Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 12-18-95 SpMtg SPECIAL MEETING ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD ROANOKE CITY LEGISLATORS 10. Roanoke Valley Graduate Center December 18, 1995 12:30 p.m. Agenda Call to Order. Roll Call. Invocation. **Lunch** Opening remarks by the Mayor. Opening remarks by the Roanoke City School Board Chairperson, Presentation of highlights of the City's 1996 Legislative Program by the City Attorney, Presentation of highlights of the School Board's 1996 Legislative Program by the School Superintendent. Remarks by legislators. Remarks by City Council Members, School Board Members and the City Manager. Adjournment. DAVID A. BOWERS Mayor CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 452 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 - 1594 Telephone: (703) 981-2444 December 14, 1995 The Honorable Vice-Mayor and Members of the Roanoke City Council Roanoke, Virginia Dear Members of Council: Pursuant to Section 10, Meetings of Council, of the Roanoke City Charter, I am calling a special meeting of the Roanoke City Council for Monday, December 18, 1995, at 12:30 p.m., at the Roanoke Valley Graduate Center, Room 120, 117 W. Church Avenue. The purpose of the meeting will be to discuss the City's proposed 1996 Legislative Program. Also in attendance will be the City's representatives to the 1996 General Assembly, or their representative, and members of the Roanoke City School Board. Lunch will be served at 12:30 p.m., and the meeting will convene immediately thereafter. Best personal regards. Sincerely, David A. Bowers Mayor DAB:sm pc; W. Robert Herbert, City Manager James D. Ritchie, Assistant City Manager Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney mliam X Parsons, Assistant City Attorney es D. Grisso, Director of Finance ry F. Parker, City Clerk MARY E PARKER, CMC/AAE City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536 Telephone: (540) 981-2541 Fax: (540) 224-3145 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk November 28, 1995 The Reverend C. Nelson Harris Chairperson Roanoke City School Board 2813 Edgewood Street, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Marilyn L. Curtis Member Roanoke City School Board 1718 Jersey Avenue, N. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Charles W. Day Member Roanoke City School Board 1830 Grayson Avenue, N. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24017 Marsha W. Ellison Member Roanoke City School Board 2030 Knollwood Road, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24018 Finn D. Pincus Member Roanoke City School Board 1116 Winchester Avenue, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24015 Melinda J. Payne Member Roanoke City School Board 301 Rutherford Avenue, N. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24016 John H. Saunders Member Roanoke City School Board 3250 Allendale Street, S. W. Roanoke, Virginia 24014 Ladies and Gentlemen: The Members of the Roanoke City Council look forward to meeting with the Members of the Roanoke City School Board on Monday, December 18, 1995, at 12:30 p.m., at the Roanoke Valley Graduate Center, Room 120, 117 W. Church Avenue, to discuss the City's proposed 1996 Legislative Program. Lunch will be served at 12:30 p.m., and the meeting will convene immediately thereafter. The Reverend C. Nelson Harris, Chairperson and Members of the Roanoke City School Board November 28, 1995 Page 2 With warmest regards, I am MFP:sm Sincerely, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk pc: Dr. E. Wayne Harris, Superintendent of Roanoke City Public Schools Richard L. Kelley, Assistant Superintendent for Operations, Roanoke City Public Schools June S. Nolley, Clerk of the Roanoke City School Board MARY E PARKER, CMC/AAE City Clerk CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Room 456 Roanoke, Virginia 24011-1536 Telephone: (540) 981-2541 Fax: (540) 224-3145 SANDRA H. EAKIN Deputy City Clerk November 28, 1995 The Honorable A. Victor Thomas Member, House of Delegates 1301 Orange Avenue, N. E. Roanoke, Virginia 24012 The Honorable Clifton A. Woodrum, III Member, House of Delegates P. O. Box 1371 Roanoke, Virginia 24007 Gentlemen: The Members of the Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke City School Board look forward to meeting with you on Monday, December 18, 1995, at 12:30 p.m., at the Roanoke Valley Graduate Center, Room 120, 117 W. Church Avenue, to discuss the City's proposed 1996 Legislative Program. Lunch will be served at 12:30 p.m., and the meeting will convene immediately thereafter. With kindest regards, I am Sincerely yours, Mary F. Parker, CMC/AAE City Clerk MFP:sm DAVID A. BOWERS Mayor CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF THE MAYOR 215 Church Avenue. S.W., Room 452 Roanoke, Virginia 24011 - 1594 Telephone: (703) 981-244~ November 28, 1995 The Honorable A. Victor Thomas House of Delegates 1301 Orange Avenue, N. E. Roanoke, Virginia 24012 The Honorable Clifton A. Woodrum, III House of Delegates Post Office Box 1371 Roanoke, Virginia 24007 The Honorable John S. Edwards Senator-Elect Post Office Box 1179 Roanoke, Virginia 24006-1179 Dear Vic, Chip and John: On behalf of the Members of Roanoke City Council and our administrators, we want to congratulate each of you on your recent successful campaign. Our Council and the City have worked well with Vic and Chip for many years, and, of course, we are very proud to have our Vice Mayor, John Edwards, going to Richmond to represent Roanoke Valley in the Senate of Virginia. We look forward to getting together with each of you at the City Council legislative meeting, along with our Roanoke School Board, on Monday, December 18, 1995, at 12:15 p.m., at City Hall. At any time that our City staff might be of assistance to you, please do not ever hesitate to contact Mr. Herbert, Mr. Dibling, our other key administrators, or Members of Roanoke City Council. Again, congratulations and best wishes for the holiday season and the New Year. Sincerely, David A. Bowers Mayor DAB:jas:Js pc: Members, Roanoke City Council Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney Ms. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk WILBURN C. DIBLING, JR. CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 215 CHURCH AVENUE, SW ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 2401:1~'~595 TELEPHONE: 540-981-2431 TELECOPIER: 540.224.3071 December 14, 1995 WILLIAM X PARSONS STEVEN J. TALEVI GLADYS L. YATES GARY E. TEGENKAMP ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEYS The Honorable Chairman and Members Roanoke City School Board Roanoke, Virginia Re: 1996 Legislative Program Dear Chairman Harris and School Board Members: I am pleased to enclose a copy of the joint Legislative Program for the City Council and School Board for the 1996 Session of the General Assembly. The Legislative Program was adopted by City Council on December 11, 1995, upon the recommendation of the Legislative Committee, consisting of Co-Chairman John Edwards and Co-Chairman William White and members Delvis O. "Mac" McCadden, The Reverend C. Nelson Harris, and Dr. Finn D. Pincus. You will find the School Board's legislative items set out on pages 8-14 of this document. As you know,~ City Council and the School Board will be meeting with the City delegation at 12:30 p.m. on December 18, 1995. This session will be held at the Graduate Center which is adjacent to the CITY School on Church Avenue. I shall look forward to seeing each of you at this time. With kindest personal regards, I am WCD:f Attachment cc: Sincerely yours, Wllburn C. Dlbling, Jr. City Attorney ~/ E. Wayne Harris, Superintendent .~chard L. Kelley, Executive for Business Affairs v~ary F. Parker, City Clerk William X Parsons, Assistant City Attorney WILBURN C. DIBLING. JR. CITY OF ROANOKE OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEy 464 MUNICIPAL BUILDING 215 CHURCH AVENUE, SW ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24011-1595 TELEPHONE! §40-g81-2431 TELECOPIER: 540-224-3071 November 30, 1995 WILLIAM X PARSONS STEVEN J. TALEVI GLADYS L. YATES GARY E. TEGENKAMP ASSISTANT C~TY ATTORNEYS The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council Roanoke, Virginia Re: 1996 Legislative Program Dear Mayor Bowers and Council Members: On November 22, 1995, City Council's Legislative Committee, Co-Chaired by Vice-Mayor Edwards and Council Member White, met and approved the City's Legislative Program for t~e 1996 Session of the General Assembly. This Program will be formally transmitted to City Council by a Committee report from the Co-Chair of the Legislative Committee and will be before City Council for consideration on December 11, 1995. Because of a tight time schedule, I wanted City Council to have a copy of the Legislative Program as soon possible, and I am enclosing a copy of the Program as recommended by the Legislative Committee. The Legislative Meeting with the City's delegation has been scheduled by Mrs. Parker for 12:30 p.m. on December 18, 1995. Therefore, I am extremely hopeful that City Council will adopt a resolution approving the Legislative Program at its meeting of December 11, 1995. On the same date, City Council will need to consider a resolution requesting a proposed Charter amendment relating to the prohibition of handguns in City parks. I have, on behalf of COuncil, caused a public notice of such public hearing to be publtshe~ in The Roanoke Times in accordance with provisions of State Code. Although this Charter amendment has been recommended by the Legislative Committee, I do want City Council to know that the publication of the notice does not commit Council to any particular action with respect to this proposal. For the convenience of City Council members, I am also enclosing a calendar of events with respect to City Council's Legislative Program. The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council November 30, 1995 Page 2 Please contact me if you have any questions about the Legislative Program or the required procedures for its adoption. I look forward to working with City Council in advancing the legislative interests of the City and its people at the 1996 Session of the General Assembly. With kindest personal regards, I am Sincerely yours, Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney WCD:f Attachments cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager Mary F. Parker, City Clerk 1996 LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM CITY OF ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL David A. Bowers, Mayor John S. Edwards, Vice-Mayor Elizabeth T. Bowles Delvis O. "Mac" McCadden John H. Parrott William White, Sr. Linda F. Wyatt SCHOOL BOARD C. Nelson Harris, Chairman Marilyn L. Curtis, Vice-Chairmm~ Charles W. Day Marsha W. Ellison Finn D. Pincus John H. Satmders Melinda J. Payne CITY MANAGER W. Robert Herbert SUPERINTENDENT E. Wayne Harris Wilbum C. Dibling, Jr. City Attorney 464 Municipal Building Roanoke, VA 2401 i 540-981-2431 POLICY STATEMENTS EFFECTIVE GOVERNMENT 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 and sewage treatment. 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 gove~rnments are the best vehicle for the delivery of basic public services because local governments ar~ 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 d~[ctate 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 According to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission, Virginia's local governments are subject to 391 Federal and State mandates. These mandates require localities to perform duties without consideration of local circumstances, costs or capacity and require localities to redirect their priorities to meet Federal and State objectives regardless of other pressing local needs and priorities affecting the health, safety and welfare of citizens. The cumulative effect of Federal and State legi:~lative and regulatory mandates has exacerbated the already serious financial problems of local governments. The Governor and General Assembly should be commended for recently showing increased sensitivity to the mandate issue. Several years ago, the General Assembly began the fiscal note process by which cost estimates for proposed legislation are completed prior to final review of the legislation by a committee. Additionally, the 1993 Session amended the State Code to require (1) that all State agencies review all mandates imposed on local governments with the objective of determining which mandates may be altered or eliminated and (2) that the Commission on Local Government prepare and annually update a catalog of Federal and State mandates. The Governor and General Assembly are urged to promote State and local partnerships in the area of mandates by requiring: A review of current mandates in specific areas (a) to establish the full costs to local governments of implementing mandates and (b) to develop an appropriate basis for determining State and local funding responsibilities. Completion of cost estimates for proposed legislation prior to its first full review by a legislative committee. Submittal of legislation negatively affecting local governments' revenue raising ability to the Commission on Local Government for a fiscal impact analysis. More local government involvement in implementation decisions, including funding arrangements, deadlines and prescribed methods of meeting mandates, so that impacts at the 'local level are identified before implementation. A performance based approach to mandates that (a) focuses on outcomes, (b) offers incentives for achieving' State objectives and (c) gives local governments autonomy to determine the best way to achieve the desired result. CLARIFICATION OF STATE AND LOCAL RESPONSIBILITIES The 1991 Session of the General Assembly is commended for requesting that the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) undertake a comprehensive review of State and local service delivery responsibilities and the funding mechanisms that support them.. The sorting out process of determining which services should be performed by the State and which by its local governments is vitally important, and more rational assignment of service delivery responsibility will advance the interests of the State and local gove~nments. The General Assembly is urged to carefully consider JLA~]'s 1993 recommendations, particularly those relating to State assumption of service delivery responsibility where service or performance standards are defined by federal or State law and/or regulations. 2 GOVERNOR'S ADVISORY COMMISSION ON THE DIT.LON RULE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT By Executive Order No. 42, promulgated October 28, 1991, Gow)rnor Wilder created the Governor's Advisory Commission on the Dillon Rule and Local Government and charged the Commission with the responsibility of considering current ~ocal government powers in the Commonwealth; assessing the ability of local governments to deal with local and regional issues within the framework of existing law; and evaluating the need for changes to the Code of Virginia deemed necessary to provide local governments with improved ability to address local and regional issues. Former Senator J. Granger Macfarlane was appointed to chair the Commission which rendered its report to the Governor in November, 1992. The Commission has performed an important service to the Com~onwealth, and its recommendations are commended to the General Assembly. These recommendations include the following: Title 15.1, Countles~ Cities and Towns, of the Code of Virginia should be recodified. Title 15.1 has not been revised since 1962, and persons testifying before the Commission uniformly criticized it as disorganized, inconsistent and confusing. Recodification of Title 15.1 is currently being carried out by the Code Commission with the assistance of a Committee including the Roanoke City Attorney and other local government representatives. The General Assembly should carefully consider JLARC's recommendations as to the assignment of service delivery responsibilities between State and local governments. The State should consider assuming responsibility for services when service and performance standards are dictated by State law and/or regulation. Also, the ability to raise revenue should more closely correspond to the requirement to provide services. The General Assembly should establish a legislative commission composed of State legislators and local government officials to study and make reco~endatlons relating to the unique problems of central cities in the Commonwealth. While the central cities of the Commonwealth are making a vigorous effort to raise revenues, data provided by the Commission on Local Government demonstrates that they are still suffering from extreme fiscal stress. A thorough study and development of an action plan to address the special problems of central cities is needed. 3 This effort should include an assessment of the impact of the "magnet effect", municipal Overburden and related social ills that are unique to urban centers. Amend S15.1-510, Powers of counties, and S15.1-839, General grant of powers t,, munich, to provide that the authority delegated to local governments by the General Assembly shall be broadly construed to effect the purpose of the delegation. Such proposal represents a modest and reasonable relaxation of current restrictions which does not do violence to the principle that local governments can exercise only those powers specifically delegated to them by the Commonwealth. REVENUE AND FINANCR 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. 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 hlghest 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 wi~lch, if any, local revenue sources should be reduced or eliminated should be strictly a local decision. SPECIAL NEEDS OF CENTRAL CITIES WITHOUT ANNEXATION POWE~ The larger, more urbanized, central cities of the Com- monwealth, such as thls Clty, provide a full range of public housing, health, mental health, transportation s humanitarian services. ~_~__. .... , ocial and ~u.uua sys=ems in t~ese cities provide excellent special education programs, and private charities located in central cities provide a broad r~nge of charitable assistance. ~ese {actors make the Commonwealth s central cities a magnet for =nose in need of services. Consider these facts: 4 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; That 23% of the City's population is below the age of 19 meaning that nearly 45% of the City's population are consumers of governmental services with little ability to pay for these services; and That, by 1991, 52% 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: 1. Reevaluation of Virginia's unique system of independent cites which imposes upon cities the unfair responsibility of providing regional services without reimbursement from adjoining beneficiary localities; Special funding by the Commonwealth of those services provided by central cities which benefit the entire region; As recommended by the Grayson Commission (House Bill 550 introduced at the 1990 Session), creation of financial incentives to encourage governmental 5 integration of independent cities with adjoining counties; and Also as recommended by the Grayson Commission, authority for cities with populations of less than 125,000 to make the transition to town status. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT City Council calls upon the Governor and the General Assembly to develop an economic development strategy for the Commonwealth and its local governments. The Commonwealth is implored to form a partnership with local governments, the business community and economic development experts to develop the strategy. The strategy should recognize the international economy in which Virginia local governments are competing and include special funding for international trade missions. The strategy should also recognize small business incubators as a vital element and provide funding, perhaps on a State matching basis, to local governments that undertake to develop and operate incubators. The strategy should include special 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. Finally, the 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 unemployable. 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. o 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 the City and an employee are sued, conflicts may require a separate attorney for each party. 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 $75,000. Constant pressure will keep the cap spiraling upward. The City is opposed to any extension of the Virginia Tort Claims Act to localities and supports extension of immunity to certain groups of municipal employees and volunteers who are particularly vulnerable to suits which jeopardize the very existence of programs desired by the community. An example of a group of employees and volunteers needing immunity is coaches and officials serving in youth athletic programs sponsored by the City ZONING AND LAND U$~ 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. 7 LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS EDUCATION OVERVIEW The Roanoke City School Board has set high expectations and standards for students during the next Biennium. Student achievement will improve by 4% annually; the student attendance rate will improve by 10% each year; physical education test scores will increase by 7% annually; and the student drop-out rate will decline by 1% each year. The Board also has set a goal of reaching the national average for teacher salaries by 1998-99. The School Board applauds the work of area legislators in the passage of legislation during the past Biennium that was directed at improving public education. Legislation that was adopted included: reduction of the prlmary grade class size; the provision of State funds for instructional technology; the strengthening of laws regarding student discipline and parental involvement; and the prohibition of weapons on school property. This legislation will greatly assist the Roanoke City Public Schools in achieving the high expectations that have been set for our students. The General Assembly is urged to continue providing the funding and program support necessary to make education a priority in the Commonwealth. EDUCATIONAL PRIORITY The School Board's legislative priority for the 1996-98 Biennium calls for increased funding for education, including full funding of the State's share of the actual cost of the Standards of Quality (SOQ) 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. Furthermore, several recent public surveys, including one conducted by The Roanoke Times, indicate the public believes education should receive the highest priority in the Commonwealth for funding. The School Board urges the General Assembly to continue the initiative adopted in the State Budget for the 1994-1996 Biennium to assist school districts with reducing class size at the primary grade level. The initiative should be expanded to upper elementary grades four and five in order to improve the performance of students who are at-risk of failure. Teacher salary data for FY93-94 shows that Virginia's average teacher salary is about $2,800 less than the national average. In order to attract and retain the best teaching talent, the State should set a goal of reaching the national average teacher salary by the 1998-99 school year. To meet the goal would require that State funding for teacher salaries increase by an additional 2.5% per year for each of the next three years, in addition to the nominal increases in teacher salaries funded by the State during the last Biennium. During the second year of the FY94-96 Biennium, reductions were proposed in State funding for programs that target dropout prevention and English as a Second Language (ESL) students. The elimination of State funding for these programs would have resulted in the loss of almost $300,000 in State monies for the Roanoke City Public Schools. The Federal government has enacted several budget amendments that will reduce Federal funding for programs for at-risk youth. The State is encouraged to continue to fund dropout prevention and ESL programs so that services to youth most at-risk of entering the welfare system can be sustained. The inadequacy of State funding for public education is readily apparent in Roanoke City. For Fiscal Year 1995-96, the General Assembly set the per pupil cost of meeting the Standards of Quality at $2,876. Actual per pupil cost for City students to meet the State Standards of Quality, however, is estimated to be $4,432 for Fiscal Year 1995-96. Moreover, the City Schools actually receive only $1,438 per pupil for this fiscal year after application of the composite index and State sales tax to the SOQ funding formula. EDUCATIONAL DISPARITY Almost 50% of the Roanoke City student population is eligible for free lunches under the Federal School Lunch Program. These students enter school with many academic, social, and welfare needs that must be served by the school district if they are to be successful students. The ability of local government to adequately fund these needs is hampered by the level of fiscal stress experienced by Roanoke and other urban areas in the Commonwealth. The General Assembly has recognized the need to more adequately fund education programs in school districts with a large number of free lunch students. During the last Biennium, funding was provided to reduce class size in schools with significant percentages of free lunch pupils. Roanoke City received slightly more than $1.0 million in State funds to hire 34 additional teachers to implement this initiative. The initiative should be expanded to grades four and five during the next Biennium to help improve the educational success of low income pupils. FULL FUNDING OF STATE MANDATED PROGRAMS JLARC studies on State mandates have recommended that State funding be increased substantially for special education. The City Council and School Board strongly support this recommendation and also supports full funding of the State's share of the actual costs of both Standards of Quality education mandates and categorical education programs. FULL FUNDING OF STANDARDS OF QUALITY The General Assembly should recognize the long standing support of public education by local governments. For many years, local governments have funded educational costs beyond their required share in efforts to provide quality education. Increased funding for education, including full funding of the State's share of the actual costs of the Standards of Quality and full funding of categorical educational mandates, is a top priority of 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 has begun to factor public school capital improvement costs into the Standards of Quality and should increase its share of funding such costs. Finally, no changes to educational funding formulas, which would reduce State funding of any school divisions, should be recommended without specific notice of such proposed changes being given to each school division and the Virginia School Boards Association. Public hearings should be held with respect to such proposed changes at locations throughout the Commonwealth. Notice with respect to any changes to be presented to any Session of the General Assembly should be given at least ninety days prior to the commencement of the Session. SAFE SCHOOL LEGISLATION School safety and violence are serious concerns of parents and teachers as community problems are carried over into school activities. The General Assembly adopted a "Safe School Act" at the 1993 Session. The Act provides a coordinated and comprehensive approach to ensure safe classrooms. The features of the Act should 10 be enhanced by adoption of the following recommendations General Assembly: State funding assistance for security personnel and equipment, including resource officers to facilitate safe schools through drug prevention, firearm education, and police awareness; Coordination of school safety programs among the appropriate state and local agencies to include the development of school safety audits; State funding assistance utilizing the City's composite index for alternative education programs (State currently funds only about seven percent of the cost of this program); and Implementation of public agency outreach programs to promote responsibility by parents for the actions of their children. by the STATE LITERARY FUND During the 1992-94 Biennium the General Assembly transferred $192 million from the State Literary Fund into the General Fund to cover teacher retirement contributions. The fiscal status of the Fund recently has improved, allowing the release of monies for most priority projects on the Literary Fund waiting list. The five year need for Literary Fund loans is estimated to be over $3.0 billion. The General Assembly is encouraged to maintain the loan authority of the Literary Fund and avoid the transfer of Literary Fund assets to other State programs. HEALTH SERVICES FOR DISADVANTAGED CHILDREN Disadvantaged children throughout Virginia are suffering from a lack of affordable health services. In the City of Roanoke, over 4,000 children lack access to comprehensive health care, and about 50% of school age children reside in low-income families, most of whom do not have adequate health insurance. Teenage pregnancy rates throughout the Commonwealth are at an all-time high and continue to escalate. The Roanoke City Schools have limited financial resources to finance health services. The General Assembly is urged to support funding for the 1996-98 Biennium that would provide at least one school-based nurse for every 1,000 children residing in the 11 locality. The services provided by these additional school-based nurse positions would be targeted to disadvantaged children. ELEMENTARY GUIDANCE Legislation has been proposed that would mandate the type of elementary guidance programs that can be used by local school districts. Such legislation also could result in the reduction or elimination of elementary guidance positions required by State Standards of Quality (SOQ). Local school districts should be able to control the type of elementary guidance services offered and the present SOQ requirement for elementary guidance counselors should be maintained. The State Department of Education is also considering adoption of regulations that would require parents to "opt in" to elementary guidance services, rather than the continuation of the present regulations that allow parents to "opt out" of the program. The "opt in" process will place an undue administrative burden on schools, and any such change in the regulations will be detrimental to the provision of elementary guidance services to students. INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY The General Assembly has provided FY95-96 funding to the City Schools in the amount of almost $875,000 to fund instructional technology. We appreciate these efforts to update classrooms and libraries with state of the art equipment and networks. The City Schools encourage the legislature to continue funding this initiative. STATE TERMINATION OF FUNDS FOR JUVENILE OFFENDERS In April of 1994 the locality was abruptly notified that funding for the continuation of the State grant for providing services to incarcerated special education juveniles was terminated. In order to continue to provide this service to Juveniles, the locality has absorbed the total cost of the program for 1995-96 which amounts to about $47,500. While the State has given priority to the incarceration of hard-core criminals, funds for prisoner education have been significantly reduced. The General Assembly is urged to enact legislation that would provide funding for the education of youthful offenders so that they may become productive citizens rather than a burden on the state prison system. 12 CHARTER SCHOOLS The Charter School concept has been proposed as a solution to assist local schools in developing educational programs at the site level. Legislation that allows local school boards to request the waiver of State mandates in order to implement innovative school programs is supported. The establishment of Charter Schools is opposed as these schools would serve a limited student population that is not representative of the diversity in student demographics for the locality. TUITION CREDITS Private school tuition credits to parents and guardians whose children attend private schools would significantly reduce State revenue available to local school boards without a corresponding decline in per pupil cost. The General Assembly is urged to oppose any system of tax or tuition credits that would reduce federal or State revenue to local public schools. 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. Legislation was proposed during the last Biennium to use pupil average daily membership (ADM) rather than the school census as the basis for computing the locality's sales tax entitlement. This methodology would reduce the sales tax distribution to urban localities with declining enrollment. It is estimated that Roanoke City would lose $760,135 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. EMPLOYEE GRIEVANCE PROCEDURES Preliminary legislation was adopted at the last Session that would put On the ballot a voter referendum to change the State constitution to allow binding arbitration on the grievance process for teaching employees. The General Assembly must approve the final legislation during the 1996 Session in order for the referendum to be held. School Boards should retain the final authority for all teacher personnel matters rather than a third party. The General Assembly is asked to reject any legislation requiring a referendum on binding arbitration for teacher grievances. 13 EMPLOYEE BACKGROUND CHEC~ The City Schools now conduct criminal background checks on all school employees through the State Police, but this check does not disclose crimes the prospective employee may have committed in other states. The General Assembly is requested to approve specific legislation for the Roanoke City Public Schools in order to allow the Schools to fingerprint applicants and that the fingerprints along with other personal descriptive information be provided to the Federal Bureau of Investigation. This background review would provide a nationwide check of any criminal activity by the applicant. SCHOOL OPENING DATE School divisions are now required to open after Labor Day which creates difficulties in scheduling for western Virginia school divisions that may have an abnormal number of closing days for inclement weather conditions. It may also require schools to remain open until the third week in June if Labor Day falls on September 6 or 7. The General Assembly is requested to remove the restriction on school opening prior to Labor Day. TAXATION: REVENUE BUSINESS~ PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL LICENSE (BPOL) TA~ A segment of the business community continues to agitate for elimination of the local business, professional and occupational license (BPOL) tax. It is important, however, to understand the devastating consequences that loss of this revenue source could have on Virginia's local governments. The BPOL tax generates about $310 million a year for local governments in Virginia and for Fiscal Year 1994-1995, generated $8.9 million for this City. The pressure to repeal the BPOL tax originated in Northern Virginia and continues to be strongest there, particularly among some high technology industries. In the City of Roanoke, there have been few, if any, complaints from the business community regarding the tax. Some in the business community have complained that the tax is unfair because it is based on gross receipts rather than profit. Businesses, however, acknowledge that the tax is passed on to customers and clients, which makes it no different than the sales tax. Furthermore, the BPOL tax is no different from any other local tax or business-related expense, such as rent, utilities, or insurance, that must be paid, regardless of whether a business is 14 profitable. Moreover, the BPOL rates are minimal. In the City of Roanoke, the amount a business would pay ranges from .0014% (contractors) to .0058% (professionals, such as doctors and lawyers). Thus, a business with $100,000 of gross receipts would pay between $140 and $580 annually, depending on its classification. Such a small amount could not be a defining element in the success of a business. It has also been suggested that the BPOL tax is a "jobs killer" and that it deters businesses from locating in Virginia. Virginia, however, is a low tax state, ranking 46th in state and local taxes per $1,000 of income. Forty-five states have a higher combined state and local tax burden than Virginia. As for the tax being a "jobs killer", the Department of Taxation reports that there have been 115,000 new jobs created in the State since the Allen administration assumed office. Elimination of the BPOL tax would reduce the stability and diversification of the local revenue base. Most local governments already rely heavily on the property tax, and many local governments have seen growth in sales tax revenue decline. BPOL revenue cannot realistically be replaced by other local taxes or fees. City Council is willing to consider amendments to the BPOL tax which would provide more uniformity on a statewide basis and which would result in no loss of revenue to the City. City Council is also willing to consider a credible replacement to the BPOL tax. A credible replacement would be a tax that remains under local control, generates an equivalent amount of revenue and has the potential for future revenue growth, which is why an annual State appropriation is not an acceptable substitute. Realistically, the income tax and the sales tax are the only other tax sources that can generate sufficient revenue to replace the BPOL tax. LAW LIBRARY The Roanoke Law Library is a public library providing services to private citizens, students, teachers, government agencies and businesses as well as the Bar. The Law Library is supported primarily by a filing fee of $4.00 levied on each civil action filed in the Circuit Court or the General District Court. Recently, the number of filings has, however, been down sharply. In Fiscal Year 1991-1992, the Law Library received $163,311 in filing fees, whereas in Fiscal Year 1993-1994, the Law Library is projected to receive only $118,000 in fees. At the same time, over the same three-year period, the cost of legal publications increased twenty-four percent, and the Library's budget for these publications decreased eleven percent. 15 The $4.00 ceiling on filing fees levied on civil actions was established by the 1988 Session of the General Assembly. In order to provide adequate support for the Law Library, the General Assembly Is urged to increase the allowable fee ceiling under $42.1-70, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, from $4.00 per case to $6.00 per civil case. Furthermore, S14.1-133.2 establishing a maximum total assessment for law library assessments and Courthouse and jail maintenance assessments should be increased from $6.00 to $8.00 per civil case. REGIONAL ISSUF'R URBAN PARTNERSHIP The Urban Partnership, which Virginia,s largest cities ~-~ ..... consists of eighteen of Commerce ~,,u uuuncles, the Virginia Chamber and the Virginia Business Council consisting of fifty of of Virginia.s largest businesses, was created to analyze the ability of the Commonwealth,s regions to compete in the global marketplace. If Virginia is to be competitive in the global marketplace, we must have high performance regions. Two of the characteristics found by the Partnership to exist in high performance regions of the Southeast with which Virginia's regions compete are collaborative regional government systems and lessened disparity among areas within the region. If the State's regions are to truly think and act regionally, major incentives must be provided to advance regional decision making and counteract the reality of multiple political boundaries within a region. The City endorses the Urban Partnership,s recommendations of an incentive fund of $200 mlllion to reward regions that think and act regionally. The incentive fund would reward increased regional efforts over time, reward those regions that undertake a broad array of regional efforts and recognize existing regional efforts. The Partnership,s study notes that, although Virginia,s system of independent cities and separate counties has served the Commonwealth well for many decades, Virginia is the only state that retains this system on a statewide basis. Today two trends ~hallenge the effectiveness of the traditional system. The first is population growth. Some Counties are densely populated and have developed a set of municipal services similar to those in cities. This parallel development of Infrastructure and services, Sometimes duplicative and expensive, undercuts the urban-rural distinction that was the basis for the traditional system. Second, economic competition today is not Just local or statewlde or even national in scope. A city no longer competes Just with an adjoining county; 16 instead the region that includes both city and county competes with regions elsewhere in the Country and the w clear ~eed for cooperation between re-~--- or~. ~his creates a , ~,~. Therefore, the City supports the Urban Partnership s recommendation that Virginia law should permit opportunities for strong regional cooperation and consolidation and an effective means for independent cities to transition to cities that are part of adjacent counties. THE NEW CENTURY COUNCIl, Through the New Century visioning process, the people of the New Century Region were given the opportunity to decide for themselves what their future should be. As a result of the work of more than 1,000 volunteers, we how have a vision of where we want to be in 20 years. In addition, New Century committees developed approximately 150 strategies. Two endorses the 1996 of the strategies require legislative action, and the City the following strategies and recommends them for action at Session: Create The New Century Regional Economic Development Council by General Assembly action to focus on and oversee a regional approach to all aspects of economic development, including the clustering of those industries likely to create new Jobs and further investment in our region. Pursue .the establishment at Virginia Tech of a joint office of the Virginia Department of Economic 'Development and the Center for Innovative Technology to expedite the commercialization of applicable research and other business prospects. INTERSTATE 73 The Intermoda! Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 ("ISTEA") authorized the development of a national highway system to serve major population centers and major travel destinations. ISTEA identifies the Interstate 73 corridor from Charleston, South Carolina, to Detroit, Michigan, as being a high priority. The City supports an alignment of 1-73 following the right-of- way of U. S. 460 from the West Virginia line, then following the rights-of-way of the proposed "Smart Highway", Interstate 81 and 17 Interstate 581 in the City of Roanoke, and then generally following the right-of-way of U. S. Route 220 from Roanoke to the North Carolina line. This alignment would provide access to the largest population center in Virginia west of Charlottesville, the medical and financial centers of Southwestern Virginia, the largest airport in Southwestern Virginia and one of the State's major universities. The City's preferred alignment would strengthen both interstate and intrastate commerce and provide direct economic benefits to the Commonwealth. SMART ROAD - 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. Recently, the Virginia Department of Transportation has begun public hearings on the "Smart Road" Project. Thus far, the federal government has allocated nearly $6 million to the Project. The City supports State funding for this important regional project which will be a catalyst for the creation of new jobs in the Roanoke and New River Valleys. INTERSTATE 66 A new transportation link between Tidewater, Virginia, and central California, via mid-America, has been proposed. This project is sometimes known as the Interstate 66 or Transcontinental Highway Project. An east-west interstate serving the southern part of Virginia, including Lynchburg and Roanoke would be a boon to the economic vitality of the Commonwealth. Therefore, the City supports an alignment of this important transportation link that would take it from Norfolk to Richmond, then follow the U. S. 460 corridor through Lynchburg and Roanoke, and then on to West Virginia. EXTENSION OF PASSENGER RAIL SERVICE City Council has previously urged support for the extension of AMTRAK rail service from New York to Atlanta via Roanoke. See Resolution No. 31374-030893. More recently, the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation has completed Phase I of a study of passenger rail service between Washington, D. C. and Bristol, and/or between Richmond and Bristol. Roanoke would be a station along both proposed routes. Phase I of the study concludes that the proposed passenger rail service is feasible. Phase II of 18 the study is now required to consider in more detail the preliminary conclusions of Phase I. New passenger rail service would provide badly needed transportation access and act as a catalyst to development of local economies. Passenger rail service to downtown Roanoke would provide additional support and increased visibility to such local economic development projects as the Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center, the Historic City Market, the Virginia Museum of Transportation, Center in the Square, Henry Street and other attractions and businesses in downtown Roanoke. City Council endorses the proposal to extend AMTRAK service between New York and Atlanta via Roanoke and urges completion of the Bristol Rail Passenger Study by the Virginia Transportation Board. VIRGINIA MUSEUM OF TRANSPORTATION The Virginia Museum of Transportation, located in downtown Roanoke, attracts visitors to downtown and is important to people of this region in understanding our railroad heritage. With the construction of the railside linear park, which will connect the Market area and the Museum, and capital improvements being made at the Museum, the Museum's potential as a tourist destination is vastly improved. City Council, therefore, is very appreciative of the General Assembly's funding of the Museum at the level of $100,000 for each year of the 1994-96 Biennium. The General Assembly is urged to increase its funding of this important educational and cultural facility in next Biennium. URBAN INTERSTATES - MAINTENANCE The appearance of the 1-581 corridor frequently creates the first impression that visitors and economic development prospects have of the Roanoke Valley. Regrettably, there have been numerous complaints about the appearance of the 1-58! right-of-way. These complaints relate to litter, lack of mowing and scarcity of trees, shrubbery and plantings to promote beautification. Members of the Roanoke Valley delegation to the General Assembly are, therefore, urged to seek adequate funding for the maintenance and beautification of the 1-581 corridor. 19 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT HIGHER EDUCATION CENTER While the Roanoke Valley has some elements of a higher education infrastructure, they are inadequate to assure to the Roanoke Valley its share of economic growth and the improved quality of life that would follow. Establishment of a higher education center in Roanoke would be a step toward this goal. The proposed higher education center is modeled after a new ten million dollar, 90,000 square foot, Southwest Virginia Higher Education Center in Abingdon. Abingdon, like Roanoke, is part of a geographic area of the Commonwealth recognized by the General Assembly as lacking sufficient higher education opportunities to meet current and future needs. The State has also recently funded a new twenty-four million dollar, 200,000 square foot, community college campus in Norfolk. The proposed center would be developed by Virginia Western Community College which would expand its programs, including programs intended to meet the area's industrial and technological training needs. The Roanoke Valley Graduate Center, which has been so well received that it has outgrown its current location, would also be located in the center. Space would be available to house programs of Virginia Tech that would benefit from an urban location near the Hotel Roanoke and Conference Center. The Genera~ Assembly is urged to fund the proposed higher education center in Roanoke which will advance the educational needs of the area as we prepare to meet the challenges of the Twenty-first Century. GENERAL GOVERNMEN'r EVICTION OF TENANTS - COSTS OF REMOVING AND DISPOSING OF PERSONAL PROP~¥ Section 8.01-156, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, seems to require, when personal property is removed from rental property pursuant to a court-ordered eviction, that the sheriff store the property and later conduct a public sale unless the owner of the property removes it from the public way. In practice, personal property is placed in the public right-of-way and then picked up by the City Department of Solid Waste Management and hauled to the Transfer Station and then ultimately to the Regional Landfill. All this occurs at great expense to the taxpayers of the City. Of course, the discarding of old sofas, mattresses and other household 20 items in the public right-of-way creates a terrible aesthetic situation and certainly negatively impacts the quality of life of neighborhoods where this occurs. Storage and sale of this personal property is not a viable alternative since there is no storage area, and, if one existed, the costs of Storage and sale would ~enerally far exceed the value of the property. Rather than burdening the general public with the cost of removing the personal property of evicted tenants and disposing of it, the City submits that this should be a cost and responsibility of the property owner who sought and obtained the eviction. Therefore, the City urges that S8.01-156 be amended to provide that removal of the possessions of evicted tenants is the responsibility of the landlord, rather than the public. VIRGINIA PUBLIc EMPLOYEE RETIREMENT SYSTEMS BENEFITS - PORTABILITY OF The recruitment and retention by the Commonwealth and local governments of qualified officers and employees is critical to maintaining and improving the quality of public service in the Commonwealth. Intrastate mobility of public service professionals would facilitate and enhance the recruitment of qualified personnel. Some political subdivisions of the Commonwealth do not participate in the Virginia Retirement System (VRS). does not currently provide for portability between local State law retirement systems or the local retirement systems and the Virginia Retirement System. To address the portability issue, the 1994 Session of the General Assembly adopted HJR 104 which required the VRS to conduct a study in conjunction with the Association of Municipal Retirement Systems. The required study has now been completed by VRS, and enabling legislation providing for portability has been recommended. The 1996 Session is requested to enact a bill providing for portability. CURFEW VIOLATION~ In 1992, a Citizens' Task Force recommended that the City's curfew ordinance be mOdernized and streamlined. Subsequently, City Council adopted a new ordinance, and the Clty administration, in conjunction with the Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court and its Court Service Unit, developed and implemented a Juvenile citation program whlch provides for Juvenile Court intervention in the case of repeat offenders. Dlspositional alternatives, however, are severely limited because curfew violation is considered a status offense. 21 In order to provide teeth for local government curfew ordinances, the General Assembly is urged to amend Title 16.1 to treat violation of local curfew ordi olation. Availability of fine° same as a traffic uispositional alternatives l:~ ~rlver license revocation as substantial deterrent to recidivism~rrew cases would create a 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 S8.01-222 is simple; a claimant merely needs to state the nature of the claim and the time 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 towns 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 S8.01-222 represents sound public policy and urges the defeat of any bill weakening or repealing ~8.01-222. COLLECTIVE BARGAININ~ Any legislation authorizing collective bargaining for public employees in general or for any public employee group, including School Board employees, should be opposed. All 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 concerns. Collective bargaining would be a detriment to the progress which has been mede. 22 HANDGUNS IN PUBLIC PARKS Under current State law, firearms may be openly carried in City parks without fear of arrest. The risks inherent in the carrying of firearms in City parks are a grave concern to City officials and citizens. The General Assembly has recently prohibited possession of firearms on school grounds. Virginia State Park Regulations prohibit the carrying or possessing of firearms tn State parks. Regulations already applicable to school grounds and State parks should logically be extended to public parks. The General Assembly is requested to amend S2(18) of the City Charter to authorize City Council to adopt an ordinance regulating or prohibiting the carrying of handguns in City parks. Such ordinance would exempt law enforcement officers and persons who hold concealed weapons permits. 23 1996 LEGISLATIVE CALENDAR November 22, 1995 Legislative Committee met and approved 1996 Legislative Program December 1, 1995 Public Notice of Proposed Charter Amendment to be published in The Roanoke Times December 11, 1995 Council holds public hearing on proposed Charter amendment. Council approves 1996 Legislative Program December 18, 1995 12:30 p.m. Meeting w/th Legislators January 10, 1996 First day of Session of General Assembly. Charter amendment bills must be Introduced on or before this date CITY LEGISLATIVE HIGHLIGHTS Taxation and Revenue · Oppose repeal of BPOL tax. · Support Regional Transportation District with 2% tax on sale of motor fuels Regional Issues · Support Urban Partnership's incentive fund. recommended Support New Century Council's work. Economic Development · Support proposed Higher Education Center Transportation Support construction of Smart Road. Support alignment of 1-73 and 1-66 through Roanoke Valley Support expansion of passenger rail service. Support adequate funding for maintenance and beautification of 1-581 corridor. Charter Amendment · Support allowing City Council to regulate handguns in City parks.