terms of at risk children, he would represent a new voice on the School
Board, and his service would be a welcome addition to the School Board.
Mr. Cynthia Ries, 3631 Peakwood Drive, S. W., endorsed the candidacy of
F. B. Webster Day. She advised that Mr. Day is a man of great character and
qualifications, he is a strong, reassuring and solid presence at Fishburn Park
Elementary School, James Madison Middle School and Patrick Henry High School
where his children are students, and he is an inspired person who inspires others
to do what they can and to stay on course. She called attention to Mr. Day's
previous service on the School Board as Vice Chair, and if appointed, he will bring
experience, skill and a subtle knowledge of the players without a learning curve, he
will be diplomatic, a word smith, a work horse without an ego problem, a consensus
builder, and a bond attorney with financial acumen.
Mr. Joe Preseren, 5022 Cave Spring Circle, S. W., endorsed the candidacy of
John W. Elliott, Jr. He advised that Mr. Elliott has an excellent professional
background of 30 years of public service, and he is a qualified person who has been
involved with the types of decisions that School Board Members are required to
make. He stated that Mr. Elliott has leadership abilities and will keep in mind the
best interests of the students of Roanoke City Schools. He asked that Council
closely review the accomplishments of Mr. Elliott to the Roanoke Valley during his
two years of residency.
Ms. Linda Calkins, 3484 Overbrook Drive, S. W., endorsed the candidacy of
John W. Elliott, Jr. She advised that Mr. Elliott exhibits drive and desire, his
intellectual curiosity stimulates other individuals, discipline and balance are key
tohis success as a leader and as an educator, he achieves a balance in work,
community service, scholarly pursuit, athletic endeavors, family and friends, an
attention to detail that has led him to develop and excel in programs and
opportunities, and he displays a thirst for knowledge and actively seeks information
that will lead not only himself but others to achieve. She stated that he is willing to
share his knowledge, he is a teacher and often explains even the most technical
aspects in terms that will fit the situation and the audience, he exhibits energy and
excitement, his passion and vision arouse excitement in the most placid bystander,
and he seeks out and develops resources in the community and offers first rate
programs. She called attention to his enthusiasm, attention to detail, the energy and
excitement that he exhibits that carries over into the community, his work ethic, and
the ever searching knowledge that he exhibits is reflected in the classroom which
causes him to be an outstanding role model.
431
No other persons wishing to be heard, the Mayor advised that all remarks
would be received and filed. He stated that Council would vote to fill the vacancy at
its next regular meeting on Monday, August 19, 2002 at 2:00 p.m.
The Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT-CITY MARKET: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the City currently leases the Market
Building at 32 Market Square, to Downtown Associates, LP; the lease agreement will
expire on December 31, 2002, and Downtown Associates has officially notified the
City that it will not exercise renewal options of the lease agreement and plans to
vacate the premises, effective December 31,2002, as will its management company,
F&W Management Corp.; therefor, the City must secure a new management
company to operate the facility, effective January 1, 2003.
It was further advised that the City desires the opportunity to consider
entering into a contractual agreement with a property management company to
manage and operate the Market Building; although the sealed bid method of
procurement would normally be used, it is not practicable or fiscally advantageous
to the public in procuring the above services; the experience, qualifications, and
references of firms that can provide the above listed services are of equal, if not
greater, importance than the cost; additional issues, other than price, include
maintenance and repair, employee training, customer responsiveness, marketing
and accounting procedures; therefore, the process of competitive negotiation using
the request for proposal process has been identified as the best method for
procurement of such services.
Itwas explained that the City 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, pursuant
to Section 23.1-4 (e) of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended; and the
proposed method will allow for negotiations with two or more providers to determine
the best qualified at the most competitive price or rate.
432
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the use of competitive
negotiation as the method to secure a management company for the Market
Building.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#36000-080502) A RESOLUTION designating the procurement method known
as competitive negotiation, rather than the procurement method known as
competitive sealed bidding, to be used for the procurement of a property
management company for the City Market Building; and documenting the basis for
this determination.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 298.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36000-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
Mr. Cutler called attention to a potential synergy between the Art Museum of
Western Virginia, Center in the Square and the City Market Building in regard to a
new heating/air conditioning system, and inquired if the new system will be a partof
the proposed management contract; whereupon, the City Manager advised thatthe
issue of replacement of the heating/air conditioning system is a priority for the City,
but is not a part of the request for proposals for a management firm. She stated that
City Engineering staff has been requested to enter into discussions with their
counterparts from the two facilities to determine the feasibility of some type of
combination system that could serve the different buildings without duplicating the
necessary levels of service.
Mr. Bestpitch suggested that the City communicate its support to local
independent businesses operating the food vendor operations in the City Market
building.
The Mayor spoke in support of merchants currently operating on the City
Market, as well as the food court in the City Market building, and stated that the
management firm should be an entity with an entrepreneurial spirit that can relate
to the market vendors because there is a special ambiance on the City Market that
should remain intact.
In clarification, the City Manager spoke in support of present activity on the
first floor of the City Market building by local vendors; however, she stated that
there is an opportunity for development of the upper floors. She called attention to
meetings with food service vendors and correspondence attempting to provide a
level of assurance; however, the greatest reassurance will come when a
433
replacement management firm is in place that will interact with market vendors. She
advised that City staff realize the value of the City Market building, both tangible and
intangible, as well as the Farmers' Market, both of which play key roles to the
success of downtown Roanoke and to the community as a whole.
Resolution No. 36000-080502 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ............................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the City of Roanoke wishes to consider entering into a contractual
agreement with a service provider for the delivery of Job Readiness training;
instruction would be made available for clients required to participate in the Virginia
Initiative for Employment Not Welfare (VIEW) and Food Stamp Employment Training
(FSET) programs; and proposed training is designed to assist participants with job
search efforts, as well as with obtaining and maintaining employment.
It was further advised that although the sealed bid method of procurement
could be used, it is not practicable or fiscally advantageous to the public in this
instance; the experience, qualifications, and references of firms that can provide the
above listed service are of equal, if not greater, importance than the cost; issues of
experience, capacity and ability to achieve desired outcomes are of critical
importance in determining the best possible provider of the required service; and
the procurement of job readiness/employment preparation training must include a
means to evaluate the quality of services to be provided in areas such as
instructional/training experience, allocation of personnel and financial management;
therefore, the process of competitive negotiation using the request for proposal
process has been identified as the best method for procurement of such goods and
services.
It was explained that the City Code 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, pursuant to Section 23.1-4 (e), Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, which method will allow for negotiations with two or more providers to
determine the best qualified at the most competitive price or rate.
434
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the use of competitive
negotiation as the method to secure vendors to provide appropriate services as
above described.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#36001-080502) A RESOLUTION designating the procurement method known
as competitive negotiation, rather than the procurement method, known
competitive sealed bidding, to be used for the procurement of services for
provision of Job Readiness instruction for eligible Department of Social Services
clients and documenting the basis for this determination.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 299.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36601-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ .0.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that Congress has appropriated funds for continuation of
the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant (LLEBG) for fiscal year 2002-2003, which
will be administered by the Bureau of Justice Assistance and the U. S. Department
of Justice; the purpose of the grant is to provide funds to units of local government
to underwrite projects designed to reduce crime and improve public safety; the City
of Roanoke has been awarded $129,407.00, and grant conditions require a local
match amount of $14,379.00, for a program totaling $143,786.00; and the award will
renew Roanoke's LLEBG Grant Program for the seventh consecutive year.
It was further advised that grant funds must be used for: (1) payment of
overtime to presently employed law enforcement officers for the purpose of
increasing the number of hours worked by such personnel and (2) procuring
equipment, training and other materials directly related to basic law enforcement
functions; and police bicycle patrol, directed at specific/problem areas or
neighborhoods of the City will be continued through the program.
435
It was stated that the deadline for acceptance of the grant is August 25, 2002;
grant funds become available only after a public hearing and an LLEBG Program
advisory committee meeting has been conducted by the Police Department; and the
public hearing and LLEBG advisory committee meeting must be conducted prior to
October 9, 2002.
It was advised that the LLEBG Program requires that all grant funds
($129,407.00) be placed in an interest bearing account; based on interest earned
during the past year of LLEBG funding, interest earnings of $2,500.00 are
anticipated; and a local cash match of $14,379.00 is available in the Police
Department's State Asset Forfeiture account.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute any
required documentation and that Council appropriate $129,407.00 to grant fund
accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the following amounts:
Police Overtime $120,000.00
FICA $ 9,180.00
Expendable Equipment $ 12,000.00
Training and Development $ 5.106.00
Total $146, 286.00
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36002-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 301 .)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36002-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ............................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
436
(#36003-080502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a certain Local
Law Enforcement Block Grant from the United States Department of Justice, and
authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 302.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36003-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ....................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising
that notification has been received from the Commonwealth of Virginia Commission
for the Arts that a $5,000.00 Local Government Challenge Grant has been awarded
to the City of Roanoke; and application for the grant was made at the request of the
Arts Council of Roanoke Valley, Mill Mountain Theatre, Opera Roanoke, Roanoke
Symphony Orchestra, and Young Audiences of Virginia.
It was further advised that in order to receive the funds, the Commission must
obtain written confirmation that local tax revenue dollars will be used to match or
exceed the amount of the grant; and for fiscal year 2002-03, the above listed
organizations will receive local tax dollar funding through the Roanoke Arts
Commission in the following amounts:
Arts Council of the Roanoke Valley
Mill Mountain Theatre
Opera Roanoke
Roanoke Symphony Orchestra
· Young Audiences of Virginia
$12,500.00
10,500.00
6,500.00
21,500.00
4,000.00
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution authorizing
acceptance of the grant, appropriate funds to an account to be created by the
Director of Finance in the Grant Fund entitled, "Challenge Grant FY 03", and
establish a revenue estimate of $5,000.00; and grant funds will then be distributed
to the five sponsoring agencies, in the amount of $1,000.00 each.
437
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36004-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 303.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36004-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith .................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#36005-080502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a Local
Government Challenge Grant from the Virginia Commission for the Arts.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 304.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36005-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
MayorSmith ................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Virginia Department of Social Services issued a
Request for Proposal to use Federal funds to provide job search, job coaching, and
job retention services for hard-to-serve Temporary Assistance to Needy Families
(TANF) recipients; the City of Roanoke Department of Social Services responded to
the Request for Proposals with a proposal outlining its intent to work collaboratively
with TAP - This Valley Works, to provide work-related services as above listed;
under the proposal, eligible TANF recipients who must obtain employment, but who
have not been in compliance with certain regulatory requirements, are provided
customized job search assistance; and case managers work with these individuals
to develop and initiate an individualized plan of action to meet compliance
requirements and to assist in securing and maintaining employment.
438
It was further advised that the City of Roanoke was awarded $207,933.00 in
grant funding under the TANF Hard-to-Serve Project for fiscal year 2003, which
includes $31,561.00 carried forward from fiscal year 2002 and $176,372.00 available
for fiscal year 2003.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize acceptance of the
grant award, appropriate Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) Funding,
totaling $207,933.00, and establish a revenue estimate of $207,933.00 in accounts to
be established by the Director of Finance.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36006-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 305.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36006-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith .......................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution:
(#36007-080502) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of a grant award
under the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Hard-to Serve Project
from the Virginia Department of Social Services, for the purpose of providing job
search, job coaching and job retention services for eligible TANF recipients who
must obtain employment, and authorizing execution of any and all necessary
documents to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 306.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36007-080502. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ...................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
439
BUDGET-GRANTS-WATER RESOURCES-ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that Presidential Decision Directive
63 (PDD-63) was issued by President Clinton in 1998 and established the National
Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC); and the Directive also designates the water
industry as one of eicjht critical infrastructure sectors and outlines a collaborative
effort between public agencies and the private sector to identify and address the
vulnerabilities in the nation's critical infrastructures.
It was further advised that in response to the attacks of September 11, 2001,
the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) received a supplemental
appropriation from Congress to improve safety and security of the nation's water
supplies; grant funds from EPA was made available for large systems that serve
populations over 100,000, such as is the case with the City of Roanoke's water
system; in December, 2001, the U. S. House of Representatives passed legislation
that will require all water utilities serving over 3,300 people to complete vulnerability
assessments of their potable water systems; and the schedule for completion of the
assessment is December 31, 2002.
It was explained that in April 2002, the Water Division applied for a $115,000.00
grant from EPA to be used by the City Water Division, in accordance with EPA
requirements/guidelines, to develop a vulnerability assessment (VA), emergency
response/operating plan (EOP), security enhancement and design, or a combination
of efforts; Randall Funding and Development, the grant writing firm under contract
with the City, assisted in the preparation of grant application materials, which
assistance is offered to the City of Roanoke for 100 per cent of all approved costs
incurred up to and not exceeding $115,000.00 and the City is under no obligation to
provide matching funds; and on June 17, 2002, the City received notification from
the Environmental Protection Agency that the $115,000.00 grant application has
been approved.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the EPA grant, in the
amount of $115,000.00, and authorize the City Manager and the City Clerk to execute
and attest, respectively, an agreement with the Environmental Protection Agency
and any other forms necessary and to take such further action as may be necessary
to accept such grant, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney; and that
Council appropriate $115,000.00 in Federal funds in an account to be established by
the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36008-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 307.)
440
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36008-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith .................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#36009-080502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a grant from
the United States Environmental Protection Agency to develop a vulnerability
assessment, emergency response/operation plan, security enhancement and design,
or a combination of these items for the City's water system; authorizing execution
of any required documentation on behalf of the City; and authorizing the City
Manager to take such further action as may be necessary to accept such grant.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 308.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36009.080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ........................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ...................................................................................... --0.
COMMUNITY PLANNING-GRANTS-BUSINESS INCUBATORS: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that since 1995, the Blue Ridge Small Business
Development Center has operated the "New Century Venture Center," the region's
premiere small business incubator and one of the most successful facilities of its
kind in the nation; the City of Roanoke has long been a supporter of the Center,
including providing Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to assist
with acquisition of the building and operating costs during the Center's first [hrse
years; and the Center facilitates the viability of new and expanding small businesses
by offering space and shared services to reduce financial burdens on such
companies.
It further advised that more recently, the Small Business Center has perceived
the need to assist businesses that cannot locate within the facility, but which
nonetheless can benefit from the cost savings that the Center makes available; the
Center is establishing a new "Venture Out" program that will provide computer,
441
communications and other services to such external companies; and external
companies will schedule time to use the equipment and services located within the
"Venture Out" area of the Center, thereby reducing capital and other costs of the
business viability.
It was stated that on May 13, 2002, Council authorized CDBG assistance to the
Small Business Center and its Venture Out Program, pursuant to Resolution No.
35848-051302, which approved submission of the City's 2002-03 Consolidated Plan
Annual Update to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; Council
accepted 2002-03 CDBG funds on June 17, 2002, pursuant to Budget Ordinance No.
35914-061702 and Resolution No. 35915-061702, pending receipt of an approval letter
from HUD; and the approval letter is completing the routine Congressional release
process and is expected by mid-August.
It was explained that in order for the Small Business Center to provide
business development activities approved in the Consolidated Plan, authorization
by Council to execute an agreement with the Center is needed; necessary CDBG
funding is available in Account No. 035-G03-0330-5370, and a total of $105,000.00 in
CDBG funds is being provided to the Small Business Center for the period from
July 1, 2002, to June 30, 2003.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the 2002-03
CDBG Agreement with the Blue Ridge Small Business Development Center.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
(#36010-080502) A RESOLUTION authorizing City officials to enter into the
2002-2003 Community Development Block Grant Program Agreement with the Blue
Ridge Small Business Development Center, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 309.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36010-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ..................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
442
REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-COMMUNITY PLANNING-GRANTS: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that since 1998, the Roanoke
Regional Chamber of Commerce Small Business Development Center has
conducted a "Community Business Development Initiative" program to promote
business development in the central City; on May 13, 2002, Council authorized the
Chamber's 2002-03 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) activities and
funding, pursuant to Resolution No. 35848-051302, which approved submission of
the City's 2002-03 Consolidated Plan Annual Update to the U. S. Department of
Housing and Urban Development; and Council accepted 2002-03 CDBG funds on
June 17, 2002, pursuant to Budget Ordinance No. 35914-061702 and Resolution No.
35915-061702, pending receipt of the approval letter from the Department of Housing
and Urban Development, and the approval letter is completing the routine
Congressional release process and is expected by mid-August.
It was further advised that in order for the Chamber of Commerce to provide
the business development activities approved in the Consolidated Plan,
authorization by Council to execute an agreement with the Chamber of Commerceis
needed; necessary CDBG funding is available in Account No. 035-G03-0330-5021,
and a total of $105,000.00 in CDBG funds is being provided to the Chamber of
Commerce for the period from July 1, 2002, to June 30, 2003.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the 2002-03
CDBG Agreement with the Chamber of Commerce, to be approved as to form by the
City Attorney.
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#36011-080502) A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of an agreement
with the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce for administration of Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for FY 2002-2003, for services related to the
promotion and development in the central area of the City.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 309.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36011-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
Mr. Dowe advised that he serves on the Board of Directors of the Roanoke
Regional Chamber of Commerce, and inquired if he has a conflict of interest;
whereupon, the City Attorney advised that since it is not a paid position, there would
be no conflict of interest.
443
Resolution No. 36011-080502 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
MayorSmith ................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
BUDGET-PARKS AND RECREATION-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that greenways were first proposed for the City
of Roanoke by landscape architect John Nolan in the 1907 and 1928 comprehensive
plans which were developed for the City; and Mr. Nolan realized that the beneficial
aspects of greenways extended far beyond their recreational value, and since that
time, the Roanoke Valley community has undertaken an extensive and ambitious
greenways development plan.
It was further advised that the Mill Mountain/Prospect Greenway was included
in the Roanoke Valley Conceptual Greenway Plan, and selected as the region's pilot
greenway project in 1995 by the Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission, which is
comprised of representatives of all four Roanoke Valley governments; as originally
envisioned, the greenway was to connect three of the Roanoke Valley's most visited
destinations, linking the Market area with attractions on Mill Mountain, and
continuing on to the Blue Ridge Parkway; due to budget constraints and other
factors, the scope of the project has been divided into phases; the present phase,
the Mill Mountain Greenway, will allow walkers, runners, and bicyclists to travel from
the Market area, through Elmwood Park, across Elm Avenue and down Williamson
Road, across the Walnut Avenue Bridge, to Piedmont Park, overlooking the Roanoke
River; construction will include new sidewalks, ramps, and retaining walls in
Elmwood Park, medians on Williamson Road, a ramp leading from Hamilton Terrace
to Piedmont Street, and a parking area at Piedmont Park, with associated amenities
and work.
It was explained that after proper advertisement, five bids were received, with
H. & S. Construction Company, submitting the Iow bid, in the amount of $655,761.20
(which includes $615,648.12 for the Base Bid and $40,113.08 for Bid Alternate Items),
and 180 consecutive calendar days for construction.
It was advised that funding in the amount of $715,761.00 is needed for the
project; additional funds that exceed the contract amount will be used for
miscellaneous project expenses, including advertising, prints, test services, minor
variations in bid quantities and unforeseen project expenses; and funding is
available from the following sources:
444
$ 90,000.00
25,263.00
20,000.00
390,000.00
190,498.00
Account No. 008-052-9709-9180
Account No. 008-052-9721
Account No. 008-530-9756
Public Improvement
Bonds Series 1999
Parks
Mill Mountain Greenway
In-kind Cash Donation
(Horace G. Fralin
Charitable Trust)
ISTEA Grant
Roanoke River Greenway
Phase II,
$ 715,761.00
It was noted that the following organizations have contributed significantly to
the project:
The Horace G. Fralin Charitable Trust contributed $20,000.00; Lanford
Brothers Co., Inc., donated labor and equipment usage for grading in
Piedmont Park (valued at $10,000.00); J. M. Turner & Co., Inc., donated
labor, materials, and installation of the trellis at Piedmont Park (valued
at $10,000.00); and Branch Highways, Inc., donated concrete barriers
for Williamson Road (valued at $10,000.00).
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the bid of H. & S.
Construction Company, in the amount of $655,761.20 (which includes $615,648.12
for the Base Bid and $40,113.08 for Bid Alternate Items), with 180 consecutive
calendar days construction time; reject all other bids received by the City; accept a
gift of $20,000.00 from the Horace G. Fralin Charitable Trust; accept gifts of Lanford
Brothers Co., Inc., J. M. Turner & Co., Inc., and Branch Highways, Inc., which are to
be made available as construction progresses into specific areas; and establish an
account receivable to accept the $20,000.00 donation and the $390,000.00 grant and
appropriate these amounts, together with transfers of $90,000.00 from Public
Improvement Bonds Series 1999 - Parks, Account No. 008-052-9709-9180, and
$190,498.00 from Account No. 008-530-9766, Roanoke River Greenway Phase II, to
Account No. 008-052-9721, Mill Mountain Greenway.
Mr. Harris offered the following budget ordinance:
445
(#36012-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 310.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36012-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
Mr. Cutler called attention to progress on the various greenways and inquired
if greenway planners are incorporating plans for easy access from one greenway
to another. The City Manager responded that easy access is the long term intent,
different greenway segments are under construction, and in the past 30 days
Council took action to approve acquisition of those parcels of land needed to bring
the Lick Run Greenway to The Hotel Roanoke. She stated that at a future Council
meeting, or via report, Council will be provided with information on proposals to
connect all of the different greenways.
Ordinance No. 36012-080502 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
MayorSmith ................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#36013-080502) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of H. & S. Construction
Company for the construction of a greenway connecting Elmwood Park and
Piedmont Park, by way of Williamson Road, Walnut Avenue Bridge, and Riverview
Boulevard, 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 dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 312.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36013-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
446 -
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith .................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
Mr. Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#36014-080502) A RESOLUTION accepting a donation of funds to be used for
the construction of the Mill Mountain Greenway; a donation of the delivery and
placement of 564 linear feet of traffic barrier on the Williamson Road portion of the
project; a donation of the materials for, and the construction and installation of, a
trellis, and a concrete pad beneath the trellis, in Piedmont Park; and a donation of
equipment and labor for the grading and preparation of the Piedmont Park parking
area and the Hamilton Terrace switchback ramp; and expressing appreciation for
each donation.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 313.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36014-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
BUDGET-Y. M. C. A-SWIMMING POOLS-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that on June 18, 2001, Council
adopted the 2002-2006 Capital Improvement Program (ClP), which included funds
for the YMCA Aquatic Center and Roanoke River Greenway projects; beginning with
fiscal year 2002, the City committed to a $2.0 million investment, to be paid in
$200,000.00 increments over a ten-year period to the YMCA Aquatic Center; funds
cover costs associated with design and construction of a new central branch YMCA
complex; and City residents will receive a discounted membership rate, allowing
them to visit any YMCA facility, including the facility planned in the City of Salem.
It was further advised that beginning in fiscal year 2002, the City also
committed to contributing $200,000.00 per year for ten years, for a total of $2.0
million to the Roanoke River Greenways project; funds for the Roanoke River
Greenway project cover costs associated with the construction of a greenway, which
will extend along the Roanoke River; greenways have become a necessary
commodity for communities across the United States since they are viewed as an
447
essential amenity that encourages economic development; greenways connect
citizens to various aspects of a community such as parks, shops, schools and
neighborhoods; and numerous greenways have been proposed, with a majority
connecting to the proposed Roanoke River Greenway.
It was explained that Council approved an update to the CIP for fiscal years
2003-2007 on May 13, 2002, and an appropriation of $200,000.00 for each project in
capital fund interest is required in order to meet the City's obligation for fiscal year
2003.
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $400,000.00 in
capital fund interest earnings to the following Capital Projects:
YMCA Aquatic Center
Roanoke River Greenway
$ 200,000.00
200,000.00
TOTAL $ 400,000.00
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36015-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 315.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36015-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and Mayor
Smith ........................................................................................................ -6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
(Council Member Bestpitch abstained from voting inasmuch as his spouse is
employed by the YMCA of the Roanoke Valley.)
BUDGET-FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the Fifth District Disability Services Board
(DSB) is responsible to local governments and serves as a critical resource for
needs assessment, information sharing and service opportunities for citizens with
disabilities, their families and the community; and the following jurisdictions in the
448
Fifth Planning District have enacted resolutions establishing their participation in
a regional effort and have appointed a local official to serve as a representative:
Cities of Roanoke, Salem, Covington, Clifton Forge; Counties of Roanoke, Craig,
Botetourt, and Allegheny; and the Town of Vinton, with other members of the
Disability Services Board including representatives from business and consumers.
It was further advised that Council authorized the Director of Finance to serve
as fiscal agent for the Fifth Planning District Disabilities Services Board on
September 25, 1995, pursuant to Resolution No. 32675-092595.
It was explained that the State Department of Rehabilitative Services, through
the Rehabilitative Services Incentive Fund (RSIF) Program, has allocated funds in the
amount of $80,346.00 over the next three years to the Fifth District DSB for the
following projects:
Heartland Rehabilitative Services - Community-based creative
movement dance classes to special needs children in cooperation with
the Roanoke Ballet.
Family Service of the Roanoke Valley - Home-based personal care
services for individuals with physical and sensory disabilities.
Adult Care Center of the Roanoke Valley - Day and weekend
therapeutic and recreational services to persons with disabilities.
It was further explained that over the next three years, the $80,346.00
Rehabilitative Services Incentive Fund allocation and a $30,440.00 local agency
match has been apportioned as follows: $53,133.00 for the first year, $47,633.00 for
the second year and $10,020.00 for the third year for the Adult Care Center, Family
Services of Roanoke Valley, and Heartland Rehabilitation; and no local government
match is required.
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $80,346.00 to grant
fund accounts to be established by the Director of Finance and create a
corresponding revenue estimate from the State Department of Rehabilitative
Services to provide funding for the Fifth District Disability Services Board.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36016-080502) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 316.)
449
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36016-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-FIFTH PLANNING DISTRICT
COMMISSION-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the development of a regional economic strategy was
undertaken by the Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance over a year ago; Eva
Klein & Associates, Ltd., and the Center for Regional Economic Competitiveness
assisted the Alliance in the planning process; over 150 individuals/groups involved
with local government, economic development, business, education, tourism, and
human resources were interviewed as part of the effort; and on July 11, 2002, the
Board of Directors of the Regional Alliance adopted a strategy to serve as a roadmap
for improving the region's economic competitiveness.
It was further advised that the Strategy includes a number of strategies, goals
and tactics developed within a framework of six critical and interrelated strategic
themes; i.e.:
Visibility
Connectivity
Quality of Life Amenities
Knowledge Work Force
Innovation & Entrepreneurship
Economic Transformation
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a measure endorsing the
Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance's Regional Economic Strategy.
Mr. Harris offered the following resolution:
(#36017-080502) A RESOLUTION endorsing a Regional Economic Strategy
developed by the Fifth Planning District Regional Alliance.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 36017.)
45O
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36017-080502. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ................................................................................... -0.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of
Finance submitted the Financial Report for the City of Roanoke for the month of
June 2002.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the June 2002 Financial
Report would be received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
COMMITTEES-ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD-STREETS AND ALLEYS:
Robert B. Manetta, Member, Architectural Review Board, requested that Council
review proposed changes to the streetscape for the Kirk Avenue area between
Market Street and Williamson Road. He called attention to the quality of work on the
first section of the street, but due to concerns regarding expenses to maintain the
area, the City has considered not following through with the same type of treatment
for the remainder of the street. He referred to future development in the Market area
in which case it would be advantageous to continue with the same type of treatment
which will invite pedestrians from those buildings to the market area. He stated that
cities all over the country with successful downtown areas have dressed up streets,
intersections, and pedestrian walkways which demonstrate pride in the community,
it is the right thing to do for an area that is extremely important to the entire City of
Roanoke, and the area represents the City's front door and showplace. He advised
that representatives of Downtown Roanoke, Inc., will appear before Council in the
near future to discuss similar treatments for other streets in the City Market area.
Mr. Peter Clapsaddle, 306 Market Street, S. W., architect for a proposed new
project at the corner of Market Street and Kirk Avenue, expressed support of the
recommendation of the Architectural Review Board to enable pavement on both
sides of the street to be consistent.
451
The Mayor advised that without objection by Council, the matter would be
referred to the City Manager for report.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS:
SWIMMING POOLS-LEASES: Ordinance No. 35977, authorizing the proper City
officials to enter into a Deed of Lease Extension between the City of Roanoke and
Roanoke Valley Swimming, Inc., for the lease and operation of certain City-owned
property known as the Gator Aquatic Center, having previously been before the
Council for its first reading on July 15, 2002, read and adopted on its first reading
and laid over, was again before the body, Mr. Harris offering the following for its
second reading and final and adoption:
(#35977-080502) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to enter
into a Deed of Lease Extension between the City of Roanoke and Roanoke Valley
Swimming, Inc., for the lease and operation of certain City-owned property known
as the Gator Aquatic Center, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 296.)
The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and MayorSmith ................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT.OUTDOOR DINING: Council Member Carder
commended City stafffor their efforts in connection with establishing outdoor dining
for the City of Roanoke.
COMMUNITY PLANNING-NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORPORATION-HOTEL
ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER.STREETS AND ALLEYS: Council Member Carder
requested that Council discuss the feasibility of reopening Jefferson Street to
vehicular/pedestrian traffic at its August 13, 2002 Planning Retreat. He pointed out
that Norfolk/Southern closed the Jefferson pedestrian crossover at about the same
time that the walkway was opened to the Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center.
452
NEIGHBORHOOD ORGANIZATIONS-COMMUNITY PLANNING-STREETS AND
ALLEYS: Council Member Carder referred to the City's Comprehensive Plan as it
relates to traffic issues/traffic calming, versus traffic moving expeditiously from one
point to another throughout the City. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan should
be the vision by which Council bases its decisions as a City Council and the ruler
by which all decisions are made by City staff and management. As a part of
Council's Planning Retreat on August 13, 2002, he requested that Council discuss
the matter of neighborhood streets and "workhorse streets". He referred to the
Bullitt/Jamison neighborhood where residents have requested two-way streets, and
advised that streets running through neighborhoods should be pedestrian friendly.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-GRANDIN THEATER: Council Member Cutler
congratulated the Grandin Theatre Foundation on raising over $1 million toward the
reopening of the Grandin Theater in the fall of 2002.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-WATER RESOURCES: Council Member Cutler
commended the efforts of a number of persons who were involved in bringing the
temporary Crystal Spring water supply on line as expeditiously as possible, and
requested that appreciation be expressed to those individuals at a future City
Council meeting.
OTHER HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised
that Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard, and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Mr. Fred Flowers, 3207 White Oak Road, S. W., spoke
with regard to a request of Structures Design/Build, LLC, for closure of a portion of
the Franklin Road right- of-way to facilitate development of a 3.5 acre strip of land
lying between Franklin Road and residential property on White Oak Road. He
advised that Council at its meeting on Monday, July 15, 2002, referred the request
to the City Manager to address issues regarding pricing and language relative to the
degree of the cut of the land. He stated that Council was previously advised that
commercial development of the land is inevitable, however, Council was desirous
of minimizing the environmental impacts of development. He stated that residents
of White Oak Road believe that there is a viable alternative to development of the
land, and they propose to purchase the 3.5 acres jointly and immediately donate the
land to the City of Roanoke for use as permanent green space. He stated that price
has been discussed in broad terms with the current land owner, and he has secured
financial commitments from most oftbe residents adjoining the property; however,
the only obstacle is that Structures/Design Build has a contract to purchase the 3.5
453
acres, subject to contingencies affecting the economic feasibility of this project. He
added that should Council grant or sell the excess Franklin Road right-of-way to
Structures Design/Build, economic feasibility of this commercial development
project will be enhanced, most likely killing any opportunity by residents to preserve
the land in its present state. He explained that because the land is too narrow, too
steep and too expensive, it has not previously been developed, and asked that
Council deny the request of Structures Design/Build in the hopes that the City will
not provide the economic stimulus that the company needs to proceed with
development.
Mr. James Mullitt, 3227 White Oak Road, S. W., advised that concerned
citizens request that Council carefully consider the proposed removal of a green
area along Franklin Road that is for sale, contingent upon Council's action to sell the
right-of-way, which will cause development of the property to be more economically
feasible. He called attention to instances in the City of Roanoke where hillsides
were bulldozed in order to make room for development which have turned out to be
eye sores, and the term "strip mining" seems appropriate for the area under
consideration. He stated that while the property is zoned commercial, it borders 12
backyards, and an entire neighborhood would be dramatically effected if such a
"strip mining" process were to occur. He added that careful consideration of the
impact of development is in order, such as safety of children should a steep grade
be present, possible erosion, the foundations of aging homes should blasting be
required, and a proposal to block the streams flowing through the area. He stated
that a vote to give or sell the land to the developer is a vote by Council to remove
green areas; and residents look to the Members of Council for the leadership to find
an alternative that will bring about the correct solution.
Mr. William Jappich, 3215 White Oak Road, S. W., expressed concern about
development of the property. He stated that the City Planning Commission voted
unanimously to denythe request, and asked that Council take into consideration the
recommendation of the Planning Commission when it makes its decision.
COMPLAINTS-TAXES-CITY COUNCIL-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert Gravely,
617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., addressed Council in connection with insufficient wages
for the City's work force, deteriorating housing stock in the City of Roanoke, and
favoritism by Council and the City administration of business over the average
citizen. He alleged taxation without representation, misuse of power, and
obstruction of justice.
454 -
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
GRANTS-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager referred to a grant
application approved earlier in the Council meeting with regard to additional security
measures for the City's water systems, which is one of two grants that the City has
received as a result of the contract with The Randall Corporation to prepare grant
writing applications that enabled the City of Roanoke to receive at least $1 million
in grants. She reported that with the two grants that were recently approved, The
Randall Corporation has more than paid for its two year contract rate and will
continue to apply for various grants on behalf of the City.
REGIONAL CHAMBER OF COMMERCE-COMMUNITY PLANNING-ECONOMIC
DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager expressed appreciation that Members of Council
have recently given credence to the importance of the City's Comprehensive Plan
and the need for the Comprehensive Plan to serve as the City's future vision. During
the Council's Planning Retreat on August 13, she requested that Council use the
Comprehensive Plan as a guiding tool for prioritizing activities of City staff over the
next several years. She further advised that the Regional Economic Development
Strategy, which was approved earlier in the meeting and involved reg!onal
cooperation by the public and private sectors, should also serve as a guiding tool
for the future. She stated that the proof of both plans is in their implementation, and
encouraged Council to hold up the two documents to City staff to ensure that the
City is on a course of action that will take the Roanoke community and the Roanoke
Valley to greatness.
At 3:45 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for one Closed
Session.
At 4:35 p.m., the meeting raconvened in the City Council Chamber, with all
Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Smith presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Mr. Bestpitch
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 me~ting
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. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt
and Mayor Smith .......................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ............................................................................. --0.
455
SCHOOLS: Mr. Harris moved that those persons (Edna Crabbere, David
Dabay, F. B. Webster Day, John W. Elliott, Jr., and William H. Lindsey), who applied
for a vacancy on the Roanoke City School Board created by the resignation of
Sherman P. Lea, also be considered for purposes of the public hearing on the
vacancy created by the resignation of William E. Skeen, pursuant to those persons
granting permission via contact by the City Clerk's Office. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Carder and unanimously adopted.
ZONING-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that pursuant to Ordinance No.
35953 adopted by Council on June 17, 2002, membership of the Board of Zoning
Appeals was increased from five to seven; whereupon, he opened the floor for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Carder placed in nomination the name of Diana B. Sheppard.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Sheppard was appointed as a
member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, for a term ending December 31, 2005, by
the following vote:
FOR MS. SHEPPARD: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe,
Harris, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ......................................................................... 7.
COMMITTEES-TRANSPORTATION SAFETY: The Mayor advised that there is
a vacancy on the City of Roanoke Transportation Safety Commission, and called for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Bestpitch placed in nomination the name of Ann F. Harmon.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Harmon was appointed as a member
of the City of Roanoke Transportation Safety Commission, for a term ending October
31, 2004, by the following vote:
FOR MS. HARMON: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris,
Wyatt and Mayor Smith .................................................................................. 7.
Mr. Bestpitch moved that the City residency requirement be waived in this
instance. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and unanimously adopted.
COMMITTEES-YOUTH: The Mayor called attention to vacancies on the Youth
Services Citizen Board; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the
vacancies.
Mr. Carder placed in nomination the name of Abbi Fitzpatrick, Lylburn D.
Moore, Jr., and Cheryl D. Evans.
456
There being no further nominations, Ms. Fitzpatrick and Mr. Moore were
appointed for terms ending May 31, 2005, and Ms. Evans was appointed for a term
ending May 31, 2003, as members of the Youth Services Citizen Board, by the
following vote:
FOR MS. FITZPATRICK, MS. EVANS AND MR. MOORE: Council Members
Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ........................... 7.
HOUSING/AUTHORITY-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the terms of
office of Christie L. Meredith and Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., as Commissioners of the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority will expire on August 31,2002, and
called for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Mr. Harris placed in nomination the names of Christie L. Meredith and
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Meredith and Mr. Fitzpatrick were
reappointed as Commissioners of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority, for terms ending August 31, 2006, by the following vote:
FOR MS. MEREDITH AND MR. FITZPATRICK: Council Members Bestpitch,
Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt and Mayor Smith ..................................... 7.
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that the term of office of
Margaret M. Grayson as a member of the Virginia Western Community College,
Board of Directors, expired on June 30, 2002, and called for nominations to fill the
vacancy.
Mr. Harris placed in nomination the name of Barry W. Baird.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Baird was appointed as a member of
the Virginia Western Community College, Board of Directors, for a term ending
June 30, 2006, by the following vote:
FOR MR. BAIRD: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris,
Wyatt and Mayor Smith .............................................................. 7.
457
At 4:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened on
Tuesday, August 13, 2002, at 9:00 a.m., in the Executive Board Room at Bernard's
Landing Resort and Conference Center, 775 Ashmeade Road, Moneta, Virginia, for
City Council's Planning Retreat. (The Council's Planning Retreat was postponed
until a later date.)
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor
PERSONNEL COMMITTEE ............ ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
August 8, 2002
2:00 p.m.
A meeting of the Roanoke City Council Personnel Committee, composed of
the Members of the Roanoke City Council, was called to order on Thursday,
August 8, 2002, immediately following conclusion of the Legislative Committee
meeting, which convened at 12:00 noon, in City Council's Conference Room, fourth
floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke,
with Chairperson C. Nelson Harris presiding.
PRESENT: Mayor Ralph K. Smith and Council Members William H. Carder,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris and Linda F. Wyatt ............. 6.
ABSENT: Council Member William D. Bestpitch ..................................... 1.
OFFICERS PRESENT: William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; and Stephanie M.
Moon, Deputy City Clerk.
CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Carder moved that the City Council Personnel Committee
convene in Closed Meeting to consult with legal counsel on a specific legal matter
requiring the advice of counsel, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(7), Code of Virginia,
(1950), as amended. The motion was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
458
AYES: Mayor Smith and Council Members Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Wyatt and
Chairperson Harris .................................................................... -6.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Bestpitch was absent.)
At 2:05 p.m., the Chairperson declared the meeting in recess.
At 2:35 p.m., the meeting reconvened in City Council's Conference Room, with
all Members of the City Council Personnel Committee in attendance, with the
exception of Council Member Bestpitch.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Ms. Wyatt
moved that each Member of the City Council Personnel Committee 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 bywhich any
Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by the City
Council Personnel Committee. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carder and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Mayor Smith and Council Members Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Wyatt and
Chairperson Harris ................................................................... --6.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Member Bestpitch was absent.)
There being no further business, the Chairperson declared the meeting
adjourned at 2:37 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Stephanie M. Moon
Deputy City Clerk
C. Nelson Harris
Chairperson
459
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ..... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
August 19, 2002
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
August 19, 2002, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the City Council Chamber,
fourth floor, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., 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.
PRESENT: Council Members William D. Bestpitch, William H. Carder,
M. Rupter Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, 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 The Reverend Seymore G. Cole,
Pastor, Melrose Avenue Seventh Day Adventist Church.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS:
DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Bestpitch offered the following resolution
memorializing the late James Edward Taliaferro, Sr., former Mayor of the City of
Salem, who passed away on August 3, 2002:
460
(#36018-081902) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late James Edward
Taliaferro, Sr., a former Mayor of the City of Salem.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 321.)
Mr. Bestpitch moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36018-081902. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ................................................................................. .-----7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
DECEASED PERSONS: Mr. Carder offered the following resolution
memorializing the late Alfred N. "Hoot" Gibson, former City Auditor and Director of
Finance for the City of Roanoke, who passed away on August 1, 2002:
(#36019-081902) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Alfred N. "Hoot"
Gibson, a native of Roanoke and former City Auditor and Director of Finance for the
City of Roanoke.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 322.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36019-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation declaring Friday,
August 30, 2002, as Hokie Pride Day.
461
VA AMATEUR SPORTS/COMMONWEALTH GAMES-SPORTS ACTIVITIES:
Peter Lampman, President, Virginia Amateur Sports, Inc., expressed appreciation to
the City of Roanoke for its support of the Commonwealth Games of Virginia. He
presented information on the economic impact that the 2002 Commonwealth Games
had on the Roanoke Valley, including information on the growth of the
Commonwealth Games and demographics of where athletes traveled from in order
to participate. He stated that figures over the past years have shown an increase in
the number of athletes coming from outside the Roanoke Valley, and approximately
110,000 athletes have competed in the Commonwealth Games of Virginia over the
past 13 years.
He advised that on site expenditures, which include hotel/lodging, eating and
drinking places, automobile/gasoline, retail, transportation services, amusement
and recreation services, entry fees, gate receipts, concessions and merchandise
sales at the event total $1,537,226.00; and off site expenditures total $7,813,463.00,
for a total impact of the 2002 Commonwealth Games of $7,200,030.00.
In appreciation of the support of the City of Roanoke, Mr. Lampman presented
the Mayor with a plaque of appreciation and provided each Member of Council with
a 2002 Commonwealth Games tee-shirt.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the remarks of Mr.
Lampman would be received and filed.
CONSENTAGENDA
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.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of City Council held on Monday,
July 1, 2002, were before the body.
(For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
462
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. Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
COMMITTEES-AUDIT COMMITTEE: Minutes of the Audit Committee meeting
held on Monday, August 5, 2002, were before the body.
The following items were considered by the Audit Committee:
Parks and Recreation Part.Time Payroll
Engagement Letter - Roanoke City Public Schools
School Board May 14, 2002 Audit Committee Minutes
Roanoke City Council Audit Committee Annual Report - June 30, 2002
Municipal Auditing Annual Report - June 30, 2002
Municipal Auditing Annual Audit Plan - June 30, 2003
Discussion on format to receive Audit Committee package - CD/paper
Discussion on format to receive information from Municipal Auditor -
fax/e-mail
(For full text, see Minutes on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
Mr. Carder moved that the minutes be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
463
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
ANN UAL REPORTS-COMMITTEES-AUDIT COMMITTEE: An annual report of the
Audit Committee for the period ended June 30, 2002, was before the body. It was
advised that during the year ended June 30, 2002, the Committee held five ren~ular
meetings; and the following is a summary of the Committee's activity during the
year:
Reviewed and concurred in the annual plan presented by KPMG,
the City's external auditors.
Reviewed and concurred in the Municipal Auditor's annual audit plan.
Reviewed the independent accountant's report with representatives
from KPMG and City officials.
Reviewed the internal audit reports with the Municipal Auditor
and City officials.
Reviewed and concurred in the School Board on an Engagement Letter
and an annual plan for the Municipal Auditor to perform internal audits
for Roanoke City Public Schools.
Reviewed an external quality control review prepared by the Virginia
Local Government Auditors Association peer review team.
Furnished a copy of the minutes of each committee meeting to
City Council and City officials.
(For full text, see report on file in the City Clerk's Office)
Mr. Carder moved that the Annual Report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
464
ANNUAL REPORTS- MUNICIPAL AUDITOR: An Annual Report of the Municipal
Auditor for the period ended June 30, 2002, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the Annual Report be received and filed. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
(For full text, see report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
OATHS OF OFFICE-ZONING-COMMITTEES: A report of qualification of
Diana B. Sheppard as a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, for a term ending
December 31, 2005, was before Council.
Mr. Carder moved that the report of qualification be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
REGULAR AGENDA
SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke City
School Board created by the resignation of Sherman P. Lea, resigned, for a term
ending June 30, 2003, and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Mr. Harris placed in nomination the names of Edna Crabbere, David Dabay,
F. B. Webster Day, John W. Elliott, Jr., and William H. Lindsay.
There being no further nominations, F. B. Webster Day was elected as a
Trustee of the Roanoke City School Board, to fill the unexpired term of Sherman P.
Lea, resigned, ending June 30, 2003, by the following vote:
465
FOR MR. DAY: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, and
Mayor Smith ............................................................................................. -6.
FOR MR. LINDSEY: Council Member Wyatt ............................................. 1.
PUBLIC HEARINGS: None
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY: Betty Jo Anthony, Assistant
Commonwealth's Attorney, presented information with regard to the Cost Collection
Unit for Fiscal year 2001-2002, Four-Year Comparison of Cost Collection Effort,
Chart: Four-Year Comparison of Cost Collection Results for Roanoke City, Four-
Year Comparison of General District Court Delinquent Collections, Chart: General
District Court Four-Year Comparison, Four-Year Comparison of Circuit Court
Delinquent Collections, Chart: Circuit Court Four-Year Comparison, Four-Year
Comparison of Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Delinquent
Collections, and Chart: Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Four-Year
Comparison.
(For full text, see report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the report would be
received and filed.
BUDGET-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY-GRANTS-VICTIM/WITNESS/JUROR
PROGRAM: A communication from Donald M. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney,
in connection with a Victim/Witness Assistance Grant, was before Council.
It was advised that the Victim/Witness Assistance Program has been awarded
a 12 month, $102,338.00 grant (#03-18554VW02) for July 2002 through June 2003,
from the Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) which will allow the
Victim/Witness Assistance Program to continue to provide compreher~sive
information and direct services to crime victims and witnesses, in accordance with
the Virginia Crime Victim and Witness Rights Act; and the Victim/Witness Program
continues to operate with a full-time coordinator for the Circuit Court, as well as one
full time assistant for the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court and one full-time
assistant for the General District Court.
466
It was further advised that the Victim/Witness Program is coordinated by the
Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney; cost to the City for Grant #03-18554VW02
would be $25,671.00 as a local cash match, for a total grant budget of $128,009.00;
the local cash match is equal to that of fiscal year 2001-2002; and is included in the
General Fund fiscal year 2002-2003 adopted budget in the Transfer to Grant Fund
Account.
The Commonwealth's Attorney recommended that Council accept
Victim/Witness Grant No. 03-18554V~V02 for $102,338.00, with the City of Roanoke
providing $25,671.00 as a local cash match from funds provided in the Transfer to
Grant Fund Account in the fiscal year 2002-03 budget, for a total grant of
$128,009.00; and authorize the City Manager to execute all appropriate documents
to obtain Grant No. 03-18554VW02, with budget funding, in the amount of
$128,009.00 in revenue accounts to be established in the Grant Fund by the Director
of Finance; and appropriateS128,009.00 to certain expenditure accounts as set forth
in Attachment B to the communication.
A communication from the City Manager concurring in the recommendation
of the Commonwealth's Attorney, was also before Council.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36020-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 324.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36020-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
467
(#36021-081902) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of Grant No. 03-
18554VW02 made to the City of Roanoke by the Commonwealth of Virginia
Department of Criminal Justice Services for a Victim/Witness Assistance Program
and authorizing the execution and filing by the City Manager of the conditions of the
grant and other grant documents.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 325.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36021-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
DRUGS/SUBSTANCE ABUSE-BUDGET-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY-
GRANTS: A communication from the Honorable Donald M. Caldwell,
Commonwealth's Attorney, in connection with a Drug Prosecutor grant, was before
Council.
The Commonwealth's Attorney advised that Federal funding was made
available to the Commonwealth of Virginia to be used for the development of several
Multi-Jurisdictional Special Drug Prosecutors statewide, which positions were
developed to coordinate prosecutorial efforts among independent jurisdictions,
reduce fractional and duplicate prosecutions, enhance the recovery of criminal
assets, utilize Federal, State and local resources to assure maximum prosecutorial
effectiveness and to provide specialized prosecutorial resources to the reg!onal
drug enforcement effort; the Commonwealth's Attorneys of Craig County, Franklin
County, Roanoke County, and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem applied on
October 9, 1987, to the Commonwealth's Attorneys' Services Council, the State
agency responsible for administration of the grant money to fund a Multi-
Jurisdictional Special Drug Prosecutor; and Council accepted the Multi.
Jurisdictional Special Drug Prosecutor Grant in April, 1988, and a full-time Special
Drug Prosecutor was hired in July, 1988.
It was further advised that on April 15, 1994, funding for the Drug Prosecutor's
Office was transferred from the Commonwealth's Attorneys' Services Council to the
Compensation Board; the Compensation Board approved funding for the Drug
Prosecutor, in the amount of $91,615.00 on April 30, 2002, which funding will
continue through June 30, 2003; local share cost is $21,941.00, for a total of
468
$113,556.00, and is budgeted in two separate accounts: Transfer to Grant Funds
(001-250-9310-9535 - $12,560.00) and Contingency (001-300-9410-2199 - $9,381.00);
and annual re-application for funding is required.
The Commonwealth's Attorney recommended acceptance of funding from the
Compensation Board, in the amount of $91,615.00, with the City of Roanoke
providing local share funding of $21,941.00; that Council authorize the City Manager
to execute the requisite documents to obtain the funding from the Compensation
Board; and that the Director of Finance be authorized to establish revenue estimates
in the amount of $113,556.00 in the Grant Fund and appropriate funding to certain
expenditure accounts, as more fully described in Attachment I to the
communication report.
A communication from the City Manager recommending that Council concur
in the recommendation of the Commonwealth's Attorney was also before the body.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36022-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 General and Grant Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 326.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36022-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
Mr. Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#36023-081902) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of funding for
the regional drug prosecutor's office from the Compensation Board of the
Commonwealth of Virginia and authorizing the acceptance, execution and filing of
appropriate documents to obtain such funds.
(For'full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 328.)
469
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36023-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY-POLICE DEPARTMENT: A
communication from the Commonwealth's Attorney in connection with Asset
Forfeiture was before Council.
The Commonwealth's Attorney advised that in an effort to better fund law
enforcement efforts to fight crime, particularly drug crime, in 1986, the Federal
Government adopted a system of asset forfeiture whereby forfeited assets, under
certain conditions, could be returned to local law enforcement agencies, police and
prosecutors, for use in their fight against crime; in July, 1991, the Virginia asset
forfeiture statute, which generally is patterned after the Federal statute, took effect,
providing that forfeited criminal assets may be returned to local police and
prosecutors for use in the fight against crime; periodically, assets seized as
evidence are ordered forfeited by local courts to the police or the Office of the
Commonwealth's Attorney to be used for criminal law enforcement efforts; and in
August, 1991, a grant fund account for cash assets forfeited to the Office of the
Commonwealth's Attorney was established with an appropriation of $25,000.~0.
It was further advised that since August, 1991, the Office of the
Commonwealth's Attorney has expended the $25,000.00 originally appropriated, and
periodically receives additional funds from the State's asset sharing program; grant
requirements include that funds be placed in an interest bearing account and that
interest earned be used in accordance with program guidelines; revenues collected
through June 30, 2002, for the grant total $146,911.78, with interest collected through
June 30, 2002, at $14,721.09; funding received in excess of the revenue estimate
totaling $22,480.42 needs to be appropriated; and funds must be appropriated before
they can be expended for law enforcement.
The Commonwealth's Attorney recommended that the Director of Finance be
authorized to increase the revenue estimate, in the amount of $20,236.00, plus
$2,245.00 interest, and appropriate funds to accounts listed on Attachment I to the
communication.
470
A communication from the City Manager recommending that Council concur
in the recommendation of the Commonwealth's Attorney, was also before the body.
Mr. Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36024-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 329.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36024-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ............................................................................... -0.
BONDS/BONDS ISSUES-ANIMALS/INSECTS: A communication from
F. B. Webster Day, Attorney, representing the Industrial Development Authority of
Botetourt County, requesting adoption of a measure approving issuance of bonds
by the Industrial Development Authority of Botetourt County, Virginia, for the benefit
of the Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, Inc., and
Animal Care Services, Inc., for issuance of up to $3,600,000.00 of Industrial
Development Authority revenue bonds to assist in financing, acquisition,
construction and equipping of the Regional Pound Facility, which will be located
within the City of Roanoke, was before Council.
Mr. Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#36025-081902) A RESOLUTION approving the issuance of bonds by the
Industrial Development Authority of Botetourt County, Virginia, for the benefit of
Roanoke Valley Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, inc., and Animal
Care Services, Inc.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 331.)
Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36025-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
471
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None .................................................................................... ~---0.
REPORT OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS:
LIBRARIES: The City Manager introduced Demetria Tucker, Library Services
Coordinator, for a briefing on the PC Navigator Program.
Ms. Tucker introduced seven of the 16 young people who participated in the
Library PC Navigator Student Computer Assisted Program. She advised that the
program was created to empower teens, ages 12 - 17, with computer and library
research skills, as well as to provide an opportunity for actual work experience, to
give back to the community, and to receive a stipend of $25.00. She stated that
funds provided for the pilot program included a $5,000.00 Library Services and
Technology Grant from the Virginia State Library and Archives and additional
funding from the City's Office on Youth for participation by four additional students.
She noted that students received customer service training, as well as training with
computer software, library on line data bases, Gates Educational Software, and
Internet researching technologies.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the briefing would be
received and filed.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that City staff recommends the use of a firm that specializes in providing
project administration/inspection/management services (services) to monitor,
inspect, and administer on a daily basis the on-going construction project for Phase
I, and future Phase Il, of the Roanoke Civic Center Expansion and Renovation
Project; construction contract for Phase I is with Martin Brothers, Inc., in the amount
of $2,349,600.00; Rosser International, Inc., is the architect and engineer on the
Project; Rosser is also the architect and engineer for the Phase II Project, but no
construction contract has been issued since Phase II is currently in the design
phase; and City staff recommends that the use of a firm to provide the above project
services, and possibly some value engineering and/or constructability review may
be necessary due to the complicated nature of the Project.
472
Itwas further advised that following interviews bythe selection committee, the
firm of KCl Technologies, Inc., was deemed the best qualified to provide the above
referenced services; City staff has negotiated an acceptable agreement with KCl
Technologies, Inc., to provide for Phase I services(now under construction), in an
amount not to exceed $130,900.00; the agreement also provides that KCl will provide
such services for Phase II when the project is ready to be bid and during
construction and possibly during the design phase; and cost of providing services
for Phase II is in an amount not to exceed $395,000.00, but since funding is currently
limited, KCl has agreed to perform services on Phase II as specifically requested by
the City and only as funds become available for such services.
It was explained that funding for Phase I services under the agreement is
available in Civic Center Expansion/Renovation Phase I, Account No. 005.550-8615;
and funding for Phase II services will be provided at a later date.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a contract
for the above referenced consultant services with KCl Technologies, Inc., in an
amount not to exceed $130,900.00, for Phase I and an amount not to exceed
$395,000.00, for Phase II, provided that services for Phase II are specifically subject
to the availability and appropriation by Council of funds for such services.
Mr. Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#36026-081902) A RESOLUTION authorizing a contract with KCl
Technologies, Inc., to provide project administration/inspection/management
services to monitor, inspect and administer on a daily basis the on-going
construction project for Phase I, and future Phase II, of the Roanoke Civic Center
Expansion and Renovation Project, and which may also include some value
engineering and/or constructability review services.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 333.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36026-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 7.
NAYS:None ......................................................................................... -0'
473
AIRPORT-APPALACHIAN POWER COMPANY-BUDGET-SEWERS AND STORM
DRAINS: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Airport
Road Storm Drain Extension project represents the second and final phase of storm
drain improvements near the intersections of Airport Road and Municipal Road, as
well as Airport Road and Towne Square Boulevard, which project was broken down
to two phases to allow construction to start on the portions within City right-of-way
(Phase 1), while property acquisition was completed for the second phase; and the
proposed storm drain project supports the continuing economic development of the
area and is part of the capital improvement project known as Innotech Expansion,
which will provide a regional storm water management facility for undeveloped
properties, as well as improved drainage for an area with chronic flooding problems.
It was further advised that four bids were received on Tuesday, August 6,
2002, with Aaron J. Conner, General Contractor, Inc., submitting the Iow bid in the
amount of $186,860.00 and construction time at 120 consecutive calendar days;
funding in the amount of $215,000.00 is needed for the project, with additional funds
that exceed the contract amount to be used for miscellaneous project expenses
including advertising, prints, test services, minor variations in bid quantities, utility
adjustment by Appalachian Power Company d/b/a American Electric Power, Cox
Communications, and unforeseen project expenses; and funding in the amount of
$215,000.00 is available from Capital Projects Fund interest earnings.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a contract
with Aaron J. Conner, General Contractor, Inc., in the amount of $186,860.00, with
120 consecutive calendar days of contract time; that all other bids received by the
City be rejected; and that Council appropriate $215,000.00 from Capital Projects
Fund balance available from Interest Earnings to an account to be established by the
Director of Finance entitled, "Airport Road Storm Drain Extension".
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36027-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 334.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36027-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
474
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#36028-081902) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Aaron J. Conner,
General Contractor, Inc., for storm drain improvements near the intersections of
Airport Road and Municipal Road, as well as Airport Road and Towne Square
Boulevard, 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 dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 335.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36028-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-TELEPHONE COMPANIES-TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT-SCHOOLS: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that in 2001, bids were received
from vendors for telephone system solutions to replace the current centrex service
which is currently used within City offices; due to considerable technological
advances, the original specifications of the bid were considered obsolete;
additionally, procurement procedures were not followed after bid opening; and
Council rejected all bids and authorized the use of competitive negotiation as the
method to secure vendors to provide the City's new telephone system through a RFP
process.
It was further advised that eight bids were received on May 7, 2002, and
reviewed by a team of eight City employees which unanimously agreed that Verizon
offered the best solution for the City's telephone system requirements; Verizon
would also provide invaluable project management support for conversion of the
current Centrex System and implementation of the new system scheduled for
October, 2002; and certain benefits to be gained by the proposed telephone system
are:
475
Cost saving of $123,000.00 the first year and $36,000.00 in each
of the following years.
Most important is the standardization of services and
instruments as a result of the many different types of systems
currently used throughout the City.
Capability to provide centralized voice mail for everyone on the
new PBX system.
More detailed call accounting information for use by
management.
City control and management of moves/adds/changes in
requests for service.
Better management and cost control of long distance calls.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to enter into a contract
with Verizon Select Services, Inc., to be approved as to form by the City Attorney, in
the amount of $1,258,004.00; funding for the project is available as follows:
$880,291.00 is available from Department of Technology Fund Account No. 013-052.
9603; $47,754.00 may be appropriated from Civic Center Retained Earnings Account,
$41,146.00 from the Water Fund Retained Earnings Account, $27,248.00 from the
Sewer Fund Retained Earnings Account, $37,982.00 from the Health Department, and
$223,583.00 from the Department of Technology Retained Earnings Account to
Telephone Project Account No. 013-430-9847.
Mr. Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36029-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 General, Water, Water Pollution Control, Civic Center, and Department
of Technology Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by
title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 337.)
Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36029 -081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
476
Ms. Wyatt inquired as to whether the proposed new telephone system will
also incorporate telephones in the City's school system; whereupon, the City
Manager advised that the school system was not included at the request of school
officials, although the option is available in the future should they wish to become
a part of the new system. She called attention to numerous features to the proposed
telephone system upgrade; i.e. improved ability to access lines leading to better use
of trunk lines throughout the system, first year savings of approximately $125,000.00
and $38,000.00 per year thereafter, every main telephone number in every City
department will be answered by a human being, unless the lines are busy or the call
is received after business hours, and all telephone numbers will remain the same.
Mr. Bestpitch called attention to operational savings during the first year of
$125,000.00 and annual savings thereafter of approximately $38,000.00, and although
the option to participate is a School Board decision, he inquired if it is anticipated
that the Schoo~ Board will select this more cost effective telephone system at some
point in the not too distant future.
The City Manager responded that the needs of the School system are different
from the needs of the City as a local government, because the schools have
numerous decentralized locations. She stated that the school system's decision not
to participate at this time could be attributed to the need to complete an assessment
of telephone usage in the future, and she would provide the Superintendent of
Schools with information on the level of savings to be incurred by the City as a
result of the new telephone system, but she noted that savings will be less in the
school environment.
Mr. Bestpitch suggested that the topic of telephone cost savings be discussed
at the joint meeting of City Council and the Roanoke City School Board to be held
on Monday, September 16, 2002, at 5:00 p.m.
Ordinance No. 36029-08t902 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... O.
Mr. Harris offered the following ordinance:
477
(#36030-081902) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Verizon Select Services,
Inc., to provide telephone system solutions, to replace the current centrex service,
upon certain terms and conditions, and awarding a contract therefor; 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. 66, page 340.)
Mr. Harris moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36030-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET- FDETC: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that
the Fifth District Employment and Training Consortium (FDETC) participates in 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; and WIA 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.
It was further advised that the City of Roanoke is the grant recipient and fiscal
agent for FDETC funding, thus, Council must appropriate funding for all grants and
other monies received by the FDETC.
It was explained that the FDETC has received an award of $25,000.00 from the
Virginia Department of Social Services to provide services to clients under the
Economic and Employment Improvement Program for Disadvantaged Persons
(EEIP), for the period July 1, 2002 through June 30, 2003; and the FDETC has
received funds from jurisdictions in the Fifth Planning District to offset
administrative costs; and to date, allocations totaling $4,961.00 have been received
(Botetourt County - $1,627.00; City of Salem - $1,278.00; City of Covington -
$2,056.00).
478
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate FDETC funding
totaling $29,961.00 and increase the revenue estimate by $29,961.00 in accounts to
be established in the Consortium Fund by the Director of Finance.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36031-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Fifth District Employment and Training Consortium Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 341 .)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36031-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .......................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
TELEPHONE COMPANIES-TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT- POLICE DEPARTMENT:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that following the terrorist
attacks of September 11,2001, and initiation of the Police Department's "Homeland
Defense Initiative", U. S. Cellular approached the Police Department with an offer to
help; the Homeland Emergency Loaner Phone (HELP) program would allow the
Police Department to use six activated cell phones during times of crisis or disaster,
which full-access phones would be deployed only when a situation required
additional communications capability; the Community Action Life Line (CALL)
program would provide 18 cell phones with paging capability for use by the Police
Department's Tactical Response Team; manyTactical Response Team members and
hostage negotiators are not equipped with pagers to allow prompt notification or
call-out; CALL phones allow calls only to specific Police Department phone
numbers; and U. S. Cellular will provide the phones and service at no cost to the
City of Roanoke.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to contract with U. S.
Cellular for use of "HELP" and "CALL" program cell phones and service for a period
of one year.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
479
(#36032-081902) A RESOLUTION authorizing execution of an agreement
between the City of Roanoke and U. S. Cellular, providing for use of cellular phones
for the Homeland Emergency Loaner Phone (H.E.L.P.) and the Community Action
Life Line (C.A.L.L.) programs.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 343.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36032-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in 1986, Congress authorized the transfer of certain
Federally forfeited property to State and local law enforcement agencies that
participated in investigation and seizure ofthe property; application foran equitable
share of property seized by local law enforcement must be made to the U. S.
Department of Justice and certified by the CityAttorney; and this property, including
funds shared with State and local agencies, may be used only for the purpose stated
in the application, i.e., narcotics investigations related to law enforcement.
--It was further advised that participation in Federally forfeited property
enhances the effectiveness of narcotics investigations by providing necessary
investigations equipment, investigative funds, overtime expenses, and offsets the
costs that would otherwise have to be borne by City taxpayers; the Police
Department receives funds periodically from the Federal Government's asset
sharing program; grant requirements state that the funds be placed in an interest
bearing account and that interest earned be used in accordance with program
guidelines; and revenues totaling $44,677.00 have been collected and are available
for appropriation in Grant Fund Account Nos. 035-640-3304-3305 and 035-640-3304-
3306.
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $44,677.00 to the
Grant Fund account for Investigations & Rewards (035-640-3304.2150), and increase
Grant Fund revenue estimates for Account No. 035-640-3304-3305 by $44,119.00 and
Account No. 035-640-3304-3306 by $558.00.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
480
(#36033-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 344.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36033-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that on February 4, 2002, the Carvins Cove Reservoir had dropped to a
level below the spillway of 20.0 feet; and Council declared that a water supply
emergency existed, that there was a need to restrict the use of water in the City of
Roanoke and approved a Water Conservation Plan.
It was further advised that the Water Conservation Plan is designed to extend
the useful life of the water supply until sufficient rainfall occurs to refill the reservoir;
the Plan identified a level of 26.0 feet below spillway that the City would begin
emergency water purchases; the reservoir reached 26.0 feet below spillway on
June 18, 2002, and the City began purchasing water from the City of Salem and
Roanoke County; daily purchase rate from the City of Salem is 1.5 million gallons
per day (mgd) at a cost of $1,450.00 per million gallons (mg) and 4.0 mgd from
Roanoke County at a cost of $2,970.00 per mg; it is anticipated that the City of
Roanoke will purchase water over the next four months or until rainfall and
additional water sources are available that can reduce or eliminate its need to
purchase water; and in addition to the purchase of emergency water, other drought
related costs are being incurred that require additional funding.
It was explained that the need exists to provide funding for unidentified
infrastructure repair and replacement, and new services and water lines; funding
levels for these accounts was reduced during the budget process and needs to be
restored to levels that will sufficiently address emergencies and critical
infrastructure improvements; and the new services, hydrants and water lines are
reimbursed through fees and charges paid by customers.
481
The City Manager recommended that Council appropriate $1,450,000.00 from
the Water Fund retained earnings into Account No. 002-510-2160.2256, Purchase
Water- Roanoke County, $261,000.00 into Account No. 002-510-2160-2255, Purchase
Water - Salem, $130,000.00 into Account No. 002-510.2160-2257, Purchase Water-
Vinton, to provide for emergency water purchases; $10,000.00 into Account No. 002-
510-2160-1004, Temporary Wages, to provide for additional personnel necessary to
manage the drought plan, $25,000.00 into Account No. 002-510-2160-2015,
Advertising, to provide for public relations materials, etc., $350,000.00 into Account
No. 002-510.2178.9026, Water - Unidentified Plant Replacement, to fund repair and
replacement, and $200,000.00 into Account No. 002-510-2178-9025, Water- New
Services, Hydrants, Lines, to fund installation of new service requests directly
reimbursed through fees and charges.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36034-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Water Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 345.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36034.081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. -7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
BUDGET-WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that improvements are needed at the Regional Water Pollution Control Plant
to control and treat high flows that occur during wet weather; a Preliminary
Engineering Report (PER) has been developed to address improvements, which has
been reviewed and approved by each partnering jurisdiction (Botetourt County,
Roanoke County, Salem City, and the Town of Vinton), and submitted to the Virginia
Departments of Environmental Quality and Health for their review; and engineering
design services are now needed to prepare detailed plans, specifications, and bid
documents necessary to complete the work which will include various modifications
and improvements referred to in the PER, as well as other items necessary to satisfy
regulatory requirements.
482
It was further advised that proposals were solicited and received from four
engineering firms; all four firms were short-listed, however, one firm withdrew from
consideration before interviews were conducted; and a selection committee selected
Hazen and Sawyer, P.C. at a negotiated agreement in the form of a lump sum fee of
$3,100,000.00.
It was further advised that the contract specifies a primary hydraulic and
biological design flow of 52 million gallons per day annual average daily flow, and
design work for two additional elements, each of which would increase the hydraulic
and biological design flow by three million gallons each, or six million gallons
cumulatively; significant provisions of the contract include extensive liquidated
damage provisions related to project schedule and project management ($500.00 per
day damages for missing completion dates for specific project phases and
$50,000.00 in damages if the Project Manager is replaced), a five percent fee
retainage provision with the right to deduct monies owed to the City, increased
insurance requirements to $15,000,000.00 aggregate, and specific language
requiring the engineer to continue design and work at no cost to the City until
specific Project goals, such as capacity and performance are achieved; and the
contract also contains a provision to allow for the engineer to earn up to a $500.00
per day bonus (with a $40,000.00 maximum limit) for completion of certain phases
of work ahead of schedule so that the City of Roanoke will be able to comply with
the schedule in the City's Consent Order with the State Water Control Board.
It was explained that the City's portion of funding for the contract is
anticipated to be $1,426,000.00, subject to further negotiations with partnering
jurisdictions; the City's portion of funds is available in Retained Earnings in the
Water Pollution Control Fund; Utility Staff and the Department of Finance have
completed a State Revolving Loan Fund application to request reduced interest
project funding from the State; the loan amount requested includes the current
engineering costs which would allow for return of the City's share of engineering
costs to Retained Earnings; and the balance of monies will be provided from
contributions by partnering jurisdictions, according to a cost allocation formula,
which is expected to be similar to that as set forth in the Multi-Jurisdictional
Contract dated November 1994, pursuant to Resolution No. 32204-101094.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a contract
for engineering and consulting services with Hazen and Sawyer, P.C., in the amount
of $3,100,000.00 to provide design and consulting services, said contract to be in a
form approved by the City Attorney; that Council amend the Water Pollution Control
Fund fiscal year 2002/2003 budget and appropriate $1,426,000.00 from Retained
Earnings, to provide design and consulting services, and appropriate a total of
483
$1,674,000.00 from Other Local Governments to the same project account; establish
accounts receivable from partnering jurisdictions according to a cost allocation
formula; and adopt a resolution declaring the City's intent to reimburse itself up to
the $3,100,000.00 from proceeds of any funds from the State Revolving Loan Fund,
or from a future bond issue.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36035-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 Water Pollution Control Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the
second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 346.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36035-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
Mr. Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#36036-081902) A RESOLUTION authorizing a contract with Hazen and
Sawyer, P.C., for engineering and consulting services for the design and
development of plans, specifications, and bid documents necessary to provide
improvements to the City's Regional Water Pollution Control Plant to control and
treat high flows that occur during wet weather and related work.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 348.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36036-081902. The mution
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ 0.
Mr. Carder offered the following resolution:
484
(#36037-081902) A RESOLUTION declaring the City's intent to reimburse itself
from the proceeds of its tax-exempt obligations for certain moneys to be
appropriated by the City for the City's share of expenditures in connection with
improvements to the Regional Water Pollution Control Plant; and providing for an
effective date.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 349.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36037-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Bestpitch and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .......................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ....................................................................................... -0.
CITY ATTORNEY:
TAXES-DELINQUENT TAXES: The City Attorney submitted a written report
with regard to delinquent real estate taxes, advising that during the last session, the
General Assembly amended §15.2-2286.B, Code of Virginia, as follows:
Prior to the initiation of an application for a special exception, special
use permit, variance, rezoning or other land disturbing permit,
including building permits and erosion and sediment control permits
or prior to the issuance of final approval, the authorizing body may
require the applicant to produce satisfactory evidence that any
delinquent real estate taxes owned to the locality which have been
properly assessed against the subject property have been paid.
The City Attorney transmitted a measure which would implement this
provision in the City of Roanoke and ensure that real estate taxes are current on
properties where the enumerated types of approvals and permits are being sought.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
485
(#36038-081902) AN ORDINANCE adding a new Section 32-7, Delinquent Real
Estate Taxes, to Chapter 32, Taxation, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, requiring that real estate taxes be current before certain applications may
be made to the City; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by
title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 350.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36038-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-GRANTS-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City
School Board requesting that Council appropriate $125,000.00 for the Title I Even
Start Family Literacy Grant, which will provide parental and preschool workshops
for family literacy efforts at the preschool and adult education levels, said grant to
be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds, was before the body.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request was also before the body.
Mr. Carder offered the following budget ordinance:
(#36039-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of
the 2002-2003 School Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 351 .)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36039-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
486
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0.
(Council Members Wyatt and Dowe requested that the City Manager discuss further
training for participants of the program with the School Superintendent.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION
RESOLUTIONS:
AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
CITY COUNCIL: Mr. Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#36040-081902) A RESOLUTION canceling the work session of City Council
scheduled to be held at 12:15 p.m., on September 30, 2002, and changing the date
of the regular meeting of City Council scheduled to be held at 12:15 p.m. and
2:00 p.m., on Tuesday, October 1, 2002, to 12:15 p.m., and 2:00 p.m., on Thursday,
October 3, 2002.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 66, page 353.)
Mr. Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 36040-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Harris and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
POLICE DEPARTMENT-TRAFFIC: Council Member Wyatt called attention to
a telephone call from a business owner on Trinkle Avenue, N. E., commending the
City of Roanoke on measures which have been implemented to address cruising on
Williamson Road.
487
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard, and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
HEALTH DEPARTMENT.HOUSING AUTHORITY: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35
Patton Avenue, N. E., expressed concern with regard to mosquitos and the West Nile
Virus that has been reported in a number of dead birds in the Roanoke area. She
also expressed specific concern for residents of the Lincoln Terrace housing
development who do not have screen doors on their housing units.
FIRE DEPARTMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue,
N. E., requested that Council review the plan to close fire stations in the
predominantly black community, which could have serious implications for those
neighborhoods. She spoke in support of City employees who work diligently for the
citizens of the City of Roanoke.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
HEALTH DEPARTMENT: The City Manager advised that Dr. Molly L. O'Dell,
Director, Health Department, has maintained contact with the City of Roanoke with
regard to the West Nile Virus and certain preventative measures that may be taken
by citizens to protect themselves.
BUDGET: The City Manager advised that the revenue shortfall at the State
level is more than was originally projected, exceeding $1.4 billion. She stated that
further reductions at the State level will occur, some of which will have a ripple
effect on localities.
WATER RESOURCES: The City Manager pointed out that the Governor's
Office may intervene in the Commonwealth of Virginia's situation as it relates to
drought conditions throughout the State.
ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-TRAFFIC: The City Manager called attention to
increased signage and shuttle buses that will be available on Tuesday, August 20,
2002, and Friday, September 6, 2002, to address large volumes of traffic in
connection with concerts at the Roanoke Civic Center, which measures are intended
to better serve patrons of the two events.
488
At 3:35 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be reconvened at
5:00 p.m., in the Emergency Operations Center Conference Room, Room 159,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke.
A joint meeting of City Council and the City Planning Commission was called
to order at 5:00 p.m., on Monday, August 19, 2002, in Room 159, Emergency
Operations Center Conference Room, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor Ralph K. Smith and Chairman Robert B.
Manetta presiding.
COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: William H. Carder, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, Linda F. Wyatt, and Mayor Ralph K. Smith ............... 6.
ABSENT: Council Member William D. Bestpitch ......................................... 1.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilbert E. Butler, Jr.,
S. Wayne Campbell, D. Kent Chrisman, Melvin L. Hill, Robert B. Manetta, Richard A.
Rife, and Fredrick M. Williams ....................................................................7.
ABSENT: None .................................................................................... --0.
OTHERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. Hackworth,
City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City Clerk,
Robert B.Townsend, Director of Planning Building and Development and Martha P.
Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission.
COUNCIL-COMMUNITY PLANNING: The Mayor welcomed members ofthe City
Planning Commission and staff to the meeting and advised that following dinner, the
business session would convene.
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Harris.
Following dinner, the business session convened at 5:35 p.m.
THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS THE CITY OF ROANOKE "GUIDING LIGHT":
Mr. Carder advised that the Comprehensive Plan should be the guiding light
and the ruler by which City Council, the City Planing Commission and City staff
base all decisions and discussions. He referred to the City's streets and corridors
and pointed out that the Comprehensive Plan states that City streets should be
pedestrian friendly, pro business/high density, with traffic calming measures, etc.;
489
however, he referenced a plan for a left turn lane on Williamson Road which is
contrary to the Comprehensive Plan and to the Williamson Road Corridor Plan. He
suggested future work sessions to discuss street arteries and corridors, how they
fit in with the Comprehensive Plan and how they become pedestrian friendly. He
called attention to Brandon Avenue through the Raleigh Court area where there is
a five lane highway which is not user friendly, and there was previously an
opportunity to turn the area into residential/retail development.
DISCUSSION:
The City Planning Commission and the citizenry at-large are
gravitating in the direction of new urbanism.
The Zoning Ordinance and Subdivision Ordinance update will be
a valuable tool to the City Planning Commission.
Successful implementation of the Comprehensive Plan starts in
the City's budget process - can a new project/expenditure be
supported based on the Comprehensive Plan.
Once the zoning classifications are updated, zoning
classifications must be assigned and the most difficult
component will be deciding which zoning districts are
incorporated in which places along Roanoke's corridors, while
moving away from strip commercial toward compact
neighborhood oriented commercial types of development.
With the Comprehensive Plan and revisions to the zoning
ordinance, there is an opportunity to reach a collective focus
which has not heretofore existed.
Some persons would like for the Comprehensive Plan to
magically happen, but there are numerous other steps that need
to occur first, and the zoning ordinance and zoning map are key
implementers to the Comprehensive Plan, therefore, the question
becomes when to begin the necessary steps. It is intended to
adopt neighborhood plans as elements of the Comprehensive
Plan in the same way that the Outlook Roanoke Plan was
adopted as an element to the Comprehensive Plan. Another 12 -
14 months will be needed before the zoning ordinance/maps are
updated, and it must be emphasized that certain elements of the
process will not be available for quite some time.
490
In summary, the City Manager advised that Council and the City Planning
Commission are the two groups that must decide how seriously they want to make
the Comprehensive Plan the City's guiding principle, and it should be taken into
consideration that there must be certain other key elements in place before the
Comprehensive Plan can be implemented.
UNDERGROUNDING OF UTILITIES AS A PART OF MAJOR STREET
REBUILDING PROJECTS:
Chairman Manetta advised that in placing the item on the agenda, he was
referring primarily to the future expansion of 10m Street and the opportunity to install
underground utilities. He stated that a concern of the City administration relates to
costs and suggested that the City obtain information on actual costs associated with
undergrounding utilities and not rely totally on information supplied by the Virginia
Department of Transportation (VDOT), because VDOT may prefer spending its money
on asphalt, as opposed to undegrounding utilities.
DISCUSSION:
If one envisions the City 50 - 75 years into the future, power lines
should not be above street level. The City has to start at some
point in time in areas such as southwest, or southeast where
power lines can be brought into the alleys, similar to certain
areas of Raleigh Court.
The City should begin to collect data on costs, the time factor for
undergrounding, and prioritize those areas where utilities should
be underground.
The bio medical facility in the Riverside Centre is a new
development that is required to have underground utilities,
which is in compliance with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
The City should take actions that get it closer to the
Comprehensive Plan, and if the Williamson Road Corridor wants
to be totally pedestrian friendly, the City should do what it can to
get closer to that point, rather than something that is contrary to
that direction.
491
When addressing the undergrounding of utilities, consideration
should be given to the fact that in the overall scheme of things,
the City has many needs and the City of Roanoke should not take
on the burden of doing everything for everyone.
The City must start thinking tactically about the Comprehensive
Plan, which will lead to tree lined streets, traffic calming,
undergrounding of utilities, etc.
The City Manager advised that the issue is broader than just 10th Street
because 10th Street is an example of a future highway project, although it is not
known when the project will be completed since the Six Year Plan of VDOT is no
longer viable. She advised that if Council is serious about the issue of underground
utilities, a work session would be in order with American Electric Power officials to
discuss costs, options in terms of financing, etc. She stated that the issue is
whether the community in a broader sense, or smaller subcommunities, are willing
to pay a special rate for electricity in order to receive undergrounding, and the
answer may differ by community, or on a City-wide basis. She advised that
undergrounding of utilities is a policy decision and it will be necessary for Council
to decide when that specific policy is to be addressed.
The Mayor requested that the City Manager obtain information on how
undergrounding of utilities is accomplished in other communities, associated costs,
etc.
The City Manager advised that undergrounding of utilities will be done at the
Riverside Centre, underground utilities currently exist at the Roanoke Centre for
Industry and Technology, and will be required for new development, however, the
question is what to do with existing development which carries a large price tag.
For example, she advised that approximately $2 million for approximately 2000 feet
will be spent on undergrounding the overhead wiring in Jefferson Street in the
vicinity of Carilion. She stated that if undergrounding of utilities is an issue that
Council wants to study, she will schedule a future work session.
DEVELOPMENT AND UPDATE OF THE GREENDAY/PEDESTRIAN PLAN FOR
THE CITY OF ROANOKE:
Chairman Manetta called attention to numerous issues concerning pedestrian
design and development in the City of Roanoke which will require rethinking about
sidewalks, neighborhoods, and parks, and within the next year, there should be an
update as to how those types of ideas tie in with the greenway plan.
492
DISCUSSION:
There should be a prioritization for the greenway plan.
There should be an assurance that greenways interconnect, and
neighborhoods should approve of greenways and feel a sense
of ownership.
The existence of a greenway along the Roanoke River places
more focus on the Roanoke River and there is a higher
expectation in terms of more frequent litter pickup, etc.,
therefore, a greenway along the Roanoke River tends to improve
the quality of the riverside.
With new development, sidewalk, curb and gutter will be
required to be funded by the developer. In those instances
where there is no need or desire for sidewalk, there should be
some flexibility to use the money for greenways, or to fund
sidewalks at other locations in the City.
REVIEW OF THE CURRENTLY PROPOSED FLOOD REDUCTION
PROJECT FOR THE ROANOKE RIVER AND ENSURE CONSISTENCY
WITH ENVIRONMENTAL AND AESTHETIC POLICY CONTAINED IN THE
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Mr. Manetta advised that there has been considerable discussion about the
Comprehensive Plan and the scenic quality along the Roanoke River. He suggested
that the City abide by some of the suggestions to ensure that the project conforms
with the rendition of what the City of Roanoke should be and what the Roanoke River
should be.
DISCUSSION:
Undergrounding of utilities tends to eliminate street trees and
flood reduction requires the clearing of trees along the river
banks.
There was discussion in regard to the Roanoke River Greenway
and the flood reduction project; whereupon, it was pointed out
by City staff that Phase I of the flood reduction project includes
the lower end from the Water Pollution Control Plant through
493
Wasena Park, in the range of $5 million, and a greenway trail is
currently in the first construction phase which is anticipated to
start in 2003.
Other than the removal of dead trees and litter, nothing will be
done to the banks of the Roanoke River during the first phase,
the majority of vegetation will remain as is, but where there are
bench cuts, which tend to be on one side orthe other, vegetation
must be removed. When the first phase of the flood reduction
project is completed, all excavation will be completed, all utilities
will be relocated and there will be a complete template along the
Roanoke River, and it would be hoped that the City would not
have to do any significant work in the future. There will be a
continuous greenway from the Sewage Treatment Plant to
Wasena Park in Phase I. The City will use that portion through
Smith Park, tie in on both ends, replace the Iow water bridges,
and the remainder of the length will be a new greenway trail.
The City Manager pointed out that Congress has not approved funding, City
staff is encouraging inclusion of the greenway, and the City has the support of
Congressman Bob Goodlatte.
STREET AND ALLEY CLOSURE PROCESS AND POLICY:
Chairman Manetta advised that for some time, the City Planning Commission
has had concerns with regard to street and alley closures and public land reverting
to private ownership, with no compensation to the City of Roanoke. He stated that
in recent months, the Planning Commission has received unrealistically Iow
estimates (not fair market value) from the Director of Real Estate Valuation on the
value of properties. Therefore, he stated that the City Planning Commission
encourages a more efficient policy to address fair market value versus assessed
value.
The City Manager called attention to a policy adopted by Council
approximately two years ago with regard to compensation for such properties and
Council has chosen to address each issue on a case by case basis. She stated that
there have been instances when the City was better off to donate a piece of property
to a petitioner for maintenance purposes; however, in those instances where
property will enhance development, a value should be placed on the property by the
City. She referred to development of a policy by City staff which will include a
statement setting forth the property value as determined by the Director of Real
Estate Valuation and the Economic Development Department prior to a petitioner
submitting an application for vacation or closure.
494
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION COORDINATION WITH CITY COUNCIL
APPOINTED/INITIATED SPECIAL CITY COMMISSIONS OR AD HOC TASK FORCES
AND COMMITTEES:
Chairman Manetta suggested that the City Planning Commission have
representation on various City task forces, study committees and ad hoc committees
that address specific matters under the jurisdiction of the City Planning Commission
so as to provide the Planning Commission's perspective.
OTHER BUSINESS: NONE
There being no further business, at 6:40 p.m. the Mayor declared the City
Council meeting in recess to be reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council
Chamber.
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday August 19, 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 William D. Bestpitch (arrived late), William H.
Carder, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., C. Nelson Harris, Linda F. Wyatt, and
Mayor Ralph K. Smith .................................................................................... 7.
ABSENT: None ............................................................................... 0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, CityAttorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City
Clerk.
The reconvened meeting was opened with a prayer by Mayor Smith.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Smith.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
SCHOOLS: Pursuant to instructions by Council, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
therafter as the matter may be heard in the City Council Chamber, to receive the
views of citizens regarding appointment of a School Board Trustee to fill the
unexpired term of William E. Skeen, resigned, ending June 30, 2005, the matter was
before the body.
495
The following persons applied for the position:
Edna Crabbere
David Dabay
John W. Elliott, Jr.
Lewis P. Grogan
William H. Lindsey
Michael W. Ridenhour
Advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke Times on
Friday, August 9, 2002, and in The Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, August 8, 2002.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to address
Council in connection with the public hearing. There being none, the Mayor
declared the public hearing closed.
The Mayor advised that Council will vote to fill the vacancy at its regular
meeting to be held on Tuesday, September 3, 2002, at 2:00 p.m.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public
hearing for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard, on the request of Valley Pine Mortgage, Inc., that a tract of land
described as a .010 acre portion of Lot 1, Block 7 Mountain View Official Tax No.
1221013 and a 0.204 acre tract portion of Lots 11 and 12, Block 7, Mountain View,
Official Tax No. 1221014, be rezoned from RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium
Density District, to LM, Light Manufacturing District, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Thursday, August 8, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the two subject
parcels are between Virginia Avenue and the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks; the
petitioner has a contract pending with the owners of Black Dog Architectural
Salvage, which plans to relocate its business to the site; the Department of
Economic Development is assisting Black Dog Salvage with relocation from its
Franklin Road address; the prospective owners plan to use the existing warehouse
building on Official Tax No. 1221201 and the adjoining parcel, Official Tax Nos.
1221203 and 1221207, to house an antique storage and retail sales establishment;
and the prospective owners propose to use the subject properties for parking, was
before Council.
496
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
request to rezone the subject properties, advising that the rezoning is consistent
with the policies of Vision 2001-2020 in that it will encourage redevelopment of an
underused industrial site.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36041-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 122, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of
Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City; and dispensing with the second
reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 354.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36041-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
Stephen W. Lemon, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before
Council in support of the request of his client.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36041-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................ 6.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
(Council Member Bestpitch had not entered the meeting.)
At this point Council Member Bestpitch entered the meeting.
STREETS AND ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on Monday April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Valley Pine Mortgage, Inc.,
that a portion of Virginia Avenue, S. W., from 13t~ Street, to Spottswood Avenue, an
497
alley lying between parcels bearing Official Tax Nos. 1221013 and 1221014; and an
alley lying between parcels bearing Official Tax Nos. 1221203 and 1221207, be
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed, to the extent that the City of Roanoke
has any legal interest in said public right-of-way, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, August 2, 2002, and Friday, August 9, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that all of the parcels of
land-and the alley adjoining Virginia Avenue are vacant; an unoccupied warehouse
lies to the west on Official Tax No. 1221201, which the petitioner is under contract
to sell; and to the south and west of the alley adjoining Midvale Avenue is a mobile
home development that is a grandfathered use on an LM-zoned property, was before
Council.
It was explained that the prospective owners plan to use the existing
warehouse building on Official Tax No. 1221201 and the adjoining parcels, Official
Tax Nos. 1221203 and 1221207, to house an antique storage and retail sales
establishment; and they propose to use the subject portion of right-of-way for
ingress and egress to the site, and to close off Virginia Avenue from Spottswood
Avenue to erect a fence for security concerns.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
request, advising that such closure will aid in redevelopment of an industrial site;
the redevelopment of such sites is encouraged in Vision 2001-2020; while Vision
2001-2020 also encourages maintaining and increasing the connectivity of City
roads, the degree of connectivity lost in this case is negligible when compared to the
greater gain of developing the site; as a condition of closure, Virginia Avenue will
remain open until the reopening of Hannah Circle; and, in addition, the closure,
discontinuance and vacation of the subject portion of Virginia Avenue and the paper
alleys will be subject to the following conditions:
The applicant shall submit a subdivision plat to the Agent
for the Planning Commission, receive all required
approvals thereof, 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 right-of.way,
including the right of ingress and egress.
498
Upon meeting all other conditions to the granting of the
application, the applicant shall deliver a certified copy of
the authorizing 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 the authorizing
ordinance with the Clerk of the 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 the authorizing
ordinance, said ordinance shall be null and void with no
further action by City Council being necessary.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36042-081902) 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 by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 355.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36042-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
The City Manager advised that rather than requiring payment for closure of the
right-of-way, in this case City staffwas of the opinion that enacting those conditions
contained in the ordinance would provide an enhanced appearance to the gateway
of a neighborhood, as opposed to requiring remuneration. She stated that this is
another example of how staff will address the issue of right-of-way and street
closure in the future.
499
Steven W. Lemon, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before
Council in support of the request of his client.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36042-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ..................................................................................... -0.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council of the City of
Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing
for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on the request of A Space, LLC, that five tracts of land located on Sixth
Street, Luck Avenue, and Marshall Avenue, S. W., identified as Official Tax Nos.
1113305, 1113501, and 1113502, zoned LM, Light Manufacturing District, and Official
Tax No. 1113312 and a portion of Official Tax No. 1113313, zoned C-1, Office District,
be rezoned to C-3, Central Business District, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, August 2, 2002 and Friday, August 9, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the only existing
improvement on the subject properties is a masonrywarehouse, sometimes referred
to as the Cotton Mill, constructed in 1919 and located on Official Tax No. 1113305
and other parcels in the petition for rezoning are used for parking; the petitioner is
contemplating a mixed-use development for the vacant warehouse space, which was
originally used as a manufacturing facility; and it is proposed that half of the
building be occupied by artist studios and loft apartments, with the balance of the
property supporting office and retail uses, such as a cafe/bistro, photography
studios, art shops, study groups, dance classes, craft stores, nature stores, outdoor
stores, and professional offices, was before Council.
5OO
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
rezoning request, advising that given the development and success of the Jefferson
Center, the need to connect the Old Southwest neighborhood with downtown, the
potential to provide desired downtown residential units and live/work space, and the
need to solidify an anchor for the western edge of downtown, the rezoning request
is an appropriate and desirable use of the properties.
Mr. Carder offered the following ordinance:
(#36043-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 111, Sectional 1976 Zone Map, City of
Roanoke, to rezone certain property within the City; and dispensing with the second
reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 359.)
Mr. Carder moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36043-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Dowe.
Nick Glennon spokesperson, appeared before Council in support of the
request of the petitioner.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36043-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................................................ -0'
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council of the City of
Roanoke on Monday April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing
for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on the request of Cesar Dominguez to repeal and replace proffered
conditions for rezoning property located at 325 Jefferson Street, N. E., bearing
Official Tax No. 3012801, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, August 2, 2002 and Friday, August 9, 2002.
501
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that on April 16, 2002,
Council approved a rezoning of the subject property from RM-2 to C-3, subject to the
following conditions, was before the body.
The existing building will be rehabilitated and reused for uses
provided for within the C-3, Central Business District. The
existing shed in the rear of the property will be removed.
There will be no sale of alcohol permitted in conjunction with any
use of property.
It was further advised that the petitioner later reconsidered the first proffer
that specified removal of the shed in the rear of the property, and requests that
conditions proffered and approved by Ordinance No. 35817-041502 be repealed and
replaced with the following proffers:
The existing two-story building will be rehabilitated
and reused for uses provided for within the C-3,
Central Business District.
There will be no sale of alcohol permitted in
conjunction with any use of property.
The Planning Commission advised that the building is vacant and has been
uninhabited for over eight years; in the past, the commercial building was the
location of the Moses Store and an upstairs apartment where the owners lived; the
shed is located to the rear of the property and faces Gilmer Avenue; and
amendment of the proffered conditions will give the owner the option of retaining
and rehabilitating the accessory buildings, or demolishing the accessory building,
with approval by the Architectural Review Board.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council accept the
amended proffered conditions.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36044-081902) 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 by the applicant; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance
by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 361 .)
502
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36044-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
Cesar Dominquez, petitioner, appeared before Council in support of the
request.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36044-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ........................................................................................ -7.
NAYS: None ........................................................ -0'
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council of the City of
Roanoke on Monday April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing
for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on the request of Cape Town, LC and Steven W. Morris, that two tracts of
land located on the southwest side of Roberts Road, S. W., designated as Official
Tax Nos. 1290212 and1290211 (2918 and 2924 Roberts Road respectively), be
rezoned from RS-3, Residential Single Family District, to C-1, Office District, subject
to cetain conditions, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, August 2, 2002 and Friday, August 9, 2002.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that following its meeting
on July 18, a Fourth Amended Petition was filed by the petitioner containing the
following proffered conditions, was before Council.
With the exception of ordinary maintenance and the addition of
any ramps or other similar structures as may be necessary to
satisfy the requirements of applicable laws, such as the
Americans with Disabilities Act, the exteriors of the residential
structures presently located on both of the lots will remain the
same as they are on the date of this petition, without material
exterior modification or addition.
5O3
Neither of the properties, nor any part of either of them, shall be
used as a trade or vocational school of an industrial nature,
medical clinic, medical office, or funeral home, club, lodge and
fraternal organization, medical laboratory, or public parking lot
and structure.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
amended petition on a vote of 6-0, advising that given the adjacent land uses and
zoning patterns, C-1, Office District, permitted uses, particularly as limited by the
proffered conditions, are appropriate uses of the subject properties; an(J the
requested zoning change, with retention of the residential structures, provides a
reasonable approach to buffering the residential neighborhood from existing
intensive commercial uses.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36045-081902) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.1-3, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and Sheet No. 129, 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
by title.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 363.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36045-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Cutler.
Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before
Council in support of the request of his client. He advised that he appeared before
Council on May 20, 2002, at which time Council received a report from the City
Planning Commission recommending denial of the request on a 3-3 vote. He
advised that on May 20, Council requested that the matter be referred back to the
City Planning Commission for further study, report and recommendation, and the
matter was again consideration by the Planning Commission in July 2002, at which
time it received a 6 - 0 vote for approval. He explained that the Planning
Commission's recommendation contains a favorable vote by the three City Planning
Commissioners who initially voted against the request in May, and noted that three
facts led to the change in the position of the City Planning Commission; i.e.: the
request was amended to provide that both houses presently located on the lots will
remain unchanged unless and until otherwise approved by Council; certain .~ses
were deleted from the application that City Planning staff believed to be heavier
5O4
traffic generators; and the City's new Director of Planning advised that the requested
rezoning was a proper zoning action for the property. Additionally, he stated that
certain facts were presented by the petitioner regarding the facility operated by
Carillon and the City Planning Commission agreed that the level of activity on the
property is such that it has materially adversely affected the viability of the lots as
residential property, because the facility is substantially an all day every day
operation which creates more activity in the area than formerly existed at the
Moore's Store, therefore, the two lots are completely open to commercial use.
He noted that the statement was made by a Member of Council that there are
sufficient C-1 properties currently available in the City of Roanoke; however, he
stated that such position would result in a static real estate market, one that would
refuse to respond to market forces, and would not take into consideration changes
that occur around properties, with the property in question serving as a perfect
example. He added that the two houses subject to the rezoning fit within the
statement of the intent of the zoning ordinance and the C-1, Office District, which is
intended to preserve the existing residential character of neighborhoods and their
viability by allowing limited commercial uses and appropriate existing or new
structures. He stated that the buildings will remain unchanged except that between
the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m., they will be used for office purposes and from
6:00 p.m. to 8:00 a.m., they will be empty, therefore, the neighborhood will notice
little difference in moving from a residential use to an office use.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing.
Mr. Charles Helms, 2951 Roberts Road, S. W., owner of four parcels of rental
property in the area, advised that the City Planning Commission previously denied
the request on a 3 - 3 vote and is now recommending approval on a 6 - 0 vote;
whereupon, he requested a clarification as to the City Planning Commission's
rationale for changing its vote. He called attention to an abundance of office space
on Franklin Road which is currently empty and questioned the need for more C-1
zoning. He presented a petition signed by 61 persons in the Roberts Road area in
opposition to the request for rezoning. He spoke against the rezoning because the
two houses would be better served as residential property, and asked that Council
deny the request for rezoning.
Ms. Maggie Snyder, '1915 Meadowbrook Road, N. W., advised that she
previously lived in the area and was subjected to loud noise at all hours of the day
and night from the Carillon facility, music from a bar behind the property, and noise
from Franklin Road in general.
5O5
Mr. Layman was requested to review the proffered conditions to rezoning
which are on file in the City Clerk's Office.
No other persons wishing to be heard, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 36045-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris Wyatt and
Mayor Smith ..................................................................................................... 7.
NAYS:None ........................................................................................... 0.
STREETS AN D ALLEYS: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council
of the City of Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a
public hearing for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as
the matter may be heard, on the request of Franklin Road, L.L.C., that a 0.717 acre
portion, more or less, of excess right-of-way of Franklin Road that adjoins Official
Tax No. 1300101, be permanently abandoned, vacated, discontinued and closed, to
the extent that the City of Roanoke has any legal interest in said public right-of-way,
the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on August 6, 2002 and August 13, 2002.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that upon Council's
July 15, 2002 continuation on the petition to close a portion of the Franklin Road
right-of-way, City staff worked with the petitioner to address various questions and
concerns raised by Council; and the following outlines the result of staff
consultations with the petitioner.
Piping of the open stream adjacent to the riqht-of.way: The drainage
system both to the north and south of this site is currently piped. As part
of any subsequent development plan for this site, the Departme;it of
Engineering would review the proposal to ensure that the piping of this
portion is of a size sufficient to properly handle flows coming from
upstream and providing proper transition to existing piping further
downstream.
506
Consideration of future Franklin Road Greenway: While in its conceptual
form, there has been no determination as to which side any future
greenway along Franklin Road might utilize. The development of this site
would result in new curb, gutter, and sidewalk along the Franklin Road
frontage where none exists today, and would provide a similar amount of
pedestrian walking area as is currently found on existing developed sites
north and south of this site on the east side of Franklin Road. Therefore,
future greenway or pedestrian way development would not be precluded,
but in fact, enhanced, on the east side of the street with the development
of this property.
Development conditions related to slopes: The applicant has presented
three conditions to which he is willing to commit at this time regarding the
slope/cut of the hill to the rear of the property.
There will be no natural/vertical cuts in the terrain of the
parcel. All land will either be graded or sloped as
geotechnical conditions warrant.
A 10-foot buffer from the rear property line will be retained
whereby a minimum of 10 feet of land will remain in its natural
undisturbed state, measured from the property line and
extending westwardly toward Franklin Road.
Resulting slopes will be re-established with permanent
vegetation on all graded areas left unpaved or undeveloped,
unless exposed rock results from the cutting into the hill at
the rear of the property. (This condition would apply as a
result of any development of the site as a part of the City's
development plan approval process).
It was further advised that City staff does not believe that these conditions, as
currently proposed, give sufficient assurances regarding the range of potential slope
percentages that could result on the site as an outcome of the vacated right-
of-way being added to the site area, which was the basis of inquiries by City Council
Members at the July 15 meeting; and more detailed geotechnical analysis would
have to be undertaken by the applicant to begin to identify the range of slope
percentages that would result from development of the property either with, or
without, the vacated right-of-way being made a part of the site.
507
Value of riqht-of-way: $15,000.00 had been previously identified as the
contributory value for the closure of this right-of-way. The petitioner has
indicated a willingness to provide payment of a significantly lesser sum of
approximately $7,800.00.
The City Manager advised that the property, by right, is properly zoned to be
developed without the street closure; some of Council's issues/concerns regarding
development of the property have been addressed in responses above noted; while
insufficient information has been provided by the applicant to address in total the
post-development range of resulting slope conditions that might result on the
property if the right.of-way were to be vacated, the ability to apply at a minimum,
condition (b) above, to a street closure approval, would potentially provide a better
buffering relationship to the top of the hill than otherwise would happen if the street
closure were denied, and the property developed as a matter of right; therefore, City
staff can support closure of the portion of the right-of-way with this conditior
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
"An ORDINANCE permanently vacating discontinuing and closing certain
public right-of-way in the City of Roanoke, Virginia, as more particularly described
hereinafter; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title."
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of the ordinance. The motion was second by
Mr. Carder.
Stephen Strauss, representing Structures Design/Build, L. L.C., advised that
he met with City representatives to discuss and resolve issues that were raised at
the July 15, 2002, public hearing. He stated that the City of Roanoke should be a
positive force to encourage development within the City and not a hindrance, and
discussions with City staff werepositive, resulting in a solution that will benefit the
City of Roanoke, the adjoining land owners and the developer, given the fact that the
property is properly zoned for development. He stated that the majority of the
issues that where raised, such as pipe sizing, erosion concerns and greenway
development, will be addressed in the development review process which will
ensure that development will comply with the City's established standards. He
advised that he is committed to paying $7,800.00 for the vacated land and, in
addition, due to right-of.way vacation, he will ensure that a natural buffer of ten feet
will remain in place along the rear of the property for the benefit of residents of
White Oak Road.
508
Mr. Bestpitch recommended a friendly amendment to the ordinance that
$15,000.00 be inserted on page 3, paragraph 2, as follows:
"BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that prior to receiving ail required
approvals of the subdivision plat referenced in the previous paragraph,
the applicant shall give to the Treasurer for the City of Roanoke a
certified check or cash in the amount of fifteen thousand dollars
($15,000.00) as consideration for this action taken by City Council."
Mr. Dowe and Mr. Carder, maker of the motion currently on the floor,
concurred in the friendly amendment offered by Mr. Bestpitch.
Mr. Fred Flowers, 3207 White Oak Road, S. W., advised that thera are two
opposing interests who would like to purchase the 3.5 acre tract of land on the side
of the hill between Franklin Road and White Oak Road, S.W. He stated that
residents of White Oak Road wish to preserve the land in its present state by
purchasing the land and donating it to the City of Roanoke as a permanent green
space; and Structures Design/Build proposes to cut into the hillside and construct
three office buildings. He noted that the property owner first offered the land,
privately, to the ten adjoining property owners at $285,000.00 in May 1998, however,
at $28,500.00 per family, residents could not afford to purchase the land and it was
placed on the market; and in January 2001, the property had not sold and the owner
again offered it to the adjoining property owners at $150,000.00, but residents still
could not afford to purchase the land and continued to hope that the property was
priced too high for commercial development. He stated that 17 months later,
Structures Design/Build appeared before the City Planning Commission with a
proposal that would make commercial development of the property economically
feasible by asking the City of Roanoke to donate .7 acre of excess right-of-way on
Franklin Road so as to reduce the slope of the cut into the hillside. He explained that
the excess right-of-way acreage will provide a significant portion of the project's
useable bottom land, costing far less to develop than the hillside portion and
dramatically reducing the amount of material to be removed from the hillside and
further lowering development costs. He stated that the revised profile drawing that
was presented to the City Planning Commission shows 81 feet of usable bottom land
that the developer would purchase and 36 feet that the City would provide; if the
City's portion amounts to 44 per cent of the developer's portion of the land and if the
option price to the developer is $156,000.00, market value of the City's land would
be 44 per cent, or $66,000.00; therefore, White Oak Road residents do not agree with
the $7,800.00 or the $15,000.00 under consideration. He stated that the $66,000.00
land subsidy, plus substantially reducing excavation costs, could easily bc the
deciding factors in the project, and it is only with this in mind that the developer has
509
pursued the project. He reiterated that residents of White Oak Road strongly oppose
the destruction of the 100 foot wide buffer between the neighborhood and Franklin
Road, and request that Council refrain from sweetening the deal for the developer,
because the City will be far better off with a newly dedicated green space donated
by its citizens.
Mr. James Mullitt, 3227 White Oak Road, S. W., advised that two weeks ago,
residents of White Oak Road requested Council's assistance in preserving the
wooded hill along Franklin Road between West Motor Sales and Avenham Avenue,
which serves as an oasis of nature in an otherwise commercial development, and
residents of the area are unanimous in their desire to save this wooded hillside. He
stated that everyone benefits from the hillside, which is why residents propose to
purchase the land and donate same to the City as a designated green space. He
added that it has been learned that development of the property is an economic
decision and one of the important economic variables is the City owned right-of-way
along Franklin Road, to which the City of Roanoke holds the key. He stated that the
area in question is a steep hill, and the City owns a large portion of what could be
flat usable land, with the remainder coming from excavation of the hill, therefore,
Council's decision not to grant the land to the developer would make development
very expensive, and might create the opportunity for the land to be turned into a
designated green space. He advised that development would increase the City's tax
base, but at what price, i.e.: loss of neighborhood values and loss of beauty and
peace to make room for more commercial buildings. He requested that Council deny
the sale or the granting of City owned right-of-way to the developer, because
residents of the area would like for the green hillside to remain intact for all to enjoy
for many years to come.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
Mr. Cutler advised that the goals of Council Members should be to promote
economic development through the highest and best use of the City's land, to
minimize negative environmental impact associated with economic development,
to protect unique environmental recreational resources and to obtain fair market
value for property rights being transferred from the City, which have been held in
trust for the citizens of the City of Roanoke. He stated that just as the City must pay
fair compensation for private property rights, the City is owed fair payment for its
property rights. He added that the developer in this instance may be unwilling to pay
what the right-of.way is worth; therefore, he favors maintaining the land in its
natural state and for the residents to acquire the land and donate same to the City
of Roanoke as green space. He stated that he intends to oppose transfer of the
right-of-way.
510
Mr. Strauss modified his previous proposal to either pay $15,000.00 in cash
or $8,200.00, which is the difference between the $7,800.00 and the $15,000.00, to be
used for additional landscaping.
U pon question, Mr. Strauss advised that regardless of whether the City grants
the right-of-way, it is his intent to construct the office building, and, additionally
there will be no ten foot buffer on the rear of the property that would be left in its
natural state, which would require an even larger cut into the hillside. He reiterated
that it is his intent to move forward with development with or without abandonment
of the right-of-way by the City.
Mr. Carder advised that he did not feel comfortable with the sale price of
$15,000.00, therefor, he could not support the request. However, he stated that the
property owner has the right to develop the land and whether the land remains as
green space is not the option of the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Strauss clarified that if the right-of-way is vacated, he would be willing to
increase the rear buffer from ten to fifteen feet from the rear property line toward
Franklin Road, leaving the area in its natural state with no grading and retain the
natural vegetation. Additionally, he stated that City Code requirements with regard
to separating a residential and a commercial area would also be included in
conjunction with the fifteen feet of natural area. Further, he stated that to reach the
contributory value of $15,000.00, he will either pay the full amount in cash, or a
portion in cash, and a portion for additional landscaping.
Ms. Wyatt advised that because of the willingness of the developer to
cooperate and his willingness as a corporate citizen to develop the land taking into
consideration the needs of the neighborhood through the least amount of
invasiveness to the land, she plans to support the request because it is the right and
fair thing to do and over the long term, such action will protect the neighborhood.
Mr. Harris advised that he intended to vote against the vacation of the right-of-
way because value of the land far exceeds $15,000.00, and the City Planning
Commission voted to deny the request.
M r. Dowe moved that the ordinance be amended to provide for a 15 foot buffer
instead of the 10 foot buffer previously offered by the petitioner. The motion was
seconded by Ms. Wyatt and adopted.
There being no further discussion; the Ordinance, as amended, was lost by
the following vote:
511
AYES: Council Member Wyatt and Mayor Smith ......................................... -2.
NAYS: Council Members Dowe, Harris, Bestpitch, Carder and Cutler- ............ 5.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-CITY PROPERTY-INDUSTRIES-LEASES-PARKING
FACILITIES: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke on Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing
for Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, in the City Council Chamber, with regard to consideration by the City of
Roanoke of awarding a Lease and/or Agreement between the City of Roanoke and
Warehouse Row, L.P., to provide that Warehouse Row will lease, renovate and equip
City-owned buildings located at 117 and 119 Norfolk Avenue, S. W., for a lease term
up to 40 years, upon certain terms and conditions; and to consider the possible
lease of all or part of City-owned property located at 117-123 Salem Avenue, S. W.,
Official Tax Nos. 1010409 - 1010411, inclusive, to Warehouse Row for use as parking
spaces, in connection with the abovementioned lease of buildings, the initial term
of lease of such property for parking spaces will be for a period of up to five years,
the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times. on Monday, August 12, 2002.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke currently owns two buildings, identified as 117 and 119 Norfolk Avenue,
S. W., along the Warehouse Row area of downtown Roanoke; and a public hearing
was held on July 1, 2002, and July 15, 2002, and continued generally, and a public
hearing was advertised forAugust 19, 2002, concerning the possible acceptance and
award of a bid submitted by Warehouse Row, L.P. for lease, renovation, and
equipping of 117 and 119 Norfolk Avenue so that such buildings may be used for
sub-leases by tenants, which may create tax revenues for the City and enhance
economic development of the area.
It was further advised that Warehouse Row, L.P. was the only entity to submit
a bid to the City of Roanoke on July 1,2002, to lease, renovate and equip such City
buildings; the matterwas referred tothe City Manager and after further negotiations,
the City Manager and Warehouse Row, L.P., reached agreement on the terms of a
Lease Agreement and a Recapture of Investment Agreement.
It was explained that term of the lease shall be for 40 years, whereby
Warehouse Row, L.P. shall pay to the City the sum of one dollar per year; in addition
to the lease of the buildings, the City of Roanoke shall provide parking spaces to be
determined by the parties, located on all or part of City owned property located at
117-123 Salem Avenue S. W., Official Tax Nos. 1010409, 1010410, and 1010411, to
512
Warehouse Row, L.P. for use as parking spaces, in connection with the lease of the
buildings, for an initial term of five years; Warehouse Row L.P. shall expend
approximately $1,700,600.00 in making permanent improvements and in equipping
the buildings; and Warehouse Row, L.P. will operate and manage the property, at its
sole cost and expense, as high quality commercial space suitable for use by
technology companies.
It was noted that in order to help finance the above lease, Warehouse Row,
L.P. needs to have a Recapture of Investment Agreement among the City, Warehouse
Row, L.P., Warehouse Row, L.L.C., Warehouse Row Lending, L.L.C., Carillon Health
System, and the Roanoke Valley Development Corporation; after five years from
when the property has been placed in service, any member of Warehouse Row
L.L.C., defined as Carillon Health System and/or The Roanoke Valley Development
Corporation, may elect to sell its membership interest in the property; upon request
for sale of the membership interest, the City, or its designee, shall first have the right
to purchase such interest, which is defined as the initial and subsequent capital
investments, plus the amount of net operating revenue, if any, not equal to an
average of a six per cent return on the original capital investment; if the City does
not execute its right to purchase such membership interest, Warehouse Row L.L.C.
shall have the exclusive right to sell the property to another purchaser; and sales
proceeds will be distributed as follows:
First, to repay Warehouse Row L.L.C. interest/investment.
In the event of any excess over the LLC investment, such
excess will be applied to the City's original purchase price
of the property ($636,000.00).
In the event the final purchase price, plus the LLC
investment noted in immediately above also exceeds the
$636,000.00 original purchase price of the City, any excess
over that amount will be distributed 1/3 to the City, 113 to
Carillon and 1/3 to The Roanoke Valley Development
Corporation.
The City Manager recommended, following the public hearing, that Council
accept the bid of Warehouse Row, L.P., authorize the City Manager to execute both
a Lease Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Warehouse Row, L.P. and a
Recapture of Investment Agreement among the City of Roanoke, Warehouse Row,
L.P., Warehouse Row L.L.C., Warehouse Row Lending, L.L.C., Carillon Health
System, and the Roanoke Valley Development Corporation, to be approved as to
form by the City Attorney; and further authorize the City Manager to take such
additional actions, or execute such additional documents as may be necessary to
implement and administer said agreements.
513
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36046-081902) AN ORDINANCE accepting the bid of Warehouse Row, L.P.,
to lease, renovate and equip certain City owned buildings located at 117 and 119
Norfolk Avenue, S. W., (Buildings) for a term of 40 years, upon certain terms and
conditions, and authorizing the City Manager to execute such a Lease Agreement,
which will also provide for the lease of or otherwise providing for parking spaces on
property owned by the City and located at 117 - 123 Salem Avenue, S. W.;
authorizing the City Manager to execute a further agreement among the City,
Warehouse Row, L. P. (WR), Warehouse Row, L.L.C., as General Partner (GP),
Warehouse Row Lending, L.L.C. (WRL), Carilion Health System (Carilion), and
Roanoke Valley Development Corporation (RVDC) and/or other parties as may be
necessary, that will provide for a recapture of the investment to be made by some
or all of such parties in connection with the lease, renovation and equipping of the
Buildings, and which agreement will include a provision for the possible future sale
of the Buildings; authorizing the City Manager to take such further action and to
execute such further documents as may be necessary to implement and administer
such lease and/or agreements; and dispensing with the second reading by title of
this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 364.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36046-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36046-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ............................................................................................... 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
SEWERS AND STORM DRAINS.CITY PROPERTY: Pursuant to instructions by
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday August 19,
2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of
the City of Roanoke to vacate a portion of a sanitary sewer easement located on
Gum Spring Street, S. E., which is encroaching on property identified as Official Tax
No. 4200901, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Tuesday, August 6, 2002 - Monday, August 12, 2002.
514
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the property
owner at 3138 Gum Spring Street, S. E., Nellie M. Brown, has requested that the City
of Roanoke vacate a portion of a sanitary sewer easement that runs under a corner
of the house and patio; encroachment of the residence was discovered when a
survey plat was prepared prior to purchase of the property; and Ms. Brown has
relocated a portion of the sewer line to remove the encroachment and is willing to
dedicate to the City an easement for the new alignment.
The City Manager recommended, following the public hearing, that she be
authorized to execute the appropriate documents to accept the new easement,
subject to a satisfactory environmental site inspection, and vacate the existing
easement; the new easement shall be dedicated as a sanitary sewer easement; and
the property owner will be responsible for preparation of all necessary documents.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36047-081902) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the vacation of an easement on
property identified as Official Tax Map No. 4200901 located on Gum Spring Street,
S. E., upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 367.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36047-081902. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Carder.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36047-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith ....................................................................................... -7.
NAYS: None .................................................................... .0.
515
CITY PROPERTY.TELEPHONE EQUIPMENT-WATER RESOURCES: Pursuant to
instructions by Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, August 19, 2002, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to lease a portion of the City owned
Washington Heights Water Tank site, located in the 4100 block of Wyoming Avenue,
to Cellco Partnership, a Delaware general partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, for the
purpose of installing antennas and related equipment thereon, to provide radio and
wireless telecommunciations services, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roa,,oke
Times on Sunday, August 11, 2002.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Council approved
and adopted the City of Roanoke Policy as to Wireless Telecommunications
Facilities located on City property dated January 21, 1997, in accordance with a
recommendation of the Water Resources Committee dated February 3, 1997; the City
currently provides leased space on four water tanks to Virginia PCS Alliance, L.C.
and Triton PCS Property Company, L.L.C.; lease agreement renewals with the
companies for use of City water tank facilities was approved on July 15, 2002; and
total annual revenue for all leases is:
$ 39,000.00/year for remainder of 2002
$127,200.00/year from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003.
$148,800.00/year from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004.
$160,800.00/year from January 1, 2005 through July 31, 2007.
Itwas further advised that Cellco Partnership, a Delaware general partnership,
dlblal Verizon Wireless, with its principal office at 180 Washington Valley Road,
Bedminster, New Jersey 07921, has requested to lease a portion of the Washington
Heights Water Tank and ground site, which is located in the 4100 block of Wyoming
Avenue, Official Tax No. 2770406; to install directional antennas, connecting cables
and appurtenances; to lease the property, a new lease agreement is required, as well
as a public hearing; terms and conditions of the lease are in accordance with the
City of Roanoke Policy as to Wireless Telecommunication Facilities located on City
Property dated January 21, 1997, and substantially similar to existing lease
agreements with other entities using the City's water tanks; term of the lease will
be four years and 11 months, commencing on September 1, 2002 and expiring on
July 31,2007; the lease may be renewed for up to two five year terms, upon mutual
agreement by the parties; the lease requires that the lessee post security to
guarantee removal of the electronic facilities at the end of the lease - either in cash
or a bond in the amount of $7,500.00 will be required; and rent for such lease is per
month, per provider, for leased space on one water tank and:
516
$1,000.00/month from September 1, 2002 through December 31, 2002.
$1,325.00/month from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2003.
$1,550.00/month from January 1, 2004 through December 31, 2004.
$1,675.00/month from January 1, 2005 through July 31, 2007.
The City Manager recommended that Council approve a new lease agreement
between the City of Roanoke and Cellco Partnership, a Delaware general
partnership, dlblal Verizon Wireless, and authorize the City Manager to execute such
agreement, in a form approved by the City Attorney; and further, authorize the City
Manager to take such additional actions and execute such additional documents as
may be necessary to implement and administer the lease agreement.
Mr. Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#36048-081902) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to enter
into a Lease Agreement between the City and Cellco Partnership, a Delaware general
partnership, d/b/a Verizon Wireless, for use of a portion of a City owned water tank
and the site on which it sits, which is located in the 4100 block of Wyoming Avenue,
Tax Map No. 2770406, known as the Washington Heights Water Tank, and which will
provide that Cellco Partnership will use such area for the placement, operation, and
maintenance of personal communication system antennas and related equipment,
upon certain terms and conditions; authorizing the City Manager to take such further
action and execute such additional documents as may be necessary to implement
and administer such Lease Agreement; and dispensing with the second reading by
title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 66, page 368.)
Mr. Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 36048-081902. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carder.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be heard
in connection with the public hearing; whereupon, Mr. Greg Tully, 2715 10th Street,
N. W., spoke in support of the lease proposal. No other persons wishing to be
heard, the Mayor declared the public hearing closed.
There being no further discussion; Ordinance No. 36048-081902 was adopted
by the following vote:
517
AYES: Council Members Bestpitch, Carder, Cutler, Dowe, Harris, Wyatt,
and Mayor Smith .............................................................................................. 7.
NAYS: None ......................................................................................... 0.
~ EASEMENTS-WATER RESOURCES: Pursuant to instructions by Council, the
City' Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, August 19, 2002, at
7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of the City
of Roanoke to vacate an existing water line easement located on privately owned
property, in exchange for a relocated easement to be dedicated to the City of
Roanoke; and thereafter, the City of Roanoke proposes to quitclaim a portion of the
new easement to the Virginia Department of Transportation, in connection with
development of Kingston Estates, a new subdivision located in Roanoke County, the
matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Sunday, August 11, 2002.
The Mayor advised that the City Manager has requested that the public hearing
be continued indefinitely; whereupon, without objection by Council, it wa.~ so
ordered.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard; and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for any necessary and
appropriate response, recommendation or report to Council.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-COMPLAINTS-CITY EMPLOYEES-HOSPITALS-YOUTH:
Mr. Robert D. Gravely, 617 Hanover Avenue, N. W., advised that Carilion Health
system has a monopoly in the City of Roanoke. He addressed the matters of Iow
wages for City employees, fair and equal treatment of City employees on a daily
basis and in promotions, the City of Roanoke does not have a large enough work
force to maintain the City's cleanliness, young people are moving out of the City
because of the way they are treated, and more police officers are needed to address
crime.
518
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 8:55 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST:
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Ralph K. Smith
Mayor