Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 11-11-91REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION .... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL November 11, 1991 7:30 p.m. AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL Call to Order -- Roll Call. Council Members Bowles and Fitzpatrick were absent. The invocation will be delivered by The Reverend Bradford L. Phillips, Pastor, Huntington Court United Methodist Church. Present. The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America will be led by Mayor Noel C. Taylor. The Mayor presented a pewter cup to Ms. Kikumi A~ki from Nagas~kl Profecture, Japan, who was participating in a two week orientation]internship program with Roanoke County. BID OPENINGS Bids for the Luck Avenue By-Pass Storm Drain Project. Eight bids were referred to a committee composed of Messrs. White, Chalr,,~n, Clark and Kiser for tabulation, roport and recommendation to Council. Bids for asbestos abatement, floor tile and mastic, at the National Guard Armory, 32 Reserve Avenue, S. W. Eight bids were referred to a committee composed of Messrs. White, Chairman, Clark and Snead for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. Eo PUBLIC HEARINGS Public hearing on the request of Mr. and Mrs. Jackie L. Fuller to amend certain proffered conditions to the rezoning of property located at 911 Tazewell Avenue, S. E., being Lot 4, Block 4, Map of Belmont Land Company, Officiai Tax No. 4112104, which property was rezoned from RG-1, Generai Residential District, to C-2, General Commerciai District, pursuant to Ordinance No. 26770 on November 21, 1983. Mr. James M. Zadell, Attorney. Adopted OrdlnAuce No. 30774 on first reading. (5-0) Public hearing on the request of Mr. and Mrs. Jackie L. Fuller that a tract of land located at 911 Tazewell Avenue, S. E., containing .09 acre, more or less, identified as Official Tax No. 4112105, be rezoned from RM-2, ResidentialMulti-Family, Medium Density District, to C-2, Generai Commercial District, subject to certain conditions proffered by the petitioners. Mr. Paul B. Wiley, Agent. Adopted Ordln~nce No. 30775 on first reading. (5-0) Public hearing on the request of Appalachian Power Company to permanently vacate, discontinue and close all of one public ailey and portions of two alleys, adjacent to First Street and Day Avenue, S. W. Mr. Daniel F. Layman, Jr., Attorney. Adopted Ordinance No. 30776 on first reoding. (5-0) Public hearing on the request of H & S Construction Company that a block of Westport Avenue, S. W., extending from 20th to 21st Street; a portion of 21st Street, extending from Westport Avenue south to a 12 foot alley; and a 12 foot alley running parallel with Westport and Salem Avenues, be permanently vacated, discontinued and closed. Mr. George M. Gee, President, Spokesperson. Adopted Ordinance No. 30777 on first re~dlng. (5-0) Public hearing with regard to a proposed amendment to the Fiscal Year 1991-92 Community Development Block Grant Program and budget. Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 30778-111191. (5-0) Adopted Resolution No. 30779-111191. (4-0, Council Member White abstained f~om VOting. ) 2. CONSENT AGENDA ALL MATTERS LISTED UNDER THE CONSENT AGENDA ARE CONSIDERED TO BE ROUTINE BY THE CITY COUNCIL AND WILL BE ENACTED BY ONE MOTION IN THE FORM LISTED BELOW. THERE WILL BE NO SEPARATE DISCUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY. NONE. REGULAR AGENDA Hearing of Citizens Upon Public Matters: Presentation with regard to services provided to the citizens of the City of Roanoke by Mental Health Services of the Roanoke Valley. Dr. Fred P. Roessel, Jr., Executive Director. Received and fried with appreciation. Petitions and Communications: A communication from Mr. C. Stan Cross, Jr., President, Council of Community Services, requesting a real estate tax-exempt status on property located at 502 Campbell Avenue, S. W. The request was referred to the City Manager for study and report to Council. The City Man~orrer was further requested to develop a proposed policy statement for handling future requests for ~ estate tax-exempt status, and that the following information be included in the report: How many 501(C)(3) organizations within the City limits own real estate which is tax exempt? Of those 501 (C) ( 3 ) organizations that are tax exempt and receive funds frem the City, does the City subtract the value of the tax-exempt status frem the funds that are contributed to such organization so that the organization will be comparable with org~nlzations that do not enjoy tax-exempt status? Does the City have a mech-ni-~m or cleal~house for identifying space needs of tax exempt org'~ni~,ations? What will be the value of tax exempt status if granted to the Council of Community Services? 3 The matter was also referred to the City Attorney, working in conjunction with the City Manager, to prepare necessary legal documents in connection with a public hearing on the request of the Couneil of Community Services. o Reports of Officers: a. City Manager: Briefings: None. Items Recommended for Action: A report recommending that a public hearing be scheduled for Monday, December 2, 1991, to receive comments on a proposed Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy. Concurred intherecommenda~on. A report recommending adoption of a measure amending the City Code which will authorize the City Manager to issue permits for erection, maintenance or removal of holiday decorations, flags and banners on certain City-owned poles, trees and facilities. Adopted Ordinance No. 30780-111191. (5-0) A report with regard to revenue adjustments for the Downtown Service District. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 30781-111191. (5-0) 4. A report with regard to appropriation of funds. Adopted Budget Ordln~nee No. 30782-11191. (5-0) A report recommending appropriation of $3.5 million for Jefferson High School renovation. Adopted Budget Ordinance No. 30783-111191. (5-0) A joint report of the City Manager and the City Attorney recommending a plan of action and timetable relative to City Council election procedures. Action on the report was deferred until the next regular meeting of Council on Monday, November 18, 1991. Council Members Bowers and White voted no. o o A commullication from Mr. Samuel F~nklln, 3822 Rolllno' Hill Avenue, N. W., was tabled until the next rogular meeting of CounCil on Monday, November 18, 1991. Adopted Resolution No. 30784-111191, establishing Thursday, December 26, 1991, and Friday, December 27, 1991, as City holidays for certain employees for thin calendar yee~ only. Council voted to resc{nd Resolution No. 30687-82691 and reinstated the Council meeting to be held on Monday, Decmember 16, 1991. The City Attorney was in-~tructed to prepare the proper measure canceling the regular meeting of Council to be held on Monday, December 23, 1991. Reports of Committees: A report of the Legislative Committee transmitting the 1992 Legislative Program of the City of Roanoke. Council Member David A. Bowers, Chair. Adopted Resolution No. 30785-111191. (5-0) Council authorized the City Clerk to advertise a public hearing to be held on Monday, November 25, 1991, at 7:00 p.m., or as seen thereafter as the matter may be hea~l, with regard to a proposed City Charter amendment. Unfinished Business: None. Introduction and Consideration of Ordln~nces and Resolutions: None. Motions and Miscellaneous Business: Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor and Members of City Council. Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council. 10. Other Hearings of Citizens: 5 MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKI - OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #27 SANDRAH. EAKIN Deputy CityClerk Mr. William White, Sr., Chairman ) Mr. William F. Clark ) Committee Mr. Kit B. Kiser ) Gentlemen: The following bids for the Luck Avenue By-Pass Storm Drain Project were opened and read before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991: BIDDER BASE BID TOTAL Counts & Dobyns, Inc. Branch Highways, Inc. E. C. Pace Company, Inc. R. S. Jones & Associates, Inc. Aaron J. Conner General Contractor, Inc. Ramey, Inc. H. T. Bowling, Inc. Prillaman & Pace, Inc. $ 969,741.00 2,014,270.00 2,023,106.50 2,123,855.00 2,177,972.20 2,334,597.00 2,546,168.00 2,596,181.00 On motion, duly seconded and adopted, the bids were referred to you for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw pc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney MARY F. PARI(ER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #122 K~DRAH. EAKIN Deputy CiWClerk Mr. William White, Sr., Chairman ) Mr. William F. Clark ) Committee Mr. George C. Snead, Jr. ) Gentlemen: The following bids for asbestos abatement, floor tile and mastic at the National Guard Armory, 32 Reserve Avenue, S. W., were opened and read before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991: BIDDER BASE BID TOTAL Western State Insulation AREMCO, Inc. Construction Services of New River Valley HICO, Inc. Absolute Enterprise, Inc. ACMC, Inc. Strahle Construction Company, Inc. Falcon Associates, Inc. $ 16,705.00 17,303.00 19,800.00 21,406.00 28,134.07 34,102.00 38,181.00 45,500.00 On motion, duly seconded and adopted, the bids were referred to you for tabulation, report and recommendation to Council. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw pc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Vh'ginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 MARY F. pARKER SANDRA H. EAKIN City Clerk November 14, 1991 D~ty City Clerk File #226-236-178-200 Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 30779-111191 authorizing an amendment to the fiscal year 1991-92 Community Development Block Grant Program and Budget in order to add the Transitional Living Center Project of Total Action Against Poverty by utilizing $20,000.00 in CDBG program income, and authorizing execution of a certain subrecipient agreement with Total Action Against Poverty in the Roanoke Valley, Inc. Resolution No. 30779-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Sincerely, ~~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno. pc: Mr. Theodore J. Edlich, III, Executive Director, Total Action Against Poverty in the Roanoke Valley, Inc., 145 Campbell Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director, Human Resources Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief, Community Planning Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30??9-111191. VIRGINIA, A RESOLUTION authorizing an amendment to the FY 1991-92 Community Development Block Grant Program and Budget to add the Transitional Living Center Project of Total Action Against Poverty of the Roanoke Valley (TAP), and authorizing execution of a certain subrecipient agreement with TAP, upon certain terms and conditions. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that the City Manager or the Assistant City Manager and City Clerk are authorized to execute and attest, resp~ctively, in form approved by the City Attorney, and to submt to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development an amendment to the 1992 CDBG Statement of Objectives to add TAP's Transitional Living Center project, utilizing $20,000.00 in CDBG program income, as well as the appropriate subrecipient agreement with TAP, and any other necessary documentation as more particularly set forth in the report to this Council dated November 11, 1991. ATTEST: City Clerk. MARY F. pARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKI OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981.2541 November 14, 1991 File #60-226-178-200 SANDRAH. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30778-111191 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1991-92 Grant Fund Appropriations, transferring $20,000.00 from Unprogrammed CDBG - Program Income to Transitional Living Center, in connection with an amendment to the fiscal year 1991-92 Community Development Block Grant Program and Budget in order to add the Transitional Living Center Project of TAP. Ordinance No. 30778-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: Mr. Theodore J. Edlich, III, Executive Director, Total Action Against Poverty in the Roanoke Valley, Inc., 145 Campbell Avenue, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director, Human Resources Mr. WilLiam F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief, Community Planning Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Ronald H. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator IN THE COUNCHL OF THE CHTY OF ROANOKEv VIRGHNI~ The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30778-111191. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain 1991-92 Grant Fund Appropriations, emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily Government of the city of Roanoke, exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by Roanoke that certain sections of the Appropriations, be, and the same are reordained to read as follows, in part: certain sections of the and providing for an operation of the Municipal an emergency is declared to the Council of the City of 1991-92 Grant Fund hereby, amended and &DoroDrietions Community Development Block Grant FY 91 Transitional Living Center (1) .................... Unprogrammed CDBG FY91 (2) ........................ l) 2) Transitional Living Center Unprogrammed CDBG - Parking Lot Income (035-090-9038-5219) (035-090-9040-5183) 20,000 (20,000) $2,188,031 20,000 26,022 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. Roanoke, Virginia November 11, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: subject: Amendment 1 of FY 1991-92 Community Development Block Grant (CDBG Program and Budget Background: A. City Council approved CDBG FY 1992 budget and Statement of Objectives on May 13, 1991 by Resolution No. 30508- 51391. Federal CDBG regulations require formally amending the Statement of Objectives if a project is added or ~eleted from the program. II. Current Situation: TAP requested funding in amount of $74,952 by letter to City Manager dated October 11, 1991 to provide for matching funds required to continue operation of Transitional Living Center (TLC) located at 23 24th Street NW. B. City Council concurred in administration recommendation to use $20,000 CDBG funds as partial funding, along with City general funds and private contributions toward this request. TLC provides shelter, counseling and other services to approximately 275 homeless individuals and families each year, all of whom are low income. III. Issues: IV. B. C. D. Cost to City CDBG program Project eligibility Legal Impact on other CDBG projects Alternatives: A. Authorize the following: o City Manager to submit an amendment to the U.S. CDBG Amendment page 2 Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of FY 1992 CDBG Statement of Objectives to add the project of TAP's Transitional Living Center using $20,000 in CDBG program income; City Manager to execute the attached subrecipient agreement with TAP; and Director of Finance to transfer $20,000 in unprogrammed CDBG program income to an account to be established for this project. Cost to City CDBG program would be $20,000 for which funds are available in CDBG unprogrammed program income account 035-090-9040-5183. Pro~ect eligibility is covered under HUD CDBG regulations allowing funding for public services to assist the homeless. It is considered fundable under those same regulations because the program directly benefits low income persons. Legal issues will be addressed by City Attorney review and approval of subrecipient agreement between TAP and City. 4. Impact on other CDBG projects would be neutral. No funds will be taken from currently-budgeted programs. Do not authorize City Manager to submit an amendment to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of FY 1992 CDBG Statement of Objectives to add the project of TAP's Transitional Living Center using $20,000 in CDBG program income; in which case a subrecipient agreement would not be needed, nor would transfer of funds be needed. 1. Cost to City CDBG program would be nothing. 2. Project eliqibility would not be an issue. 3. Legal questions would not be an issue. 4. Impact on other CDBG projects would be neutral. Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council concur in Alternative A which will authorize the following: City Manager to submit an amendment to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) of FY 1992 CDBG Statement of Objectives to add the project of CDBG Amendment page 3 TAP's Transitional Living Center using $20,000 in CDBG program income; City Manager to execute the attached subrecipient a~reement with TAP, subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and Director of Finance to transfer $20,000 in unprogrammed CDBG program income to an account to be established for this project. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH/MTP cc: Assistant city Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Human Resources Director of Public Works Chief of Economic Development Chief of Community Planning City Engineer Building Commissioner Grants Monitoring Administrator Executive Director, TAP E:AMENDMT1.RPT AGREEMENT This Agreement is made and entered into this day of , 1991, by and between the following parties: The Grantee - City of Roanoke, Virginia 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 and the Subgrantee Total Action Against Poverty 145 Campbell Ave S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 The Grantee has been authorized by its City Council pursuant to Resolution No. , adopted November 11, 1991, to provide $20,000 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds for the Transitional Living Center located at 23 24th Street N.W., an activity which provides shelter, counseling, and other services to homeless individuals and families. The parties hereto mutually agree as follows: SCOPE OF SERVICES: Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) will provide supportive housing for homeless individuals and families for up to 24 months, as well as comprehensive services to those persons, including medical care, education, employment counseling, housing counseling, and budgeting skills. TIME OF PERFORMANCE: This Agreement shall be for the period of November 11, through June 30, 1992. Agreement may be extended with the written agreement of both parties. 1991 BUDGET: The total CDBG budget for this project will be $20,000. PROPOSED PAYMENT SC~)ULE AND PROCEDURES: Requests for payment will be submitted by TAP to the City's assigned Project Manager, accompanied by an invoice from the Transitional Living Center. Funds will be disbursed monthly, based on the invoices. Payment will be made to the Subgrantee within ten (10) days from date of receipt, if all compliance issues are met. Agreement page 2 e INDEI~IFICATION: The Subgrantee agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees, from any and all claims, legal actions and judgments advanced against the City and for expenses the City may incur in this regard, arising out of the Subgrantee's intentional, negligent acts or omissions with respect to the rights and privileges granted by the City to the Subgrantee in this Agreement. C(A~IPLIANCE WITH FEDERAL REGULATIONS: The Subgrantee agrees to abide by the HUD conditions for CDBG programs as set forth in Attachment A and all other applicable federal regulations relating to specific programs performed hereunder. Further, the Subgrantee agrees to require compliance with applicable federal regulations of any contractors by agreement. UNIFORM ADMINISTRATIVE REQUIREMENTS: The Subgrantee shall comply with the requirements and standards of OMB Circular No. A-122, "Cost Principles for Nonprofit Organizations", and the following Attachments to OMB Circular No. A-110: Attachment A, "Cash Depositories"; Attachment B, "Bonding and Insurance"; Attachment C, "Retention and Custodial Requirements for Records"; Attachment F, "Standards for Financial Management Systems"; Attachment H, "Monitoring and Reporting Program Performance"; Attachment N, "Property Management Standards"; and Attachment O, "Procurement Standards." PROGRAM INCOME: "Program income" means gross income received by the Grantee or Subgrantee directly generated from the use of CDBG funds. The Subgrantee may retain program income, generated by this agreement, to be revolved in subsequent projects having the same guidelines and restrictions as those covered by this Agreement. All program income and expenses shall be reported to the Grantee on a quarterly basis. 9. RECORDS AND REPORTS: The Subgrantee shall maintain full and accurate records with respect to all matters covered under this Agreement. All records pertaining to this Agreement and the services performed pursuant to it, shall be retained for a period of three (3) years after the expiration date of this Agreement or its amendments. Appropriate City and/or HUD personnel shall have free access to those records during the Agreement duration and the following three-year time period. The Subgrantee shall submit semi-annual reports (January 31 Agreement page 3 for the period July - December and August 31 for the period July thru June) to the Grantee's Office of Grants Compliance. Such reports shall consist of a narrative of accomplishments date, a financial report of revenues, expenses and program income, and an accounting of program beneficiaries. to 10. CONFLICT OF I~T~EST: No employee, agent, consultant, officer or appointed official of the Subgrantee, who is in a position to participate in a decision-making process or gain inside information with regard to any CDBG activity, may obtain a personal or financial interest in any contract, subcontract or agreement with respect thereto, or in the proceeds thereunder, either for themselves, their family or business associates, during their tenure or for one (1) year thereafter. 11. SUSPENSION AND TERMINATION Suspension or termination may occur if the Subgrantee materially fails to comply with any term of this award, and the award may be terminated for convenience by the Grantee or Subgrantee upon written notification to the awarding agency (HUD), setting forth the reasons for such termination, the effective date, and in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. 12. REVERSION OF ASSETS: Upon expiration of this agreement, or amendments thereto, the Subgrantee shall transfer to the city any CDBG funds or program income on hand at the time of expiration and any accounts receivable attributable to the use of CDBG funds. 13. ANNUAL AUDIT AND MONITORING: The Subgrantee shall provide for an annual independent audit of all CDBG expenditures covered by the Agreement. Copies of said audit report shall be furnished to the Grantee's City Manager and Director of Finance within thirty (30) days of completion of the audit. 14. THIRD-PARTY CONTRACTS: The Grantee shall not be obligated or liable hereunder to any party other than the Subgrantee. 15. AMENDMENTS. The Grantee, from time to time, may require changes in the obligations of the Subgrantee hereunder, or its City Council may appropriate further funds for the Transitional Living Center project. In such event or events, such changes which are mutually agreed upon by and between the Subgrantee and grantee Agreement page 4 16. shall be incorporated in written amendment to this Agreement. GOVERNING LAW: This Agreement shall be governed by laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year hereinabove written: ATTEST: CITY OF ROANOKE By By Mary F. Parker, City Clerk W. Robert Herbert, City Manager SUBGRANTEE By Witness By Theodore J. Edlich III Executive Director Total Action Against Poverty E:TAPTLC.CON ATTACHMENT A page i U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM SPECIAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS "Section 3" Compliance in the Provision of Training, Employment and Business Opportunities: The work to be performed under this contract is on a project assisted under a program providing direct Federal financial assistance from the Department of Housing and Urban Development and is subject to the requirements of Section 3 of the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1968, as amended, 12 U.S.C. 170. Section 3 requires that to the greatest extent feasible opportunities for training and employment be given lower income residents of the project area and contracts for work in connection with the project be awarded to business concerns which are located in, or owned in substantial part by persons residing in the area of the project. Bo The parties to this contract will comply with the provisions of said Section 3 and the regulations issued pursuant thereto by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development set forth in 24 CFR 135, and all applicable rules and orders of the Department issued thereunder prior to the execution of this contract. The parties to this contract certify and agree that they are under no contractual or other disability which would prevent them from complying with these requirements. The contractor will send to each labor organization or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, if any, a notice advising the said labor organization or workers' representative of his commitments under this Section 3 clause and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment or training. The contractor will include this Section 3 clause in every subcontract for work in connection with the project and will, at the direction of the applicant for or recipient of Federal financial assistance, take appropriate action pursuant to the subcontract upon a finding that the subcontractor is in violation of regulations issued by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development 24 CFR Part 135. The contractor will not subcontract with any subcontractor where it has notice or knowledge that the latter has been found in violation of regulations under 24 CFR part 135 and will not let any subcontract unless the subcontractor has first provided it with a preliminary statement of ability to comply with the requirements of these regulations. Compliance with the provisions of Section 3, the regulations set forth in 24 CFR Part 135, and all applicable rules and orders of the Department issued hereunder prior to the execution of the contract, shall be a condition of the federal financial assistance provided to the project, binding upon the applicant or recipient for such ATTACHMENT A page 2 assistance, its successor and assigns. Failure to fulfill these requirements shall subject the applicant or recipient, its contractors and subcontractors, its successors and assigns to those sanctions specified by the grant or loan agreement or contract through which Federal assistance is provided, and to such sanctions as are specified by 24 CFR Part 135. Equal Employment Opportunity: Contracts subject to Executive Order 11246, as amended: Such contracts shall be subject to HUD Equal Employment Opportunity regulations at 24 CFR Part 130 applicable to HUD-assisted construction contracts. The Contractor shall cause or require to be inserted in full in any non- exempt contract and subcontract for construction work, or modification thereof as defined in said regulations, which is paid for in whole or in part with assistance provided under this Agreement, the following equal opportunity clause: "During the performance of this contract, the contractor agrees as follows: The contractor will not discriminate against any employee or applicant for employment because of race, color, religion, sex or national origin. The contractor will take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed and that employees are treated during employment without regard to their race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Such action shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; recruitment or recruitment advertising; layoff or termination; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and selection for training, including apprenticeship. The contractor agrees to post in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment, notices to be provided by the contracting officer setting forth the provisions of this nondiscrimination clause. The contractor will, in all solicitations or advertisements for employees placed by or on behalf of the contractor, state that all qualified applicants will receive consideration for employment without regard to race, color, religion, sex or national origin. Co The contractor will send to each labor union or representative of workers with which he has a collective bargaining agreement or other contract or understanding, a notice to be provided by the Contract Compliance Officer advising the said labor union or workers' representatives of the contractor's commitment under this section and shall post copies of the notice in conspicuous places available to employees and applicants for employment. The contractor will comply with all provisions of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and of the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor. The contractor will furnish all information and reports required by Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, and by the rules, regulations and orders of the Secretary of Labor, or pursuant thereto, and will permit access to his books, records and accounts by the ATTACHMENT A page 3 Department and the Secretary of Labor for purposes of investigation to ascertain compliance with such rules, regulations and orders. Fo In the event of the contractor's noncompliance with the nondiscrimination clauses of this contract or with any of such rules, regulations or orders, this contract may be canceled, terminated or suspended in whole or in part, and the contractor may be declared ineligible for further Government contracts or Federally-assisted construction contract procedures authorized in Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, or by rule, regulation or order of the Secretary of Labor, or as otherwise provided by law. The contractor will include the portion of the sentence immediately preceding paragraph {A) and the provisions of paragraphs {A} through (G) in every subcontract or purchase order unless exempted by rules, regulations or orders of the Secretary of Labor issued pursuant to Section 204 of Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, so that such provisions will be binding upon each subcontractor or vendor. The contractor will take such action with respect to any subcontract or purchase order as the Department may direct as a means of enforcing such provisions, including sanctions for noncompliance; provided, however, that in the event a contractor becomes involved in or is threatened with litigation with a subcontractor or vendor as a result of such direction by the Department, the contractor may request the United States to enter into such litigation to protect the interest of the United States." The Contractor further agrees that it will be bound by the above equal opportunity clause with respect to its own employment practices when it participates in Federally-assisted construction work; provided, that if the Contractor so participating is a State or local government, the above equal opportunity clause is not applicable to any agency, instrumentality or subdivision of such government which does not participate in work on or under the contract. The Contractor agrees that it will assist and cooperate actively with the Department and the Secretary of Labor in obtaining the compliance of contractors and subcontractors with the equal opportunity clause and the rules, regulations and relevant orders of the Secretary of Labor; that it will furnish the Department and the Secretary of Labor such compliance; and that it will otherwise assist the Department in the discharge of its primary responsibility for securing compliance. The Contractor further agrees that it will refrain from entering into any contract or contract modification subject to Executive Order 11246 of September 24, 1965, with a contractor debarred from, or who has not demonstrated eligibility for Government contracts and Federally-assisted construction contracts pursuant to the Executive Order and will carry out such sanctions and penalties for violation of the equal opportunity clause as may be imposed upon contractors and subcontractors by the Department or the Secretary of Labor pursuant to Part II, Subpart D, of the Executive Order. In addition, the Contractor agrees that if it fails or refuses to comply with these undertakings, the Department may take any or all of the following actions: cancel, terminate or suspend in whole or in part the grant or loan guarantee; refrain from extending any further assistance to the Contractor under the Program with respect to which the failure or ATTACHMENT A page 4 refusal occurred until satisfactory assurance of future compliance has been received from such Contractor; and refer the cause to the Department of Justice for appropriate legal proceedings. Nondiscrimination Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964: This Agreement is subject to the requirements of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (P.L. 88-352) and HUD regulations with respect thereto, including the regulations under 24 CFR Part 1. In the sale, lease or other transfer of land acquired, cleared or improved with assistance provided under this Agreement, the Contractor shall cause or require a covenant running with the land to be inserted in the deed or-lease for such transfer, prohibiting discrimination upon the basis or race, color, religion, sex or national origin, in the sale, lease or rental, or in the use of occupancy of such land or any improvements erected or to be erected thereon, and providing that the Contractor and the United States are beneficiaries of and entitled to enforce such covenant. The Contractor, in undertaking its obligation in carrying out the program assisted hereunder, agrees to take such measures as are necessary to enforce such covenant and will not itself so discriminate. Obligations of Contractor with Respect to Certain Third-pa~t~ Relationships: The Contractor shall remain fully obligated under the provisions of the Agreement, notwithstanding its designation of any third party or parties for the undertaking of all or any part of the program with respect to which assistance is being provided under this Agreement to the Contractor. Any Contractor which is not the Applicant shall comply with all lawful requirements of the Applicant necessary to insure that the program, with respect to which assistance is being provided under this Agreement to the Contractor is carried out in accordance with the Applicant's Assurances and certifications, including those with respect to the assumption of environmental responsibilities of the Applicant under Section 104(h) of the Housing and Community Development Act of lg74. Interest of Certain Federal Officials: No member of or delegate to the Congress of the United States, and no Resident Commissioner, shall be admitted to any share or part of this Agreement or to any benefit to arise from the same. Interest of Members, Officers or Employees of Contractor, I~mbers of Local Government Body~ or Other Public Officials: No member, officer or employee of the Contractor, or its designees or agents, no member of the governing body of the locality in which the program is situated, and no other public official of such locality or localities who exercises any functions or responsibilities with respect to the program during his tenure, or for one (1) year thereafter, shall have any interest, direct or indirect, in any contract or subcontract, or the proceeds thereof, for work to be performed in connection with the program assisted under the Agreement. The Contractor shall incorporate, or cause to be incorporated, in all such contracts or subcontracts a provision prohibiting such interest pursuant to the purposes of this section. Prohibition Against Payments of Bonus or Co~mission: The assistance provided under this Agreement shall not be used in the payment of any bonus or commission for the purpose of obtaining HUD approval of the application for such assistance, or HUD approval or applications for additional assistance, ATTACHMENT A page 5 10. 11. or any other approval or concurrence of HUD required under this Agreement, Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, or HUD regulations with respect thereto; provided, however, that reasonable fees or bona fide technical, consultant, managerial or other such services, other than actual solicitation, are not hereby prohibited if otherwise eligible as program costs. "Section log': This Agreement is subject to the requirements of Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, 42 U.S.C. 3535(d). No person in the United States shall on the ground of race, color, religion, sex or national origin be excluded-from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity funded in whole or in part with funds available under this title. Access to Records and Site of F_~mployment: This Agreement is subject to the requirements of Executive Order 11246, Executive Order 1375, Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended. Access shall be permitted during normal business hours to the premises for the purpose of conducting on-site compliance reviews and inspecting and copying such books, records, accounts, and other material as may be relevant to the matter under investigation and pertinent to compliance with the Order, and the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto by the Contractor. Information obtained in this manner shall be used only in connection with the administration of the Order, the administration of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended) and in furtherance of the purpose of the Order and that Act. Records: All records pertaining to this Agreement and the services performed pursuant to it, shall be retained for a period of three (3) years after the expiration date of the Agreement. Appropriate City and/or HUD personnel shall have free access to those records during the Agreement duration and the following three-year time period. Termination for Convenience or for Cause: This Agreement may be terminated by either the City or the Contractor in the event of a substantial failure to perform by either party. In the event of such termination, the Contractor shall be entitled to collect all sums for services performed as of the date of termination. This Agreement may be terminated for convenience in whole or in part by the City with the consen~ of the Contractor, in which case the two parties shall agree upon the termination conditions, including the effective date and in the case of partial termination, the portion to be terminated. 12. Legal Rem~lies for Contract Violation: If the Contractor materially fails to comply with any term of this Agreement, whether stated in a Federal statute or regulation, an assurance, in a State plan or application, a notice of award, or elsewhere, the City may take one or more of the following action, as appropriate in the circumstances: 1} Temporarily withhold cash payments pending correction of the deficiency by the Contractor, 2) Disallow all or part of the cost of the activity or action not in compliance, 3) Wholly or partly suspend or terminate the current Agreement, or 4) Take other remedies that may be legally available. E:ATTACHMT.PRO 10/1/91 M November 8, 1991 '91 NOV-8 P3:21 JohnM Hudgins, Jr Henry J Sullivan. PhD Daniel E Karnes Fred R Roessel, Jn, PhD. The Honorable Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council Office of City Clerk Room 456, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: Attached is a copy of our Progress Report for FY91. Thank you for extending time on the agenda on Monday, November 11, 1991 for us to briefly discuss this report. As noted in a previous communication, Janet Bonds will provide comments from the perspective of a consumer of our services. Thomas Chapman, Director of Administration, and I will accompany Dr. Cheri Hartman, member of the Board of Directors. Sincerely, Executive Director cc: Dr. Cheri Hartman Thomas Chapman MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF THE ROANOKE VALLEY - Executive Offices 301 Elm Avenue, SW, Roanoke, Virginia 24016-4026 - (703) 345-9841 FAX (703) 342-3855 Serving the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Counties of Botetourt, Craig and Roanoke RENTAL RRALTH SERVICES OF TIlE RO,O/OKE VALLEY CITY OF ROANOKE PROGRESS REPORT - FY91 DURING THIS PAST FISCAL YEAR, 5306,588 OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE'S TAX DOLLARS WERE MATCHED WITH STATE AND FEDERAL DOLLARS AND FEES TO PROVIDE $5,318,172 OF SERVICE TO THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE. THIS AMOUNTS TO 517 WORTH OF SERVICES FOR EACH TAX DOLLAR EXPENDED. PROGRAMS DURING THE PAST FISCAL YEAR (JULY, 1990 - JUNE, 1991) PROVIDED SERVICES TO PERSONS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS, MENTAL RETARDATION, AND PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE. PREVENTION AND EARLY INTERVENTION SERVICES WERE ALSO PROVIDED TO PERSONS AT-RISK FOR MENTAL ILLNESS, MENTAL RETARDATION, AND PROBLEMS ASSOCIATED WITH DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE. ~ MENTAL }IEAL~ DIVISION PROVIDES AN ARRAY OF SERVICES TO ADULTS WITH SERIOUS MENTAL ILLNESS, EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS, AND THE MEDICALLY INDIGENT. THE SERVICES OF THE DIVISION WERE PROVIDED TO 2,215 CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE DURING THIS PAST YEAR. IN ADDITION, 4,772 HOURS OF PREVENTION ACTIVITIES WERE PROVIDED. THESE SERVICES TO CHILDREN, ADOLESCENTS AND THEIR FAMILIES AND ADULTS INCLUDE: 0 EMERGENCY CONSUMERS OUTREACH SERVICES AND ONGOING OUTREACH - CRISIS INTERVENTION AND OUTREACH TO OF MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES; INCLUDES INTENSIVE IN-HOME SERVICES, TO GERIATRIC ADULTS, HOMES FOR ADULTS, AND ADULT PROTECTIVE CASE MANAGEMENT AND OUTPATIENT - COMPREHENSIVE SERVICES: INCLUDES ASSESSMENT, INDIVIDUALIZED CASE PLANS, AND SPECIFIC SERVICES SUCH AS MEDICATION MANAGEMENT, PSYCHOTHERAPY AND ADVOCACY 0 CRISIS INTERVENTION - 24-HOUR CRISIS INTERVENTION FOR PERSONS EXPERIENCING EXTREME EMOTIONAL STRESS O PSYCHIATRIC EVALUATION AND FOLLOW UP - COMMUNITY PSYCHIATRISTS PROVIDE EVALUATION, MEDICATION, AND FOLLOW-UP SERVICES AS CONSULTANTS TO THE TREATMENT TEAMS O PSYCHOSOCIAL REHABILITATION, TEACHING LIVING SKILLS WHICH PROMOTE INDEPENDENCE, PEER SUPPORT, AND INTEGRATION INTO THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTIAL SERVICES - TREATMENT FOR SERIOUSLY EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED CHILDREN, AGES 5 - 12, IN A COMMUNITY SETTING; FULL SUPPORTING SERVICES TO ADULTS LIVING INDEPENDENTLY PREVENTION SERVICES - TRAINING AND CONSULTATION WITH PROFESSIONALS IN NON- MENTAL I{EALTH SETTINGS, AS A METHOD FOR PHEVENTING EMOTIONAL DISOPd)ERS IN CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS; INCLUDES PARENTING EDUCATION, SOCIAL PROBLEM- SOLVING SKILLS, AND PEER HELPING DAY TREATMENT - SERVICES PROVIDED DURING AND IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING TYPICAL SCHOOL HOURS FOR CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS, INCLUDES GROUPS, INDIVIDUAL AND FAMILY COUNSELING, PARENT EDUCATION AND SUPPORT, ADJUNCTIVE THERAPIES AND ACADEMIC INSTRUCTION OF SPECIAL NOTE: A PARTNERSHIP WITH LUTHERAN FAMILY SERVICES EXPANDS OUR CAPACITY AND AGE RANGE FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION AND THERAPEUTIC DAY TREATMENT FOR SERIOUSLY EMOTIONALLY DISTURBED CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS. MHSRV FUNDS A FULL TIME CASE MANAGER POSITION FOR THE FOCUS PROJECT IN ROANOKE CITY, AND WE CONTINUE TO HAVE STAFF AT ALL LEVELS INVOLVED IN INTERAGENCY TEAMS, FROM OUR EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO LINE STAFF. WE HAVE NEGOTIATED CONTINUATION FUNDING FOR THE BED PURCHASE AGREEMENT, WHICH OFFERS CRISIS STABILIZATION IN THE COMMUNITY FOR ADOLESCENT RESIDENTS OF SANCTUARY AND THE YOUTH HAVENS. ~(E HAVE BEEN GRANTED INTERAGENCY FUNDS FOR A CASE MANAGER TO COORDINATE THE ACTIVITIES OF ALL THE PRESCRIPTION TEAMS IN THE CATCHMENT AREA. ROANOKE MEMORIAL HOSPITAL'S PSYCHIATRIC SERVICES AND MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES' MENTAL HEALTH AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROGRAMS ARE COLLABORATING TO PROVIDE EVALUATION AND ASSESSMENT FOR OUR CLIENTS. A TEAM OF PROFESSIONALS MEETS DAILY WITH THE CLIENT TO IDENTIFY PROBLEMS AND SET TREATMENT GOALS. MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES FUNDS A FULL TIME CASE MANAGER POSITION FOR THE FOCUS PROJECT IN ROANOKE CITY, AND WE CONTINUE TO HAVE STAFF AT ALL LEVELS INVOLVED IN INTERAGENCY TEAMS, FROM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO THE LINE STAFF. '1'!t1~ DIVISION OF MENTAL R~TARDATION SERVICES PROVIDES A COMPREHENSIVE SYSTEM OF QUALITY COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES THAT ARE RESPONSIVE TO PERSONS WITH MENTAL RETARDATION, THEIR FAMILIES, AND THE COMMUNITY. DURING THE PAST YEAR WE PROVIDED SERVICES TO 674 CITIZENS OF ROANOKE. THESE SERVICES INCLUDE: EMERGENCY SERVICES AVAILABLE 24 HOURS PER DAY, SEVEN DAYS PER WEEK WHICH PROVIDE CRISIS INTERVENYION, STABILIZATION, AND REFERRAL ASSISTANCE OVER THE TELEPHONE OR FACE-TO-FACE CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES TO ASSURE IDENTIFICATION OF AND OUTREACH TO POTENTIAL CLIENTS AND CONTINUITY OF CARE BY ASSESSING, PLANNING WITH, LINKING, MONITORING, AND ADVOCATING FOR CLIENTS IN RESPONSE TO THEIR CHANGING NEEDS DAY SUPPORT SERVICES WHICH PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT, ADULT DEVELOPMENTAL EDUCATION/RECREATION PLANNED PROGRAMS TO INCLUDE SHELTERED SERVICES, SL~PORTED EMPLOYMENT, AND 2 RESIDENTIAL SERVICES WHICH PROVIDE OVERNIGHT CARE IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN INTENSIVE TREATMENT OR TRAINING PROGRAM (I.E. INTERMEDIATE CARE EACILITY OR GROUP HOME) OR SUPPORTIVE SERVICES TO ASSIST CLIENTS IN MAINTAINING RESIDENTIAL SETTINGS (I.E. RESPITE SERVICES) EARLY INTERVENTION SERVICES TO PROVIDE EDUCATION AND TRAINING DEVELOPMENTALLY DELAYED INFANTS (0-2 YEARS OF AGE) AND THEIR PARENTS. INTERVENTION IS DESIGNED TO REDUCE THE HANDICAPPING CONDITION. TO THE OF SPECIAL NOTE: THE COMMUNITY MEDICAID INITIATIVE HAS BEEN SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED. BY SECURING MEDICAID-FUNDED CASE MANAGEMENT SERVICES THE DIVISION REPLACED STATE FUNDS WITH REIMBURSEMENT FROM THE MEDICAID PROGRAM. THE SERVICES REIMBURSED BY MEDICAID PROVIDE THOROUGH ASSESSMENT, LINKAGE WITH NEEDED SERVICES, AND DEVELOPMENT OF PROGRAMS THAT ASSIST PERSONS WITH MENTAL RETARDATION TO PARTICIPATE MORE SUCCESSFULLY IN THEIR COMMUNITIES. IN ADDITION, QUALITY ASSURANCE FOR DAY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION SERVICES HAS BEEN INCREASED BY INCLUSION UNDER LICENSURE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEPARTMENT OF MENTAL HEALTH, MENTAL RETARDATION, AND SUBSTANCE ABUSE SERVICES. THIS DAY SUPPORT SERVICE IS OPERATED BY ARC-ROANOKE/CHD INDUSTRIES THROUGH CONTRACT WITH MHSRV. THE ADULT EDUCATION PROGRAM ALSO EXPANDED ITS CAMPUS INTO THE COMMUNITY WITH A NEW VOLUNTEER PROGRAJ~ CALLED BRIDGE BUILDERS. VOLUNTEER PARTNERS ARE MATCHED WITH ADULTS WITH MENTAL RETARDATION LIVING IN THE COMMUNITY TO PLAN AND EXPLORE ACTIVITIES BASED ON MUTUAL INTEREST. THE CAPACITY OF RESIDENTIAL SERVICES HAS BEEN EXPANDED TO SERVE TWO CLIENTS IN A TRANSITIONAL APARTMENT ON-SITE AT THE NIAGARA ROAD RESIDENCE. TWENTY-ONE NEW FAMILIES WERE REGISTERED FOR RESPITE SERVICES THROUGH THE SHORT- TERM CARE PROGRAM FOR FY'91, AND TWENTY-FOUR NEW FAMILIES WERE ELIGIBLE FOR FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE THROUGH THE FAMILY SUPPORT PROJECT. '1}~ DIVISION OF Sb~TANCE ABUSE SERVICES PROVIDES SERVICES TO PREVENT THE DEVELOPMENT OF SUBSTANCE ABUSE AND TO PROMOTE THE RECOVERY OF INDIVIDUALS WITH ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUG ADDICTIONS OR DEPENDENCIES. IN THE PAST YEAR, 1,929 CITIZENS OF ROANOKE CITY RECEIVED PREVENTION, EARLY INTERVENTION, COUNSELING, DETOXIFICATION, OR RESIDENTIAL SERVICES FOR ADDICTION OR OTHER SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEMS. IN ADDITION, 2,732 HOURS OF PREVENTION AND EARLY INTERVENTION WERE PROVIDED. THESE SERVICES INCLUDE: 0 0 OUTPATIENT SERVICES - PROVIDING COMPREHENSIVE TREATMENT SERVICES TO DRUG AND ALCOHOL DEPENDENT PERSONS AND THEIR FAMILIES MEDICAL/SOCIAL DETOXIFICATION PROVIDING A TEN-BED, COMMUNITY-BASED DETOXIFICATION PROGRAM UNDER MEDICAL SUPERVISION FOR PERSONS WITH .~tLCOHOL AND OTHER DRUG PROBLEMS 0 0 0 PRIMARY CARE SERVICES - PRIMARY CARE UNIT, A SHORT TERM RESIDENTIAL PROGRAM OF ALCOHOL/DRUG EDUCATION AND A TRANSITION TO A MORE INTENSIVE T1LEATMENT SETTING, OR TO THE COMMUNITY WITH AFTERCARE SERVICES MULTI-LODGE, A SIXTEEN BED THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY INDIVIDUAL AND GROUP COUNSELING AS WELL AS CASE SIXTEEN WEEKS ENVIRONMENT PROVIDING MANAGEMENT FOR UP TO HEGIRA HOUSE - PROVIDING A THERAPEUTIC COMMUNITY TREATMENT PROGRAM. FOR ADU%TS WITH SEVERE SUBSTANCE ABUSE PROBLEMS SUPPORTED LIVING ARRANGEMENTS PROVIDING A DRUG AND ENVIRONMENT TO FACILITATE A TRANSITION BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AND MULTI-LODGE ALCOHOL-FREE FROM HEGIRA PREVENTION/EARLY INTERVENTION - PROMOTING A COMMUNITY NORM OF NON-TOLERANCE OE ALCOHOL AND OTHER DRUG ABUSE, TO INCREASE AWA~ENESS OE DRUG AND ALCOHOL ABUSE, AND TO PROVIDE PROGRAMMING TO DETER FIRST USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF ABUSE PATTERNS OF SPECIAL NOTE: THROUGH SPECIAL SUPPORT FROM THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT DRUG-FREE RECREATIONAL ACTIVITIES WERE PROVIDED IN THE CITY, AND CITY RESIDENTS WERE ENABLED TO ATTEND THE PRIDE CONFERENCE ON DRUG ABUSE PREVENTION. MEMBERS OF OUR STAFF SERVED ON THE ROANOKE AREA DRUG AND ALCOHOL COUNCIL. SUPPORT GROUPS WERE PROVIDED IN THE SCHOOLS FOR STUDENTS AND SPECIAL GROUPS WERE PROVIDED FOR ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION STUDENTS. FACULTY TRAINING WAS PROVIDED FOR THE STUDENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. SYSTEMATIC TREATMENT SERVICES W~RE PROVIDED TO INMATES IN THE ROANOKE CITY JAIL. BED CAPACITY AT T}~ PRIMARY CARE UNIT WAS INCREASED, AND AN AFTERCARE COMMUNITY SUPPORT SERVICES PROGRAM HAS BEEN EST.ABLISHED. SERVICES AT THE NEW DIRECTIONS OUTPATIENT PROGRAM HAVE BEEN EXPANDED THROUGH THE HIRING OF A CASE MANAGER/DISCHARGE PLANNER. THE RENOVATION OF THE ALCOHOL AND DRUG REHABILITATION CENTER AND AT NEW DIRECTIONS HAS BEEN COMPLETED. MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES WAS THE LEAD AGENCY IN APPLYING FOR A GRANT TO PROVIDE AN INTERAGENCY APPROACH TO MAKE AVAILABLE COORDINATED SERVICES TO MEET THE NEEDS OF Sb~STANCE ABUSING PREGNANT AND POST PARTUM WOMEN AND THEIR INFANTS LIVING IN THE ROANOKE VALLEY. ON THE ATTACHED CHART IS A MORE DETAILED BREAKDOWN OF O[~R SERVICES TO THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY DURING FISCAL YEAR 1991. (ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL - NOVEMBER 11, 1991 - 7:30PM) 4 11/11/91 MHSRV DIRECTLY FUNDED PROGRAMS FY-91 PERFORMANCE REPORT ROANOKE CITY Unduplicated Units of Value of Client Count Service Service MENTAL HEALTH Outpatient Services Case Management Clubhouse Emergency Services Child & Adolescent Day Treatment Children's Center MH Subtotal MENTAL RETARDATION Counseling and Life Skills Center Work Activities Adult Development Supported Employment Read Road Niagara Road Hazelridge ICF/MR Melrose MR/ED Residential Respite Short Term Care College for Living MR Subtotal SUBSTANCE ABUSE New Directions Community SA Services Detoxification Center Primary Care Unit Multi-Lodge Hegira House Supervised Apartments SA Subtotal PREVENTION MH Prevention Services SA Prevention Plus Prevention Subtotal 509 6,810 hours $398,028 832 21,268 hours ,$715,884 72 4,269 days $187,046 756 3,955 hours $151,631 36 3,195 days $367,071 10 1,194 j~ ...... $196,552 2,215 40,691 mixed $2,016,212 units 3 6 5 9 72 62 674 429 8,174 hours $304,123 41 6,192 days $148,773 17 2,773 days $94,470 26 5,212 hours $56,364 4 1,460 days $93,288 788 days $56,824 2,190 days $328,021 978 days $188,317 37 days $29,712 12,690 hours $89,707 842 hours $25,819 411~ mixed $1,415,418 units 1,457 13,243 185 1,716 132 2,426 99 3,872 21 5,080 30 1,695 ....... ~ ........ ~57 d~ .......... ~14 1,929 28,789 mixed $1,544 units Contacts Units hours $504,989 hours $49 835 days $470 769 days $206 879 days $184 119 days $113 394 569 554 4,184 4,772 hours 5,897 2,732 hours 10,081 7,504 hours $199 518 $ 42 47o $341 988 TOTAL FY-90 Local Share Service/Local Dollar 14,899 118,315 $5,318 172 $306,588 - $17 rv October 24, 1991 The Honorable Mayor and Members of Roanoke City Council Office of City Clerk Room 456, Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 RECEIVSD OCT 2 5 1991 MAYOR'S OFFICE Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen: This is to request time on the agenda of the Roanoke City Council on Monday, November 11, at 7:30pm. Cheri Hartman, Ph.D., Mental Health Services Board Member appointed by the City of Roanoke, Thomas Chapman, Director of Administration, and I will be present to give a brief report about services provided to the citizens of the City of Roanoke by Mental Health Services of the Roanoke Valley. Janet Bonds, a resident of Roanoke, will also be present, and will give a brief report from a consumer's point of view. Written materials describing our services in some detail will be forwarded to you prior to our meeting on November 11. Sincerely, cc: Cheri W. Hartman, Ph.D. Janet Bonds Thomas Chapman MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES OF THE ROANOKE VALLEY IExecutive Offices 301 Elm Avenue, SW. Roanoke. Vir§inia 24016-4026 - (703) 345-9841 FAX (703) 342-3855 Servin§ the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, and the Counties of Botetourt. Crai§ and Roanoke MARY F. PARLOR City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKI . OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke. ~ru~,inia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #79 SANDRA H. EAKIN Depmy City Clerk Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney Roanoke, Virginia Gentlemen: I am attaching copy of a communication from Mr. C. Stan Cross, Jr., President, Council of Community Services, requesting real estate tax-exempt status on property located at 502 Campbell Avenue, S. W.', which communication was before the Councli of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. On motion, duly seconded and adopted, the request of the Council of Community Services was referred to you for study and report to Council. You were further requested to develop a proposed policy statement for handling future requests for real estate tax-exempt status which would, in part, address the following questions: How many 501 (C)(3 ) organizations within the City limits own real estate which is tax exempt? Of those 501 (C) (3) organizations that are tax exempt and receive funds from the City, does the City subtract the value of the tax-exempt status from the funds that are contributed to such organizations so that the organizations will be comparable with organizations that do not enjoy tax-exempt status? Does the City have a mechanism or clearinghouse for identifying space needs of tax exempt organizations? ~' 4. What will be the value of tax exempt status, if granted, to the Council of Community Services? Mr. W. Robert Herbert Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling November 14, 1991 Page 2 The matter was also referred to the City Attorney, working in conjunction with the City Manager, to prepare the necessary legal documents in connection with a public hearing on the request of the Council of Community Services. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw mne. Mr. C. Stan Cross, Jr., President, Council of Community Services, P. O. Box 598, Roanoke, Virginia 24004 The Honorable William White, Sr., Council Member Council of Community Services RECErv~u CITY C~..E~'~S ~;:; ~£ 518 Carlton Terrace Building / P.O. Box 598 920 South Jefferson Street / Roanoke, VA 24004 ~91 NOV -5 P/~- :~0 Telephone: (703) 985-0131 PRESIDENT: Broaddu$ C. Fitzpatrick VICE PRESIDENTS: C. Stan Cross, Jr. Howard Packett Cheri Hartman, Ph.D. BOARD OF DIRECTORS: Briggs Andrews Roger L. Baumgardner Caroiyn R. Bass James P, Beatty Michael W. Coffman David C. Douglas Marc S. Fink J. W, "Bill" Fox, Jr. Jan B. Garrett Kenneth Haley William F. Hawkins Edna Henning Calvin Johnson Samuel L Lionberger Richard D. Lucas Donna Proctor Marilyn A. Rigby Wayne Slusher Vanetta Stockton Mary Ellen Carneal EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Raleigh Campbell The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council City of Roanoke Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mayor Taylor, Mrs. Bowles, and Gentlemen: The Council of Community Services has purchased the building located at 502 Campbell Avenue S.W., Roanoke, Virginia for its offices. We are a 501 (c) (3) organization and we hereby request exempt status from real estate taxes in the City of Roanoke. The Council is a Human Services planning and coordinating body established in 1960. As you know, we have worked closely with the City over the past 31 years. I am attaching a brochure that more completely outlines our services. Also, attached is a copy of our certificate indicating our tax-exempt status. We request the opportunity to speak before Council at its regularly scheduled meeting on November 11, 1991. Sincerely, C. Stan Cross, Jr. President cc: Mr. Raleigh Campbell Mr. Robert Herbert A United Way Agency Iniernai ~¥~nu~ ~er¢ic~ A E~,¢= sheer conc&~n£nE b~c ~n~o~on &bout ,'he enclosed. MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKI - OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue. S.W. Room 456 Roanoke, Vh'ginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File //178-236-200 ~a, NDRA H. EAI/IN Deputy City Clerk Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: Your report recommending that a public hearing be scheduled for Monday, December 2, 1991, to receive comments on a proposed Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy, was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. On motion, duly seconded and adopted, Council concurred in the recommendation and authorized the City Clerk to advertise a public hearing to be held on Monday, December 2, 1991, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be held. Sincerely, '~0~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw pc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. John R. Marlies, Chief, Community Planning Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator Mr. H. Daniel Pollock, Jr., Housing Development Coordinator CITY I, ' ' :' Roanoke, Virginia November 11, 1991 '91 l O't P 3 '.05 Honorable Mayor and Members of Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: SUBJECT: Request for Public Hearing on Proposed Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy I. Background: The Cranston-Gonzalez National Affordable Housing Act of 1990 requires that entitlement localities, like Roanoke, develop a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS), by October 31, 1991, in order to receive federal funding. Because this is the first year for this new re- quirement, HUD is giving some flexibility with this dead- line. The City of Roanoke is required to prepare a CHAS in order to participate in federal community development and housing programs, such as: the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program, housing assistance under the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act, Supportive Housing for the Elderly and the new HOME and HOPE programs. City Council was briefed on this requirement by letter, dated April 1, 1991, which recommended that the Roanoke City Planning Commission take the lead in developing the CHAS. (See letter attached). The Planning Commission assigned its Community Development Committee in April 1991 to serve as the coordinating body for preparation of the CHAS. (Staff support for this effort has been provided by the Office of Grants Compliance, City Planning Department and Office of Housing Development.) II. Current Situation: Community Development Committee and staff developed a draft Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) based on statistical data and information obtained during an informational work session. Draft document was made available for a 60-day public review and comment period as required by U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) regulations. (The review period began on August 8, 1991 and ended October 7, 1991). D. E. F. A public hearing before the Planning Commission was held on September 25, 1991, to receive public comments on the CHAS. A presentation on the CHAS will be made to City Council on November 25, 1991. HUD regulations require governing body to authorize a resolution adopting the CHAS. Public hearing on December 2, 1991 will provide citizens with an opportunity to make final comments on the CHAS before its consideration by Council. III. Recommendation: Recommend that City Council schedule a public hearing for its December 2, 1991, regular meeting to receive citizen comment on the CHAS and take official action, if appropriate. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH:VLP cc: Assistant City Manager City Attorney Director of Finance Director of Public Works Chief of Community Planning Grants Monitoring Administrator Housing Development Coordinator Office of ~ City Manager April 1, 1991 Mayor Noel C. Taylor 2~60 Grandin Road Roanoke, Virginia 2#015 Dear Mayor Taylor: Last November, President Bush signed into law the Cranston-Gonzalez ~gational Affordable Housing Act (NAHA). This law is a major piece of housing- related legislation, in that it creates new, eliminates old, and redefines and adjusts existing housing programs, initiatives, and requirements. This is espe- cially true of those programs oriented toward low-moderate income citizens. The NAHA will be the major source of funding for most housing programs in the fore- seeable future. One requirement of the Act is that each "entitlement" community, such as Roanoke, prepare a Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS). Such a Strategy must be adopted by the locality and approved by HUD before that loca- [ity may receive any federal funds under the Community Development Block Grant program, the McKinney Act for homeless assistance, or any of the major new programs authorized under the Act. The CHAS is a five-year plan, to be updated annually, identifying housing needs and resources, and determining strategies to direct those resources to the needs considered most important. All entitlement localities are required to submit the first CHA$ by October 31, 1991, in order to be eligible to receive federal housing funds in Fiscal Year 1992. The law requires a community to engage in substantial public consultation during the preparation of the CHAS. HUD estimates the total process to prepare and adopt the strategy to take approximately six months. The draft must be pre- pared by mid-2uly to meet the time mandates. This week, I intend to ask the Planning Commission to take the lead role in coordinating the preparation of the Strategy~ with the assistance of City staff responsible for planning, housing, and grants. As part of this process, the Planning Commission will consult and coordinate with other agencies and groups in the City involved with housing, including the Redevelopment and Housing Authority. The Commonwealth of Virginia is also required to prepare a state-wide CHAS. In recent years, the state has been an important source of funds for housing activities, and the provisions of the state-wide CHAS likely will be important to Roanoke's options. Accordingly, our staff is also participating in the Commonwealth's process, to coordinate our Strategy with theirs. Room 364 Munialx~l Duilcling 215 Churci~ Avenue, S.W. ~, Virginia 24011 (703)981-2333 Page 2 Meetings with community groups and agencies will begin in mid-April. My goal will be to present the draft Strategy for your consideration in the fall. Meanwhile, if you would like more information about provisions of the Act or the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) please contact either Dan Pollock, Housing Development Coordinator, or John Marlles, Chief of Community Planning. ~/RH/hdp (chaswrhltr) Sincerely yours, ~V. Robert Herbert City Manager CC: Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning Mary F. Parker, City Clerk CharLes A. Price, Jr.. Chairman, Planning Commission H. Daniel Pollock, Jr., Housing Development Coordinator Vickie L. Price, Grants Monitor MARY F. PARI~ Ci~' Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue. S.W.. Room 456 Roanoke. V~wginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #169-499-277 SANDRP, H. F-AKIN City Cl~k Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30780-111191 amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of new Article VI, Erection and Maintenance of Holiday Decorations, Flags, and Banners, to Chapter 30, Streets and Sidewalks; such new Article authorizing you to issue revocable permits allowing the display of holiday decorations, flags and banners from certain City owned poles, trees and facilities, establishing time limitations' for such displays, regulating the size and shape of holiday decorations, flags and banners and providing for indemnification, insurance and other terms and conditions of display. Ordinance No. 30780-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Sincerely, '-~' ~)0~..~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eric. pc: Mr. Franklin D. Kimbrough, III, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., 410 First Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President - Supplements, Municipal Code Corporation, P. O. Box 2235, Tailahassee, Florida 32304 Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest Virginia Building, Roanoke, Virginia 24011 The Honorable Kenneth E. Trabue, Chief Judge, Circuit Court, 305 East Main Street, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable G. O. Clemens, Judge, Circuit Court, P. O. Box 1016, Salem, Virginia 24153 The Honorable Roy B. Wiliett, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Circuit Court The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, Circuit Court Mr. W. Robert Herbert November 14, 1991 Page 2 pc: The Honorable Joseph M. Clarke, II, Chief Judge, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court The Honorable Edward S. Kidd, Jr., Chief Judge, General District Court The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General District Court The Honorable Richard C. Pattisal, Judge, General District Court The Honorable Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney The Honorable A. Dale Hendrick, Clerk, Circuit Court Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court Mr. Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate Mr. Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Mr. Robert K. Bengtson, Acting Manager, Signals & Alarms Ms. Lauren G. Eib, Risk Management Officer IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30780-111191. AN ORDINANCE amending the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by the addition of new Article VI, Erection and Maintenance of Holiday Decorations~ Flags~ and Banners, to Chapter 30, Streets and Sidewalks; such new Article authorizing the City Manager to issue revocable permits allowing the display of holiday decorations, flags and banners from certain City owned poles, trees and facilities, establishing time limitations for such displays, regulating the size and shape of holiday decorations, flags and banners and providing for indemnification, insurance and other terms and conditions of display; repealing S27.1-3, Erection and maintenance of banner above and across streets; and providing for an emergency. BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. The Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is hereby amended and reordained by the addition of new Article VI, Erection and Maintenance of Holiday Decorations~ Flags~ and Banners, to Chapter 30, Streets and Sidewalks, such new Article to read and provide as follows: Article VI. Erection and Maintenance of Holiday Decorations, Flags, and Banners S30-109. Permits. The City Manager shall be authorized to issue to any person a permit, allowing the erection, maintenance, and removal of a holiday decoration or flag on or from a City- owned light standard, pole or other facility within the public right-of-way, allowing the erection, maintenance and removal of a holiday decoration from a City-owned tree, or allowing the erection, maintenance, and removal of a banner across either public property or a public right-of-way, when in his discretion, such holiday decoration, flag, or banner will promote the general welfare and economy of the City. The erection, maintenance or removal of any holiday decoration, flag, or banner pursuant to this section shall be at the sole expense of Permittee. No holiday decoration, flag, or banner may be erected or maintained without a proper application being filed and a permit issued pursuant to this Article. Any holiday decoration, flag, or banner erected or maintained without a proper application being filed and permit issued may be removed and disposed of by the City Manager at the expense of the owner of such holiday decoration, flag, or banner, or the person or entity responsible for the erection or maintenance of such holiday decoration, flag, or banner. No religious or sectarian holiday decoration or flag may be erected or maintained on or from a City-owned light standard, pole, facility or tree, and no religious or sectarian banner may be erected or maintained across public property or a public right-of-way. 930-110. Definitions. For the purpose of this Article, the following words and phrases shall be defined as follows: (a) Banner shall mean a piece of canvas, cloth, plastic, weatherproof paper, or other material which is attached to a cable or other support suspended across either public property or a public right-of-way. A banner shall not be considered a "sign" or a "snipe sign" under Chapter 27.1 of this Code. (b) Flag shall mean a single piece of canvas, plastic, cloth, paper, or other material which has been attached along one side or edge of a support. A flag shall not be considered a "sign" or a "snipe sign" under Chapter 27.1 of this Code. (c) Holiday shall mean a day or period of time that has been recognized by City Council by ordinance or resolution, including those City holidays established by §2-37 of this Code. (d) Holiday Decoration shall mean an assembly of canvas, plastic, cloth, paper, or other material, including lights, which forms a shape of an object that is related to a particular holiday and which is designed to draw attention to it. A holiday decoration shall not be considered a "sign" or a "snipe sign" under Chapter 27.1 of this Code. (e) Permittee shall mean any person or entity who or which has received a revocable permit from the City Manager pursuant to this Article for the erection, maintenance or removal of a holiday decoration, flag or banner. §30-111. Time limitations. (a) Each application for a permit under this Article shall be completed and submitted on a form supplied by the City at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the time proposed for erection of a holiday decoration, flag or banner. (b) A holiday decoration may be erected and maintained for a maximum time period of two (2) weeks, except for the Thanksgiving, Christmas, and New Year's Day holidays. A holiday decoration for Thanksgiving, Christmas, or New Year's Day holidays may be erected and maintained from November 1st through January 15th, but any such holiday decoration may be illuminated only from Thanksgiving Eve through January 5th. (c) A flag may be displayed for a maximum time period of thirty (30) days, or such shorter period as may be established by the permit issued by the City Manager, and shall be removed for a minimum of one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days prior to reapplication for a permit to erect said flag again. (d) A banner may be displayed for a continuous period of up to thirty (30) days, or such shorter period as may be established 3 by the permit issued by the City Manager, and such banner shall be removed for a minimum of one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days prior to reapplication for a permit to erect the same banner again. (e) No permit shall be issued more than six (6) months before the date on which a Permittee wishes to erect or display a holiday decoration, flag, or banner. (f) Permanent reservation of dates for a holiday decoration or a banner will not be allowed. Permanent reservation of dates for flags will not be allowed, except American flags on the last Monday in May (Memorial Day), Flag Day, July 4th (Independence Day), the first Monday in September (Labor Day), and Veterans Day; and two (2) days before and one (1) day after each of said holidays may be reserved. S30-112. Size and shape of holiday decorations~ flags and banners. (a) The shape, size, weight, windload projection from supporting structure, and means of attachment of any holiday decoration, flag or banner shall be subject to review and approval in the sole discretion of the City Manager. When supported by post top street lights, a flag shall be attached to a wooden pole 7/8" in diameter or less, and no such flag shall be larger than 3' x 5' When supported by a traffic signal pole, no flag shall be larger than 30" x 96", and any such flag shall be hung vertically and shall be hung above the mast arm which supports the traffic signal. (b) Under no circumstances shall the size or shape of any holiday decoration, flag, or banner interfere with the visibility of any traffic control device from ground level, the movement of traffic, or the illumination of streets. No banner shall at any point be less than seventeen (17) feet above ground level. §30-113. Other conditions. (a) Any permit issued under this Article shall be revocable with or without cause at 4 the sole discretion of the City Manager. Revocation shall be effective upon the City Manager sending notice of such revocation by certified mail to the address of Permittee stated on the application or upon the City Manager delivering notice of such revocation to the address of Permittee stated on the application. Upon such mailing or delivery ol notice of revocation, Permittee shall bO considered to have received said notice. Permittee shall remove each holiday decoration, flag or banner, within twenty-four (24) hours after receipt of notification or seventy-two (72) hours after the date and time of the City Manager's sending notice of such revocation, whichever is sooner. Should Permittee fail to remove each holiday decoration, flag or banner, which is the subject of a revoked permit within the applicable time period, the City Manager shall be entitled to remove and dispose of the same and charge Permittee for any and all expenses in doing so. (b) Permittee shall indemnify, keep and hold harmless the City, its officers, agents, and employees, from any and all claims, legal actions, judgments,, or liabilities, and for any expenses incurred, including attorney fees, arising out of the erection, maintenance or removal of each holiday decoration, flag or banner. (c) Permittee shall obtain a certificate of insurance for public liability in the proper amounts and form, as prescribed by the City's Risk Management Officer. Said certificate of insurance shall name the City as an additional insured and shall be filed with the City's Risk Management Officer more than ten (10) calendar days before the first day of display of any holiday decoration, flag or banner, erected by the Permittee. (d) Any and all codes or regulations shall be complied with which pertain to the erecting, displaying, and removing of a holiday decoration, flag or banner. (e) Permittee shall obtain any and all necessary permission for the erection, maintenance, and removal of a holiday 5 decoration, flag or banner, from the Virginia Department of Transportation. (f) The City Manager may require inspection of the condition, appearance, materials and shape, of each holiday decoration, flag or banner to be displayed before issuing a permit. The City Manager may reject and/or order the removal of any holiday decoration, flag or banner which, in the sole discretion of the City Manager, is tattered, frayed, faded, or otherwise unsightly, or which is an immediate threat to the health, safety or welfare of the general public or causing damage to any City-owned light standard, pole, facility, or tree. (g) The City Manager may impose conditions upon any permit or promulgate regulations to be complied with by any Permittee when such conditions or regulations are intended to protect the public health, safety or welfare or to protect City-owned light standards, poles, facilities, or trees from being defaced, harmed or otherwise damaged. (h) The name, street address and telephone number of a person, who may be contacted by the City Manager after normal working hours should an emergency requiring immediate action arise, shall be stated in the application. (i) Permittee shall obtain any and all necessary permission for the erection, maintenance, and removal of a banner from the owners of the property to which the banners are attached and present proof acceptable to the City Manager of such permission upon application for the permit. (j) No more than one (1) banner shall be permitted in any one City block, but in no case shall any banner be within two hundred (200) feet of any other banner. 2. Section 27.1-3, Erection and maintenance of banners above and across streets, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is hereby REPEALED. 6 3. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and this ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. '91 NOV -6 P3:05 Roanoke, Virginia November 11, 1991 Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor and Members of Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: SUBJECT: Display of Holiday Decorations, Flags and Banners From City-Owned Poles I. Background: A. City Council has reserved sole authority to grant permission for use of City-owned poles and trees. City Council, upon recommendation by the City Manager, has granted permission to various civic organizations, promotional groups, and certain business organizations to display flags, logos, banners, and holiday decorations on or supported by City-owned poles and trees. C. The organizations that have received permission in the past include: 1. Center In The Square 2. American Red Cross 3. United Way of Roanoke Valley, Inc. 4. Junior Achievement of Roanoke Valley 5. Vietnam Veterans (American Flags) 6. Downtown Roanoke, Inc. (Holiday Decorations) 7. Festival In The Park 8. Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Virginia (Holiday Decorations) 9. Colonial American National Bank (Holiday Decorations) 10. Dominion Bank (Holiday Decorations) Members of City Council Page 2 D. Conflicts of a minor nature have arisen in the II. past - 1. Two organizations have requested permission for same time period. 2. An organization's request covers a time period that another organization has used in the past. 3. A time period granted covers a holiday on which the American flags are displayed. Vietnam Veterans presently display American Flaqs on the following holidays: 1. Memorial Day 2. Flag Day 3. Independence Day 4. Labor Day 5. Veterans Day Current Situation: The number of requests and above-referenced conflicts indicate the need to permit the Administration to grant permission to erect flags, banners and holiday decorations. Such permission should be granted on a case-by-case basis, using guidelines consistent with a mandate from City Council. Any guidelines developed should address the following concerns: A. Length of time allowed for each type of display B. The need to promote the economy of the City C. Size, shape, weight, etc. D. Reservation of dates E. Timing for application and issuance of permits F. Protection of the City as to liability. G. Insurance Requirements Members of City Council Page 3 III. Issues: IV. A. Permit process B. Guidelines C. Current users Alternatives: City Council amend the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to include a new section which authorizes the City Manager to issue permits for erection, maintenance or removal of holiday decorations, flags, and banners. Permit process is streamlined since City Council approval would no longer be a necessary step. City staff would be able to directly administer all applications for holiday decorations, flags, and banners in accordance with the proposed code section. Guidelines proposed in code section establish appropriate application process and display periods, as well as the appropriate physical characteristics and placement of any holiday decorations, flags, or banners and provide for indemnification of City from liability. Current users were polled by Downtown Roanoke, Inc., and we have been advised that they concur in the proposed ordinance. City Council not amend the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to include a new section which authorizes the City Manager to issue permits for erection, maintenance or removal of holiday decorations, flags, and banners. Permit process would continue to require approval by City Council for each separate request to erect holiday decorations, flags, or banners. Guidelines are not established and must be reviewed separately with each request for holiday decorations and flags (Section 27.1-3 presently addresses requirements for erection and maintenance of banners above and across streets). Members of City Council Page 4 Current users would continue to use prior method of application. Recommendation is that City Council amend the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to include a new section which authorizes the City Manager to issue permits for erection, maintenance or removal of holiday decorations, flags, and banners. Respectfully submitted, City Manager WRH:RKB:jrm Attachment copy: Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer Robert K. Bengtston, Acting Manager of Signals & Alarms Mr. Franklin D. Kimbrough III, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., 410 First Street, Roanoke, Virginia, 24011 MARY F. PARLOUR City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #79-277 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk Mr. Joel M. Sehlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: Sincerely, I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30781-111191 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1991-92 General Fund Appropriations, appropriating $44,000.00 to Downtown Service District Tax, representing an increase in revenue estimate for fiscal year 1991-92 in the Downtown Service District. Ordinance No. 30781-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eno o pc: Mr. Franklin D. Kimbrough, III, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, Inc., 410 First Street, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager The Honorable Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30781-111191. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1991-92 General Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that certain sections of the 1991-92 General Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: & ro ri&tione Parks, Recreation and Cultural Contributions (1) .............................. Revenue General Property Taxes Real Estate Tax (2) ............................ 1) Downtown Service District (001-002-7220-3712) $44,000 2) Current- Downtown District Tax (001-020-1234-0103) 44,000 $ 3,965,748 835,301 $49,976,300 33,407,000 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: City Clerk. '91 -7 P3:05 Office af the Cil¥ Manager November 7, 1991 The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Dear Mayor Taylor and Members of City Council: Subject: Revenue Adjustment - Downtown Service District Tax At your May 20, 1991 meeting, you received a report from me concurring in the request of Downtown Roanoke, Incorporated to extend the Downtown Service District's Service Agreement with DTR, Incorporated for a period of up to ten years and expand the Downtown Service District boundaries. Council's action was to adopt Ordinance No. 30523-52891 regarding this matter. As a part of your FY '91-92 budget adoption, the Downtown Service District tax revenue was estimated at $120,000. With Council's approval of an expanded district, the revenue estimate adopted as a part of the FY '91-92 budget should be increased by $44,000 and appropriations increased $44,000 in account 001-002- 7220-3712 Downtown District Service. Thus, this is to respectfully request that City Council adopt the appropriate measure to amend the FY '91-92 revenue estimate for the Downtown Service District to reflect this increase. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH/dh cc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance The Honorable Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer Mr. Barry Key, Manager, Office of Management & Budget Mr. Franklin D. Kimbrough, III, Executive Director, Downtown Roanoke, Inc. Room 364 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 2401 t (703) 981-2333 MARY F. Cily Clerk CITY OF ROANOKi OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue. S.W.. Room 456 Roanoke, V'wginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #60-192-87 SANDRAH. F_AKIN Deputy CityClerk Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30782-111191 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1991-92 General and Civic Center Funds Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $42,000.00 from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program to certain Civic Center accounts, in connection with promotional activities for special events and conferences which are determined to be of significant revenue benefit to the City. Ordinance No. 30782-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc o pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Administration and Public Safety Mr. Bobby E. Chapman, Manager, Civic Center Mr. E. Laban Johnson, Special Events Coordinator Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RO~I~OKEv The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30782-111191. VIRGINTA amend and reordain certain sections of the Center Funds Appropriations, and AN ORDINANCE to 1991-92 General and Civic providing for an emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that certain sections of the 1991-92 General and Civic Center Funds Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: ~nd A ro riations Nondepartmental Transfers to Other Funds (1) ...................... Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program - City Unappropriated (2) .................. civic Center Fund A ro r'at'ons Civic Center - Promotional Contractual Services (3) .......................... Revenue Non-Operating Revenue Operating Supplement - General Fund (4) ............ $12,047,285 10,698,395 $ 635,353 $ 113,361 52,000 $ 767,566 735,566 1) Transfers to Civic Center Fund 2) CMERP - City Unappropriated 3) Fees for Prof. Services 4) Operating Supplement General Fund (001-004-9310-9505) (001-3323) (005-050-2106-20~0) $ 42,000 (42,000) 42,000 (005-020-1234-0951) 42,000 BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: this City Clerk. NOY-7 P :31 Office of the City Manager November 11, 1991 The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor and Members, Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Dear Mayor Taylor and Members of City Council: Subject: Appropriation of Funds As a part of the Roanoke Civic Center budget, funds are provided to assist in promotional activities for special events and conferences which are determined to be of significant revenue benefit to the City. Due to several recent events of a significant nature, it has become necessary to add additional funds to this account. Therefore, this is to recommend that City Council concur in the transfer of $42,000 from the 1990-91 CMERP fund to the appropriate account within the Civic Center fund. The Director of Finance has prepared a measure which would accomplish this transfer. Respectfully submitted, City Manager WRH:EBRJr:mp cc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget Mr. Bob Chapman, Manager, Civic Center Mr. Laban Johnson, Special Events Coordinator Room 364 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981-2333 MAgY F. PARI~;R City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Vh~,inia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #60-467 SAN'DP. AH. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk Mr. Joel M. Schlanger Director of Finance Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Schlanger: I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 30783-111191 amending and reordaining certain sections of the 1991-92 Capital Fund Appropriations, transferring $3,500,000.00 from Capital Improvement Reserve - Public Improvement Bonds, to Jefferson High School Foundation, to be used for the purpose of restoring and renovating the Jefferson High School building, pursuant to agreement with the Jefferson Center Foundation. Ordinance No. 30783-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Sincerely, ~~ Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Ene o pc: Mr. Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Sr., Chairman, Jefferson Center Foundation, 2425 Nottingham Road, S. E., Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Brian J. Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development Mr. E. Douglas Chittum, Economic Development Specialist Mr. Barry L. Key, Manager, Office of Management and Budget Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer XN THE COUNCXL OF THE CXTY OF RO~%NO~E; VXRGXNX& The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30783-111191. AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the 1991-92 Capital Fund Appropriations, and providing for an emergency. WHEREAS, for the usual daily operation of the Municipal Government of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to exist. THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that certain sections of the 1991-92 Capital Fund Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and reordained to read as follows, in part: ADDroDri&tions General Government Jefferson High School Foundation (1) ............. Capital Improvement Reserve Public Improvement Bonds 1991 (2) ................ $ 10,940,837 3,500,000 (11,528,707) ( 5,975,667) 1) Appropriations from Bonds 2) Buildings (008-002-9654-9001) (008-052-9701-9173) $ 3,500,000 (3,500,000) BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage. ATTEST: this City Clerk. '91 IID¥-6 P3:05 November 11, 1991 Honorable Mayor and Members of Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Council Members: Subject: Appropriation of $3.5 million for Jefferson High School Renovation I. Background: Resolution Number 29920-2590 allocated $3.5 million of bond proceeds to the renovation and restoration of the Jefferson High School (JHS) Building. The Jefferson Center Foundation (JCF) was the successful bidder on the project. II. Current Situation: ao City Council authorized the appropriate City officials to enter into an Agreement, Deed of Lease and Sublease agreement to have the JCF restore, renovate and operate the JHS building as a mixed-use community center, subleasing approximately 15,000 square feet to the City. B. JCF is ready to begin work on the project. III. Issues: A. Cost of construction. B. Need for office space by the City. C. Timinq relative to needs of the City and JCF. D. Development opportunity for area in need of stabilization. IV. Alternatives: Appropriate $3.5 million in anticipated bond Droceeds approved by referendum on May 1, 1990 to a capital account to be established by the Director of Finance entitled JHS Foundation to be used for the purpose of restoring and renovating the JHS building per the agreement with Jefferson Center Foundation. Members of Council November 11, 1991 Page 2 Cost of construction would be provided by $3,500,000 in funds approved in the 1990 Bond Issue and a minimum of $1.6 million from JCF. Need for suitable office space by the City would be addressed. Timing relative to meting the needs of the City and the desire of the JCF to stabilize the JHS building would be met. Development opportunity to stimulate growth and stabilize an area of the City in need of capital investment will be seized. Do not appropriate $3.5 million in anticipated bond proceeds approved by referendum on May 1, 1990 to a capital account to be established by the Director of Finance entitled JHS Foundation to be used for the purpose of restoring and renovating the JHS building per the agreement with the JCF. 1. Cost of construction will have to be addressed. 2. Need for office space by the City will not be addressed. Timinq relative to meeting the needs of the City and JCF will not be met. Development opportunity to stimulate growth and stabilize a neighborhood would be missed. V. Recommendation: Appropriate $3.5 million in anticipated bond proceeds approved by referendum on May 1, 1990 to a capital account to be established by the Director of Finance entitled JHS Foundation to be used for the purpose of restoring and renovating the JHS building per the agreement with the Jefferson Center Foundation. Respectfully submitted, W. Robert Herbert City Manager Members of Council November 11, 1991 Page 3 WRH/EDC:kkd cc: Director of Finance city Attorney Manager, Management and Budget MARY F. pARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKI OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, xrn'girtia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #184 SANDRAH. EAKIN Deputy CityClerk Mr. W. Robert Herbert City Manager Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. Herbert: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 30784-111191 establishing Thursday, December 26, 1991, and Friday, December 27, 1991, as City holidays for certain employees for this calendar year only. Resolution No. 30784-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Enc. pc: The Honorable A. Dale Hendrick, Clerk, Circuit Court Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court The Honorable Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, City Sheriff The Honorable Gordon E. Peters, City Treasurer The Honorable Jerome S. Howard, Jr., Commissioner of Revenue Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance Ms. Nadine C. Minnix, Acting Director of Real Estate Valuation Mr. Robert H. Bird, Municipal Auditor Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director, Human Resources Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director, Administration and Public Safety Mr. Kenneth S. Cronin, Personnel Manager IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30784-111191. A RESOLUTION establishing Thursday, December 26, 1991, and Friday, December 27, 1991, as City holidays for certain employees for this calendar year only. BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that: 1. Thursday, December 26, 1991, and Friday, December 27, 1991, shall be observed as holidays for certain City employees as hereinafter provided. 2. City personnel who are not engaged in performing emergency service or other necessary and essential services for the City shall be excused from work on Thursday, December 26, 1991, and Friday, December 27, 1991. 3. With respect to emergency service employees and other employees performing necessary and essential services who cannot for reasons of public health, safety or welfare be excused from work on December 26 and 27, 1991, such employees, regardless of whether they are scheduled to work on December 26 and 27, 1991, shall be accorded equivalent time off according to a schedule to be arranged by the City Manager. 3. Adherence to this resolution shall cause no disruption or cessation of the performance of any emergency, essential or necessary public service rendered or performed by the City. ATTEST: City Clerk. Office of tt-,e City Manager November 8, 1991 The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor and Members, Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Subject: Additional Holiday Leave for Roanoke City Employees Dear Mayor and Members of Council: I am pleased to recommend to City Council that you consider approving two additional holidays for regular Roanoke City employees. I recommend that Council consider adding December 26 and 27 as holidays for certain City employees who are not other- wise performing necessary and essential services. As usual, employees who are performing necessary and essential services who cannot for reasons of public health, safety or welfare be excused from work on December 26 and 27 shall be accorded equivalent time off according to a schedule arranged by the City Manager. Roanoke City employees have shown a strong commitment to this City Government and its citizens during adverse economic times. Our employees deserve every consideration possible and I believe this recommendation can be handled in an orderly and businesslike way. Thank you for your consideration of this matter. Respectfully, W. Robert Herbert City Manager WRH:mp cc: Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mr. Joel M. $chlanger, Director of Finance Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager Mr. George C. Snead, Director, Administration & Public Safety Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director, Human Resource Mr. William F. Clark, Director, Public Works Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director, Utilities and Operations Room 364 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue. S.W. Roanoke. Virginia 24011 (703)981-2333 MARY F. PARKER City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W,. Room 455 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703)981-2541 November 14, 1991 File #137-132 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney Roanoke, Virginia Dear Mr. DibHng: I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 30785-111191 adopting and endorsing a Legislative Program for the City to be presented to the City's delegation to the 1992 Session of the General Assembly. Resolution No. 30785-111191 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, November 11, 1991. On motion, duly seconded and adopted, Council authorized a public hearing to be held on Monday, November 25, 1991, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with regard to a proposed City Charter amendment. Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP: sw Eric. pc: The Honorable David A. Bowers, Chairman, Legislative Committee Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA, The llth day of November, 1991. No. 30785-111191. A RESOLUTION adopting and endorsing a Legislative Program for the City to be presented to the City's delegation to the 1992 Session of the General Assembly. WHEREAS, the members of City Council are in a unique position to be aware of the legislative needs of this City and its people; WHEREAS, previous Legislative Pro,rams of the City have been responsible for improving the efficiency of local government and the quality of life for citizens of this City; and WHEREAS, Council is desirous of again adopting and endorsing a Legislative Program to be advocated by the Council and its reprasentatives at the 1992 Session of the General Assembly; THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows: 1. The Legislative Prog~2m transmitted by report of the Legislative Committee, dated November 11, 1991, is hereby adopted and endorsed by the Council as the City's official Legislative Program for the 1992 Session of the General Assembly. 2. The Clerk is directed to issue cordial invitations to the City's Senator- elect and delegates to the 1992 Session of the General Assembly to attend Council's Special Meeting relating to legislative matters, the date and time of which have been established to be December 2, 1991, at 10:30 a.m. ATTEST: ~~ City Clerk. CITY OF ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 Telephone: (703) 981-2541 November 11, 1991 Council Members: David A. Bowers Elizabeth T. Bowles Beverly T Fitzpatrick, Jr. James G. Harvey, II Wil]iarn White, Sr. The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: 1992 Legislative Program Dear Council Members: On November 4, 1991, City Council's Legislative Committee met to review the proposed 1992 Legislative Program prepared by the City Attorney. After careful review, the Committee approved the Program and recommended that City Council adopt the attached resolution endorsing the Program and commending it to the City's delegation to the 1992 Session of the General Assembly. I call to your attention that the paramount issue presented by the Legislative Program is the City's request that the Commonwealth participate in funding of the public facilities to be constructed in conjunction with the Hotel Roanoke Project. The Program also emphasizes the importance of the Commonwealth's correcting the constitutional infirmity in the current system of funding public education. Previous Legislative Programs of the City have been responsible for improving the efficiency of local government and the quality of life of citizens of this City, and the Program that the Legislative Committee now recommends to you should continue this tradition. Please note that the Charter amendment will require a public hearing, and its recommended that Council, by motion, establish a public hearing on the proposed Charter amendment for November 25, 1991. The City Attorney has recommended this date which will aliow him to complete the required public advertising and still allow adoption of a resolution requesting the Charter amendment prior to City Council's annual meeting with the City's legislators. Working with the City Clerk, City Council's annual meeting with the City's delegation has been scheduled for December 2, 1991, at 10:30 a.m. As has been the case in previous years, the School Board will also be invited to participate in this meeting. Please reserve this date on your calendars. Thank you for your consideration of the 1992 Legislative Program. Respectfully submitted, Legislative Committee Honorable Mayor and Members November 11, 1991 Page 2 DAB: mf Attachments CC; W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Mary F. Parker, City Clerk CITY COUNCIL Noel C. Taylor, Mayor Howard E. Musser, Vice-Mayor David A. Bowers Elizabeth T. Bowles Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. James G. Harvey, II William White, Sr. SCHOOL BOARD Finn D. Pincus, Chairman Charles W. Day, Vice-Chairman Sallye T. Coleman Marilyn L. Curtis Wendy O'Neil Thomas L. Orr James M. Turner, Jr. CITY MANAGER W. Robert Herbert SUPERINTENDENT Dr. Frank P. Tota Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney 464 Municipal Building Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703)981-243! TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ......... Policy Statements .... Legislative Proposals Charter Amendments... Appendix ............. Index ................ INTRODUCTION The City Council is pleased to commend this Legislative Program for consideration by the 1992 Session of the General Assembly. The City Council representing all the people of our great City is uniquely qualified to understand the legislative needs of City government and our people. I am of the opinion that this Program is responsive to those needs. With the support of our legislators, and this City is fortunate to have legislators who are most supportive and responsive to the needs of our City and its citizens, I know that our City government and School Division will be improved and that the quality of life for our citizens will be advanced. This Program has been prepared by our City Attorney, Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., with the assistance of comments and suggestions from Council members, School Board members, City and School administrators and citizens. It has been carefully reviewed by City Council's Legislative Committee consisting of David A. Bowers, Chairman, James G. Harvey, II, and William White, Sr. Upon the recommendation of the Legislative Committee, the Program was adopted and endorsed by City Council on , 1991. See Resolution No. at App. A-1. The Program consists of three parts. The first part is a series of policy statements which represent the philosophy of Roanoke City Council on a number of important policy issues. Obviously, it is impossible to anticipate all the legislative issues that will arise during the course of any session of the General Assembly, and these policy statements should provide helpful guidance to our legislators throughout the Session. The second part of the Program consists of specific legislative proposals of the City, and the third part consists of recommended Charter amendments. A Resolution requesting the Charter amendments is included at App. A-2. If during the course of the Session our legislators have questions concerning the position of the City on legislative matters, they are encouraged to contact our City Attorney who I know will be pleased to respond after consultation with Council's Legislative Committee or the School Board and any other appropriate officials. I also know that the City Attorney will be in contact with our legislators on many occasions during the 1992 Session, and their consideration of his communications is deeply appreciated. Noel C. Taylor Mayor i EFFEC?~VE GOVERNHEN~ POLICY STATEMENTS Local governments were originally organized to provide essential services and protection that citizens could not or would not provide for themselves. Examples of such essential local services are education, provision for health and welfare, police and fire protection, delivery of safe water, sewage treatment and refuse collection. Local governments and their officials are continually striving for economy, effectiveness, responsiveness, efficiency and productivity in delivery of such services. Unfortunately, the essential services for which local governments were originally created have been overshadowed by numerous less critical programs mandated by the federal and State governments. The federal and State governments should recognize that local governments are the best vehicle for the delivery of basic public services because local governments are closest to the people and most responsive to their needs. Furthermore, basic public services cannot be provided in the most effective way if the State attempts to dictate in minute detail the structure of all local government, the administrative and legislative procedures to be followed uniformly by all local governments and the details of all programs administered at the local level. The City opposes State intrusions in the way local governments conduct their business, including the way Council meetings are conducted, procedures for adopting ordinances, what can be addressed by ordinance and what by resolution, purchasing procedures and establishment of hours of work, salaries and working conditions for employees. MANDATES In light of the Commonwealth.s fiscal difficulties and the reductions in State aid to localities adopted by the 1991 Session of the General Assembly , the issue of State mandates becomes more critical than ever before. For many years, mandates have been a serious financial concern to local governing bodies and school boards. Reduction of excessive regulatory and statutory mandates and full funding of all existing mandates is urgent. The General Assembly is also urged to carefully consider the fiscal impact of all bills imposing mandates on local governments. REVENUE AND FINANCE The City is vitally concerned over the continued erosion of local revenue sources. The General Assembly is urged not to cap, remove or further restrict any revenue sources that are currently available to localities, including taxing authority and user fees. Furthermore, the General Assembly should give localities additional - ! - authority, such as the one-half cent local option sales tax, to raise adequate local revenues to ensure the continued vitality of local government. Historically, real and personal property taxes have been the foundation of local tax revenues. The State's restriction and erosion of other local sources, however, has resulted in over reliance on property taxes, placing local governments in financial jeopardy. The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission's (JLARC's) own study shows that the real property tax rate in Virginia is the second highest among fifteen Southern states and fifty percent higher than nine Southern States. The City supports additional and more equitable sources of revenue, but the decision on which, if any, local revenue sources should be reduced or eliminated should be strictly a local decision. EDUCATION Correction of the constitutional infirmity in educational funding should be the top priority of the 1992 Session. The General Assembly is also urged to provide full funding of the State's share of the actual cost of the Standards of Quality and full funding of categorical educational mandates. The Report of the Governor's Commission on Virqinia's Future states that education should be the highest priority of the Commonwealth. Yet, the Report notes that Virginia has not honored its commitment to education. SPECIAL NEEDS OF CENTRAL CITIES WITHOUT ANNEXATION POWER The larger, more urbanized, central cities of the Com- monwealth, such as this City, provide a full range of housing, health, mental health, transportation, social and humanitarian services. School systems in these cities provide excellent special education programs, and private charities located in central cities provide a broad range of charitable assistance. These factors make the Commonwealth's central cities a magnet for those in need of services. Consider these facts: That the City has over 4110 subsidized housing units while Roanoke County and Salem have only 198 and 216, respectively; · That the City's elderly population is at 22% and increasing; - 2 - That 24.6% of the City's population is below the age of 19 meaning that nearly 47% of the City's population are consumers of governmental services with little ability to pay for these services; and That, by 1991, 44.2% of children in the City Public School System came from economically deprived homes (up from 15.8% in 1980). In spite of these demographic negatives, the City has made tremendous strides in economic development. Downtown has been revitalized; industrial parks have been established; and new businesses and industries have been attracted. It is unlikely, however, that these recent successes can be sustained over the long term. In this regard, the major problem facing the City is an inadequate inventory of developable land. Much of our mountainous terrain is either undevelopable or developable only at tremendous costs. Other land in the heart of the Roanoke Valley is subject to flooding and undevelopable. Roanoke's peculiar problems are compounded by the need of central cities to provide welfare, public safety, transportation, and water and sewer services at a level not required in adjoining suburban or rural localities. These services benefit the entire region, but are paid for primarily by City taxpayers. Historically, the fiscal stress of central cities has been relieved by annexation. Recently, however, the power of annexation has, without logic, been denied to the central cities which need it most. If the central cities of the Commonwealth are to remain strong, viable units of government, which is in the best interest of the Commonwealth, decisive action needs to be taken. Among those actions which should be considered are: Reevaluation of Virginia's unique system of independent cites which imposes upon cities the unfair responsibility of providing regional services without reimbursement from adjoining beneficary localities; 2. Creation of financial incentives for local government mergers which result in stronger, more viable units of local government; and Special funding by the Commonwealth of those services provided by central cities which benefit the entire region. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT Economic development is a way of improving the economy and tax base of the Commonwealth and its localities. Much of the Eastern part of the Commonwealth (the Golden Crescent) has experienced tremendous growth during the 1980's. The City urges the -3 - Commonwealth to develop programs for those areas west of the Blue Ridge mountains and central cities across the Commonwealth. Each of these areas will need special financial assistance from the State if we are to have balanced growth across the Commonwealth. According to the Report of the Governor's Commission on Virginia's Future, Virginia needs an economic development strategy. The Commonwealth is implored to form a partnership with its localities to develop a statewide strategy which should recognize the unique economic development problems of Virginia's land poor central cities. Part of that strategy should include additional educational funding for central cities. With shrinking labor pools in central cities across the State, new and existing businesses cannot afford to have young adults in these cities become unemploy- able. Special efforts must be made now through additional educational funding to save these at risk children. Tourism and convention activities that enhance the economic well being of the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions should be recognized as legitimate components of economic development. We urge the General Assembly to look closely at the way State tourism dollars are spent and to insure their fair distribution. Western Virginia has, in the past, not received a proportionate share of the dollars spent by the State tourism office, and there has been little emphasis on promoting the Virginia mountains. GOVERNMENTAL IMMUNITY Every session of the General Assembly brings new assaults on the doctrines of governmental immunity for political subdivisions and official immunity for local government employees. These doctrines should be retained, and in fact strengthened, for, among others, the following reasons: Local governments would be forced by loss of immunity to eliminate or cut back high risk functions or services, such as operation of nursing homes, parks and playgrounds and athletic programs, and such action is not in the public interest. Frivolous suits would be encouraged. Local governments would be viewed as a "deep pocket" making them an easy target for plaintiffs who could bring suit without even attempting to identify the employee allegedly at fault. Cost of local government would increase rapidly at a time when localities can ill afford a new major drain on financial resources. Cost of defense of litigation may be a more serious problem than the obvious cost of paying judgments. When tae City and an employee are sued, conflicts may require a separate attorney for each party. 4 A recent authoritative study shows that, of every $4 paid out in litigation by local government, $3 goes to legal costs; only $1 actually goes to compensate plaintiffs. Threats of harassing lawsuits may make local government officials less likely to act decisively where courageous or difficult actions are in order. Good government is difficult to achieve when officials operate under con- stant fear of lawsuits. The cap on liability under the Virginia Tort Claims Act is illusory. The $25,000 cap on liability has already been increased to $75,000. Constant pressure will keep the cap spiraling upward. The City is opposed to any extension of the Virginia Tort Claims Act to localities and supports extension of immunity to certain groups of municipal employees and volunteers who are particularly vulnerable to suits which jeopardize the very existence of programs desired by the community. An example of a group of employees and volunteers needing immunity is coaches and officials serving in youth athletic programs sponsored by the City See page 12. ZONING AND LAND U~ One of the most important functions of local governments is local planning and land use control. This is appropriate because there is no entity better suited to make key land use decisions on behalf of any locality than the local governing body. In making land use decisions in this City, Council is guided by a comprehensive plan developed through a citizen-based planning process. City Council views with increasing alarm recent efforts of the General Assembly to control local land uses. The Council opposes any legislation that would restrict present land use powers of local governments to establish, modify and enforce zoning classifications. Local governments should remain free to adopt and enforce zoning changes that address local land use needs. - 5 - LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS HOTEL ROANOKE - FUNDING OF PUBLIC FACILITIES The Hotel Roanoke project consists of three parts: 1. Renovation and revitalization of the Hotel building at an approximate cost of $30,000,000; Construction of an adjoining Conference Center (meeting rooms, ballroom, etc.) at an approximate cost of $8 to $12 million; and 3. Construction of an adjoining Trade and Convention Center (exhibit hall). By Agreement with Virginia Tech Real Estate Foundation, Inc., the City has agreed to pay half of the debt service cost of an $8 million bond issue to permit construction of the Conference Center. The Conference Center will be operated by the Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission created by the 1991 Session of the General Assembly. See Chapter 440 of 1991 Acts of Assembly. Completion of the Hotel renovation and the construction of the Conference Center will provide the hotel and conference facilities to justify a trade and convention center. Moreover, the City has completed a feasibility study which establishes the economic viability of a trade and convention center in Downtown. This study shows that the facility would generate $2,179,000 in new tax revenue each year; of this amount, $1,022,000 would be new State tax revenue. Conference and convention facilities around the State are no longer competitive with facilities in other Southeastern and Mid- Atlantic states. Many states around the country have participated in part or in whole in the funding of such facilities. If facilities around Virginia are to be competitive, the Commonwealth will need to help. For urban areas, with limited undeveloped land, economic development opportunities of this nature are crucial. The General Assembly is urged to establish a two part program to address this need. First, consideration should be given to a rebate program similar to programs in Alabama, Arkansas and Florida whereby the State would return all sales tax collections generated by public assembly facilities to the localities constructing such facilities to help defray the cost of debt service. This program is attractive because it rewards local governments for aggressively pursuing trade and convention centers. Second, the State is urged to consider new or additional taxing power. Under this alternative, the State would give a locality new or increased taxing power for a specific purpose (trade and convention center) -6 - for a specific period of time. New taxing power might be tied to a new facility. EDUCATION - EQUITABLE FUNDING The Virginia Bill of Rights makes education a fundamental right. It imposes an affirmative duty upon the Commonwealth to assure "an effective system of education throughout the Commonwealth." See Article I, S15, Paragraph 2, Constitution of Virginia. The Constitution also requires that the General Assembly provide for substantially equal educational opportunity for every child in the Commonwealth by mandating a single, Statewide education system. See Article VIII, Sl. In spite of the constitutional mandates, the method by which the Commonwealth funds its system of public schools results in substantial disparities in educational opportunities among school divisions. Divisions with low physical capacities have less money to spend for the education of students residing in those divisions than divisions with high fiscal capacities. The effect is that children throughout the Commonwealth are not afforded substantially equal educational opportunity. The Governor's Commission on Educational Opportunity for all Virginians was created in 1990 with the charge of advising the Governor and the General Assembly on how to address the problem of educational disparity. In its report to the Governor in February, 1991, the Commission recognized that, in order to address disparity in funding public education, the Commonwealth must (1) increase the size of the entire education budget by providing more funding and (2) redistribute funds so that those school divisions with lower fiscal capacity and those divisions with higher concentrations of students with special needs receive a greater proportion of the total funds. To achieve more equitable funding, Board urge the General Assembly recommendations of the Commission: the City Council and School to adopt the following Revise and fund the educational standards of quality to acknowledge prevailing practices and to recognize the additional costs of students with special needs, such as those who may be educationally disadvantaged, handicapped or in need of remedial assistance. Currently, the Commonwealth's school divisions provide a higher level of education than is required by the standards. This higher level is achieved by the expenditure of local-only funds. The impact of raising the standards would be to match State standards to prevailing practices, thus pumping additional State dollars into education. - 7 - Provide a better measure than the current composite index of the ability of the Commonwealth's localities to pay for education. The composite index is the ability to pay measure that is currently used to distribute 75% of the State's education funding. Any new measure of local ability to pay for education should more accurately reflect (i) local fiscal stress; (ii) taxpayer ability to pay; and (iii) local funding effort for education. The current composite index is defective in that it does not measure local fiscal stress. While revenue capacity is an important factor, the current formula ignores the expenditure side of the local budget. Central cities, such as Roanoke, must make large expenditures for public safety, health and welfare that are not required of suburban and rural counties. Fiscal stress should be a part of the formula so that communities with crime, poverty and large numbers of children having special needs (disadvantaged students and those requiring special education or remedial education) are not shortchanged in educational funding. The composite index should also more accurately reflect taxpayer ability to pay. The current composite index appears to overemphasize land values and deemphasize income. The City's residents have a lower adjusted income than residents of surrounding localities and cannot be expected to provide the same level of financial support for education. This inability, however, should not penalize the City's school children. Finally, the composite index should measure local funding effort for education. Forty-four percent of the City of Roanoke general fund budget goes to education. Over the years, City Council has made a Herculean effort to fund education. This effort, which has imposed a heavy burden on the City's taxpayers is far in excess of that made by many local governing bodies. The revised composite index should promote equal local funding effort relative to revenue capacity. In summary, the City Council and School Board submit that educational funding disparity has been permitted to exist for far too long in the Commonwealth. Now is the time for the Governor and General Assembly to act decisively to deal with the disparity issue. EDUCATION - METHOD OF CALCULATING STANDARDS OF QUALITY COSTS; FULL FUNDING OF STANDARDS The City urges the General Assembly to study the methodology used by JLARC in calculating the costs of the Standards of Quality (SOQ) to determine whether the formula accurately reflects the actual costs of meeting the SOQ. The new methodology appears to be - 8 - inadequate in several respects. First, it artificially lowers the State average salary instead of using actual salary figures. Second, it uses an artificially low limit on the number of professionals per thousand students for which State aid is given. Third, the methodology does not address the cost differences in providing education to students with special needs, such as the inner city school population served by our School Division. Inadequacy of State funding of the SOQ is readily apparent in our own City. For Fiscal year 1991-1992, the General Assembly has set the per pupil cost of the SOQ at $2,732. Actual per pupil cost for City students, however, is estimated to be $4,835 for Fiscal Year 1991-1992. Moreover, the City schools actually received only $1,062 per pupil for this Fiscal Year (including one time hold harmless payment for enrollment loss) after application of the composite index and State sales tax to the SOQ funding formula. Increased funding for education, including full funding of the State's share of the actual costs of the SOQ and full funding of categorical educational mandates, is a top priority of City Council and the School Board. Increased State funding should be achieved without reduction to other funding components of the State's public education budget or to other State funding items affecting local governments. The State should also factor public school capital improvement costs into the SOQ and should begin to share in funding such costs. EDUCATION -'ELIMINATION OF SCHOOL AGE CENSUS Every three years, all school divisions conduct a census of school age children residing in the locality. The census becomes the basis for the distribution of State educational sales tax to the locality. New methodology using pupil average daily membership (ADM) would reduce the sales tax distribution to urban localities with declining enrollment. It is estimated that Roanoke City would lose over $1.2 million in State educational aid if such a change were to occur. This legislation should be opposed unless it incorporates a mechanism to protect urban school divisions from losing State aid. EDUCATION - ENROLLMENT LOSS The last Session of the General Assembly continued the enrollment loss provision for school divisions with declining enrollment. State educational aid was continued for each student lost through enrollment decline at 80% of the prior year enrollment. This legislation should be continued for the next Biennium in order to protect school divisions with declining enrollment from a substantial loss of State aid. 9 EDUCATION - DAY CARE The General Assembly is requested to amend the State Code to authorize the School Board to operate a day care program for children of School Division and City employees. Such program would operate during, before and after school hours. EDUCATION - SCHOOL OPENING DATE Section 22.1-79 of the State Code requires that local school boards establish school calendars so that the first day of the school year shall fall after Labor Day. This provision creates a hardship for western Virginia school divisions which may have an abnormal number of closing days due to inclement weather. Also, when Labor Day falls on September 6 or 7, it may require the schools to remain open into the third week of June. The General Assembly is requested to grant an exception permitting the Roanoke City School Division to commence its school year prior to Labor Day. EDUCATION - CRIMINAL CONVICTION RECORDS OF APPLICANTS FOR EMPLOY- MENT WITH SCHOOL DIVISION It is important that the School Division not employ persons previously convicted of violent crimes, sexual offenses or drug offenses to work with our children. Section 22.1-296.2, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, authorizes the school boards of three specific counties and three specific cities to obtain criminal conviction information with respect to applicants for employment from the Central Criminal Records Exchange. Criminal conviction information made available to the school boards is limited to violent crimes, sexual offenses, drug offenses and certain other crimes enumerated in S22.1-296.2. In order to protect the children of our School Division, it is requested that S22.1-296.2 be amended to authorize our school board to obtain the type criminal conviction data made available to certain school boards by the Central Criminal Records Exchange. TRANSPORTATION - IMPROVED ACCESS TO BLACKSBURG/VIRGINIA TECH Direct access between the Roanoke Valley and Blacksburg/Virginia Tech is important to economic development efforts in Southwest Virginia. The State Transportation Commission has already recognized that a direct link from Blacksburg to 1-81 is a different project from solving traffic congestion on U.S. Route 460 in Montgomery County, and its importance was high-lighted when it was placed in the State's 6-year plan. The City supports State funding for this important regional project. - 10 - JUVENILE DETENTION FACILITIES The number of serious crimes committed by juveniles has caused an acute shortage of secure detention beds in juvenile detention facilities throughout the Commonwealth. The situation is no different in Roanoke. Review of recent statistics reflects the following utilization rates for our local facility: 102% in Fiscal Year 1990; 102% in Fiscal Year 1991; and 110% for Fiscal Year 1992 (projected). The projected cost of expansion of the City's juvenile detention facility is $1.5 million. State law requires the Commonwealth to reimburse localities up to one-half the cost of construction or enlargement of a juvenile detention home. See S16.1-313, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. The 1992 Session of the General Assembly is urged to appropriate one-half the cost of expanding the City's juvenile detention facility. The Commonwealth is also urged to assume a fair share of the costs of maintaining and operating juvenile detention facilities. Since 1982, when the block grant program for juvenile detention was initiated, the Commonwealth's funding of this program has eroded from 82% to 69% in Fiscal Year 1991. If the City is to expand its juvenile detention facility in partnership with the State, then the State must assume a fair share of operating costs. JAIL - COST OF PERSONNEL AND EXPANSION OF FACILITIES The Roanoke City Jail was occupied on June 26, 1979, and at that time had an operating capacity of 162 inmates. Due to increasing number of prisoners being committed each year, wherever possible cells have been equipped with two bunks although the cells were designed as one person cells. Presently, the Jail has a total of 245 cells equipped with 431 beds. On September 15, 1991, the Jail reached an all time high count of 428 inmates. Sheriff's deputies who operate the Jail are approved and funded by the State Compensation Board. In spite of serious overcrowding and understaffing, the Board has recently declined to approve new positions for the Jail. To address serious safety and security issues, City Council has stepped forward, and by action of October 14, 1991, Council agreed to fund 11 additional positions for the Jail at 100% local cost. The 1992 Session of the General Assembly is urged to meets its moral and legal obligation to fund these vital positions. Furthermore, it is clear that expansion of Jail facilities will be required in the near future. The early estimate of the cost of such expansion is $650,000. The General Assembly is urged to meet its statutory obligation to appropriate 50% of the cost of such expansion. See §53.1-80. - 11 - SALES TAX - LOCAL OPTION The City strongly urges the General Assembly to enact legislation authorizing all localities to levy an additional one- half cent local option sales tax, the revenues from such additional tax to be used for general government purposes. This tax authority would be in addition to the one cent local option sales tax now available to cities and counties. If authorized and levied by the City, the Director of Finance estimates an additional $6.36 million would be generated for the City's general fund. ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD - DELEGATION OF POWERS TO AGENT Section 15.1-503.2, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended authorizes City Council to adopt an ordinance providing that no building in a historic district shall be altered or restored without approval of the Architectural Review Board ("ARB"). The requirement that the ARB act on minor alterations to fences, awnings, decks, etc., creates unnecessary hardship and delay to citizens. Therefore, it is recommended that S15.1-503.2 be amended to empower a duly authorized agent of the ARB to review and approve such minor alterations. Disapproval by the agent of an application would, of course, be appealable to the ARB. Delegation of powers to an agent of the ARB would be analogous to delegation of subdivision review powers to an agent of the Planning Commission under S15.1-473. IMMUNITY FOR STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS IN YOUTH ATHLETIC PROGRAMS The City's non-profit, youth athletic programs are supported by several City employees and many volunteers. These volunteers serve as coaches, assistant coaches, league officials, etc. It is well known that these athletic programs involve high risk activities which expose staff and volunteers to considerable liability. If these athletic programs, which are so beneficial to our youth, are going to continue, the General Assembly will need to extend immunity to the local government employees and volunteers who oversee them. NOTICE OF CLAIMS Section 8.01-222, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, requires that notice of personal injury and property damage claims against cities and towns be given in writing within six months after the occurrence. Compliance with §8.01-222 is simple; a claimant merely needs to state the nature of the claim and the time - 12 - and place at which the injury occurred. Bills have been introduced at several recent Sessions of the General Assembly to repeal this valuable notice requirement. Although compliance with S8.01-222 is simple, the notice requirement is vital to the Commonwealth's cities and towns. First, the notice provides the opportunity to correct any defect on public property which may have caused injury before another injury occurs. Second, the notice requirement affords the city or town a fair opportunity to investigate the facts and circumstances relating to a claim. The city has hundreds of miles of streets and sidewalks and usually becomes aware of a slip and fall or trip and fall only when notice is filed. Fresh notice is essential to the conduct of any meaningful investigation. If S8.01-222 is repealed, cities and town will frequently first learn of a claim two years after the fact when suit is filed. This will deny any reasonable opportunity to conduct an investigation of the facts and circumstances relating to the injury. In this regard, a locality is unlike a private property owner who is usually aware immediately of an injury on his property. The City believes that the notice requirement of represents sound public policy and urges the defeat of weakening or repealing S8.01-222. S8.01-222 any bill EXTENSION OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE PRESUMPTIONS Police officers, deputy sheriffs and firefighters have the advantage of nearly irrebutable presumptions that heart disease and hypertension are occupational diseases under the Workers' Compensation Act. Firefighters have an additional presumption with respect to lung disease. The City currently has a Workers' Compensation Act liability of $2.6 million for heart, hypertension and lung awards made to public safety officers as a result of the statutory presumption. Without stating any opinion as the wisdom of the current presumptions, the City urges the General Assembly not to extend the occupational disease presumption to new diseases, such as cancer. The high incidence of cancer among Americans is known to all of us, and, as terrible as this disease is, it should not be the subject of a work related presumption. COLLECTIVE BARGAINING Any legislation authorizing collective bargaining for public employees in general or for any public employee group should be opposed. Ail public employees now have effective grievance procedures. Both the City and the School Board have developed effective means of communication which permit public employees to voice their - 13 - concerns. Collective bargaining would be a detriment to the progress which has been made. SALARIES OF MAYORS~ VICE-MAYORS AND COUNCIL MEMBERS Salaries of mayors and council members, which are established by ~14.1-47.2, of the State Code for cities of various population brackets ($15,000 for mayors and $13,000 for council members in cities of our size), have not been increased since 1985. Given inflationary forces and increasing time demands made on members of local governing bodies, an increase of $2,000 in the maximum salaries allowed for mayors and council members in all population brackets should be enacted. Furthermore, the General Assembly should allow that vice mayors be paid $1,000 more than the salary allowed for council members. The time demands made on the vice mayor in a city of our size are considerable, and additional compensation for this office is clearly in order. If the General Assembly increases the maximums as requested, salary increases for members of local governing bodies will not be automatic. Each local governing body will need to make an individual decision whether salary increases are in order in the particular locality. - 14 - CHARTER AMENDMENT GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS - PROVIDE FOR DISCRETIONARY REFERENDA Just as in the case of any business, the prudent administration of city government often requires a commitment of money beyond a single fiscal year, principally for capit~l projects that the elected leadership of the community has determined are necessary to the future well-being of the City. Capital projects today require extraordinary amounts of money in relation to current revenue and expenditures, but they are almost invariably less costly to the citizens when funded by bonds rather than current revenues. The demand for general fund money for such projects is often placed in direct competition with day-to-day needs for police, fire protection and schools. Most city councils in the Commonwealth need no referendum to issue general obligation bonds to accomplish projects deemed necessary for the community. The only constitutional limitation is that total indebtedness cannot exceed ten percent of the locality's assessed real estate valuation. Having no constitutional requirement for referendum, most cities can more readily commit future revenues to needed projects. Whether such commitment requires a tax increase or the issuance of long-term indebtedness, it is the elected city council's choice to make, without case by case approval by the electorate. The 1991 Session of the General Assembly, however, enacted a new Public Finance Act which, after July 1, 1992, eliminates the option of city council to issue bonds under the Public Finance Act without referendum. Since most municipal charters do not require any referendum as a condition precedent to the issuance of bonds, the Public Finance Act of 1991 treats the City of Roanoke differently from the vast majority of the Commonwealth's municipalities. The 1992 Session of the General Assembly is urged to amend the City Charter to restore City Council's option to issue bonds without referendum. Council's authority to require a referendum in appropriate cases should be retained. In the emergency situation or where a referendum would be frivolous, it should not be required. - 15 - INDEX POLICY STATEMENTS Economic Development .............................. Education ......................................... Effective Government .............................. Governmental Immunity ............................. Mandates .......................................... Revenue and Finance ............ ~i[~ ........... Special Needs of Central Cities Annexation Power .................................... Zoning and Land Use .................................. 3 2 1 4 1 1 2 5 LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS Architectural Review Board - Delegation of Power to Agent ............... 13 Collective Bargaining..~]~i.~]~]ii~]]i~]~ 12 Education - Criminal Conviction Records of Appli- cants for Employment with School Division .......... 10 Education - Day Care ....... ~;~i'~'a;~i~]]]]][]] 10 Education Elimination of 9 Education - Enrollment Loss ......................... 9 Education - Equitable Funding ....................... 7 Education - Method of Calculating Standards of Quality; Full funding of Standards ................. 8 Education - School Opening Date ..................... 10 Hotel Roanoke - Funding of Public Facilities ........ 6 Immunity for Staff and Volunteers in Youth Athletic Programs ........ . . 11 Jail Costs of Personnel iAA'~AiAiAA~][2']]'[][2[ 1= Juvenile Detention Facilities ....................... 11 Notice of Claims .................................... 12 Occupational Disease Presumptions - Extension ....... 13 Salaries of Mayors, Vice Mayors and Council Members... .. 12 Transportation - Improved Access to Blacksburg/ Virginia Tech ...................................... 10 CHARTER AMENDMENTS General Obligation Bonds - Provide for Discretionary Referenda .......................................... 15