HomeMy WebLinkAboutCouncil Actions 09-12-88Bowe~s
(29276)
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION ...... ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
September 12, 1988
7:30 p.m.
AGENDA FOR THE COUNCIL
Call to Order -- Roil Call. Al~ pr~ent.
The invocation will be delivered by The Reverend Joe
Lindsoe, Pastor, Melrose Christian Church. Pa~ent.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States
of America will be led by Mayor Noel C. Taylor.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Public hearing on the request of Mr. Leonard W. Weaver,
that a tract of land consisting of 0.53 acre, more or
less, lying on the east side of Plantation Road, N. E.,
identified as Official Tax Nos. 3121014 3121018,
respectively, be rezoned from HM, Heavy Manufacturipg
District, to LM, Light Manufacturing District, subject
to certain proffered conditions. Mr. Cart L. Kinder,
Jr., Attorney. Adopted Ordinance No. 29276 on first reading.
B. Public hearing on the request of N & W Associates, a
Virginia general partnership, that a tract of land con-
taining 2.306 acres, more or less, located on the
southwest corner of the intersection of U. S. Route 460
East (Orange Avenue) and Mecca Street, N. E.,
designated as Official Tax No. 7070114, be rezoned from
LM, Light Manufacturing District, to C-2, General
Commercial District, subject to certain proffered con~
ditions. Mr. James F. Douthat, Attorney. Adopted
Ordinance No. 29277 on f~t reading. (7-0)
C. Public hearing on the request of Mr. & Mrs. Harry A.
Craighead, Mr. Jesse W. Elmore, Melrose Avenue Seventh
Day Adventist Church, and the U. S. Plumbers and
Steamfitters Local Union 491, that an alley 15 feet in
width extending in an east/west direction from
Sixteenth Street, N. W., for a distance of 404 feet, be
permanently vacated, discontinued and closed. Mr. John
D. Copenhaver, Attorney. Adopted Ordinance No. 29278 on
fiAst readin~. (7-0)
D. Public hearing on the request of the City of Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, that certain por-
tions of Linwood Land Company and Deanwood Terrace be
vacated, pursuant to Section 15.1-~482 (b) of the Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended. Mr. Daniel F. Layman,
(1)
C-i
C-2
C-3
C-4
C-5
Public hearing on the proposed three year Housing
Assistance Plan. Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager·
Adopted Ordinance No. 29280. {7-0) ~
CONSENT AGENDA {Approved 7-0)
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 DIS-
CUSSION OF THESE ITEMS. IF DISCUSSION IS DESIRED, THAT ITEM WILL
BE REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT AGENDA AND CONSIDERED SEPARATELY.
Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday,
June 6, [988, Monday, June 13, 1988, and Monday, June 20, 1988.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Dispense with the reading thereof
approve as ,·corded.
and
A congnunication from Mayor Noel C. Taylor requesting an
Executive Session to discuss personnel matters relating to
vacancies on various authorities, boards, corrgnissions and com-
mittees appointed by Council, pursuant to Section 2·1-344 (a)
(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Concur in request for Council to convene in
Executive Session to discuss personnel m~t-
ters relating to vacancies on various
authorities, boards, con~nissions and com-
mittees appointed by Council, pursuant to
Section 2.[-344 (a) (1), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended.
A communication from Council Member James O. Trout
requesting an Executive Session to discuss a real estate matter,
being the acquisition of real property for public purpose, pur-
suant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (3), Code of Virginia (1950) as
amended.
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Concur in request for Council to convene in
Executive Session to discuss a real estate
matter, being the acquisition of real pro-
perty for public purpose, pursuant to
Section 2.1-344 (a) (3), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended.
A report of the City Manager with regard to Memorial Bridge
Rehabilitation.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
Qualification of Mr. John H.
Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste
of four years ending July 31, 1992.
Parrott as a member of the
Management Board for a term
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
(2)
C-6
C-7
C-8
Qualification of Mr. Kemper A. Dobbins as a member of the
Roanoke Arts Commission for a term of three years ending June
30, 1991.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
Qualification of Mr. Joe E. Brown as a member of
Services Citizen Board for a term ending May 31, 1990.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and fi le.
the Youth
Qualification of Dr. Wendell H. Butler and Mr. Percy T.
Keeling as Com~nissioners of the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority for terms of four years each, ending August
31, 1992.
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive and file.
Requ~t of ~. M~ser for an Executive S~sion to disc~s a co~ract und~
negotiation.
REGULAR AGENDA
Hearing of Citizens Upon Public Matters:
a. Request of lessees of the Municipal Parking Garage on
Church Avenue, S. W., to address Council with regard ~o
parking fees, security and the overall condition of the
parking garage. Referred to the Citer ~nageAto ad~A~s concer~
expr~sed b~! l~se~ of the Church Avenu~ p~king ~ara~e.
Petitions and Communications: · ~
A communication from the Roanoke City School Board recom-
mending appropriation of grant funds to various school
accounts· Adopted Ordinance No. 29281. (7-0)
I. A corr~unication from Mr. W. Alvin Hudson, City Sheriff,
recommending appropriation of $1,200.00 to provide the
local cash match necessary to receive a grant through'
the Virginia Department of Correctional Education to
initiate an Adult Basic Education program in the
Roanoke City Jail. Adopted Ordinance No. 29282 and R~olution
No. 29283. (7-0)
2. A report of the City Manager concurring in the above
recommendation. Received and filed.
Reports of Officers:
a. City Manager:
Briefings:
1. A report with regard to proposed solid waste regula-
r ions. Concu~Aed in the revort ~th the anderstanding that the Cit~!
.~a~ager ~ encouAage the C~mmonwe~h of Virginia to provide funding
Items Recommended for Action: ~for the proposed new regulator.
(3)
bt
11.
Director
2. A ,eport with regard to a request to amend Ordinance
No. 29197 to extend the expiration date of the Campbell
Avenue historic properties' real estate option
agreemen t. Adopted Ordinance No. 29284. (6-0, ~. Bower~ abstained
from voting. 1
3. A report wi th regard to acceptance of a Division of
Historic Landmarks Grant Award. Adopted Ordinance No. 29285
and Ordinance No. 29286. (6-0, Mr. Bowe~s ~bstained from voting. )
4. A report recommending an increase in the fee for fi ling
of civil actions in the Roanoke City Courts from $3.00
to $4.00, effective October 1, 1988; and appropriation
of $26,988.00 therefor. Adopted Ordinance No. 29287 and Ordinance
No. 29288. (7-0)
5. A report ~'ecommending authorization to accept funds, in
the amount of $66,070.00, from the Virginia Department
of Corrections to establish and administer a Family
Oriented Group Home Program by the Crisis Intervention
Center; and appropriation of funds therefor. Adopted
Ordinance No. 29289. (7-0)
6. A report recommending adopt ion of a measure to enact
Volume I, New Construction Code, 1987 edition, and
Volume II, Building Maintenance Code, 1987 edition,
adopted by the State Board of Housing and Corr~nuni ty
Development, effective March I, 1988. Ado~ted Ordinance
No. 29290. (7-0) '
7. A report with regard to proposed Preservation Strategy.
Concurred in recommendation. '
8. A report recommending appropriation of $8,101.00 in
Litter Control Grant funds for transfer to the Clean
Va i fey Counci I. Adopted Ordinance No. 29291. (7-0)
9. A report with regard to the Rental Rehabilitation
Program - Endorsement of Loan from the Virginia Housing
Development Authority to the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority. Adopted R~olution No. 29292. (7-0)
10. A report with regard to Change Order No. 2, WilIiamson~
Road Storm Drain (Lower Segment), Phase 2, Contract
II-A and West Sanitary Sewer. Adopted Ordinance No. 29293.
17-0)
A report with regard to a Sewage Pretreatment Agreement
with contributing jurisdictions. Adopted R~o~on No.
29294. (7-0)
of Finance:
1. A report recorrgnending authorization to execute an
agreement with Sovran Bank to provide paying agent and
registrar services for the $10,000,000 Public
Improvement Bonds, Series 1988· Adopted Ordinance No. 29295.
~
City Attorney:
A report transmitting a proposed Legislative Program
for the 1989 Session of the Generai Assembly. RefeA~ced to
Council acting as a committee of the whole for a~ion on September 26,
1988.
5.e.2. Coun~l wd~l hold a pubtic hea~ing on Monda~G September 26, 1988, at 2:00 p.m.,
on proposed Cit~ Cheer Amendme~.
Reports of Committees:
a. A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending
authorization to execute a permit aiIowing for encroachment
of structures into the alley at 625 and 631 Campbell
Avenue, S. W., said permit to include indemnification and
public liability insurance provisions protecting the City.
Council Member Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairman. Adopted
Ordinance No. 29296 on first reading. (7-0)
b. A report of the Water Resources Co,~nittee recommending
authorization to execute an APCO Indenture permitting uti-
lization of public utility easements in the Rancho Mexico
Business Park, Section 1, to provide underground electric
service. Council Member Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairman.
Adopted Ordinance No. 29297 on fd~t reading. (7-0)
c. A report of the Water Resources Committee recommending
authorization to execute an APCO Indenture permitting
installation of a meter pole for the transformer for the
new blower motor at the Sewage Treatment Plant. Council
Member Elizabeth T. Bowles, Chairman. Adopted Ordinance No.
29298 on fdAst reading. (7-0)
Unfinished Business: None.
Introduction and Consideration of Ordinances and Resolutions:
a. Ordinance No. 29269, on second reading, authorizing the
City Manager to execute State-Local Hospitalization Plan
Agreements with the State Department of Social Services and
certain hospitals and the City Health Department to provide
for in-patient, ambulatory surgery, and out-patient care
and treatment for certain indigent citizens at certain
rates· Adopted Ordinance No. 29269, {4-0, ~yor Taylor, ^~. Bowl~
and ~r. Garland abstained from voting.)
b. Ordinance No. 29271, on second reading, authorizing execu-
tion of a deed of release releasing the City's interest in
a public utility easement reserved by the City by Ordinance
No. 16584, adopted August 23, 1965, upon certain terms and
conditions· Adopted Ordinance No. 29271. {7-0~
c. A Resolution cancelling the meeting of the Council of the
City of Roanoke scheduled for Monday, October 3, 1988, at
2:00 p.m. Adopted R~olution No. 29299. (7-01
d. A Resolution cancelling the meeting of the Council of the
City of Roanoke scheduled for Monday, December 5, 1988, at
2:00 p.m. Adopted R~olut~on No. 29300. (7-0)
e. A Resolution designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate
Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Session of the
Virginia Municipal League and for any meetings of the Urban
Section of the League. Adopted R~o£u~on No. 292301. {7-0)
f. A Resolution designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate
Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Session of the
Congress of Cities. Adopted R~ol~on No. 29302. (7-0)
(5)
9. Motions and Miscellaneous Business:
Inquiries and/or comments by the Mayor and Members of City
Council.
b. Vacancies on various authorities, boards, commissions and
committees appointed by Council·
c. Expiration of the two year terms of Mr. WiIburn C. DibIing,
Jr., City Attorney; Mr. Joel M. SchIanger, Director of
Finance; Mr. William L. Brogan, Municipal Auditor; and Ms.
Mary F· Parker, City Clerk, on September 30, 1988. Reappoi~ed
for two ~_~ear terms, ending September 30, 1990.
10. Other Hearings of Citizens:
9.a. Mr. Musser inqu~ed of the City Manager as to the exte~ of ut~zation of
person~ comput~ b~! City Staff; he also inquired if the City has the
informa~on s~stems ~ea divorced from the main frame of computer operation.
10. ~. Wi~am Tanger, represe~ng F~iends of the Roanoke River, made a
prese~on with reg~d to the cost and yi~d of we~ in the Town of
Vinton as opposed to the City's cost to p~ipate in the Spring Hollow
Project.
~. Michael B. Smith, 4708 Edgelawn Avenue, N. W., adv~ed of the need fo~
a sto~ d~nage s~stem on Edgel~n Avenue to eliminate excessive ~er
run-off. The ma~er was refe~ed to the City Manager for investigation and
report to Council.
(6)
Office of theCityOer~
September 14, 1988
File #178-200-256
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. lterbert:
I am attaching copy qf Ordinance No. 29280, authorizing a Housing
Assistance Plan for the City's Community Development Block Grant
program; and authorizing submission of the Plan to the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development, which
Ordinance No. 29280 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
,,IBP: ra
Eno.
pc:
Mr. Herbert D. McBride, Executive Director, Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 2624 Salem Turnpike,
N. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Mr. Witburn C. Dibling, Jr.~ City Attorney
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Ronald lf. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning
Administrator
Mr. H. Daniel Pollock, Housing Development Coordinator
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Ms. Marie To Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator
Roa :, ~56 ',~, ,,c:/~l 9ml~i,~g 215 (},~cr-, AYen~,,e SW Roanc~he virg,n~a 24011 (703) 98%2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29280.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE authorizing a Housing Assistance Plan for the
City's Community DevelopmeNt Block Grant program; authorizing
the submission of this document to the United States Department
of Housing and Urban Development; and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. The Housing Assistance Plan for the period of October 1,
1988, through September 30, 1991, with the goals set forth there-
in, as submitted to Council by a report from the City Manager
dated September 12, 1988, is hereby approved as a part of the
City's Community Development Block Grant program.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to submit the
aforesaid Housing Assistance Plan to the United States Depart-
ment of Housing and Urban Development for its approval, along
with any related documents that may be necessary.
S. 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.
A6 Roanoke Times & World-News, Monday, Sept. 5, 1988 ~ F,. t.a~.,,~: t, ~.,,~.~t,~. ~,.~ u,..~.*.,
BEFORE THE
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
The Roanoke City Council will hold a public headng on
Monday, September 12, 1988, at 7:30 p.m., or as soon thereafter
as the matter may be heard, in the City Council Chambers, Fourth
Floor, Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Roanoke,
Virginia, in order to consider the proposed three year Housing
Assistance Plan (HAP) for submission to the United States De-
partment of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for review
and approval of the plan. All citizens and other persons may
appear at such hearings and be heard with respect to the
proposed HAP.
The City's HAP describes local housing conditions and sets
quantitative goals for providing housing to Iow and moderate
income residents. The thrse-year HAP will be in effect from
October 1, 1988, through September 30, 1991. As part of the
submission to HUD the City will include an annual housing
asslstance goal for the period of October 1, 1988, through
September 30, 1989. The City's HAP is a basis upon which HUD
apporves or disapproves assisted housing in the City and against
which HUD monitors the City's provision of assisted housing.
Additional information may be obtained from the City's Build-
ing Inspection Department, Room 170, (703) 981-2222, or the
City's Grants Compliance Office, Room 362, (703) 981-2141,
Municipa Bu ding 215 Church Avenue, S.W., Roanoke, Virginia.
A copy of this propsed HAP is on file for review by nterssted
persons in the Office of the City Clerk, Room, 456 Municipal
Building, Roanoke, Virginia.
Given under my hand this 1st day of September 1988.
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
rher's Fee $ ........... ... ....
TE OF VIRGINIA. (, Affidavit
OF ROANOKE .~ to wit:
..... .~o~a~-=.m~a~ .......... · ........ an officer of
',S-WORLD CORPORATION, which cor-
don is Publisher of the Roanoke Times &
[-News, a daily newspaper published in
~ke, in the State of Virginia, do certify that
-nnexed notice was published in said news-
' 12th a~A~e September, 1988
Witness, this ......... d.: ......... ............. ..........
Ro~rt F. Nay,. V/ce. Pres
Director of Advertising
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BEFORE THE
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
The Roanoke City Council will hold a public hearing on
Monday, September 12, 1988, at 7:30 p.m., or as soon there-
after as the matter may be heard, in the City Council
Chambers, Fourth Floor, Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue,
S.W., Roanoke, Virginia, in order to consider the proposed
three year Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) for submission to the
United States Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) for review and approval of the plan. Ail citizens and
other persons may appear at such hearing and be heard with
respect to the proposed HAP.
The City's RAP describes local housing conditions and
sets quantitative goals for providing housing to low and
moderate income residents. The three-year HAP will be in
effect from October 1, 1988, through September 30, 1991
As part of the submission to HUD the City will include ~n
annual housing assistance goal for the period of October 1,
1988, through September 30, 1989. The City's HAP is a basis
upon which HUD approves or disapproves assisted housing in
the City and against which HUD monitors the City's provision
of assisted housing.
Additional information may be obtained from the City's
Building Inspection Department, Room 170, (703) 981-2222, or
the City's Grants Compliance Office, Room 362, (703)981-2141,
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. ~., Roanoke, Vir-
ginia. A copy of this Proposed HAP is on file for review
by interested persons in the Office of the City Clerk, Room
456 Municipal Building, Roanoke, Virginia.
Given under my hand this 1st day of September, 1988.
Mary F. Parker,
Please publish in full once in the Roanoke
Times & World News, Morn;ng Edition Friday
September 2, 1988. '
City Clerk
Please send publisher's affidavit to:
Mary F. Parker, C~ty Clerk
Room 456, Munlcipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Please bill to:
Office of Grants Comoliance
Room 362, Municipal Building
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor, Noel C. Taylor, and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
SUBJECT: THREE YEAR HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN (HAP) -
October 1, 1988 to September 30, 1991
I. BACKGROUND
Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) is a required part of the
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) program which
describes local housing conditions and sets quantitative
goals for providing housing to low and moderate income
residents. (See attached HAP).
Description of the current housing stock is provided
in the HAP, including: (a) the number of substandard
units suitable for rehabilitation; (b) rental subsidy
needs of the elderly, large and small family households;
(c) number of owner and rental units to be assisted;
(d) number of households to be assisted; (e) number of
lower income households expected to reside in the area;
and (f) the role of HUD-assisted rental housing, renter
and owner programs, in meeting housing goals.
Goals for providing housing assistance for a one year
period and for a three-year period are included in the
HAP.
Entitlement communities, such as the City of Roanoke, must
prepare a HAP according to statutory requirements to receive
CDBG funds.
Roanoke's HAP is used by HUD to monitor the City's pro-
vision of assisted housing, and to allocate housing
assistance funds to the City.
2. Performance under the HAP is one factor considered by HUD
in their annual grantee performance review.
3. HUD approves or disapproves assisted housing applications
in the City based, in part, upon the HAP.
II. CURRENT SITUATION
Roanoke City must submit ~ new three year HAP to HUD by
September 30, 1988 to be effective from October 1, 1988
through September 30, 1991.
Page 2
Submission will include specified annual goals which are:
1) realistic based on all assisted housing resources
expected to be available,
2) established considering feasible project size, and
3) constitute reasonable progress towards meeting the three
year goals.
HUD will review the HAP and notify the City within 3_90 days
of its official action to approve or disapprove the plan.
III. ISSUES
A. Compliance with Federal regulations governing the CDBG
program.
B. Applications for assisted housing in the City.
C. Timing of submission.
D. Goal of eliminating substandard housing in the City.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Approve the three year HAP for October 1, 1988 through
September 30, 1991 and the annual goal for October 1, 1988
through September 30, 1989 and authorize the City Manager to
submit these documents to HUD for their approval.
Compliance with federal regulations governing the CDBG
program, regarding the development of a three year HAP
and an annual goal, would be achieved.
Applications for assisted housing in the City would be
reviewed based on the HAP which allows the City to plan
for the housing needs of its lower income citizens and
to make reasonable progress towards meeting those needs.
e
Timing of submission to HUD is critical since the City's
current HAP expires on September 30, 1988 and a new plan
is required no later than October 31, 1988.
Goal of eliminating substandard housing in the City over
the next ten years would be assisted by the implementa-
tion of the HAP and through funding sources which require
the HAP.
Do not approve the three year HAP for October 1, 1988
through September 30, 1991 nor the annual goal for October
1, 1988 through September 30, 1989.
Page 3
Compliance with federal regulations regarding the
development of the HAP and annual goal would not be
achieved and the City would be in violation of the certi-
fications it made to HUD to receive FY 1988-89 CDBG en-
titlement funds.
Applications for assisted housing in the City may be
reviewed unfavorably because there is no current HAP on
which to establish the need or base funding decisions.
Timing of submission to HUD would be delayed.
Goal of eliminating substandard housing in the City over
the next ten years would be hampered without a HAP
because the resources to achieve this goal may be denied.
IV. RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that City Council concur with Alternative ~,
to adopt the three year Housing Assistance Plan for October 1,
1988 through September 30, 1991 as well as the annual goal for
October 1, 1988 through September 30, 1989, and authorize the
City Manager to submit these documents to the Department of
Housing and Urban Development for their approval.
Respect f~l,y su~bmitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:vlp
CC:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Building Commissioner
Chief of Community Planning
Grants Monitoring Administrator
Executive Director, Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM
ENTITLEMENT PROGRAM
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN
PROM: October l, 1988 TO: September 30, 1991 HUDAPPROVAL
September 29, 198q ~[ Original [] Revision []Amendment (SignarureofAurhorizedOfficial) (Dere)
PART I - HOUSING ASSISTANCE NEEDS
TABLE - HOUSING STOCK CONDITIONS
STANDARD UNITS SUBSTANDARD UNITS SUBSTANDARD UNITS SUITABLE FOR REHAB
TENURE
OCCUPIED UNITS
Owner 24~ 957 280 570 92 540 486 75
Renter 17 ~ 917 625 900 375 765 728 285
TABLE - RENTAL SUBSIDY NEEDS OF LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
Form Approved
OMB ,No, 2506-00S3
NAME OF COMMUNITY
City of Roanoke, Virginia
ELDERLY
N
, Low Income 366
Percent 25
Other Lower Income 178
ETR 20
To be Displaced
Total
Percent
12
576
2O
SMALL FAMILY
891
% 60 %
834
135
28
1.888
PART II - THREE YEAR GOAL
LARGEFAMILY TOTAL
J K
231 1,488
15 % loo%
163 1,175
35 190
5 45
434 2.898
15 % loo%
TABLE I - UNITS TO BE ASSISTED
REHABILITATION NEW CONVERSION 10
OF HOME
SUBSTANDARD UNITS CONSTRUCTION STANDARD UNITS IMPROVEMENTS
L M N O
15 Owner 1,021 1,355 160 56 0 565
16 Renter 334 154 60 40 320
(UNITS EXPECTED TO ASSIST LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS)
17 Owner 964 1,228 123 36 0 565
18 Renter 264 134 55 5 310
TABLE II - LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS TO RECEIVE RENTAL SUBSIDIES
ELDERLY SMALL FAMILY LARGE FAMILY TOTAL
P Q R S
19 J Households to be Assisted 75 166 39 280
20 i Percent ~7 % 59 % 14 % 100%
TABLE Ill - GOALS FOR HUD RESOURCES: SUBJECT TO LOCAL REVIEW AND COMMENT
ELDERLY SMALL FAMILY LARGE FAMILY TOTAL
T U V W
21 I Households to be Assisted 75 166 39 280
HOUSING TYPE PREFERENCE/Max/mum Number of Units that will be Accepted}
22 I NEW REHAB EXISTING
150 (Sec. 202)I j 124 I [ 106
23i [] Check this box if the al)pi/cant w/shes to review State Housing Agency proposals within its jut/sd/ct/on.
PART Ill - GENERAL LOCATIONS
(24 CFR 570.306)
XXX
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN (HAP)
Work Sheets
PART II, TABLE II
RENTAL SUBSIDIES TO LOWER INCOME HOUSEHOLDS
HOUSING TYPE
TOTAL SMALL LARGE
UNITS ELDEP~LY FAMILY FAMILY NEW I~-gAB EXISTING
Section 8/Mod Rehab 50
Section 8 Existing 85
Project Self-Sufficiency 21
Section 202 Elderly 50
Rental Rehab 74
8 38 4
9 62 14
0 20 1
50 0 0
8 46 20
280 75 27% 166 59% 39
50
85
21
50
74
14% 50 124 106
PART IV, SECTION III
LOWER INCOME OWNER BENEFITS - HUD-ASSISTED (FIRST YEAR)
pROGRAM
ANNUAL LOWER INCOME
UNITS UNITS SMALL LARGE
TOTAL ASSISTED ELDERLY FAMILY FAMILY
CDBG Assisted Rehab
Critical Home Repair
Private Rehab & Subsidy
Operation Paintbrush
Home Purchase Assistance
36 36 14 18 4
26 17 5 9 3
20 20 14 5 1
5 3 _q0 --2 __1
87 76 33 34 9
CDBG Assisted New Construction
Vacant Lot Homesteading
Other HUD Assisted Rehab
Section 312 Rehab
Non HUD Assisted Rehab
VHDA Home Loans
TAP Weatherization
Non HUD Assisted Purchase/Rehab
or Construction
Single Family Rehab Loans (VA.
Dept. of Housing & Community
Development - DHCD)
Single and Multi-Family
Production Program (DHCD)
10 5 0 3 2
5 5 1 3 1
5 5 1 3 1
5 3 0 2
120 120 70 35
125 123 70 37
7 7 1 4
i i _q _ii
8 8 1 5
1
15
16
2
TOTAL OF OWNER PROGRAM 235 217 105 82 30
> u) ~
§ § § § o
§ o ~
o § ~
HOUSING ASSISTANCE PLAN
Narrative
Definition - Substandard Units
In the City of Roanoke substandard housing units are defined as those
that are unsafe or unhealthy for occupancy.
Units meeting this description either have been condemned or are
condemnable. The 1,933 units that are estimated to be substandard
within the context of the Housing Assistance Plan (HAP) include those
housing units that fit this definition.
This determining standard for the HAP goes beyond the basic health
and safety standards which are applied for condemnation of a unit.
Therefore, the HAP estimate is higher than other local estimates of
condemnable housing units or those approaching that condition. Yet,
this number is fewer than that for units that would not meet Section
8 Housing Quality Standards.
Definition - Substandard Units Suitable for Rehab
The City maintains a commitment to ensuring that safe, decent and
sanitary housing is available to all its citizens and considers
rehabilitation of existing structures a priority. As policy, the
City reserves to the property owner every reasonable prerogative to
preserve and/or renovate his/her property.
Within the framework of the HAP, Substandard Units Suitable for Rehab
are those that:
1) Technically can be repaired, i.e. without extreme
deterioration of structural elements or foundation;
2)
Costs of materials and labor (considering the possibility
of the owner's labor) are not likely to far exceed the
unit's post-rehab value; and
3) Otherwise are unlikely to be repaired due to special
programs, special interest by some party, etc.
It is estimated that:
1)
Of the 570 owner-occupied substandard units, 95% meet
the criteria, with 90% of these units occupied by lower
income owners;
2) Of the 92 vacant units that are in the "Owner" category,
82% meet the criteria;
3)
Of the 900 substandard "Rental-Occupied" units, 85%
meet the criteria, with 95% of these units occupied by
lower-income tenants; and
4) Of the 375 vacant rental units, 75% meet the criteria.
Lower Income Households
Expected To Reside
Elderly - 20
Planned Employment - 50 Small Family
15 Large Family
Current Employment - 85 Small Family
20
TOTAL - Expected To Reside
20
5O
15
85
20
190
Impact of Conversions
Based on previous experience with conversion of rental property to
condominium or cooperative ownership in the City, there is not
expected to be any appreciable impact in this area over the three-
year term of the HAP.
Lower-Income Minority Households
In Substandard Housing
Since the non-black minority population of Roanoke is approximately
1%, figures for that segment are not treated separately here.
Homeowner Households
Rental Households
TOTAL Minority Households in Substandard Housing
280
405
685
Assuming the percentage of minority low-income households needing
rental assistance is 1 and 1/2 times the percentage of minorities in
the population of Roanoke (22%), and that this proportion holds
uniformly by household type, the following is estimated:
Elderly 151
Small Family 612
Large Family 81
TOTAL Needing Rental Assistance
844
The City of Roanoke proposes to widen a portion of the Roanoke River
as part of its flood reduction plan. Plans for this project include
purchase and removal of 35-40 units of a 92 unit trailer park by
November, 1989. In addition, the First Street/Gainsboro Road and the
Franklin Road Widening projects combined may involve displacement of
approximately five households. The number of minority households
expected to be displaced is estimated as follows:
Elderly 4
Small Family 6
Large Family 2
TOTAL To Be Displaced
12
Special Housing Needs
Handicapped Persons
According to the 1987 edition of the Virginia Statistical Abstract
there are 2,280 handicapped persons in Roanoke, including:
ADULTS CHILDREN
Aged 672
Blind 26 2
Disabled 1,430 150
TOTAL 2,128 152
Estimates suggest the following breakdown:
Elderly 570
Small Family 1,368
Large Family 342
TOTAL 2,280
Single Individuals
Data from the Fifth District Planning Commission indicates that, for
all income levels, there are 5,667 female headed households in the
City of Roanoke. Of this number, 1,758 are single parents who
receive Aid to Dependent Children (ADC). It is estimated that 23% of
these parents are under the age of 25.
The Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) reports more
than 800 low income applicants on the waiting list for the Section 8
Existing Housing Program. (This list includes those applicants who
have been determined eligible and those whose eligibility
determination is pending). RRHA staff estimate that 75% of these
applicants are recipients of ADC.
Such information indicates a significant need for affordable housing
for this population of Roanoke City residents, very low income,
single parents (many under age 25).
NARRATIVE
Recognizing that the age of housing in the City implies that there
will be an increasing need for rehabilitation in future years, the
City of Roanoke is committed to an ongoing effort to encourage
maintenance of the existing housing stock. The City will take the
following actions to assist in the implementation of its Three Year
Goal and to meet its Annual Goal for housing assistance:
A)
Implement a variety of public programs to supplement the
supply of affordable housing in the private market,
especially for low and moderate income persons, and to
encourage rehab of existing units. Most programs will
consist of income-eligible loans and grants aimed
primarily at housing rehabilitation and will attempt to
maximize public dollars in leveraging private equity and
private loans.
B)
Work with resources such as the Virginia Housing Develop-
ment Authority and the Virginia Department of Housing and
Community Development to seek out and develop non-CDBG,
and even non-HUD, programs to contribute to neighborhood
revitalization, housing rehabilitation and affordable
housing efforts.
c)
Contract with the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority to administer most of the programs for the
rehabilitation and revitalization of residential areas in
the City. And to have RRHA provide technical assistance
and counseling to citizens with housing concerns including:
technical advice on repair, remodeling or rehabilitation
and guidance on possible financial arrangements for purchase
and/or rehabilitation of housing.
D)
RRHA will conduct promotional activities to encourage
property owners to make units available for rehabilitation
and/or existing housing programs.
E)
Two building inspectors in the City's Building Inspection
Department will work on substandard housing issues such as
identification, inspection, outreach and problem solving.
F)
Provide encouragement to property owners to maintain
property to acceptable levels through enforcement of
property maintenance codes and financial assistance,
ever applicable and available.
when-
G) Encourage the development of housing in the downtown area,
as recommended by the Downtown Housing Task Force.
H)
Staff of the Office of Community Planning will continue
process to develop a detailed plan for each neighborhood,
in which housing will be a major component.
I) Neighborhood Partnership will provide technical assis-
tance to neighborhood organizations undertaking housing
rehabilitation and infill development.
J)
Utilize the City's Vacant House Catalog and related
informational brochures to publicize and market housing
programs offered by the City and RRHA.
Substandard housing and lack of adequate maintenance are problems
generally concentrated within the City's central neighborhoods. This
is particularly true for the rental housing stock and homes owned by
elderly residents living on fixed incomes. The majority of the
City's housing assistance programs are designed to benefit low and
moderate income persons in these areas. (See the attached map).
6
Displacement
The City of Roanoke proposes to widen a portion of the Roanoke River
as part of its flood reduction plan. Plans for this project include
purchase and removal of 35-40 units of a 92 unit trailer park by
November, 1989. In addition, the First Street/Gainsboro Road and the
Franklin Road Widening projects combined may involve displacement of
approximately five households. Otherwise, the City has no definite
plans to demolish any standard residential units during the period
covered by this HAP as a result of direct Federal, State or local
actions.
To minimize the displacement of persons from their homes and
neighborhoods, the City will take the following steps:
A) Encourage housing rehabilitation, rather than
demolition.
B) Promote better maintenance of public and private
property.
C) Enforce building, housing and zoning codes.
D)
Where property acquisition is necessary, all reason-
able measures will be followed to acquire unoccupied
property or sparsely occupied property.
These measures will be used to minimize displacement of persons of
low and moderate income.
In an effort to preserve or expand the availability of housing for
low income persons the City has targeted a number of rehabilitation
and home improvement programs for its Rehabilitation and Conservation
districts, only. (A significant number of low income households are
concentrated in these inner-city districts). A majority of these
programs, such as Operation Paintbrush, are administered as grants.
Efforts to preserve or expand housing for moderate income persons
consist of those programs which are offered city-wide which generally
involve income eligible loans and grants aimed primarily at housing
rehabilitation.
Housing Assistance Plan Map
Roanoke, Virginia 1988 1991
Section 8 Rental Rehabilitation
Section 8/Moderate Rehabilitation - City-wide
Section 8 Existing - City-wide
Section 202 New Construction Elderly - City-wide
Office of Grants Compliance
o
o
o
o o
0 ~
'1
0
4J
0
4J
MINUTES CONSIDERED AT THIS COUNCIL MEETING
MAY BE REVIEWED ON LINE IN THE "OFFICIAL MINUTES" FOLDER,
OR AT THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
O~ce of the ,'~:~or
September 8, 1988
The Honorable Vice-Mayor and
Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
I wish to request an Executive Session to discuss personnel
matters relating to vacancies on various authorities, boards,
commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant to
Section 2.1-344 (a) (1), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
Sincerely,
Mayor
NCT: se
Room 452 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. RoanoRe, Virginia 24~11 (703) 981-2444
Office of the Council
September 8, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
I wish to request an Executive Session to discuss a real estate
matter regarding acquisition of real property for public purpose,
pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (3), Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended.
~ames 0cereiy'
. Trout
JOT:se
Room 456 Municipal Building 2t 5 C~urch Avenue, SW. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541
C~ce o~ nhe City Cle~
September 14, 1988
File #102
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear ~r. Herbert:
Your report with regard to the rehabilitation of Memorial J3ridge,
was before the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the report was
,eceived and filed.
Sincere ly, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Mr.
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Roc~: ¢56 ~,~ ,c,.,]lQ ~i~.; ,~, ~!~ ¢!,~chA,,,en~e ,:w £~c,~,:o~,e wrq~ma24011 (703) 981-2541
moanome, v~r~zn~a~
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Memorial Bridge Rehabilitation,
Informational Report
I. Backsround:
A. Memorial Brid~e was dedicated in 1926 as a memorial to war
veterans of World War I and the Spanish-American War.
Annual Brid~e Inspection by Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern,
Inc. (HSMM) in 1987 rated the bridge as fair. HSMM indicated
that the concrete deck should be evaluated for possible reha-
bilitation.
Councilman Bowers on behalf of various citizen groups
requested staff to review the possibility of
rehabilitating/renovating the bridge to an appearance in
keeping with a veteran's memorial.
II. Current Situation:
A. City staff reviewed the bridge and estimated the cost of
rehabilitating/renovating at $843~000.00.
B. Citizen Group Leaders met with City staff on July 29, 1988 to
discuss options available to the City, namely:
Superstructure improvements could be initiated in the
next year to improve the overall appearance. This is
tempered with the reality that these improvements could
be damaged when substructure and bridge deck improve-
ments commence at another date.
Improve entire brid~e under one contract when funds
become available through prioritization and future bond
sales.
The consensus of the citizen leaders and City staff was that
the most prudent approach was to improve the entire bridge
under one contract. However, the City would have to provide
funding within three to five years.
Page 2
WRH/JAP/mm
cc:
Co
Recent bond sales have included sufficient funds to rehabili-
tate one bridge per year. With the current bond schedule and
bridge priorities, staff estimates that a complete rehabili-
tation of the Memorial Bridge could occur within three (3)
years.
Staff emphasizes that the Memorial Bridge is structurally
sound. However, the bridge is 60 years old and must be reha-
bilitated to avoid rapid deterioration.
III. Recommendation is that City Council receive and file this report.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Director of Finance
City Attorney
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Citizen Group Leaders
0-2
Oath or Affirmation of Office
8ta~ o~ Vi~'ginia, C, it~l o~ Roanoke, to
I, John H. Parrott _, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that
I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that
I will talthfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as
Member of the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste Management Board
~or a term of four years, ending July 31, 1992.
according to the best of my ability. So help me God. x~ /~~
Subscribed and sworu to before me, this ~ ~f~/L)/~), ~+~day°f ~
, Deputy Clerk
Office of Fne City Qe~
July 27, 1988
File #144-15
Mr. John H. Parrott
P. O. Box 12312
Roanoke, Virginia
24024
Dear Mr. Parrott:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, July 25, 1988, you were reelected as a representative
of the City of Roanoke on the Roanoke Valley Regional Solid Waste
Management ~oard for a term of four years~ ending July 31, 1992.
Enclosed you will find a certificate of your reelection and an
Oath or Affirmation of Office which may be administered by the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, located on the
third floor of the Roanoke City Courts Facility, 315 Church
Avenue, S. W.
Please return one copy of the Oath of Office to Room 456 in the
Municipal Building prior to serving in the capacity to which you
were reelected.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enc.
pc: Mr.
Mr.
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 O~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 240tl (703) 98t-2541
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper of the records thereof~
do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council held on
the 25th day of July, 1988, JOHN H. PARROTT was reelected as a
representative of the City of Roanoke on the Roanoke Valley
Regional Solid Waste Management Board for a term of four years,
ending July 31, 1992.
Given under my hand and the Seal of the
27th day of July, 1958.
City of Roanoke this
City Clerk
September 16, 1988
File ~15-230
Mr. Timothy L. Jamieson, Chairman
Roanoke Arts Commission
6857 Sugar Rum Ridge Road, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Dear Mr. Jamieson:
This is to advise you that Mr. Kemper A. Dobbins has qualified as
a member of the Roanoke Arts Comraission for a term of three
years, ending June 30~ 1991.
,~incerelv, .
Mary F. Parker, C~4C
City Clerk
3*~'p: ra
pc: Ms. Joyce A. Sink, Secretary, Roanoke Arts Commissioa
Room 456 Mumopal BuHcJIn9 245 Church Avenue S W Roanoke V~rg~ma 24011 (703 981 2541
0-2
ep~int June
Oath or Affirmation of Office
~at~ o~ Virginia, Oi~l o~ I~oanoke, to
I, K~:~:~:ii, er A. r. ~,~lns . do solemnly swear (or ~) ~at
I w~l sup~rt the Constitution of the Unit~ S~tes, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, snd that
I w]l faithfully and impa~ially discharge and ~rform all the duties incumbent
th~ ~loanok~ Arts Commission for a tarm of three years
30, 1991 ·
according to the best of my ability. So help me God.
Subscribed and sworn to before ,ne, this
Office of the City Clerk
June 29, 1988
File #79-15
Mr. Kemper A. Dobbins
825 Park Lane, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24015
Dear Mr. Dobbins:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
Monday, June 20, 1988, you were reelected as a member of the
Roanoke Arts Corr~nission for a term of three years ending June 30,
1991.
Enclosed you will find a certificate of your reelection and an
Oath or Affirmation of Office which may be administered by the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, located on the
third floor of the Roanoke City Courts Facility, 315 Church
Avenue, S. W.
Please return one copy of the Oath of Office to Room 456 in the
Municipal Building prior to serving in the capacity to which you
were reelected.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Eno.
pc: Mr. Timothy L. Jamieson,
6857 Sugar Rum Ridge, S.
Chairman, Roanoke Arts Co~ission,
W., Roanoke, Virginia 24018
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 C~urch Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2541
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
C I TY OF ROANOKE )
I, Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Clerk of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper of the records thereof,
do hereby certify that at a regular meeting of Council held on
the 20th day of June, 1988, KEMPER A. DOBBINS was reelected as
a Member of the Roanoke Arts Cor~ission for a term of three
years, ending June 30, 1991.
Given under my hand and
29th day of June, 1988.
the seal of the City of Roanoke this
City Clerk
September 16, 1988
File #15-304
Ms. Carol B. ~arcbal, Chai,man
Youth Services Citizen Board
2320 Mount Vernon Road, S. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24015
Dear Ms. Marchal:
This is to advise you that Mr.
member of the Youth Services
31, 1990.
Joe E. Brown has qualified as a
Citizen Board for a term ending May
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mrs. ~Marion V. Crenshaw, Youth Coordinator
Room 456 Mun~cipol Bu~lc~mg 2 ~ 5 Church Ave,~LJe S W Roanoke Virginia 24011 (703) 981 2541
Oath or Affir~afiqn ,of Office
Stat~ o] Virginia. Oitg o] Roanoke, to.wit:
I, , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that
wilt support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that
will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me aL
according to the best of my ability. So help me God.
Subscribed and swor,, to before me, this
Office of Fne City Clerk
August 24, 1985
File #15-304
?J;'. Joe E. rJrown
1744 20th St?'eet, N. E.
Roanoke, Virginia 24012
At a ~'eguIar meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, August 22, 1988, you were elected as a membei, of the
Youth Services Citizen Board fot' a tez'm ending May 31, 1990.
Enclosed you will find a eel'tificate of you;. election and an Oath
or' Affirmation of Office which may be administered by the Clerk
of the Circuit Cou?t of the City of Roanoke, located on the thii'd
floo~~ of the Roanoke City Coup, ts Facility, 315 Church Avenue,
Please return one copy of the Oath of Office to Room 456 in the
~iunicipaI Building p'~'io,' to serving in the capacity to which you
were elected.
Sincerely, ~
~/la;,y F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:
pc:
~Js. Carol 3. Marchal, Chai;~,man, Youth Services Citizen Boa~,.d,
2320 ,~4ount Ve'~.non Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015
~,{s. Mai'ion V. Crenshaw, Youth Plannei'
Roo~n456 MunlcipalBulldlng 215 Church A',~ue, S.W.l:kx~noke. Vtrg~nia24011 (70,3) 981-2541
COMMONWEALTH OF
CITY OF ROANOKE
VIRGINIA
)
) To-wi t:
)
I, Ma~'y F. Parker, City Clerk, and as such City Cle~'k of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper, of the ~'ecoi'ds thereof,
do hereby ce~'tify that at a ~'egu~a~. meeting of Council ~teld on
the 22nd day of August, I988, JOE ~. BROWN was elected as a
member of the Youth SeJ'vices Citizen Boa~.d fo~' a term ending
May 31, 1990.
Given under' my hand and the Seal of the City of Roanoke this
24th day of August, 1988.
~ity Clerk
September 16, 1988
File #15-178
Dr. Wendell H. ~utler, Chairman
aoanoke aedevelopment and
Housing Authority
2118 4ndrews Road,
Roaaoke, Virginia 24017
Dear Dr. Butler:
This is to advise you that Mr. Percy T. Keeling has qualified as
a Corr~issioner of the Roanbke ~edevelopment and tiousing Authority
for a term of four years, ending August 31, 1992.
Sincerely~
~ary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc:
Mr. Herbert D. McBride, E.~ecutive Oirector, Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 2624 Sale~ Turnpike,
N. W., Roanoke~ Virginia 24017
Roocn 456 Mumc~pal BuHdin9 21 ~ Church Avenue S W Roanoke Virgln,a 24011 (703) 981 254~
0,-2
O th or A{fi m hon o{
State o] Virolnia, City o] Roanoke, to .*.o/t:
· do solemnly swear (or affirm) that
I wilt support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that
I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me a&..
according to the best of my ability. So help me God.
Subscribed and sworn to before me, this.'~''~ --day
Office of the City Clerk
August 24, 1988
File ~15-17,~
Dr. Wendell H. r~utIer
2118 Andrews Road, N. W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Dear D?'. But
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, August 22, 1988, you wer'e ;'eeIected as a Commissioner
of the Roanoke Redevelopment & ~ouslng Authoi.ity for a temn of
fou;' years, ending August 31, 1992.
Enclosed you will find a ce;,'tificate of your ;'eelection and an
Oath or Affirmation of Office which may be administered by the
Clerk of the Circuit Court of the City of Roanoke, located on the
thi;"d floor of the Roanoke City Coup*ts Facility, 315 Chu~ch
Avenue, S. W.
Please return one copy of the Oath of Office to Room 456 in the
Municipal Building prior to semving in the capacity to whic~ you
were reelected.
SincereIy,~ ~ ~7
Mary F. Pai'kei., C,~fC
City CIe~'k
MFP: ~'a
~nc,
[; ,t!r, ~ferbe;,t
Redeve i opmen t
D. ,~1cD','ide, ~2cecutive Di~'ector, Roanoke
,~ [lousing Autho~.ity, 2624 ~Salem Tu~'npike,
~oanoke, Vir~linia 24017
Room456 MunlclpolBulldlng 21501urchAv~flue, S.W. Roonoke, Vlrglnla24011 (703)981-2541
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wi t:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Ma~.y F. Pa~'ke~', City Clerk, and as such City Cle~.k of the
Council of the City of Roanoke and keeper, of the recoi'ds the,,eof,
do hereby ce~'tify that at a *'eguIa~' meeting of Council held on
the 22nd day of August, 1988, WENDELL R. BUTLER was :'eelected as
a Commissione?. of the Roanoke Redevelopment
for. a te~.m of fouP years, ending August 31,
Given undel, my hand and the Seal of the
24t~ day of August, 1988.
and Housing Authol'ity
1992.
City of Roanoke this
,~lty Clerk
0-2
Oath or Affirmation of OfflCe
State o] Virginia, ~it~l o[ Roanoke, to
I, ~erc,v T. Keelinm
, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that
I will support the Constitution of the United States, and the Constitution of the State of Virginia, and that
I will faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all the duties incumbent upon me as_..
a ~O,~m'~.~" '
~oner of the r, oanoke ~edevelop~,~en~ a~d Ho,~$in~ .~utnor~ty
for ~ ~e,'?, o~ ,~u, ~'af, r5
according to the best of my ability. So help me God.~z~
Subscribed and sworn to before me, this__ ---day of
Office of~heCityClerk
August 24, 1988
File #15-178
Mr. Percy T. ~4eeIing
1519 Syracuse Avenue,
Roanoke, Virginia 24017
Dea;, ~d~.. Keeling:
4t a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, August 22, 1988, you were reelected as a Corr~oissioner
of the Roanoke Redevelopment & Housing Authority for a teI'm of
four years, ending August 31, 1992.
Enclosed you will find a certificate of you'd' reelection and an
Oath o~. Affirmation of Office which ,nay be administered by the
Clerk of the Circuit CouPt of the City of Roanoke, located on tile
third floor of the Roanoke City Courts Facility, 315 Church
Avenue, S. W.
Please return one copy of the Oath of Office to Room 456 in the
,~unicipaI Building prior to serving in the capacity to which you
were reelected.
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP ~ a
Mr. WeadelI H. 8utler, Chairman, Roanoke Redevelopment
~ousing Authority, 2118 Andrews Road, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia 24017
.~'. Herbei't D. McBride, E.~ecutive Director., Roanoke
Redevelopment & Housing Autho~'ity, 2624 Salem Turnpike,
Roanoke, Virginia 24017
R°°m456 Munici~:~alBuildlng 2150~urchAve~ue, S.W. goanake, Vircj~nlo24011 (703)981-2541
COMMONWEALTIf OF VIRGINIA )
) To-wit:
CITY OF ROANOKE )
I, Ma~'y F. Pa~'ke~', City Clerk,
Councit of the City of Roanoke and
do hereby ce~'tify that at a regular meeting of Councit ~etci on
the 22nd day of August, 1988, PERCY T. KEELING was ;'eelected as a
Commissione~. of the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authot'ity
for a term of fou~' yea~'s, ending August 31, 1992.
Given under' my hand and the Seat of the City of Roanoke t~is
24th day of August, 1988.
and as such City Clev~ of the
keeper of the reco~.ds thei.eof,
City Clet.k
Office of the Council
September 12, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
I wish to request an Executive Session for the purpose of
discussing terms and conditions of a contract in negotiation,
pursuant to Section 2.1-344 (a) (7), Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended.
//~ncere ty~ '
Council Member
HEM:MFP:ra
Roa'n 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virglnio 2401 '/ (703) 981-2541
C)ffice of ff',e Cir,, Clerk
September 14, 1988
Fi~e #255
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke° Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, September 12, 1988, the lessees of the ~nicipal
Parking Garage on Church Avenue, S. W., addressed Council with
regard to parking fees, security and the overaii condition of the
parking garage.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, you were
requested to address the abovestated concerns.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, C~
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Ms. Linda Milton,
24012
2924 Dell Avenue, N. E., Roanoke,
Vir3inza
Room 456 Municip(~l Buildir~j 215 C~urch Avenue 5W Rc~noke 'V~rg~nia 24011 (703) 981-254'~
September 7, 1988
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor
Members of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
RE: Roanoke Municipal Parking Garage/Church Avenue
Dear Mayor Taylor and Members of the Roanoke City Council:
This letter is to request that the above-referenced subject
be placed on the agenda for the September 12, 1988, City Council
meeting scheduled for 7:30 p.m.
Thank you.
Edith Bradley
For Lessees - Roanoke Municipal Parking Garage/Church Avenue
August, 1988
We the undersigned want to protest the following as related
to the Roanoke Municipal Parking Garage on Church Street:
(1). Increase in rates for parking
(2). Elevators that are not in good working order
(3). Filthy condition of the elevators, waiting area, stair
wells, and parking area
(4). Lack of adequate security
~A}{ES/ADDRESSES
We the undersigned want
to the Roanoke Municipal
(1).
(2).
(3).
(4). Lack of
August, 1988
to protest the following as related
Parking Garage on Church Street:
Increase in rates for parking
Elevators that are not in good working order
Filthy condition of the elevators, waiting area, stair
wells, and parking area
adequate security
~AHES/ADDRESSES
We the
to the
August, 1988
undersigned want to protest the following as related
Roanoke Municipal Parking Garage on Church Street:
(1). Increase in rates for parking
(2). Elevators that are not in good working order
(3). Filthy condition of the elevators, waiting area, stair
wells, and parking area
(4). Lack of adequate security
~u'.{I~S/AI)DRESSES
Au§ust, 19~
We the undersigned want to protest the following as related
to the Roanoke Municipal Parking Garage on Church Street:
(1). Increase in rates for parking
(2). Elevators that are not in good working order
(3). Filthy conditiDn of the elevators, waitin§ area, stair
wellsj %nd parking area '
(4). Lack of adequate security
NAHES/ADDRESSES
August, 1988
We the undersigned want to protest the following as related
to the Roanoke Municipal Parking Garage on Church Street:
(1). Increase in rates for parking
(2). Elevators that are not in good working order
(3). Filthy condition of the elevators, waiting area,
wells, and parking area
(4). Lack of adequate security
stair
~AMES/ADDRESSES
Office of theCi~Manager
September 12, 1988
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Enclosed please find two items that relate to your agenda for Monday
evening, September 12, 1988.
(1)
There is an informational letter which relates to item
3-a. on your agenda. I wanted you to understand how we
have been trying to work with the parking patrons on
issues related to the Church Avenue garage.
(2)
I have also enclosed the report that goes along with the
subject listed as 5-a.(7). As we were waiting for some
important information from the State Division of Historic
Landmarks to include in this report, it was not ready to
send out with the City Clerk's regular package.
Sincerely,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:EBRJr:mp
Enclosures
cc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. $chlanger, Director of Finance
bt: Mrs. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Room 364. Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue, S.W. Roonoke, Virglnio 24011 (703)981-2333
Office of the Oty Manager
September 9, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
You have received a lengthy petition for your September 12, lg88
Council meeting protesting the following items at our Church Avenue
parking garage.
1. Increased parking rates,
Elevator malfunctions,
3. Cleanliness, and
4. Security
We have already received one petition, two letters and several
phone calls, also initiated back in August, protesting the above items
as well as bad air circulation in the garage.
APCOA, Inc. manages and operates the garage for the City. The
other petition and letters have been reviewed with APCOA who is
responding to the parking patrons and who is providing Mr. Kiser with a
listing of reco~mnendations.
By way of background, the parking rate increase announcement of
$40.00/month occurred during some record hot days. Both of these
occurrences prompted these protests and complaints, many of which have
merit. The hot weather causes the elevator controls to stick and
thereby makes the elevators malfunction (generally by going to all or
more floors than the floor desired). Also, about the same time, vandals
broke into the elevator control tower on the First Street end of the
garage and discharged a fire extinguisher into the control mechanism and
generators. This not only created a mess, but resulted in some down
time until the elevators could be repaired.
I will refer the petition to our parking management company, APCOA,
to provide a suitable response after consulting with Mr. Kiser. For
your information, the following work has been accomplished, attempted or
is being reviewed:
Air Circulation - Garage elevator lobby doors were propped
open but subsequently closed due to fire code considerations.
Rocrn 304 Mumapal Bu,lClincj 215 Churcl~ Avenue S W Roanoke V~rgln~a 2401 t (703~ 984 2333
Honorable
September
Page 2
Mayor and City Council
9, 1988
Security - Security guard check-in clocks repaired and guard
asked to be more visible during peak traffic hours. Please
remember that this is a roving security guard. Also,
previously ordered burned out light tube replacements have
been received and improved lighting has been restored.
Cleanliness - Trash cans have been replaced, again by cans
ordered previously. Also cleanliness has been re-emphasized
with APCOA. APCOA has suggested and we are reviewing a
repainting program for portions of the garage.
Increased parkin~ rates - Discussions with many people have
centered around our need to continue to attempt to make this
facility a self sustaining facility. The Administration will
continue to reco~nend rate increases in subsequent years to
help meet this self sustaining policy.
This is for Council's information.
Sincerely,
~. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:KBK:afm
cc: Mr. Charles Munn, APCOA
Mr. Bobby Layman, APCOA
bc: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
Office of ~e City Cle~
September 14, 1988
File #60-467
qr. Joel ~4. Schlange,
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear ~r. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29281, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1988-89 General and Grant Funds
Appropriations, providing for appropriation of grant funds to
various school accounts, which Ordinance No. 29281 was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
~ary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. James M. Turner, Jr., Chairman, Roanoke City School
Board, Po O. Box 1020, Salem, Virginia 24153
Dr. Frank P. Tota, Superintendent of Schools, P. 0. Box 13145,
Roanoke, Virginia 24031
~r. Richard Lo Kelley, Executive for Business Affai,s and
Clerk of the ~oard, P. 0. Box 13105, Roanoke, Virginia 24031
Rc~-~; 466 ~,~ i(~.,Jl ~n, ,i~li~Cj Z I ~ (I,~ch Aven~.e S W Rc,~nohe ~ rg~nla 24011 (703) 98¢-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29281.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and
1988-89 General and Grant Funds
an emergency.
WHEREAS, for the usual daily
Government of the City of Roanoke,
exist.
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED
Roanoke that certain sections
Funds Appropriations, be, and
reordained, to read as follows,
reordain certain
Appropriations,
sections of the
and providing for
operation of the Municipal
an emergency is declared to
by the Council of the City of
of the 1988-89 General and Grant
the same are hereby, amended and
in part:
General Fund
Appropriations
Education
Instruction (1-3) ...................................
Other Uses of Funds (4) .............................
$57,279,386
42,409,094
666,215
Grant Fund
Appropriations
Education
Chapter I Carryover (5-28) .
Chapter I Winter (29-64)..~.]~i~~]~]~]i
Chapter II Block Grant (65-69) ......................
Alternative Education (70 87) '
Vocational Education Teen Mothers (88-94) ...........
Child Development Clinic (95-97) .........
Bureau of Crippled Children (98-100) .....
· Juvenile Detention Home (101-103) ........
Special Education Inservice (104) ........
Artist in Education (105-106) ............
Magnet Schools (107-132) .................
Grants Development (133-136) .............
$17,301.388
595 000
1,955956
165 023
195 212
35 000
45 950
56 993
36 171
11 475
13 380
1,688,458
41,050
Revenue
Education
Chapter I Carryover (137) ............. ............
Chapter I Winter (138) ............................
Chapter II Block Grant (139) ......................
Alternative Education (140-141) ...................
Vocational Education Teen Mothers (142) ...........
Child Development Clinic (143) ....................
Bureau of Crippled Children (144) ...............
Juvenile Detention ~(145)
Home ...................
Special Education Inservice (146) ...............
Artist in Education (147-148) .
..................
Magnet Schools (149) ........ ~'''''.''''''''''-''
Grants Development (150) .....
-----
1) Matching Funds
2) Matching Funds
3) Matching Funds
4) Transfers to
Grant Fund
5) Elem. Teachers
6) Coordinators
7) Teacher Aides
8) Social Security
9) Retirement
10) Health Insurance
ll) State Group Life
Insurance
12 Secondary
Teachers
13 Social Security
14 Retirement
15 Health Insurance
16 State Group Life
Insurance
17 Administrator
18 Clerical
19 Social Security
20 Retirement
21 Health Insurance
22 State Group Life
Insurance
23) Indirect Costs
24) Nurses
25) Social Security
26) Retirement
27) Health Insurance
28) State Group Life
Insurance
2~) Elem. Teachers
30) Coordinators
31) Teacher Aides
32) Social Security
(001-060-6001-6400-0588)
(001-060-6001-6201-0588)
(001-060-6001-6301-0588)
$17,301,388
595,000
1,955,956
165,023
195,212
35,000
45,950
56,993
36,171
11,475
13,380
1,688,458
41,050
(130,212)
( 5,000)
( 5,000)
001-060-6005-6999-0911) 140,212
035-060-6123-6000-0121) 242,569
035-060-6123-6000-0124) 31,657
035-060-6123-6000-0141) 101,107
035-060-6123-6000-0201 28,188
035-060-6123-6000-0202 57,051
035-060-6123-6000-0204 13,703
035-060-6123-6000-0205
035-060-6123-6100-0121
035-060-6123-6100-0201
035-060-6123-6100-0202
035-060-6123-6100-0204
4,128
49,214
3,696
7,481
1,134
035-060-6123-6672-0205) 205
035-060-6124-6000-0121) 663,753
035-060-6124-6000-0124) 105,523
035-060-6124-6000-0141) 337,022
035-060-6124-6000-0201) 82,021
035-060-6123-6200-0205) 178
035-060-6123-6200-0212) 10,521
035-060-6123-6672-0131) 18,671
035-060-6123-6672-0201) 1,402
035-060-6123-6672-0202) 2,838
035-060-6123-6672-0204) 378
035-060-6123-6100-0205 541
035-060-6123-6200-0114 10,594
035-060-6123-6200-0151 5,594
035-060-6123-6200-0201) 1,216
(035-060-6123-6200-0202) 2;461
035-060-6123-6200-0204) 473
33) Retirement
34 Health Insurance
35 State Group Life
Insurance
36 Instruct. Travel
37 Secondary
Teachers
38 Social Security
39 Retirement
40 Health Insurance
41 State Group Life
Insurance
42) Administrator
43) Clerical
44) Social Security
45) Retirement
46) Health Insurance
47) State Group Life
Insurance
48) Indirect Costs
49) Srvc. Contracts
50) Admin. Travel
51) Field Trips
52) Testing, Evalua-
tion, Dissemi-
nation
53) Parent Involve-
ment
54) Inservice Train-
ing
55) Office Supplies
56) Instr. Supplies
57) Equipment
58) Nurses
59) Social Security
60) Retirement
61) Health Insurance
62) State Group Life
Insurance
63) Medical Travel
64) Medical Supplies
65) Writing Lab Aide
66) Library
Materials
67) Audio Visual
Equipment
68) Visiting
Teachers
69) Director, Educ.
Partnerships
70) Second. Teachers
71) Coordinator
72) Specialists
73) Instr. Supplies
(035-060-6124-6000-0202
(035-060-6124-6000-0204
(035-060-6124-6000-0205
(035-060-6124-6000-0553
(035-060-6124-6100-012t
(035-060-6124-6100-0201
(035-060-6124-6100-0202
(035-060-6124-6100-0204
(035-060-6124-6100-0205)
(035-060-6124-6200-0114)
(035-060-6124-6200-0151)
(035-060-6124-6200-0201)
(035-060-6124-6200-0202)
(035-060-6124-6200-0204)
035-060-6124-6200-0205)
035-060-6124-6200-0212)
035-060-6124-6200~0332)
035-060-6124-6200-0553)
035-060-6124-6200-0583)
035-060-6124-6200-0584)
035-060-6124-6200-0585)
035-060-6124-6200-0587
035-060-6124-6200-0601
(035-060-6124-6200-0614
(035-060-6124-6200-0821
(035-060-6124-6672-0131
(035-060-6124-6672-0201
(035-060-6124-6672-0202
(035-060-6124-6672-0204
035-060-6124-6672-0205)
035-060-6124-6672-0553)
035-060-6124-6672-0605)
035-060-6223-6004-0141)
035-060-6223-6214-0613)
035-060-6223-6214-0821)
(035-060-6223-6231-0123)
(035-060-6223-6665-0114)
(035-060-6415-6100-0121)
(035-060-6415-6100-0123)
(035-060-6415-6100-0138)
(035-060-6415-6100-0614)
166,007
45,675
12,013
11,625
164,045
12,320
24,935
3,780
1,804
42,375
22,378
4,863
9,842
1,575
712
35,186
43,500
4,400
15,000
14,500
4,500
3,500
1,500
28,400
8,485
62,238
4,674
9,460
1,260
685
1,900
4,500
8,322
3,795
52,318
63,838
36,750
84,000
25,000
38,000
3,000
74)
75)
76)
77)
78)
79)
80)
81)
82)
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92)
93)
94)
95)
96)
97
98
99
100
101
102
103
104
105
106)
107)
108)
109)
110)
111)
112)
113)
114)
115)
116)
Clerical
Contracted
Counseling
Services
Bus Tokens
(035-060-6415-6300-0151)
(035-060-6415-6300-0311)
(035-060-6415-6300-0341)
Custodial Srvcs. (035-060-6415-6300-0381)
Printing/Dissemi-
nation
Insurance
Lease/Rental of
Equipment
Lease/Rental of
Facilities
Staff Travel
Field Trips
Grant Evaluation
Office Supplies
Utilities
Telephone Srvcs.
Teacher
Social Security
Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life
Insurance
Travel
Contracted Child
Care
Indirect Costs
Travel
Instr. Supplies
Indir ~t Costs
Trave~
Instr. Supplies
Indirect Costs
Travel
Instr. Supplies
Inservice
Training
Contracted
Artists
Instr. Supplies
Elem. Teachers
Social Security
State Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life
Insurance
Second. Teachers
Social Security
State Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life
Insurance
(035-060-6415-6300-0521)
(035-060-6415-6300-0538)
1035L060-6415-6300-0541)
035-060-6415-6300-0542)
035-060-6415-6300-0551)
035-060-6415-6300-0583)
035-060-6415-6300-0586)
035-060-6415-6300-0601)
035-060-6415-6681-0511)
035-060-6415-6681-0523)
035-060-6416-6138-0121)
(035-060-6416-6138-0201)
(035-060-6416-6138-0202)
(035-060-6416-6138-0204)
(035-060-6416-6138-0205)
(035-060-6416-6138-0551)
(035-060-6416-6138-0381
(035-060-6564-6554-0212
(035-060-6564-6554-0551
(035-060-6564-6554-0614
035-060-6565-6554-0212
035-060-6565-6554-0551
035-060-6565-6554-0614
035-060-6566-6554-0212
035-060-6566-6554-0551
035-060-6566-6554-0614
035-060-6567-6229-0587)
035-060-6811-6201-0381)
035-060-6811-6201-0614)
035-060-6942-6007-0121)
035-060-6942-6007-0201)
035-060-6942-6007-0202)
035-060-6942-6007-0204)
035-060-6942-6007-0205)
035-060-6942-6107-0121)
1035-060-6942-6107-0201)
5942-6107-0202)
035-060-6942-6107-0204)
035-060-6942-6107-0205)
13,712
5,600
4,000
1,500
200
600
2,000
6,000
1,500
2,500
4,500
500
2,000
600
21,671
1,683
3,294
630
238
945
6,539
1,688
1,300
450
2,116
1,300
450
1,350
200
5O0
11,475
12,380
1,000
65,417
4,913
12,521
1,890
720
546,563
41,047
104,617
12,600
6,012
117) Administrator (035-060-6942-6307-0114
118) Other Profession-
al Staff
119) Clerical
120) Social Security
121) State Retirement
122) Health Insurance
123) State Group Life
Insurance
124) Indirect Costs
125) Printing Costs
126) Travel
127) Evaluation Costs
128) Misc. Costs
129) Inservice
130) Instr. Supplies
131) Equipment
132) Clerical
133) Social Security
134) Retirement
135) Health Insurance
136) State Group Life
(035-060-6942-6307-0138
(035-060-6942-6307-0151
(035-060-6942-6307-0201
(035-060-6942-6307-0202
(035-060-6942-6307-0204
(035-060-6942-6307-0205)
(035-060-6942-6307-0212)
(035%060-6942-6307-0351)
035-060-6942-6307-0551)
035-060-6942-6307-0584)
035-060-6942-6307-0586)
035-060-6942-6307-0587)
035-060-6942-6307-0614)
035-060-6942-6307-0822)
035-060-6943-6665-0151)
035-060-6943-6665-0201)
035-060-6943-6665-0202)
035-060-6943-6665-0204)
Insurance
137) Federal Grant
Receipts
138) Federal Grant
Receipts
139) Federal Grant
Receipts
140) Local Match
141) Federal Grant
Receipts
142) Federal Grant
Receipts
143) State Grant
Receipts
144) State Grant
Receipts
145) State Grant
Receipts
146) State Grant
Receipts
147) Local Match
148) Federal Grant
Receipts
149) Federal Grant
Receipts
150) Federal Grant
Receipts
(035-060-6943-6665-0205)
035-060-6123-1102
035-060-6124-1102
035-060-6223-1102
035-060-6415-1101
035-060-6415-1102
035-060-6416-1102
035-060-6564-1100)
565-1100)
035-060-6566-1100)
035-060-6567-1100)
035-060-6811-1101)
035-060-6811-1102)
035-060-6942-1102)
(035-060-6943-1102)
50,870
220,760
32,039
22,806
58,125
6,615
3,340
30,507
5,400
2,000
16,736
38,922
4,480
75,000
324,558
32,563
2,445
5,054
630
358
595,000
1,955,956
165,023
130,212
65,000
35,000
3,438
3,866
2,050
11,475
10,000
3,380
1,688,458
41,050
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE, VA. i:~L ~
September 12, 1988
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Joel M. Schlanger
Appropriation of Roanoke City School Grants
I have reviewed' the attached request for the
appropriation of grant funds for the School Board. Tu~ of the
twelve grants being appropriated are funded with 100% federal or
state funding. The Alternative Education grant requires a local
match of $130,212 and the Artist in Education grant requires a
local match of $10,000.
Funding for
Instruction category of
in the following accounts:
the local matches is available in the
the Education section of the General Fund
· Matching Funds (001-060-6001-6400-0588) $130,212
· Matching Funds (001-060-6001-6201-0588) 5,000
· Matching Funds (001-060-6001-6301-0588) 5,000
$140,212
I recommend that you concur with this request of the
School Board.
JMS:dp
~irec~or of Fi~ce
James M. Turner, Jr.. Chairman Marilyn C. Curtis
Sallye T. Coleman, Vice Chairman Edwin fl. Feinour
Donald Bartol
Velma B. Self
William White,
Frank P. To~a, Superini:endenC
Richard L. Kelley, Clerk of i[he Board
City School Board
P.O Box 1310S, Roanoke, Virginia ~4031 ·
703-981 -~ ~81
August 24, 1988
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Members of Council:
As the result of official School Board action at its meeting of August
23, 1988, the School Board respectfully requests City Council to appropri-
ate funds to the following school accounts:
Grant No. 6123- $595,000.00 for the Chapter I Carryover program to
utilize the balance of the FY87-88 Chapter I allo-
cation to defray FY88-89 Chapter I costs. The
program is one hundred percent reimbursed by
federal funds.
Grant No. 6124-
Grant No. 6223-
Grant No. 6415-
Grant No. 6416-
$1,955,956.00 for the Chapter I Winter program to
provide remedial reading, language arts and math-
ematics instruction for students in targeted schools.
The program is one hundred percent reimbursed by
federal funds.
$165,023.00 for the 1988-89 Chapter II Block Grant
to provide funds for the improvement of instructional
services in the school district. The program is one
hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds.
$195,212.00 for the Alternative Education program to
provide instruction and guidance services to secon-
dary level students who are at risk of leaving school
due to poor academic achievement, Iow or unrealistic
self-concept, or a poor understanding of academic
preparation required to achieve their career interest.
The program will be funded by local match in the
amount of $130,212 and from federal funds in the
amount of $65,000.
$35,000.00 for the Vocational Education Teen Mothers
program to provide vocational instruction to twenty
students. The program is one hundred percent
reimbursed by federal funds.
Excellence in Education
Members of Council
Page 2
August 24, 1988
Grant No. 6564- $3,438.00 in additional state funds for the Child
Development Clinic.
Grant No. 6565- $3,866.00 in additional state funds for the Bureau of
Crippled Children.
Grant No. 6566- $2,050.00 in additional state funds for the Juvenile
Detention Home.
Grant No. 6567-
Grant No. 6811-
$11,475.00 for the Special Education Inservice pro-
gram to provide funds for the training of special
education program staff members and for assistance
to parents of handicapped students. The program is
one hundred percent reimbursed by state funds.
$13,380.00 for the Artist in Education program to
provide funds for the enhancement of the district's
arts program by bringing experts into the schools
for student workshops. The program is funded in
the amount of $3,380 from federal funds and $10,000
from local funds.
Grant No. 6942-
Grant No. 6943-
$1,688,458.00 for the Magnet Schools program to
provide for the operation of magnet schools for the
performing and visual arts, future skills technology,
and communications and media arts. The program is
one hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds.
$41,050.00 for the Grants Development program to
provide clerical services for the Office of Grant, s and
Development. The program is one hundred percent
reimbursed by federal funds.
rg
CC:
Sincerely, I ~ /~
Richard L. Kelley
Clerk of the Board and
Executive for Business Affairs
Mr. James M. Turner, Jr.
Dr. Frank P. Tota
Mr. William L. Murray, Jr.
Mr. Kenneth F. Mundy, Jr.
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger (with accounting details)
ROANOKE CITY SCBOOL BOARD
Roanoke. Virginia
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
Chapter I Carryover. 124-88-3
6123
0~5-060-6129-b000-0121
095-060-b129-6000-012~
095-060-6129-6000-01~1
095-060-6129-6000-0201
095-060-b129-bO00-0202
0~5-060-b129-6000-020~
O~5-ObO-b12~-6000-020~
O~-ObO-b12~-b100-0121
035-ObO-b12~-b100-0201
O~5-ObO-612~-b100-0202
O~5-ObO-b12~-6100-O20N
O~-ObO-b123-b100-0205
095-ObO-b129-b200-011q
O~5-ObO-b12~-b200-0151
035-ObO-612~-b200-0201
095-ObO-b12~-b200-0202
035-ObO-b123-b200-O20N
095-0~0-~129-b200-0205
095-ObO-b129-b200-0212
095-O~O-b323-bb?2-01~1
0~5-0~0-b129-6~72-0201
095-ObO-612~-~b?2-0202
095-ObO-b12~-bb?2-O20N
O~5-060-b123-b672-0205
Appropriation Unit ZIJ
095-OhO-b123-1102
Elementary Teachers
Coordinators
Teacher Aides
Social Security
Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Secondary Teachers
Social Security
Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Administrator
Clerical
Social Security
Retirement
Nealth Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Indirect Costs
Social Security
Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Federal Grant Receipts
242,56g. 00
31,657.00
101,107.00
28,188.00
57,051.00
13,703.00
4,128.00
4q. 21N. 00
3, hq6.00
7,481.00
-1,131.00
511.00
IO. Sqq. oo
5,5q~.oo
1,21b. OO
2,461.OO
473.00
178. OO
10.521.OO
18, b71.00
1,402.00
2,838.00
378,00
205.00
6q~,o00. O0
59~9,000.00
The Chapter I Carryover program ,ill utilize the balance of the FY1q87-88
Chapter I allocation to defray FYlg88-Sg Chapter I costs. The appropriation
o£ carryover Funds should be taken from the FYlq88 Chapter I Rinter
appropriation unit, Z1H. One hundred percent of expenditures will be
reimbursed by federal funds. The program will end December 31. 1988.
August 25, lq88
ROANOKE CITY SOHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, ¥ir~inia
A--~PROPRIATION REQUEST
Chapter ! Ninter, 12#-8q-1
6124
095-060-6124-6000-0121
035-060-6124-6000-0129
095-060-6124-6000-0141
095-0h0-6124-6000-0201
095-060-6124-b000-0202
095-060-6124-6000-0204
095-060-6124-6000-0205
095~060-6124-b000-0553
035-060-b124-6100-0121
095-060-6124-6100-0201
095-0b0-6124-6100-0204
035-060~6124-6100-0205
095-060-6124-6200-0114
095-060-6124-6200-0151
095-060-6124-6200-0201
035-060-6124-6200~0202
095-060-6124-6200-0204
0~5-060-6124-6200-0205
095~060-6124-5200-0212
095-060-6124-6200-0992
095-060-6124-6200-0553
035-060-6124-6200-0583
095-O60-b12q-b200-O58q
095-060-6124-6200-0585
095-ObO-b124-b200-0587
0~5-060-6124-6200-0601
0~5-060-6124-6200-0614
095-060-6324-6200-0B21
095-060-6124-6672-0131
095-060-6124-6672-0201
035-060-6124-6672-0202
035-060-6124-5672-0204
035-060-6124-6672-0205
095-060-6124-bb72-0563
035-060-6124-6672-0605
APpropriation Unit Z1K
095-060-6124-1102
August 29, 1988
Elementary Teachers
Coordinators
Teacher Aides
Social Security
Retirement
Uealth Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Instructional Travel
Social Security
Retirement
~ealth Insurance
State G~oup Life Insurance
Administ~ato~
Clerical
Social Security
Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Indirect Costs
Service Contracts
Administrative Travel
Field Trips
Testing, Evaluation. Dissemination
Parent Involvement
Inse~vice T~ainin~
Office Supplies
Instructional Supplies
Equipment
Social Security
Retirement
Realth Insumance
State G~oup Life Insurance
Medical Tmavel
Medical Supplies
Federal Grant Receipts
8
$
669.753.00
105,523.00
337,022,00
82,021.00
156.007.00
45,675. O0
12,013.00
11,625.00
164,045,00
12,320.00
24, q35.00
9,780.00
1,804,00
42,375.00
22,978.00
4.863.00
q, 892.00
1,575.00
712. O0
35,186.00
49,500.00
4,400.00
15. OOO. OO
14,500,00
4,500.00
?,500.00
1.5OO. OO
28.4OO. OO
3,485.00
62,298.00
4,674.00
q, 460.00
1.260.00
685.00
1,q00.00
~00.0~
1, 9551 9,56. O0
1,955t 9~6. O0
Chapter ! II~nter 12~-8q-1
bl 2u,
The Chapter I Ninter program will provide remedial reading, language arts and
mathematics instruction for students in targeted schools. The program is one
hundred percent reimbursed by federal funds and ~ill end June 30. lgSg.
August 23, ~g88
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
&PPROPRIAT~ON REOU~ST
Chapter II 1988-89
6223
O~5-OhO-h223-bOOq-Olq1
035-OhO-b223-b21q-Ob13
035-ObO-b223-h21N-0821
035-OhO-b223-b231-0123
035-ObO-b223-hhh~-011~
Appropriation Onit Z2K
035-OhO-b223-1102
~ritin{ Lab Aide
Library Materials
Audio Visual Equipment
Visiting Teachers
Director, Educational Partnerships
Federal Grunt Receipts
$ 8,322.00
52,318.00
b3,838.00
3b, 750.00
$ 165~ 029. O0
The 1q88-Sq Chapter II Block Grant eill provide Funds For the improvement of
instructional services in the school district. The program is one hundred
percent reimbursed by Federal Funds and Hill end June 30, lqSg.
Au{ust 23, 1988
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, VirEinta
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
Alternative Education 1988-89
6#15
0~5-060-6N15-6100-0121
035-ObO-bN15-b100-012~
035-O60-6N15-b100-01~8
O~5-ObO-bN15-blOO-OblN
O~5-ObO-bg15-b300-0151
035-ObO-6N15-6300-0311
035-060-bN15-6300-0381
O~5-O60-6N15-b300-0521
O~5-ObO-bN15-6300-0538
035-ObO-bN15-b~OO-OSg1
O~5-060-6N15-b300-OSN2
O~5-ObO-bg15-6300-0551
0~5-060-6~15-6~00-0583
035-060-6N15-6~00-0586
O~5-060-bglS-b300-Ob01
O~5-ObO-bN15-6681-O611
0~5-060-6N15-6681-052~
ApPropriation Unit ZNG
095-060-bNI~-1101
O~5-ObO-6N15-1102
Secondary Teachers
Coordinator
Specialists
Instructional Supplies
Clerical
Contracted Counselin~ Services
Bus Tokens
Custodial Services
Printing/Dissemination
Insurance
Lease/Rental of Equipment
Lease/Rental of Facilities
Staff Travel
Field Trips
Grant Evaluation
Office Supplies
Utilities
Telephone Serviees
Local Match
Federal Grant Receipts
84,000.00
25,000.00
38,000.00
3,000.00
13,712.00
5,600.00
g, O00. O0
1,500.00
200.00
bO0. O0
2,000.00
6,000.00
1,500,00
2,500.00
4,500.00
500.00
2,000.00
~. 600.0_0_
9 170,~12. O0
_. 691 000.00_
$ _1_9 ~_~21 2. 0~0
The Alternative Education program ~ill provide instruction and guidance
serviees to secondary level students abc are at risk of leaving school due to
poor academic achievement, lo~ or unrealistic self-concept, or a poor
understanding of academic preparation required to achieve their career
interests. Pro{ram expenditures ~ill be £unded by local match from account
number 001-060-6001-6400-0588 in the amount of 91~0, 212 and-from federal funds
in the amount of $65,000. The program Rill end June ~0, 1989.
August 23, 1988
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, ViPginia
~PPBOPRIAT~ON REOUHST
Vocational Education Teen Hothers, Title II~
O~5-060-6N1b-b138-0121
035-ObO-6N16-6138-0201
095-ObO-bN16-b138-0202
035-060-6N1b-6138-O20N
O~5-060-b416-b138-0205
035-060-bN1b-6138-0551
03~-060-6N16-6138-0381
~PpPopriation Unit ZNH
O~5-ObO-bN1b-1102
Social Security
Retirement
Health InsuPanee
State Group LiFe InsuPance
TPavel
ContPaeted Child CaPe
Federal GPant Receipts
$ 21,671.00
1,683.00
3,2qg. o0
630.00
238.00
qN5.00
6,5~9. oo
$ ~5,0oo. oo
The Vocational Education Teen Mothers progPam ,ill pPovide vocational
instruction to t~enty students. The pPo{Pam is one hundred pePcent Peimbursed
by fedePal Funds. The PPO{ram ~ill end June 30, 1989.
August 23, lq88
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL HOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
~PPROPRIATION REQUEST
Child Development Clinic 88-8q
035-060-656q-~55~-02~2
0~5-0b0-656~-655~-06~
ApPropriation ~nit
035-ObO-bSbN-1100
Indirect Costs
Travel
Instructional Supplies
State Grant Receipts
9
$
1.688.00
1,300.00
_.
· The above appropriation represents additional Funds provided by the state for
the Child Development Clinic. The pro,ram q/Il end June 30. lgSg.
Au{ust 2g, 1088
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
APPROPRIATION ~EQUEST
Bureau of Crippled Children 88-89
b565
035-060-6565-6554-0212
035-060-6~65-6554-0551
035-ObO-b565-b55N-0614
Approoriation §nit
03~-060-6~b~-1100
Indirect Costs
Travel
Instructional Supplies
State Grant Receipts
$ 2,116.00
1,300.00
450.00
$ 3, ~66.0Q
The above appropriation represents additional funds provided by the state for
the Bureau of Criooled Children. The program ~ill end June 30, 1989.
August 23, 1988
ROANOKE CITY SCNOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
APPROPRIATION RBONEST
Juvenile Detention ~ome 88-89
O~6-ObO-bSbb-b~5~-0212
035-ObO-~Sbb-b55N-O651
035-ObO-bSbb-b55N-OblN
Appropriation Unit ZSb
O~5-ObO-bSbg-1100
Indirect Costs
Travel
Instructional Supplies
State Grant Receipts
$ 1,350.00
200.00
500.00
$ 2,0~0.00
2.0gO. O0
The above appropriation represents additional funds provided by the state for
the Juvenile Detention Home. The program Hill end June 30, lg8g.
~u~ust 23, 1988
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, ¥irginia
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
Special Education Inservice 1988-89
03~-060-6567-622g-0587
Appropriation Unit Z~7
Inserviee Training
8 11~47~.00
035-ObO-bg67-1100
State Grant Receipte
8 _11,47~.00
The Special Education Inservice program aill provide Funds for the training of
special education pro{ram etaFf members and For assistance to parents of
handicapoed etudents. The pro{ram is one hundred percent reimbursed by stats
Funds. The pro{ram ~ill end June 30, lg8g.
Au6ust 23, 1988
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
APPROPRIATION REOU£ST
Artist in Education 19BB-89
b811
035-obO-b811-b201-0381
035-ObO-6811-b201-Ob1N
Approoriation Unit ZSE
Contracted Artists
Instructional Supplies
$ 12,380.00
1,000.00
S
035-0b0-6811-1101
Og~-ObO-b811-1102
Local Hatch
Federal Grant Receipts
S 10.000.00
9,380.00
s 1 '~, 380. co
The Artist in Education program provides funds for the enhancement of the
district's arts program by brin~in§ experts into the schools for student
workshops. The program is funded in the amount of S~,380 from federal funds,
~ith the balance of $10, OOO local match to be taken in the amount of $5,000
each from accounts OO1-ObO-bOOl-b201-O588 and OO1-ObO-6OO1-b301-O588. The
program ~ill end June 30, lqSq.
August 23, 1988
ROANOKE CITY SCNOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
&PPROPRIATZON REqUeST
Na~net School 1988-89
6q~2
095-060-6442-b007-0121
035-ObO-bq42-bO07-0201
0~6-060-6442-6007-0202
0~5-0b0-6442-6007-0204
O~5-060-bqN2-hlO?-0121
O~5-O60-bqN2-b107-0201
0~6-0h0-6q42-6107-0202
0~5-060-6442-b107-0204
0~5-060-6q42-6107-0206
0~-060-bq42-6907-0114
035-060-6442-6~07-0138
0~5-060-6442-b907-0161
O~5-O60-bq42-b~O?-0201
0~5-060-6q42-6~07-0202
0~5-060-6442-6~07-0204
0~6-060-6442-6~07-020~
0~-0b0-6442-6~07-0212
0~$-0b0-6q42-6907-0~1
0~6-060-6442-b~07-0~1
0~5-060-6942-6~07-0~84
O~-OhO-bg~2-6~O?-O~Bb
0~-060-6q42-6~07-0~87
O~-060-bq42-b~O?-Ob14
095-060-6q42-6~07-08~2
Appropriation Unit zq3
095-060-6942-1102
Elementary Teachers
Social Security
State Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Lzfe Insurance
Secondary Teachers
Social Seeurit¥
State Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Administrator
Other Professional Staff
Clerical
Social Security
State Retirement
Health Insurance
State Group Life Insurance
Indirect Costs
Printing Costs
Travel
Evaluation Costs
Miscellaneous Costs
Inserviee
Instructional Supplies
£quipment
Federal Grant Receipts
65,417.00
4,913.00
12.521.00
1,840.00
720.00
546,56~.00
41,047.00
104,617.00
12,600.00
6,012.00
50,870.00
220,760.00
32,039.00
22,806.00
58,125.00
6,615.00
%340.00
30,507.00
~,400.00
2,000.00
16,736.00
98,922.00
4,480.00
75.000.00
324,558. oo
$ 1,088,4~8.00
9 1,688, N~8.00
The Ma{net Sehoole pro{ram aill provide for the operation of ma{net schools
for the performin~ and visual arts. future skills teehnoloEy, and
eommunieationa and media arts. The pro,ram will operate on the elementary,
middle and high school levels. The pro,ram will be reimbursed one hundred
percent by federal funds.
August 23, lq88
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD
Roanoke, Virginia
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
Grants Development 1988-89
694~
0~5-0~0-6943-b665-0161
0)5-060-6943-6665-0201
035-060-6943-6665-0202
035-OBO-6943-6bbS-020~
035-0b0-6q43-6665-0205
Appropriation Unit zq4
Clerical $ 32,563.00
Social Security 2,445.00
Retirement 5,054.00
Health Insurance 630.00
State Group Life Insurance ~58,00
OgS-O60-6g43-1102
Federal Grant Receipts
411 050.02
The Grants Development pro,ram .ill provide clerical services for the Office
of Grants and Development. The pro,ram .ill be one hundred percent reimbursed
by federal funds. The pro,ram ends June 30, lqSg.
Au{uet 23, 1988
Office of theCi~Clerk
September 14, 1988
Fi le #121-123-236
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 29283, authorizing accep-
tance of a Jail Education Grant made to the City of Roanoke by
the State Department of Correctional Education, in the amount of
~10,922.25, to be matched by local funds, in an amount not to
exceed $i~200.00, for the purpose of providing educational
programs to inmates at the Roanoke City Jail, which Resolution
No. 29283 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc: The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, City Sheriff Mr. Joel Ii. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator
Roa'n 456 ,,~:~ :ic,~i ~;~ia,~9 Z~5 (t,~,~ch A~,en~.e )W Rc~t'iC~he v~rg~nta 24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29283.
VIRGINIA,
A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a Jail Education
Grant made to the City of Roanoke by the State Department of
Correctional Education and authorizing the acceptance, execution
and filing of the required grant agreement by the City Manager.
BE. IT RESOLVED By the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. The City of Roanoke hereby accepts the offer made by the
State Department of Correctional Education of a grant in the
amount of $10,922.25, to be matched by local funds in an amount
not to exceed $1,200.00, for the purpose of providing educational
programs to inmates at the Roanoke City Jail.
2. The City Manager is hereby authorized to accept, exe-
cute and file on behalf of the City the Grant Agreement, a copy
of which is attached to the City Manager's report to City Council
dated September 12, 1988.
3. The City Manager is further directed to furnish such
additional information as may be required by the State Department
of Correctional Education in connection with the City's acceptance
of the foregoing grant or with such project.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of ~e City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #60-121-123-236
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance ~o. 29282, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1988-$9 General and Grant Funds
Appropriations, providing for the transfer of $1,200.00 in con-
nection with acceptance of a Jail Education Grant made to the
City by the State Department of Correctional Education, f'ar the
purpose of providing educational programs to inmates at the
Roanoke City Jail, which Ordinance No. 29232 was adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, September 12, 1988.
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc: The Honorable W. Alvin Hudson, City Sheriff Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City ~anage.
Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator
Roo~r' ¢56 '4: .,c:~;,~l D, 4d~,,g ~! % ~.1, ,cf' A,,en~e SW Rc~no~,e ~rg~n,a 2401t (703) 98t-254.1
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day
AN ORDINANCE
1988-89 General
an emergency.
WHEREAS,
Government
exist.
VIRGINIA,
of September, 1988.
No. 29282.
to amend and reordain certain sections of
and Grant Funds Appropriations, and providing
the
for
for the usual daily operation of the Municipal
of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1988-89 General and Grant
Funds Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
General Fund
Appropriations
Nondepartmental
Transfers to Other Funds (1) ........................
Contingency (2) .....................................
$11,265,946
9,324,468
630,691
Grant Fund
Appropriations
Public Safety
Adult Basic Education Jail (3 4)
Revenue
Public Safety
Adult Basid Education - Jail (5-6) ..................
1) Transfers to Grant
Fund
2) Contingency
3) Temporary Employee
Wages
(001-004-9310-9536) $ 1,200
(001-002-9410-2199) ( 1,200)
(001-024-5000-1004) 11,822
$ 378,412
12,122
378,412
12,122
4) Publications
5) State Revemue
6) Local Match
(035-024-5000-2040) $ 300
(035-035-1234-7064) 10,922
(035-035-1234-7066) 1,200
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Roanoke, Virginia
September 6, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Subject: Department of Correctional Education
Adult Basic Education (ABE) grant
Dear Members of City Council:
I. Back~round:
In 1987~ Governor Gerald Baliles initiated a Literacy Pro~rmm for
inmates incarcerated in the Virginia Department of Corrections. This
program is intended to reduce recidivism among inmates by
encouraging inmates to obtain a G.E.D. level of education. It is
thought that by offering early release by parole inmates would be
encouraged to participate in this program and, in doing so, this
would increase their abilities to obtain jobs once released from
custody.
In July 1988~ limited ~rant funds became available to local jails
through the Department of Correctional Education to initiate and/or
augment established educational programs for inmates at the local
level. The Roanoke City Jail applied for grant funds to supplement
the existing program and to enhance the jail's ability to better
serve all the inmates needs. This is especially true now, since the
jail houses many inmates sentenced to the Department of Corrections
but who must serve these felony sentences in the jail. Many inmates
believe that acquiring a G.E D~ will anhance their chance~ o+ being
paroled from the jail at the earliest date.
II. Current Situation:
The Roanoke City Jail presently has a G.E.D. pro~rmm, which is
offered to the inmates incarcerated therein, that utilizes volunteer
tutors recruited through St. Gerards Catholic Church (Social Action
Committee). Although this program has had limited success, it does
not sufficiently meet the needs of all the inmates to the fullest
potential, especially those inmates sentenced to serve time in the
Department of Corrections and are eligible to be paroled from the
jail.
1. Because of the limited number of volunteer tutors, inmate
requests for program participation are not fully granted.
Presently, we have ten inmates participating in the program and
thirteen more additional inmates on a waiting list.
Volunteer tutors lack expertise in the field of education and
this skill is lacking in the program presentation.
The pro~ram lacks stability~ continuity and consistency due ~o
the high turn over in volunteer tutors.
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Page 2
On September 1~ 1988~ the Roanoke City Jail was selected by the
Department of Correctional Education as an Adult Basic Education
(ABE) grant recipient.
The grant will fund one or more part-time teacherr for a total
of 840 hours between now and May 31, 1989 to instruct inmates
and administer G.E.D. testing in the Roanoke City Jail.
Department of Correctional Education will reimburse Roano~,.
City at the rate of 90% for part-time teacher wages of $11.43
per hour for 24 hours per week for 35 weeks to be completed by
May 31, 1989.
Department of Correctional Education will reimburse Roanok,.
City at the rate of 90% for part-time teacher social security
benefits for 840 hours to be completed by May 31, 1989.
Department of Correctional Ed,,e&tion will reimburse Roanoko
City at the rate of 90% for $300.00 in approved educational
materials.
Roanoke City will provide 10% cash match to extend the
Department of Correctional Education grant. The City's cash
match will not exceed $1,200.00.
The total of the grant will be approximately $12,122.25. The
grant will not exceed $10,922.25 from the DCE plus a $1,200.00
local match.
III. Is___sues in order of importance are:
mo
Initiation of an Adult Basic Education program in the Roanoke City
Jail to augment the present G.E.D. program offered to inmates.
B. Funding.
IV. Alternatives:
City Council appropriate $1~200.00 from the City's Contingency Fund
to the Grant Fund to provide the local cash match necessary to
receive the Adult Basic Education grant.
Initiation of an Adult Basic Education progra,,, could be
established in the Roanoke City Jail to augment the present
G.E.D. program presently in existence.
Funding of the $12,122.25 would be accomplished by authorizing
the Director of Finance to establish the required accounts in
the Grant Fund (Personal Services and Operating Expenses) and
increase the revenue estimate for FY 1988-89, since additional
DCE grant funds of $10,922.25 will be received by the City of
Roanoke and $1,200.00 in local cash match will be provided from
the City's Contingency Fund.
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Page 3
Bo
Do not appropriate $1~200.00 in local cash match as required to
receive DCE grant funds for the establishment of an Adult Basic
Education grant.
Recommendation is that City Council
authorizing the Director of Finance to:
Initiation of an Adult Basic Education pro~rm,,, would not be
possible and the present G.E.D. program would remain intact
although it lacks certain expertise, stability, and continuity.
Fundin~ of the $1,200.00~would not be necessary.
concur with Alternative "A" by
Establish Revenue estimate in amount of $10,922.25 in DCE grant
funds and $1,200.00 in local cash match to be transferred from
General Fund Contingency account 001-002-59410-2199.
Establish required accounts in Grant Fund (Personal Services and
Operating Expenses) in the amount of $12,122.25.
1. Appropriate $11,822.25 in Personal Services Account.
2. Appropriate $300.00 in Operating Expenses Account.
WAH/gm
pc: City Manager
Director of Finance
City Attorney
Respectfully submitted,
W. Alvin Hudson
C~y Sheriff
Office of the
Superintendent of Schools
COMMON' VEALTJH of VIRGINIA
Department o[ Correctional Education (DCE)
James Monroe Building--7th Floor
101 North 14th Street
Richmond. Virginia 23219-3678
September 1, 1988
Local: 804-225-3310
Scats: 8-335-3310
_MEMORANDUM
TO: Mr. W. A. Hudson, Sheriff
Roanoke City Jail
FROM:
Michael L. Dutton ~
Jails Program Coordinator
Department of Correctional Education
The Department of Correctional Education has selected Roanoke City
Jail as an ABE (Adult Basic Education) Grant recipient. The Grant
will not exceed $10,922.25 from the DCE plus a $1200 local match.
The total of the Grant will be approximately $12,122.25.
l~he Grant will fund one or more part-time teachers for a total of
840 hours between now and May 31, 1989.
Please refer to my letter of August 22, 1988 for other details
respecting this Grant. '
Please call me at (804) 225-3324 if you have any questions of
concerns.
MLD/art
xc: Mr. James D. Grisso
An Equal Opportunity Employer
Office of the
Superintendent of Schools
Department o[ Correctional Education (DCE)
James Monroe Building--7th Floor
101 North 14th Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219-3678
Local: 804-225-3310
Scats: fl-335-;~310
August 22, 1988
TO:
FROM:
Mr. W. A. Hudson, Sheriff
P. O. Box 494
Roanoke, Virginia 24003
Michael h. Dutton
Jail Programs Coordinator
James Monroe Building - 7th Floor
101 N 14th Street
Richmond, VA 23219-3678
Congratulations on your jail education grant!
Please read the attached agreement, sign, and return it
your earliest convenience.
to me at
PLease have the part-time teacher call me at (804) 225-3324 during
the first week on the job.
MLD/art
Attachment
JAIh EDUCATION GRANT AGREEMENT
understand that ~dai1 has been awarded a part-tine teacher grant
By the Department of Correctional Education.
As grant recipient on behalf of Roanoke Cit Jail, I understand and agree to
the following grant provisions:
DCE will reimburse Roanoke City Jail at the rate of 90% for part-
time teacher wages ~f $11.43 per hour for 24 hours per week for 35
weeks to be completed by ~a~ 31, 1989. -
2. DCE will reimburse Roanoke Cit Jail at the rate of 90% for part-
time teacher social security benefits for 840 hours to be completed
by May 31, 1989.
3. DCE will reimburse Roanoke City Jail at the rate of 90% for $300.00
in approved educational materials.
4. R~oanoke City Jail will pr~ide a 10% cash match to extend the DCE
grant (the jail cash match will not exceed $1200.00).
5. ~Jail will hire a certified teacher by September [, 1988.
6. The certified teacher will be supervised hy the sheriff or his
designee.
7. ~ Jail will submit monthly reports to the DCE in a timely
manner.
~ Jail will provide class space for the teacher and at
east 15 students for at ]ea~ 18 nou~.s each week through May 31,
1989. The other six hours will be spent in planning and transitioning
each week.
R~oanoke City Jail will schedule local GED testing for its inmates at
least 3__ times before May 31, 1989.
Roanoke City Jail will negotiate arrangements with the local GED test
center so that free GED testing can be offered inmates at this
facility.
11. Roanoke City Jail will provide free ABE and literacy services to its
inmates.
12. Roanoke City Jail intends to apply directly to the Virginia Department
of Education for education program funding in 1989.
Signature
Signature
Signature
Date
Witness Signature
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor and Member of Council:
Subject: Department of Correctional Education
Adult Basic Education (ABE) Grant
I concur in the attached report from Sheriff W. Alvin Hudson with
reference to the above subject.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/a
cc: Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Finance Director
Office of the Ci/~ Cler~
September 14, 1988
File #144
Mr. W. Robert Herber't
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. lterbert:
Your report with regard to proposed solid waste regulations, was
before the Council ~f the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting
held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, Council con-
curred in the proposed position to be taken at the public
hearing, with tile understanding that the Commonwealth of Virginia
will be encouraged to provide sufficient funds for the proposed
new regulations.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk .
MFP: ra
pc: Mr. Joel
Mr. Kit
M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
D. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
-~-, ,~ .:l~,.,,ilchA,,e~. SW F',c,ano~,e *,rg,n,a24011 (703) 981-254t
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Proposed Solid Waste Regulations - Briefing
I. BackKround:
City of Roanoke is a party to a Roanoke Valley Regional Solid
Waste Management agreement under which Roanoke City, Roanoke
County and the Town of Vinton established a Board to dispose
of solid waste on properties to be provided by the
jurisdictions that are parties to the agreement.
Current sanitary landfill was permitted by the State in 1975
under a 17 page set of regulations. Current landfill is
operated in compliance with that permit.
Proposed new regulations have been developed and promulgated
by the State over a period of months. Current draft, number 5
to date, was received on August 5, 1988 and is composed of a
comprehensive set of regulations of approximately 225 pages.
Public hearinKs are scheduled in Richmond on September 16,
1988 and in Blacksburg on September 19, 1988. Written
comments regarding the proposed regulations may be submitted
to the State through September 26, 1988.
E. Anticipated effective date is January 1, 1989.
Fact sheet developed by a consultant in the solid waste
management field is attached.
Go
Hazardous waste and infectious waste are regulated separately
and are not the subject of these regulations.
SewaKe sludge that is composted without addition of other
materials or are land applied are regulated separately by the
Virginia Water Control Board and the Virginia Health
Department.
I. Other exemptions or exclusions:
Domestic and industrial waste water discharKes which
are separately regulate~.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 2
II.
ii. Materials that are recycled
iii. Nuclear or nuclear by-product materials, which are
separately regulated.
iv. Agriculture wastes
Landfill sites that are closed prior to the
effective date of these regulations.
vi. Sites that dispose only of rocks, dirt, brick,
broken road pavement.
Wastes that are regulated (non-inclusive), unless excluded
above:
i. Household waste
ii. Commercial waste
iii. Industrial waste
iv. Non-recyclable by products of recycle efforts
v. Putrescible waste
vi. Lumber or timber products, including leaves, stumps,
tree limbs, construction or demolition debris.
vii. Tires
Impacts on the City of Roanoke and its citizens, developers,
businesses, and industries either directly or through the City or
the current Landfill Board.
No permitted sanitary landfill on the current site at the end
of 5-years, or sooner depending on our ability to:
1. Maintain usable space for five years.
Develop an approved ~roundwater monitoring plan within 6
months.
3. Develop an approvable closure plan within 2 years.
Construction/demolition/debris (CDD) landfills currently in
operation must close. New regulations will require that these
landfills have specified liners and groundwater monitoring
plans. This will add a large but unknown tonnage that will
need to be disposed in an anticipated regional sanitary
landfill or separately permitted CDD landfills will need to be
publicly or privately established and operated under the
proposed regulations.
C. Vastly increased cost for solid waste disposal, in the 3 to 5
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 3
fold increase range. The cost of collection will also likely
increase with the need to increase recycling efforts. Also,
construction and demolition debris, much of which has been
disposed in virtually unregulated fills will now have to be
disposed of in controlled landfills.
10 years of post closure responsibility on the current
landfill site.
III. Public hearing positions: The following positions are intended to
be taken relative to the proposed regulations unless there is other
direction from City Council:
General support for the regulations and their intended
purpose.
Bo
Request that landfills currently operatin~ with and in
compliance of a permit issued from the Commonwealth of
Virginia be allowed to continue to operate under these permits
as long as usable space is available on the permitted site
unless there is a positive identifiable danger to health,
safety, or the environment.
Request that the double lining requirements be reduced to a
single lining of 1 foot of clay with a clay having a
permeability less than 1 x 10 - 5 centimeters per second for
controlled construction/demolition/debris landfills.
D. Request that construction/demolition/debris landfill~ be
permitted to take tires.
E. Restatement of the prohibitions of ]nndfill sitem on land
having "springs, seeps, or other groundwater intrusion into
the site" to a more practical statement recognizing that all
land has some type of groundwater inherent on the site. A
more definitive designation and designation of site
desirability/prohibition needs to be developed.
Reduce the double lining requirement for sanitary landfills
from two feet of 10 - 7 clay to 10 - 6 clay since permeability
of 10 - 7 clay is virtually impossible to obtain.
Permit debris landfills to take not more than 20% by volume of
wood/timber products.
IV. Conclusion: This report is for Council's information and any
direction Council may wish to give to the staff.
WRH:KBK:afm
Attachment
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
Members, Landfill Board
Respect f~ly submitted,,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
P I FACT. SHEET
ANTICIPATED DATE OF ENACTMENT:
WHO WILL BE .~VFECTED?
WHAT WILL BE REQUIRED?
SITING CRITERIA
DF-.SlGN CRITERIA
December 31, 1988
A. All new facilities
B. Existing facilities when:
i. Permit recalled by Executive Dh'ec~or
2. Activity moves into next area / phase
3. Within 5 yeax$
4. It i~ a health / CnV{roIllllental hazard
5. Whichever of thc above occu~ first
A. Siting. Design a~a_ Operation Standarda
B. Monitoring Wells vArhi, 2 yeara
C. Clo~ure Pla~ wlth~,, 2 ye~s
D. Closure / Post Closure Acti,Atiea
immediately where .applicable
A. Asa. nltaty la~dfill canno{ b~ site~l within.
1. 1~ ~ fl~ p~
Geol~ ~ble ~e~
3. 5,~ / 10,~ f~t of
p~ton / t~j~ ~ res~e~
4. 1~ f~t of s~a~ ~t~ ~ or ~ver
~. ~ feet of web or
6. ~ f~t of re~den~,
7. ~ feet of pubfic
8. ~ea where s~ ~o~ter mo~to~
pr~m ~ ~ ~plement~
* Ca..~ ~ ~ ~o~ ~ r~ flo~
2. Sho~e of ~ ~ (~.~ ~ ~)
4. Ut~ ~ ~n~
5. Prior o~n drop ~
,4. Required components of design / construction:
I. Natura/ / man-made access con~o~, all sidea
Z All-weather access roads
3. Heated shelter and sanitary facilities
4. Visual screens (aesthetic considerations)
5. Telephone or radio comm,mications
6. 2 foot 'impervious' clay liner ', or
GROL,~DWATER
MONTTO RLNG
2. Closure must begi~
mad ~m~et~
A. ~ muss be prepar~ md ,,,est: °
1. Include specifics o{ proo-a,~.e$ ~1
2. Begin in 2 ye. ars , if ~1~ ao~ ~ow
3. 1~ upgraded ia 6 moe~ if' ~,e.~. already
4. Include 1 up & 3 dova~'ad~:
.5-. Meaaure Sroundwa~r ie~..~, ~a~ rate ~ dlreetio~
6. Have Phase 1 ln'o~-ama Te~: off 9:
7. Have co~,~¢acy Pha~ 1! pec~am:
8. Have coerln~¢acy ~ !~ priam-mm Teati~.
* Further re~ ia suggested d~ to the c~nplea:ity
of the requiremem .
Of'rice c~ the City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #249-2-166
Mr. Wo Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
! am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29284, amending Ordinance
No. 29197, in order to extend the duration of the Real Estate
Option Agreement authorized thereby from August 31, 1988, until
midnight, October 12, 1988, the consideration of such extension
to be in the additional amount of $1,500.00, which Ordinance No.
29284 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting held on Monday, September i2, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Pa~ker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc:
Mr. James L. Trinkle, 120 Kirk Avenue, S.
Virginia 24011
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. Huffine,
Mr.
W., Roanoke,
City Engineer
Brian J. Wishneff, Chief of Economic Development
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29284.
AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 29197, in order to extend
the duration of the Real E~tate Option Agreement authorized thereby;
and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Ordinance No. 29197, adopted July 11, 1988, be and it is
hereby amended to extend the duration of the Real Estate Option
Agreement authorized thereby from August 31, 1988, until midnight,
October 12, 1988, the consideration for such extension to be for
the additional amount of $1,500.00.
2. The City Manager is authorized to execute an amendment
to the Real Estate Option Agreement dated July 20, 1988, in order
to effect the extension authorized hereby; such amendment to be
in form approved by the City Attorney.
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.
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Noel C. Taylor and
Members, Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of City Council:
Subject:
Request to Amend Ordinance No. 29197 to Extend the
Expiration Date of the Campbell Avenue Historic
Properties' Real Estate Option Agreement
I. Background
A. Orisinal Real Estate Option Agreement was approved by City Council
on July 11, 1988, pursuant to Ordinance No. 29197.
B Expiration date of Agreement was August 31, 1988.
II. Current Situation
mo
Time extension of expiration date to October 12, 1988 has been
offered by property owner at City's request.
Council approval of time extension is required in order to authorize
the City Manager to execute an amendment to the original Agreement.
Terms and Condition of the original Real Estate Option Agreement
will remain unchanged.
D. Cost to extend expiration date to October 12, 1988 is ~1,500.00 which
is the same amount paid previously on a per month basis.
III. Recommendation
It is recommended that Roanoke City Council authorize the City Manager to
execute an extension to the original Real Estate Option Agreement which will
change the expiration of the Agreement from August 31, 1988 to October 12,
1988, thus establishing a new 30-day option period of September 12, 1988 to
October 12, 1988. Council's approval will also authorize payment of $1,500.00
to secure the new 30-day option period of September 12 - October 12, 1988.
Respectf~y submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:EBRJr:mp
cc:
Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Brian Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development
Release Da~: ~ 8 8
Con,ct: M. Michelle Bono
Public Information Officer
ROANOKE ANNOUNCBS N~W WORK TO HELP SAVE HISTORIC BUILDINGS
The City of Roanoke has reached a tentative a~reement with James L.
Trinkle concerning four historic buildings at 118, 120, 122, and 124 Campbell
Avenue. The agreement, which must be approved by the Roanoke City Council at
its meeting on Sept. 12, would extend the city's option on the buildings until
Oct. 12 at midnight. The cost of the option is $1,500.
In addition, the city has been notified by the Virginia Division of
Historic Landmarks that Roanoke will receive $100,000 to go towards the cost of
purchasing the buildings. If the grant is approved by City Council at the Sept.
12 meeting, the city would receive $50,000 immediately and another $50,000 after
July 1, 1989.
"The City of Roanoke believes in historic preservation as well as down-
town revitalization," said Earl Reynolds, assistant city manager. "We appre-
ciate the extention of the option by Mr. Trinkle and view it as his commitment
to try in every way possible to save these buildings. At the same time, we have
agreed with Mr. Trinkle that this will be the final extension.
"Armed with $100,000 from the Virginia Division of Historic Landmarks
(VDHL), we feel we have a greater opportunity to sell these buildings," Reynolds
- more --
office of Public Information Municipal Building, Room 364 215 Church Ave., S.W. Roanoke,VA 24011 (703) 981-2336
2
added. "We want to publicly thank Bryan Mitchell, and others with the VDHL
who have worked so diligently to provide assistance with this project," Reynolds
said. "In addition, our elected officials, including Jim Olin, Chip Woodrum,
Vic Thomas and Granger Macfarlane, have helped in obtaining state funds."
Under the terms of the grant any potential owner, and/or the city, would
have to agree to three requirements before receiving the grant money: (1) The
buildings would have to be placed on the state and national Register of Historic
Places. The buildings are already eligible for this status. (2) The state would
have the authority to review the rehabilitation plans. (3) The Virginia Division
of Historic Landmarks, through an easement, would approve any changes to the
buildings in the future.
"It's important to realize that this is not a done deal at this point,"
said Reynolds. "We are simply in a better position now to save these
buildings."
Economic Development Chief Brian Wishneff says much work has been
accomplished in the last 60 days since a two month option was signed with
Trinkle for the city to try to sell the buildings.
An advertisement was placed in Preservation News in an effort to
generate interest gf preservationalists outside of the Roanoke Valley. The
property has been shown to a group from Philadelphia, one from Michigan and
to seven local individuals. In addition, packages of information have been
sent to over a dozen prospects who have inquired about the buildings.
- more -
In addition, Wishneff says many local preservationists and other indivi-
duals have given time and support to the project. A local architect has made
renderings and plans of how the buildings could be used. Another architect
donated measured drawings of the interior of the buildings. Both were used in
the marketing materials sent to prospective buyers.
Local developers have preformed an analysis on what it would take to
make the project economically feasible and the city has contacted firms spe-
cializing in historic rehabilitation to see if they were interested in the
project.
"We have seen tremendous support for this project, but we are reaching
the final days," said Reynolds. "Now is the time for people to step forward and
buy these buildings, and support groups such as the Roanoke Valley Preservation
Foundation. The community, not Just the City of Roanoke has been given this
30-day extension. If the community is truly interested in saving these
buildings, we need to hear from them now."
- 30 -
Of'flcec~fne City Cler~
September 14, 1988
File #236-216-249
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29286, authorizing accep-
tance of a grant and execution of a Grant Agreement and related
documents with the Virginia Division of Historic Landmarks in the
amount of $100,000.00, for the purpose of assisting in the pre-
servation of certain historic structures on Campbell Avenue,
S. W., which Ordinance No. 29286 was adopter by the Council of
the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday,
September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enco
Mr.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
John R. Martles, Chief of Community Planning
Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural Review Board
Brian J. Wi~shneff, Chief of Economic Oevelopment
Marie T. Pontius, Grants Monitoring Administrator
Rac,: 456 ..~ ,~c~,~l '5, d ',g 215 Church A,,,,en~e SW ~-~(~,',:lke ,.'irq,n~O 2,:~O11 (703) 08t-254t
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
lhe 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29286.
AN ORDINANCE authorizing the acceptance of a grant and the exe-
cution of a Grant Agreement and related documents with the Virginia
Division of Historlc Landmarks for the purpose of assisting in the
preservation of certain historic structures on Campbell Avenue; and
providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. The City Manager, or the Assistant City Manager, is autho-
rized to accept a grant from the Virginia Division of Historic
Landmarks in the amount of $100,000, to be used for those purposes
identified in the report of the City Manager to Council dated September
12, 1988; and to execute the requisite Grant Agreement and any related
documents in order to accept said grant on behalf of the City.
2. The Grant Agreement and related documents shall be approved
as to form by the City Attorney.
3. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the
municipal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and this ordi-
nance shall be in full force and effect upon its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
C~ce of ~e Ci~ Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #60-236-216-249
~r. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Scnlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29285, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1988-89 Capital Fund
Appropriations, providing for the appropriation of $100,000.00,
in connection with acceptance of a Division of Historic Landmarks
Grant Award, for the purpose of assisting in the preservation of
certain historic st.uctures on Campbell Avenue, S. W., which
Ordinance No. 29285 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CS~
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enco
pc:
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Ms. ~velyn $o (;unter, Seceetary, A.chitectura! Review Board
Mr. Brian Jo Wishneff, Chief of ~conomic Development
~s. Marie T. Pontius, Geants ~4onitoring Administrator
Roo~~ ~50 ~/~ i;.~..~i'D :~'~i~ ~15~iu,chA~en~e ~W £4c.~r~¢,~.e .,i~g~ma24011 (703) 981-254t
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29285.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reordain certain sections of the
1988-89 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 1988-89 Capital Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
General Government
Campbell Avenue Historic Properties (1) .............
Revenue
Due from State - Division of Historic Landmarks (2).
Misc. Revenue - Division of Historic Landmarks (3)..
1) Appr. from State (008-002-9620-9007)
2) Accts. Rec.
Historic Landmarks (008-1235)
3) Rev. - Historic
Landmarks (008-008-1234-1086)
$100,000
100,000
100,000
$13,116,881
100,000
$ 100,000
100,000
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members, Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of City Council:
Subject: Acceptance of Division of Historic Landmarks Grant Award
I. Backsround
mo
Real Estate Option A~reement designed to help save the Campbell
Avenue historic properties (118, 120, 122, and 124 West Campbell)
from demolition was approved by City Council on June 27, 1988.
B. Strategy to save buildings required that funds be obtained to help
an interested party finance a development/renovation plan which
would preserve the structures.
C. Grant funds from the State Division of Historic Landmarks (DHL) in the
amount of $200,000.00 were applied for to help with this effort.
II. Current Situation
A. Grant award of $100,000.00 has been offered to the City (see attached
letter).
B. Award does not require any matching funds from the City.
C. Conditions of award are as follows:
Official Registration - Properties must be formally added to State
Register of Historic Places and nominated to the National Register
of Historic Places.
o
Preservation Guarantee - City must prove to DHL that buildings
will be preserved by requiring buyers/developers, who benefit from
the grant funds, to give the Landmarks Board an easement to pre-
vent future unauthorized changes or demolition. A preservation
guarantee other than an easement may be acceptable to DHL if the
City presents evidence that requiring an easement from a buyer/
developer is inappropriate.
Plan Approval - Renovation work must be reviewed and approved by
DHL to assure compliance with the Secretary of Interior's
Standards for Rehabilitation Projects.
2
III. Recommendation
It is recommended that City Council concur in the acceptance of the
grant award by:
1. Authoriztn~ the City Manaser to send a letter to DHL accepting the
grant award of $100,000 under the conditions offered.
2. Appropriating $100,000 to accounts to be established by the Director
of Finance and establish a corresponding revenue estimate.
3o
Authorizin~ the City Manager to execute any additional grant agree-
memts that may be required by DHL with the approval of the City
Attorney and Director of Finance.
Respectful~ submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:EBRJr:mp
CC:
Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Brian Wishneff, Chief, Economic Development
Evie Gunter, City Planner
Divisions
His{'(. '~ Landmarks
Litter Control
Parks and Recreation
Soil and Water Conservation
B. C, LEYNES, JR.
Director
COMMONWEALTH of VIRQINIA
Department of Conservation and Historic Resources
Division of Historic Landmarks H. Bryan Mitchell, Director
September 1, 1988
221 Governor Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219
Telephone (804) 786-3143
Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant city Manager
Room 364, Municipal Building
215 C~%zrch Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
S£P O 6 1988
Roanoke City Office 0;
Economic Development
~nis is to cc~firm cur earlier d{.~cussion concerning state financial assis-
tance for the City's effort to save the Trinkle Buildings on Campbell Avenue
fZ~LL demolition. We have reviewed the City's application for assistance fz~u
the Virginia Historic Preservation Fund; based on that review we hereby offer
the city of Roanoke a total c~m.~tment of $100,000 toward the acquisition of the
in light of the small size of our w£~nt fund, but we believe that the importance
of the city's effort to save this significant row of buildings calls for an
exceptional response. We will pay the City $50,000 fz~. our cuz~=nt fiscal y~r
(1989) allocation and $50,000 f£~, our fiscal year 1990 allocation, the latter
becoming available next July 1.
been li~t~_ on the Virginia Iandmarks Register, the city must prepare and submit
an aocegtable P~gister report to the Virginia Historic Landmarks Board, and the
district must be formally added to the state register and ncatlnae~ to the
National Register of Historic Plaoes. We will be happy to provide the necessary
tec_hnical a~istance to you for this project.
Secca3d, the grant offering specified that recipients of $25,000 or more
would be e~pec~ to donate to tb~ Iandmarks Board a perpebml preservation
easement on the property assisted by state grant funds, unless the recipient
could demDnstrate to cur satisfaction that an ~=Jaent is inappropriate. In the
case of the Trinkle Buildings, the up[~3rtunity to ~,a~antee the preservation of
an extensive and p£~,dnent portion of RDanoke's historic streetscape is what
made the City's application so c~alling. Since we are making a single 9z~nt
to the City for $100,000, not four se~3arate 9~ts to four subsequent buyers,
we will need an assurance f~-cm-~ the city of the preservation of tb~ structures.
If the city is unable to broker a perpetual easement fzum, a prospective buyer,
it will be the city's burden to demonstrate that the effect is achieved in some
Mr. ~rl B. ~ynolds, Jr. Page Two
city of Roar~ke Se~ffmm~r 1, 1988
fir~4~g a b~yer who will take c~ o~e or more of the k~41dings a~d ~
~. ~ ~ ~~ ~t ~ ~ of a ~m] ~ ~Y at f~ ~
~o~hle ~ ~ ~i~, ~ ~t ~ ~ ~j~ fa~le ~ ~
~ ~ a ~t. ~ for ~ ~ ~ a b~ ~li~ti~
~ ~ ~ ~ti~ ~~. It ~d ~ ~p~ ~ Y~
~i~ ~ ~ive ~. Giv~ ~ ~i~le ~i~
a~~ ~ ~ P~, ~ ~d ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~vi~ly
wi~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~y ~e ~i~ ~ ~.
F~ly, ~ ~~rk~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ of
~e B,~l~ ~ ~ ~i~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ offi~
~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~-~ior's ~ for
~il~ ~4~. S~ it ~ l~i~l ~ ~ ~t ~ ~ili~ti~
~j~ ~ ~d ~ ~ a~il ~v~ of ~ p~ti~ ~
~t fo~ ~ti~ will ~ ~le, ~ ~i~ of ~ p~ ~rk
will ~ a ~ of ~ ~.
~ ~l~i~, ~ ci~ of ~ ~ ~t ~,,~ for i~
effo~ ~ ~-~ ~ ~e ~ ~ ~ of i~ ~ric ~. ~ ~
gl~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ p~i~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~s v~
~ effo~. ~le ~ 1~ size of ~ gf~ ~ ~ ~ f~
off~ ~ ~ ~ ~1 ~ of y~ ~, ~ ~ ~t ~ off~ will
~fici~ ~ ~ ~ ~i~ of ~ fz~ wi~ ~
~t w~l ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~t
~. ~ pl~ of f~ ~ ~ wi~ ~ f~t w~ ~t ~
will a~l~ ~t ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~-
~ra~ati~ ~ ~ ~ of ~ ~ ~li~. ~ 1~ fo~
Enclosure
1988
RECEIVED
C~ Manager's
Off/~
Office of ~e City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #24A-290
:~r. W. Robert ~lerbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29288, amending and reor-
daining subsection (d) of §18-30, Assessment of additional court
costs for support, Cede of the City of Roanoke (1979),
amended, to increase from three dollars ($3.00) to four dollars
($4.00), the assessment of casts for support of the Law Library
incident to civil actions or suits filed in courts in the City,
effective Octaber 1, 1988, which Ordinance No. 29288 was adopted
by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held
on Monday, September 12, 1988.
,Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: The Honorable Jack B. Coulter, Chief Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Roy B. Willet t, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Ci.cuit Cou.t
lliss Patsy Testerman, Clerk, Circuit Court
The Honorable Edward S. ~idd, Jr., Chief Judge, ~eneral
District Court
The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, General District
Court
The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General Dist.ict
~ourt
Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court
The Honorable Philip Tcompeter, Chief Judge. Juvenile and
Domestic Relations District Cou.t
2401 !, (703) 981-254t
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
Page 2
September 14, 1988
pc: The Honorable Fred L. Hoback, Jr., Judge, Juvenile and
Domestic Relations District Court
Ms. Patsy A. Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations
District Court
Mr. James Do Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Ms. Beve,ly Bury, City Librarian
Mr. Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney
Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest
Virginia Building, Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Mr. Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate, P. 0. Bo,~
13867, Roanoke, Virginia 24037
Mr. Daniel S. Brown, President, Roanoke Bar Association,
P. 0. Box 720, Roanoke, Virginia 24004
Ms. Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian
Mr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President Supplements, Municipal
Code Corporation, P. O. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA
The 12~h day of September, 1988.
No. 29288.
AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining subsection (a) of
$18-30, Assessment of additional court costs for support, Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to increase from three
dollars ($3.00) to four dollars ($4.00) the assessment of costs
for support of the Law Library incident to civil actions or suits
filed in courts in the City; and providing for an emergency and
an effective date.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Subsection (a) of $18-30, Assessment of additional court
costs for support, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended,
is amended and reordained as follows:
(a) As authorized by $42.1-70, Code of Virginia (1950),
as amended, there is hereby imposed an assessment of costs
incident to each civil action or suit filed in the courts of
record of the city, in an amount of four dollars ($4.00), and
an assessment of costs incident to each civil action or suit
filed in the courts not of record in the city, in the amount
of four dollars ($4.00), which assessments shall be collected
by the clerks of the respective courts for use by the city in
the maintenance of the law library in the courthouse of the
city, to be open for the use of the general public.
2. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the
municipal government, au emergency is deemed to exist, and this
ordinance shall be in full force and effect on and after Octo-
ber 1, 1988.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #60-290
Mr. Joel M. Schtanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schtanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29287, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1988-89 General Fund
Appropriations, provi,ding for the appropriation of $26,988.00, in
connection with an increase in the fee for filing of civil
actions in the Roanoke City Courts from $3.00 to $4.00, effective
October 1, 1988, which Ordinance No. 29287 was adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely, ;~b4ffA.4.,,.
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enco
pc:
The Honorable Jack B. Coulter, Chief Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Clifford R. ~Veckstein, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Edward S. Kidd, .Ir., Chief Judge, ~enerat
District Court
The Honorable Diane M. Strickland, Judge, General District
Court
The Honorable Julian H. Raney, Jr., Judge, General District
Court
The Honorable Philip Trompeter, Chief Judge, Juvenile and
Domestic Relations District Court
The Honorable Fred L, Hoback, Jr., Judge, Juvenile and
Domestic Relations Distriqt Court
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Ms. Beverly Bury, City Librarian
Mr. Clayne Calhoun, Librarian, Law Library
Ro~ :~ ¢56 F , :~,:H D. ,;d,,~ ZI 5 ~},~cP Aven~e S W R(~'oke virg,ma 24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
AN ORDINANCE to
1988-89 General Fund
emergency.
VIRGINIA,
No. 29287.
amend and reordain certain sections of the
Appropriations,' and providing for an
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 1988-89 General Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Judicial Administration Law Library (1-7) ...................................
$ 2,826,067
107,883
Revenue
Charges for Current Services Court Costs (8) .....................................
Regular Employee
Salaries
Retirement
FICA
Hospitalization
Life Insurance
Publications
Equipment
Law Library Fees
001-054-2150-1002
001-054-2150-1105
001-054-2150-1120
0-1125
001-054-2150-1130
001-054-2150-2040
001-054-2150-9005
001-020-1234-0819
$ 7,576
914
569
576
77
11,476
5,800
26,988
$ 3,221,219
509,588
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
existing, this
ATTEST:
City Clerk
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor Noel C. Taylor and
Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Members of Council:
SUBJECT: INCREASE OF FILING FEE TO SUPPORT THE LAW LIBRARY BRANCH OF
THE ROANOKE CITY PUBLIC LIBRARY
I. BACKGROUND
Roanoke Bar Association has requested the City to amend
the City of Roanoke Code Section 18-30 to authorize an
increase in the filing fee at the Law Library Branch of
the Roanoke City Public Library.
Local legislation is now permitted by Virginia Code
Section 42.1-70 allowing filing fees for actions filed in
the Roanoke City Courts of record and courts not of
record to be increased from the current fee of $3.00 to
$4.oo.
Income for the filing fee supports the Law Library's
budget. An increase of $1.00 in the filing fee would
provide an additional $26,988 based on the average number
of cases filed during the last five years.
II. CURRENT SITUATION
Roanoke City Library Administration has identified a need
for additional equipment, personnel, and books for the
Law Library.
Cataloging of the Law Library's collection needs to
be completed in order to list its holdings in a
union microfiche catalog with the library holdings
of Virginia Western Community College, Roanoke
County, Salem, and other Roanoke City Library
locations.
Additional personnel is needed to complete the
cataloging project as well as provide reference
assistance to library users. Usage has increased 30
percent since 1985.
New and updated legal materials are needed to meet
the information needs of the general public and the
legal community.
III.
IV.
Additional shelving to improve accessibility to
library materials is needed.
Bo
City Library Administration recommends the additional
income of $26,988 be used to:
Purchase a micro-computer for cataloging library
materials.
Change the status of the part-time temporary Library
Assistant II position to a regular full-time
position.
3. Purchase books and shelvinq.
ISSUES
A. Library operations.
B. Budget concerns.
ALTERNATIVES
Increase the fee for filing of civil actions in the
Roanoke City Courts from $3.00 to $4.00 effective October
1, 1988 and increase the Law Library's budget and revenue
estimate by $26,988.
1. Library operations.
a)
Users of area libraries would have access to
the Law Library's holdings through a union
microfiche catalog.
b)
The quality of library materials and staff's
ability to meet user demands will be improved.
2. Budget concerns. No additional cost to the City.
Do not increase the fee for filing of civil actions in
the Roanoke City Courts from $3.00 to $4.00 and do not
increase the Law Library's budget by $26,988.
1. Library operations.
a)
No increased accessibility to the Law Library's
collection for area library users.
b)
Library materials and services would not be
improved. User satisfaction will decline.
Budget concerns. City funds may be requested to
supplement the Law Library's budget.
V. RECOMMENDATION
City Council concur in the implementation of Alternative
A and increase the fee for filing of civil actions in the
~oanoke City Courts from $3.00 to $4.00 effective October
1, 1988, and appropriate the additional $26,988 to the
following accounts with a corresponding increase in the
revenue estimate, account #001-020-1234-0819.
1. } 5~800 to #001-054-2150-9005, Equipment.
2. }11,476 to #001-054-2150-2040, Publications.
~ 7~576 to #001-054-2150-1002, Regular Employee
Salaries.
4. $ 914 to #001-054-2150-1105, Retirement.
5. $ 569 to #001-054-2150-1120, FICA.
6. $ 576 to #001-054-2150-1125, Hospitalization.
$ 77 to #001-054-2150-1130, Life Insurance.
(Personnel costs based on 16 pay periods November 1,
1988 to June 12, 1989.)
Respectful ly submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/BAB/slw
CC:
Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Beverly Bury, City Librarian
Office of the Cit~ Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #60-304
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29289, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1988-89 General and Grant Funds
Appropriations, providing for the appropriation of $20,000.00 to
the budget of the Crisis Intervention Center, and $46,070.00 to
the Grant Fund, in connection with acceptance of funds, in the
total amount of $66,070.00, f,om the Virginia Department of
Corrections, to establish and administer a Family Oriented Group
Home Program by the Crisis Intervention Center, which Ordinance
~o. 29289 was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a
regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988o
Mary F. Parker~ CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc;
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
,]Is. Annie B. Krochalis, Program ~anager, Crisis Intervention
Center
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor Noel C. Taylor and
Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Members of Council:
SUBJECT: FUNDS FRON DEPARTNENT OF CORRECTIONS FOR SANCTUARY FANILY
ORIENTED GROUP HONE PROGRAN
I. BACKGROUND
Ao
City of Roanoke received funds from the Virginia
Department of Corrections to establish and administer a
Family Oriented Group Home Program for local children in
need of therapeutic residential placement.
Bo
Family Oriented Group Home is a community-based private
family dwelling contractually affiliated with a local
jurisdiction and the Virginia Department of Corrections
to serve children ages 10-18. This is a treatment
environment for a defined period of time (9 months).
The pro~ram will be administered through the Crisis
Intervention Center (Sanctuary), a department of the
Directorate of Human Resources, under the supervision of
the Crisis Intervention Center Group Home Program Manager
and will be known as "Sanctuary Family Oriented Group
Home Program."
II. CURRENT SITUATION
The Department of Corrections funds to establish and
administer a Family Oriented Group Home Program were
received by the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. Block Grant Annual $20,000
2. Initial Start-Up Fund $46,070
(Transferred from the City
of Staunton, 25th District
Family Oriented Group Home
Program, which has closed due
to underutilization.)
The Department of Corrections Board has approved the
ongoing Block Grant (#1 above) funding at $20,000.
Initial start-up funds will cover future budget deficits,
professional liability insurance fees, or unexpected
costs in this and future years until expended.
III.
The Family Oriented Group Home Program will operate from
the Crisis Intervention Center and be administered by its
current staff.
A separate cost center will be established and
administered by the staff of the Crisis Intervention
Center. This will hold annual block grant funds.
A grant pro~rams account will be established to hold the
initial start-up funds in this and future years until
expended.
The Family Oriented Group Home Program is subject to the
standards for Family Oriented Group Homes promulgated by
the Department of Corrections and standard auditing
practices.
ISSUES
Ao
Need for service. An increased need for therapeutic
placement exists in the community.
A waiting list of 6-30 children often exists for
placement at the Crisis Intervention Center.
Mental Health Services has closed two adolescent
residential facilities:
a} Adolescent Crisis Unit.
b) Kiwanis Independent Living Program.
Current programs do not provide for all adolescents
in need of services.
B. Budget.
Family Oriented Group Home Program will be operated
with State funds from the Department of Corrections.
Operations and costs in the future will continue to
be covered by this block grant. ($20,000 Block
Grant).
One-time initial funds ($46,070) are available from
the Department of Corrections through a program
closure in the City of Staunton. These funds will
need to be carried forwarded into the next year
until fully expended.
IV. ALTERNATIVES
Authorize the City Manager to accept the $66,070 in funds
from the State Department of Corrections to establish and
administer a Family Oriented Group Home Program by the
Crisis Intervention Center.
Need for service. Services to adolescents in need
of therapeutic placement in a residential group
setting will be increased.
Budget. The services can be provided at no
additional cost to the City.
Do not authorize the City Manager to accept the $66,070
in funds from the State Department of Corrections to
establish and administer a Family Oriented Group Home
Program by the Crisis Intervention Center.
Need for service. Services to adolescents in need
of therapeutic placement in a residential group
setting will not be increased.
Budget. The funds will have to be returned to the
State Department of Corrections.
V. RECOMMENDATION
City Council concur in the implementation of Alternative A and
appropriate $20,000 to the budget of the Crisis Intervention
Center and $46,070 to the Grant Fund for a Family Oriented
Group Home Program in an account to be established by the
Director of Finance.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH/JDR/ABK/slw
CC:
Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Annie B. Krochalis, Program Manager, Crisis Intervention Center
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
AN ORDINANCE
1988-89 General
an emergency.
WHEREAS,
Government
exist.
No. 29289.
to amend and reordain certain sections of the
and Grant Funds Appropriations, and providing for
for the usual daily operation of the Municipal
of the City of Roanoke, an emergency is declared to
THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that certain sections of the 1988-89 General and Grant
Funds Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
General Fund
Appropriations
Public Safety
Crisis Intervention Center (1) ......................
Revenue
Grants-in-Aid Commonwealth
Family Oriented Group Home Program 2) ..............
$23,617,947
360,913
$49,435,016
20,000
Grant Fund
Appropriations
Health and Welfare
Family Oriented Group Home Program
Revenue
Health and Welfare
Family Oriented Group Home Program
$ 302,197
46,070
$ 302,197
46,070
1) Purchased Services
2) Family Oriented
Group Home Revenue
3) Purchased Services
4) Family Oriented
Group Home - State
Revenue
(001-054-3360-3160) $20,000
(001-020-1234-0684) 20,000
(035-054-5125-3160) 46,070
(035-035-1234-7059) 46,070
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency existing, this
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Office of the Ciry, Cler'k
September 14, 1988
File #24A-64
Mr. Wo Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29290, amending and reor~
daining §§7-13, 7-30 and 7-32~ and repealing §7-15 of Chapter 7,
~uilding Regulations, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, which Ordinance No. 29290 was adopted by the Councii of
the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday,
September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
~ary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:
Enc.
pc:
ra
The Honorable Kenneth E. T,abue, Chief Judge, Ct,cult Court,
305 East Main Street,_Salem, Virginia 24153
T~e Honorable Jack B. Coulter, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable Clifford R. Weckstein, Judge, Ci,cuit Court
The Honorable Roy B. Willett, Judge, Circuit Court
The Honorable G. O. Clemens, Judge, Circuit Courtj P. O. Box
1016, Salem, Virginia 24153
The Honorable Philip Trompeter, Chief Judge, Juvenile and
Domestic Relations District Court
The Honorable Fred L. ~oback, Jr., 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 Diane M. Strickland, Judge, General District
Court
Roc~ :~56 '~", ~:~lB,~,i'Ji~;~ ~:~.Ci,~cnAven~,~ SW R~,~:nc:~,e v,rg~ma24011 (703) 981-2541
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
Page 2
September 14, 1988
pc:
Miss Patsy Testerman, Clerk, Circuit Court
Ms. Patsy Bussey, Clerk, Juvenile and Domestic Relations
District Court
Mr. Ronald Albright, Clerk, General District Court
Mr. Donald S. Caldwell, Commonwealth's Attorney
Mr. Raymond F. Leven, Public Defender, Suite 4B, Southwest
Virginia Building, Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Mr. Bobby D. Casey, Office of the Magistrate, P. O. Box
13867, Roanoke, Virginia 24037
Ms. Clayne M. Calhoun, Law Librarian
Mr. Robert L. Laslie, Vice President - Supplements, Municipal
Code Corporation, P. 0. Box 2235, Tallahassee, Florida 32304
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. RonaId H. Miller, Building Commissioner/Zoning
Administrator
IN TRE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29290.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §97-13, 7-30 and 7-32, and
repealing 97-15 of Chapter 7, Building Regulations, Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. Sections 7-13, 7-30 and 7-32 of Chapter 7, Building Regula-
tions, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, are amended to
read and provide as follows:
$7-13. Adopted; w~re copies filed.
The provi~ions, requirements and regulations
contained in that~rtain building code known as the
Uniform Statewide Bu~l~ing Code of Virginia, including
and comprised of: Volume..1, New Construction Code, 1987
Edition; Building Officia~ and Code Administrators
International, Inc. (BOCA) ]lasic Building Code, 1987
Edition; BOCA National Plumbing Code, 1987 Edition;
BOCA National Mechanical Code, 1987 Edition; the
National Fire Protection Association National Electri-
cal Code 1987 Edition; and the One and Two Family
Dwelling Code of the Council of American Building
Officials, 1986 Edition with 1987 amendments; as the
same may from time to time hereafter be amended by
the State Board of Housing and Community Development;
are hereby adopted by the City and are incorporated
herein by reference as fully as if set out at length
herein, and the same shall be controlling in the
construction, reconstruction, alteration, enlargement,
repair, conversion or demolition of buildings and
other structures contained within the corporate limits
of the City. Such code shall be referred to herein-
after as the Building Code. Copies of such Code shall
be kept on file in the Office of the Building Commis-
sioner and in the Office of the City Clerk.
$7-30. Adopted; where copies filed.
The provisions, requirements and regulations con-
tained in that certain building maintenance code known
as the BOCA National Existing Structure Code, 1987
Edition, as amended and adopted and incorporated in
Volume II of the Building Maintenance Code of the 1987
Edition of the Virginia Uniform Statewide Building
Code, as the same may from time to be time be amended,
is hereby adopted as the building maintenance code of
the city. Copies of such code, and any amendments
thereto, shall be kept on file in the office of the
building commissioner and the city clerk.
§7-32.
Building maintenance division created; compo-
sition.
Pursuant to the provisions of ~116.0 of the city's
building code, there is hereby created a building main-
tenance division of the city's board of building code
appeals, which shall consist of five (5) members who
shall be appointed by city council. Such division shall
have jurisdiction to consider appeals pursuant to the
provisions of ~108.0 of the city building maintenance
code.
2. Section 7-15, Projection of cornices of show windows, Code of
the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, is hereby REPEALED.
3. In order to provide for the usual daily operation of the munici-
pal government, an emergency is deemed to exist, and this ordinance shall
be in full force and effect upon its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Request Adoption of Ordinance Amending Sec. 7-13,
7-30 and 7-32, City Code, Building Regulations;
Repeal Sec. 7-15, City Code.
I. Current Situation:
Existing regulations under Chapter 7, Sec. 7-13 and
7-30, Roanoke City Code, adopt by reference the Uniform
Statewide Building Code of Virginia, which is comprised of
the BOCA Basic Building Code/1984, the BOCA Basic Plumbing
Code/1984, the BOCA Basic Mechanical Code/1984, the One
and Two Family Dwelling Code/1983 edition and 1984
supplement, the NFPA National Electrical Code/1984. The
above-mentioned codes have been in effect in the city
since March 1, 1986. Section 7-15 of the City Code re-
gulates projections of cornices of show windows.
The State Board of Housing and Community Development has
adopted Volume I - New Construction Code 1987 Edition,
including model building, plumbing and mechanical codes of
the Building Officials and Code Administrators
International, Inc. and the electrical code of the
National Fire Protection Association 1987 edition, and
supplemented by adoption of the One & Two Family Dwelling
Code 1986 edition, with 1987 supplements (published by the
Council of American Building Officials) and Volume II,
Building Maintenance Code 1987 edition, effective March 1,
1988. Projection of cornices of show windows, as referred
to in Sec. 7-15, are considered part of a building and,
therefore, are addressed under yard requirements in the
zoning ordinance.
II. Issues:
A. Mandatory, statewide uniform regulation;
B. Legal requirements.
III. Alternatives:
A. Authorize the amendment of Sec. 7-13, 7-30 and 7-32,
Roanoke City Code, to adopt Volume I, New Construction
Code 1987 edition, including model building, plumbing,
mechanical codes of the Building Officials and Code
Administrators International, Inc. and the electrical code
of the National Fire Protection Association 1987 edition,
and supplemented by adoption of the One & Two Family
Dwelling Code 1986 edition, with 1987 supplements
(published by the Council of American Building Officials)
and Volume II Building Maintenance Code 1987 edition,
effective March 1, 1988, and repeal Sec. 7-15, Code of
City of Roanoke (1979), as amended.
Mandatory, statewide uniform regulations must be
enforced to be in compliance with state law.
2. Legal requirements would be met.
Do not authorize the amendment of Sec. 7-13, 7-30,
and 7-32, and repeal of Sec. 7-15, Roanoke City Code.
Mandatory, statewide uniform regulations not adopted
would be in conflict with the General Assembly of the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
2. Legal requirements would not be met.
IV. Recommendation:
City Council concur with Alternative "A" and amend Sec. 7-13,
7-30 and 7-32, and repeal Sec. 7-15, Roanoke City Code, as in
the attached ordinance prepared by the City Attorney.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:RHM:ra
Attachment
CC:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Building Commissioner
O'~ce of Yne Ci~,, Cler~
September 14, 1988
File #249-216
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
Your report with regard to a proposed Preservation Strategy,
recon~nending that you be authorized to proceed with implemen-
tation of recommendations and report as to progress on Monday,
September 26, 1988, was before the Council of the City of ~oanoke
at a regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, Council con-
cuffed iq the recommendation.
Sincerely,
Mary Fo Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc: Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works Mr. Charles M. Huffine, City Engineer
Mr. Ronald H. ~filler, Building Commissioner/Zoning
Administrator
' Mr. John R. Marlles, Chief of Community Planning
Ms. Evelyn S. Gunter, Secretary, Architectural Review Board
R~; ~56 '~ J iC;~]~ ~Ji :1~1, ]g Z! 5 ~ ] ~'~Cb A,.,en,~e SW F~c,~,~ohe wrg~ma 2401 t (703) 981-2541
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Proposed Preservation Strategy
I. Backsround:
Roanoke Vision identified the preservation of cultural and
historic resources as an important community value in planning
for the future of Roanoke and its neighborhoods.
Comprehensive Plan recommended that a detailed historic
and cultural inventory plan be undertaken to develop
expanded strategies and programs for the preservation of
historic resources and neighborhood character.
Zoning: A Process for Balancin~ Preservation and Chang,
published as part of the City's comprehensive plan,
specifically addressed the importance of history on the
successful revitalization of downtown and the City's
neighborhoods. The document recommended zoning changes
in local and state legislation to address preservation
issues.
Preliminary survey of known historic structures in the City
was undertaken in conjunction with Roanoke Vision in 1985.
The survey listed properties on the National Register of
Historic Places, those potentially eligible for the National
Register, and those of local significance.
Ce
City's Zonin$ Ordinance, comprehensively amended in 1987,
reflected preservation values and provided changes in land
development regulations to promote the preservation of
neighborhood resources. The changes included:
New H-2, Neighborhood Preservation, historic district was
created to encourage compatible new construction.
New CN, Neighborhood Cor~m~ercial, district was created to
protect neighborhood shopping areas and maintain their
pedestrian, residential character.
Members of City Council
Page 2
September 12, 1988
New provision for special uses in historic structures was
included which provides for alternative uses in
structures of historic merit by a special exception
permit and after architectural review.
Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) district
provides for increased density of housing units when an
existing building is preserved.
II. Current Situation:
me
Historic preservation is a continuing community concern that
has been an issue both locally as well as nationally.
State of Virginia is presently studying the preservation
issue. Last year the governor appointed a commission to study
historic preservation and make recommendations for change.
Regional resource centers for history and archaeology were
identified as needed as well as changes in state enabling
legislation.
In Roanoke, major preservation issues have involved most
recently Huntingdon, the Trinkle buildings on Campbell Avenue,
the Williams buildings on Church Avenue, the Keagy House on
Lee Highway, the Boxley house, and the Queen Anne house on
Washington Avenue.
Plannin~ Commission is considering the inclusion of 16
buildings in downtown Roanoke for H-1 historic designation.
These buildings are either already on the National Register of
Historic Places or are potentially eligible for the Register.
The request, initiated by the City's Architectural Review
Board, was tabled several months ago to allow further
discussion with property owners and staff study of potential
financial incentives and strategies. Action by the Planning
Co~ission on this request is expected at its October 5, 1988
meeting. City Council action will be scheduled for October
10, 1988.
Piannin~ staff has investigated successful preservation
approaches and strategies utilized by cities across the
country. The results of this research, summarized in
Attachment A, indicate that the most successful programs
employ a balanced preservation strategy, which includes
regulatory measures designed to protect historic structures,
financial incentives to encourage property owners to preserve
and restore historic buildings, increased penalties for owners
who intentionally neglect or illegally demolish historic
structures, flexible code interpretation for adaptive reuse
projects utilizing historic structures, expedited plan review
for development projects involving historic properties,
community education regarding the benefits of historic
preservation, and increased technical assistance to property
owners and developers of historic properties.
Members of City Council
Page 3
September 12, 1988
City's existing preservation approach, summarized in
Attachment B, emphasizes a regulatory approach to historic
preservation. While the City has received national attention
for its success in revising the City's comprehensive plan and
zoning ordinance to promote preservation, recent events have
demonstrated the vulnerability of the City's historic
resources to economic pressures and other forces. Greater
emphasis needs to be placed on non-regulatory approaches to
historic preservation.
III. Issues:
Need exists for the City to adopt a more balanced preservation
strategy which helps provide a reasonable rate of return to
owners of historic properties, to counter economic forces and
to encourage systematic rehabilitation of historic structures
in the City.
Timing is critical. Better strategic planning is needed to
address properties and issues before the threat of demolition.
Funding in order to provide incentives to owners or developers
of historic properties has been found to be a key ingredient
in successful preservation efforts.
Investment by private or public owners must be secure to be
effective in preserving historic structures.
Neighborhood heritage is important to maintaining and
enhancing the quality of life in the City and increasing
property values.
IV.
Alternative program activities which would complement the City's
existing efforts and provide a more proactive approach to
preserving the City's historic resources are outlined in Attachment
C. Major recommendations include:
Expansion of the City's existing tax abatement program for
qualified properties in designated historic districts from
five years to ten years as permitted by state code.
Establishment of a City-sponsored, low-interest loan program
to provide an incentive for private revitalization efforts in
designated historic districts. The program could be
administered by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority.
Encourage the establishment of a privately financed low-.
interest loan program similar to programs operating in over
ten other cities and towns in Virginia. The loan program
could be capitalized by equal commitments by local financial
institutions and would complement the City's loan program
described above.
Members of City Council
Page 4
September 12, 1988
Expansion of the H-1 Historic District and H-2, Neishborhood
Preservation District where appropriate to protect existing or
potentially eligible National Register properties.
Seek amendments to the state code which increase the penalty
for illegally razing or demolishing historic structures and
help prevent major deterioration or demolition of historic
structures.
Increase the City's capability to provide technical assistancn
to owners or developers of historic properties in such areas
as financing, design assistance, regulatory requirements,
etc., by contracting with private firms or non-profit
organizations to provide these essential services. This goal
can be partially achieved if Roanoke is successful in being
designated as the demonstration community for the Division of
Historic Landmarks Regional Center program (see Attachment D).
Ge
Support the efforts of the Roanoke Valley Preservation
Foundation and the Roanoke Valley History Museum to increase
community preservation education programs.
Recommendation:
That Council authorize the City Manager to proceed with
implementation of recommendations and to report progress on
September 26, 1988.
Respectfully submitted,
City Manager
WRH:JRM:mpf
cc: Assistant City Manager
Director of Finance
City Attorney
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Building Commissioner/Zoning Administrator
Chief, Community Planning
Secretary, Architectural Review Board
ATTACHMENT A
Analysis of Historic Preservation Approaches
August 31, 1988
Background
Introduction: Preservation techniques and incentives used by local
governments tend to fall into six (6) major approaches: regulatory,
incentives, disincentives, procedural (administrative), educational and
technical assistance. The most successful preservation programs around
the country blend these approaches using a "carrot and stick"
philosophy. Each of these approaches is summarized below:
Regulatory - Regulatory approaches attempt to protect historic
structures by delaying demolition and preventing inappropriate
modifications to the exterior of structures. Ordinances
providing for the designation of historic districts represent
the traditional and most common approach to historic
preservation at the local level. The regulatory approach by
itself will not prevent "demolition by neglect" nor will it
relieve economic pressure to demolish and redevelop to a more
profitable use.
Incentives: Incentive programs function as inducements to
preserve historic structures. Incentive programs can be built
into a community's zoning ordinance such as density bonuses or
they can take the form of financial inducements such as
low-interest loans, grants, facade easements, and real estate
tax relief.
Penalties: Examples of this approach include direct financial
penalties or fines imposed on property owners who illegally
demolish or intentionally neglect historic structures and/or
the loss of the use of the federal investment tax credit and
accelerated depreciation.
Procedural/Administrative: Expedited review procedures and
flexible interpretation of the building code are two examples
of procedural/administrative techniques that can be used to
facilitate preservation. In Virginia, Section 513.1 Special
Historic Buildings and Districts of the UVSBC Code provides
for flexibility by exempting buildings or structures
identified and classified by the state or local government
authority as historic buildings from the mandatory provisions
of the code, subject to certain requirements.
Education: Education of citizens and the development
community can help assure the preservation of historic
structures and sites by increasing citizen awareness of such
resources and providing information or instruction on proper
techniques to follow in the restoration or rehabilitation of
historic structures.
Technical/Design Assistance: The availability of technical
and design assistance is a critical element of a local
preservation program. Preservation of historic structures is
often a time consuming and frustrating process. Local staff
support is often needed to assist property owners and
developers work through the intricacies of a restoration
project by preparing feasibility studies, marketing properties
and assisting with locating financial assistance. Design
assistance in the form of conceptual drawings of exterior
elevations is critical in helping property owners and
potential developers visualize the hidden possibilities of a
historic structure.
Summary: None of the six approaches by themselves are totally effective
in preventing demolition of historic structures. Generally, the most
successful preservation programs around the country have used a
combination of the above approaches using a "carrot and stick"
philosophy.
ATTACHMENT B
Summary of Existing Preservation Techniques/Approaches in
Roanoke, Virginia
August 31, 1988
Introduction: Specific preservation techniques and approaches presently
employed in the City of Roanoke are identified in Table 1 (attached) and
are summarized below:
Regulatory - The City's zoning ordinance, comprehensively
amended in 1987, reflected preservation values and provided
changes in local development regulations to promote the
preservation of neighborhood resources. These changes
included:
A new H-2, Neighborhood Preservation, historic district
to encourage compatible new construction in the City's
older inner-city neighborhoods.
A new CN, Neighborhood Commercial district, to protect
neighborhood shopping areas and maintain their
pedestrian, residential character.
A new provision expanding the list of allowable uses
permitted in historic structures; and
A Residential Planned Unit Development (RPUD) district
which provides for increased bonus density of housing
units when an existing building is preserved.
Incentives: Unlike a number of other cities around the
country, Roanoke does not offer any specific financial
incentive programs such as low-interest loan or grant programs
to encourage preservation or rehabilitation of historic
structures in the City~ In 1981, C~ty Council did approve a
program authorized by s58-3220 and s58.3221 of the Virginia
State Code,(1950), as amended which exempts owners from paying
increased property taxes on improvements to qualified
residential, commercial or industrial properties. In order to
qualify for the exemption which is available anywhere in the
City for five years, the building must be at least 25 years
old and the rehabilitation must increase the building's
assessed value by 40% for a residential structure and 60% for
a commercial or industrial structure. The State Code
authorizes the exemption for up to ten years.
Penalties: This City has implemented historic district zoning
in the Market District, Warehouse District, and in Old
Southwest. There is a problem with the minimal penalties
authorized by the State Code for razing a historic structure
without following the required procedures. For violations of
local zoning ordinances, ~15.1-491(e) authorizes a penalty of
not less than $10 nor more than $1,000.
In its 1987-88 legislative ~rogram, the City recommended to
the General Assembly that ~15.1-503.2 of the State Code, the
enabling legislation for local historic preservation
ordinances, be amended to state that the razing or demolition
of a historic structure in violation of a local historic
district zoning ordinance adopted pursuant to ~15.1-503.2
shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor which carries a
penalty of confinement in jail for not more than 12 months and
a fine of not more than $1,000, either or both.
Procedural/Administrative: Although the City's new zoning
ordinance includes a number of new mechanisms to improve
coordination of the development review process, there are no
specific provisions designed to coordinate and expedite the
review of historic renovation or adaptive reuse projects. The
potential exists for delays in the approval process when
conflicts occur between the health, safety, and welfare
requirements of the UVSBC and the Secretary of the Interior's
Standards for Historic Preservation.
o
Education - Ongoing public educational opportunities in the
area of historic preservation are extremely limited within the
City. The Roanoke Valley History Museum sponsors a Local
History Appreciation Program for third graders in both the
City and County school systems. The history museum also has
displays and exhibits which describe the history of the
Roanoke Valley. The City's Office of Community Planning
produced two publications on historic preservation entitled,
Historic Preservation in Roanoke, Virginia, which serves as a
primer on historic preservation in the City and an information
poster on the Old Southwest Historic District. There are
presently no ongoing workshops, design guideline, or training
programs to instruct property owners or developers on proper
restoration/ rehabilitation techniques.
Technical Assistance: The availability of ongoing technical
assistance to property owners and developers is also extremely
limited. The City's Office of Community Planning has one City
Planner who normally devotes approximately 30% of her time to
working with the Architectural Review Board addressing
preservation issues in the City. As a result of recent
events, this has increased to approximately 75% creating a
strain on the department's resources. The part-time City's
Historic Review Officer, housed within the Office of Grants
Compliance, is limited to providing technical assistance to
preservation projects utilizing CDBG funds. There is no
design assistance presently available in the City.
Summary: The City presently lacks a balanced approach to historic
preservation. The City has received national attention for its success
in revising the City's comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance to
promote preservation, design quality and neighborhood conservation.
However, recent events in Roanoke have demonstrated the vulnerability of
the City's historic resources to economic pressures. Greater emphasis
needs to be placed on the non-regulatory approaches to historic
preservation.
T~LE 1
SUMMARY
Existing Preservation Approaches/Techniques
Roanoke, Virginia
June 28, 1988
Regulatory Availability
Options
Local Historic Districts
National Register Districts
Individual Register Listings
Special Design Districts*
Incentives
Options
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Low-Interest Loan Program
Incentive Grants
Real Estate Tax Relief
Zoning "Bonuses"
No
No
Yes (5 years)
Yes
Disincentives
Options
Direct Fines/Penalties
Loss of Federal Tax Incentives
Fines for Not Maintaining Properties*
Procedural/Administrative Options
Expedited/Coordinated Review
Procedures for Historic Structures
Flexible Code Interpretation
Education
Options
Information Clearinghouse
In-School Education Programs
Workshop/Training Program
Brochures/Publications
Technical Assistance
Options
Minimal
Yes
No
No
Limited
No
Limited
No
Limited
- Staff Assistance Limited
- Design Assistance No
* Would require amendment of State Enabling Legislation
ATTACHMENT C
Summary of Recommended Preservation Incentives/Techniques
Roanoke, Virginia
August 31, 1988
Introduction: The following additional incentives/techniques are
recommended to supplement the City's existing efforts and to provide a
more balanced approach to encouraging preservation of the City's
historic resources. Implementation of several of the recommendations
may require commitment of additional financial resources and/or
amendments to state enabling legislation. The recommendations are not
in priority order.
REGULATORY
Extend the H-i, Historic District and H-2, Neighborhood
Preservation District where appropriate to protect existing or
potentially eligible National Register properties.
Support amendments to the State enabling legislation (Section
15.1-503.2, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, through the City's
legislative program, which:
expand the range of zoning tools available to assist in
preservation efforts; particularly zoning tools which help
compensate property owners for any loss in value resulting
from restrictions on demolition of historic structures.
encourage the selective preservation of designated areas
outside of local historic districts where such designation may
not be acceptable or appropriate. The creation of special
design districts would be helpful in protecting the fringe
areas around designated historic districts and individual
historic structures from incompatible development.
INCENTIVES
1. Extend the City's existing exemption for qualified residential,
commercial or industrial rehabilitation projects from 5 years to 10
years in designated historic districts, as permitted by State Code.
2. Establish a City-sponsored, low-interest loan program to encourage
private revitalization efforts in designated historic districts.
The program could be administered by the Roanoke Redevelopment And
Housing Authority.
Encourase the establishment of a privately financed low-interest
loan program similar to programs operating in over ten other citie~
and towns in Virginia. The loan program could be capitalized by
e~ual comitments by local f~n~cial institutions and would
complement the City's loan program described above.
Amend the City's zoning ordinance to include additional
"incentives" to encourage preservation/revitalization of exist~n¥
structures and more sensitive new infill construction in designated
historic districts.
PENALTIES
Continue to support amendments, through the City's legislative
program, that increase the penalty for illegally razing or
demolishin~ historic structures in violation of a local historic
district ordinance adopted pursuant to ~15.1-503.2.
PROCEDURAL/ADMINISTRATIVE
Continue ongoing efforts to streamline the City's overall
development review process.
me
Establish a qualified City review team consisting of
representatives from the planning, engineering, and building
departments trained in historic restoration and adaptive reuse
techniques to respond to specific development proposals involving
historic properties.
TECHNICAL/DESIGN ASSISTANCE
1.
Provide free or low-cost design assistmnr~, Very few building
owners of historic properties have expertise in the areas of
architectural styles, design development and construction
techniques. Free or low-cost design services geared to the owner's
budget and time frame are one of the strongest incentives the City
could offer.
Increase the ability of the City to provide technical assistance
owners or developers of historic properties in such areas as:
Identifying financial resources and locating potential
investors.
Conducting or assisting in the preparation of preliminary
feasibility studies (pro-forma analysis) to help convince
building owners/developers of the economic viability of
specific development proposals.
Actively promote Roanoke as the location for the Division of
Historic Landmarks proposed Regional Resource Center. The location
of the Regional Resource Center in Roanoke would increase the level
of state provided preservation technical assistance not only to
Roanoke but to ail of Southwest Virginia.
EDUCATION
Support the efforts of other organizations, includin~ the Roanoke
Valley Preservation Foundation and the Roanoke Valley History
Museum, to provide community preservation education programs.
Prepare and distribute additional publications promoting the
benefits of historic preservation and investing in the City's
designated historic districts.
Divisions
Hist(,ric Landmarks
Litter Control
Parks and Recreation
Soil and Water Conservation
B. C. LEYNES, JR.
Director
COMMONWEALTH of VIRGINIA
Department of Conservation and Historic Resources
Division of Hist oric Landmarks H. Bryan Mitchell, Director
ATTACHMENT D
Richmond. Virginia 23219
Telephone (804) 786-3143
VIRGINIA D][¥XSION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS P. EGIONAL CERTr_~
REQUEST FOR PROPOSA?~
DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT: 5:00 PM, OCTOBER 14, 1988
INTRODUCTION
The Division of Historic Landmarks of the Department of
Conservation and Historic Resources intends to establish a
pilot regional office to improve its ability to meet the
needs of varied and numerous client groups on the local and
regional level, as well as offering increased protection to
Virginia's historic resources. The Division is able to
provide professional staffing for the regional center,
supervision of the center by the Richmond office and a
portion of the operation costs.
It is the intent of the Division to select the location of
the center based on mroDosals received from public entitie~
interested in hosting the center under a cooperativ~
agreement with the Division. Private organizations wishinq
to aPPlY should work through a Public entitY in the proDosed
region to submit the application. Conversely, public
entities should demonstrate in their application tho
interest and involvement of appropriate pr~vat~
organizations within the DroDosed region.
While the program emphasis for the center will depend in
part on the needs of the selected region and the quality and
thoroughness of existing survey data, the center, with the
guidance and assistance of the Division staff in Richmond,
will identify and nominate significant historic areas to the
state and national registers, produce survey and technical
reports, and provide technical assistance to local
governments, architectural review boards, preservation
organizations, and land owners. It will work with local
governments and planning district commissions to establish
local and regional preservation goals and priorities.
Page 2
Applicants should submit proposals that clearly demonstrate
their ability to host such a center and their interest in
working cooperatively with other local or regional groups.
The effectiveness of the Division of Historic Landmarks in
encouraging the protection of Virginia's historic and
archaeological resources depends upon being able to deal
directly with those resources and with those individuals and
organizations that control or affect the resources. The
establishment of a regional office is an effort to improve
that effectiveness. In response to our proposal for a
statewide system of regional offices the Governor and the
1988 General Assembly provided funds for one such office on
a pilot basis through the biennium that ends on June 30,
1990. The level of accomplishment by the pilot office will
in substantial measure determine whether the state
establishes a full system of regional ~reservation offices.
The pilot nature of the project, then, is not a temporary
demonstration to encourage localities to take on the program
following the demonstration; instead, the project is to
demonstrate whether the state government should expand its
own commitment.
While the pilot office is a possible forerunner of an
expanded state effort, the level of funding provided for
this pilot project assumes that there will be some
assistance coming from the host region. This assistance is
discussed further below. The level and kind of assistance
offered will be taken into account in selecting the location
of this pilot office.
The purpose of the regional center is to concentrate state
preservation resources in an area of critical need, thereby
enhancing the Division's ability to deliver services in the
most effective, timely and efficient manner possible.
The responsibilities of the regional staff would include the
following:
To encourage the protection of significant
architectural and historic resources by
developing, implementing and monitoring an on-
going comprehensive regional program for the
identification,permanent recording, evaluation,
registration, and sensitive treatment of historic
Page 3
buildings, structures, districts, objects and
cultural landscapes.
To identify, gather, assess, manage, and
disseminate information leading to the
preservation of prehistoric and historic
archaeological resources. This would include
assisting with and/or coordinating rescue
archaeology on significant sites threatened by
destruction.
To assist localities and planning district
commissions with preservation planning; to
work with architectural review boards to
improve the level of local protection of
historic resources; to provide preservation
education programs; to serve as clearinghouse for
general preservation information and Division
responsibilities and activities.
RESOURCES TO BE PROVIDED BY DIVISION OF HISTORIC LANDMARKS:
The Division will provide three qualified professional
employees who will work under the supervision of the
Richmond office. The regional staff will be Division staff
members and will consist of the following:
Regional Environmental Specialist
Archaeologist
Architectural Historian
(office supervisor)
In addition, the Division will provide approximately $40,000
per state fiscal year for temporary and/or part-time staff
and operating costs to mesh as appropriate with the
assistance provided by the host.
RESOURCES REOUESTED FROM APPLICANT:
At a minimum, applicants should be able to provide office
and storage space. Other needs possibly supplied by
applicant could include any of the following:
use of copier, use of vehicle, telephone, administrative
support, clerical support, interns or volunteers, access to
computer/wordprocessing, existing preservation-related
programs, office furniture and equipment, camera equipment,
darkroom facilities, curation facilities, answering
machine/service.
Page 4
SELECTION CONSIDERATIONS:
-- does the proposed regional center location serve an
area not well served by the Richmond office?
-- does the proposgl demonstrate an ability and
commitment to serving the region surrounding the
proposed location?
-- what would be the population served?
-- is there any indication of broad-based local/regional
support or interest among local governments,
legislators, and preservation groups?
-- does the proposal include adequate office space,
facilities, equipment, etc.?
-- does the proposal address areas under-represented in
the Division's inventory and the Virginia Landmarks
Register and the National Register of Historic
Places ?
-- could the proposed location respond to the needs of
areas threatened by development pressures?
-- what local resources would be directly/indirectly
available to the center? What existing local
programs would enhance and be enhanced by the
work of the regional office?
-- what is the proposed center's potential for
demonstrating the wide range of benefits that
would be derived from a statewide system of
regional offices and for promoting the estab-
lishment of that system?
NATURE OF AGREEMENT:
Selected applicant and Division will negotiate a Memorandum
of Agreement specifying obligations of both parties for an
initial period expiring July 1, 1990. It is the intention of
the Division, should both parties be interested and able,
that the arrangement be continued beyond this initial
funding period.
Ail proposals must be received no later than 5:00 PM on
O t . Selection will be made by October 28, and
the office will be opened Immediately upon selection of
staff. Applicants are encouraged to inform the Division as
soon as possible of space they intend to make available for
the regional office, so that any necessary site visit can be
scheduled expeditiously.
Page 5
APPLICATION
Ail proposals must contain the following:
1. Proposal cover sheet
Statement of what applicant is willing to
contribute
3. Description of proposed regional center facility
4e
Information on any special benefits offered by
proposed location and sponsoring organization
5. Statement of applicant's priorities and needs
6. Estimated date of availability
Proposed area to be served (the attached map of
cultural regions is meant to be illustrative but
not prescriptive; the proposed region should
include several jurisdictions but obviously will
be influenced by logistics)
List of staff, specialists and other persons
willing or able to be involved with regional
center
Page 6
D~vmSION OF HISTORIC
PROPOSAL
Proposal Cover Sheet
1. Applicant:
2. Address:
3. Applicant Contact:
Title:
Address:
Phone:(
4. Authorized Applicant Signature:
Name (print):
Title:
I certify that the information in this proposal is accurate
to the best of my knowledge, and that I am authorized to
make this proposal.
Date
signature
Applications should be delivered to:
Director
Division of Historic Landmarks
221 Governor Street
Richmond, VA 23219
(804) 786-3143
DEADLINE FOR RECEIPT OF APPLICATION:
1988
5:00 PM, OCTOBER 14,
C,~ce of ~he CiW Cle~
September 14, 1988
File #60-236-265
~fr. Joel ,~. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29291, amending and reor-
daining certain sections of the 1988-89 Grant Fund
Appropriations, providing for the appropriation of $8,101.00 to
Public Works, Litter Control, for transfer to the Clean Valley
Council in connection with grant funds received by the City from
the Department of Waste Management, Division of Litter Control
and Recycling, for the purpose of developing and coordinating
a litter control program for the entire Roanoke Valley, which
Ordinance No. 29291 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc:
Ms. Ann E. Weaver, Executive Director, Clean Valley Council,
P. O. Box 3320, ~oanoke, Virginia 24015
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
(703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
lhe 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29291.
AN ORDINANCE to amend and reo~dain certain sections
1988-89 Grant Fund Appropriations, and providing for an
emergency.
of the
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 1988-89 Grant Fund
Appropriations, be, and the same are hereby, amended and
reordained, to read as follows, in part:
Appropriations
Public Works
Litter Control FY89 (1) ..............................
Revenue
Public Works ~
Litter Control FY89 (2) ..............................
1) Fees for Prof.
Services (035-052-5116-2010) $ 8,101
2) State Grant
Revenue (035-035-1234-7034) 8,101
$ 16,202
8,101
$ 16,202
8,101
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that, an emergency
Ordinance shall be in effect from its passage.
existing, this
ATTEST:
City Clerk
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor
and Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mayor Taylor and Council Members:
Subject:
Background:
Appropriation of
Litter Control Grant Funding
A. City Council adopted Resolution No. 29068 on April 25, 1988,
designating the Clean Valley Council (CVC) to develop a
coordinated litter control program for the entire Roanoke
Valley and authorizing CVC to apply for certain grant funds
from the Comraonwealth for operation of such program.
B. Litter control grant was approved by the Department of Waste
Management, Division of Litter Control and Recycling on
July 25, 1988.
II. Current Situation:
ao
City has received grant funds in the amount of $8,101.00
from the Department of Waste Management.
III. Issues:
A. Appropriation of grant fundm to Clean Valley Council.
IV. Reco~nendation:
ao
Council appropriate $8,101.00 to an account to be
established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund
for transfer to Clean Valley Council.
Respectf~y submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:WFC:pr
pc:
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Clean Valley Council, P.O. Box 3320, Roanoke, Virginia 24015
' /.' ~ -/c~'~ ulv~sion of Litter Con+~^, .ag~ement.
~ J .3~ ~,~ -~Ok cycl lng
,. ~. Cha.~_ ' g~n~a Waste Ma
. Co e
TO. ~-'~:~F~ h~, ~
_City of Roanoke
215 Church Ave., S.W.
_Roanoke, VA 24011
Attention: W. Robert Herbert, Manager
The application which you submitted for a litter control grant has been
approved. Please be guided by the items which are checked below.
_ A check in the total amount indicated below will be sent to you
for a single locality program.
__x A check in the total amount indicated will be sent to you for a
cooperative program to be coordinated by: Clean Valle Council
JUNE 30 19~. RANT PERIOD JULY 1 1988 THROUGH
An extension has been allowed for this grant. The extension applies only
to (See Section-~ of the "Reg~
details on reporting and accountability for extended grants.)
In accepting this grant, the applicant(s) must comply with the Regulations
governing litter control grants dated February 22, 1988, and the program
plan and other requirements as stated in the ApPlication, form LCG-1,
previously approved for the Current grant period.
*NEW LINE ITEMS MAY NOT BE ADDED WITHOUT PRIOR APPROVAL BY THE DIVISION.
Date approved: July 25, 1988 ~~~~
Total Amount of Grant: $8,101.00
G~rants approved fO'r:
LYN~. HUDSON, DIRECTOR
Copies: Kelly Whitney
DATE:
TO=
FROM:
SUBJECT:
CITY OF ROANOKE
Interdepartment Communication
August 11, 1988
Bill Clark, Director of Public Works
Mike Crew, Financial Analyst
Litter Control Grant Funding
A check in the amount of $8,101.00 was received on
8/08/88 and deposited by the Department of Finance representing
Litter Control funding from the State for FY89.
A Council Report should now be prepared to appropriate
these funds in the Grant Fund so that they may be paid over to the
Clean Valley Committee. I have attached a copy of the check and
the resolution adopted in the spring. Thanks.
MC/kp
Attachment
PAY
TO THE ORDER OF:
CiTY OF ROANOKE
ROANOKE
VA 2~01t
~ S8~. I01.00
DI
SOVRAN BANK
~PARTHENT OF ~ASTE MANAGEMENT
CITy OF' ROANOKE PHONE 80~.22~.26~7
INVOICE NO INVOICE CATE INvOIcE DESc
RE~E~ENcE NO A.,,BBO~s~ONTR~RANT'NvO'C' A"O~NT
$8~ I01 ,00
sa, IUI .00
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 25th day of April, 1988.
No. 29068.
VIRGINIA,
A RESOLUTION designating the Clean Valley Council to develop
a coordinated litter control program for the entire Roanoke
Valley and authorizing such Council to apply for certain grant
funds from the Commonwealth for operation of such program.
WHEREAS, the City of Roanoke recognizes the existence of a
litter problem within the boundaries of this City;
WHEREAS, the Virginia Litter Control Act of 1976 provides,
through the Department of Conservation and Historic Resources,
Division of Litter Control, for the allocation of public funds in
the form of grants for the purpose of enhancing local litter
control programs; and
WHEREAS, having reviewed and considered the regulations and
the application covering administration and use of said funds;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that:
1. The City Council endorses and supports such a program for
the City of Roanoke.
2. The City Council expresses its intent to combine with the
City of Salem, Town of Vinton, and Roanoke and Botetourt Counties
in a mutually agreed upon cooperative program contingent on
approval of the application by the Department of Conservation and
Historic Resources, Division of Litter Control, and contingent
upon the receipt of funds.
3. The Clean Valley Council is authorized to plan and
budget for a cooperative litter control program, which shall
represent said program for all localities named in this resolu-
tion.
4. Such Council is authorized to apply on behalf of all of
the above-named localities for a grant and be responsible for the
administration, implementation and completion of the program as
it is described in Application Form LC-G-1.
5. This City accepts responsibility jointly with the Clean
Valley Council and the City of Salem, Town of Vinton, and Roanoke
and Botetourt Counties for all phases of the program in accor-
dance with applicable regulations and the application.
6. This City accepts responsibility for its pro rata share
of any funds not properly used or accounted for pursuant to the
regulations and the application.
7. Said funds, when received, shall be transferred imme-
diately to the Clean Valley Council and all funds will be used in
the Cooperative Program to which Council gives 1ts endorsement
and support.
8. The Department of Conservation and Historic Resources,
Division of Litter Control, is requested to consider and approve
the application and program, said program being in accord with
regulations governing use and expenditure of said fun~s.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
September 14, 1988
File #17,~
Ms. Carolyn Bo Watts
Directo, of Planning & Research
Virginia Housing Development Authority
13 South 13th Street
Richmond, Virginia 23219-4188
Dear Mso Wat ts:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29292, endorsing a loan of
the Virginia ltousing Development Authority, in the amount of
$350,000.00, to the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority in support of the 1988 Rental Rehabilitation Program,
which Resolution No. 29292 was adopted by the Council of the City
of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on ~onday, September 12,
1988o
I am also enclosing the Certificate of Approval signed by the
~4ayor on behalf of the City for the Rental Rehabilitation
Program.
Sincere fy, ~
Mar-y F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc:
Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Mr. Witburn C. Dibling, J,., City Attorney
Mr~ William F. Clark, Director of Public Wo,ks
Mr. Ronald ft. Miller, ~uilding Commissioner/Zoning
Administrator
Mr. H. Daniel Pollock, Housing Development Coordinator
Ms. Marie T. Pontius, Grants ~onitoring Administrator
Mr. Herbert Do Mcbride, Executive Director, Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority, 2624 Salem Turnpike,
N. W., Roanoke~ Virginia 24017
Room 456 Municipal Buildincj 215 C~urch Avenue SW Rc,~noke x/rgmia 24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
lhe 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29292.
A RESOLUTION endorsing a loan of the Virginia Housing
Development Authority in the amount of $350,000 to the City of
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority in support of the
1988 Rental Rehabilitation Program.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that
does hereby endorse the loan of funds by the Virginia Housing
Development Authority to the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority in support of the 1988 Rental Rehabilitation
Program, and the Mayor of the City of Roanoke is hereby
authorized to certify such approval to the Virginia Housing
Development Authority in accordance with the provisions of
§36-55.39.B, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
it
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
September i2, i988
Honorable Mayor and Members of Council
Roanoke) Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
I. Background:
Rental Rehabilitation Program - Endorsement of Loan £rom Virginia
Housing Development Authority (VHDA) to Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority (RRHA)
Rental Rehabilitation Program has been a cooperative program among HUD,
the City, and the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA), to
encourage rehabilitation of privately-owned rental property.
B. Program for 1988 is based in part on funds made available by VHDA to sup-
port funding provided by HUD.
Loan of $350,000 from VHDA to RRHA for the Program is expected on terms
favorable enough to allow the subsidies made from the $1#2)000 currently
allocated to the City by HUD for the Program to be repaid for future use
in rehabilitation or community development.
II. Current Situation:
A. Final agreement and loan papers have not yet been received from VHDA for
approval and signature by RRHA and/or City.
Even though VHDA Board of Commissioners has already approved the loan to
the RRHA for this Program, Virginia law requires VHDA to invite endorse-
ment or disapproval from the local government where such a multi-family
loan is to be made (Attachment A).
III. Issues
A. Impact on neighborhood revitalization
B. Cost to the City
C. Timing
IV. Alternatives
A. Endorse the loan by VHDA of loan funds to the RRHA in support of the 1988
Rental Rehabilitation Program.
Page 2
September 12, i998
Impact on neighborhood revitalization would be positive. The
$3`50,000 expected from VHDA would support the rehabilitation of
approximately 20-2.5 substandard housing units to be occupied by iow-
moderate income citizens. In addition, long-term revitalization
would be enhanced by eventual repayment of matching HUD funds to the
City for reuse. Favorable comment to VHDA will support progress
toward reaching final terms with VHDA and implementation of the
Program.
Cost to the City will be insignificant. The loan to RRHA is not an
obligation of the City and will not require a match of any funds from
the City other than the HUD funds for the Program. Administration of
the Program is provided for by the contract for services between the
RRHA and the City.
Timing is such that this is the latest date on which Council may act
to comment on the loan, having been alloted 60 days to comment.
Presentation to Council has been delayed until this date in hopes
that the final arrangements could have been made with VHDA for the
specifics of the loan. This has not yet occurred.
Disapprove the loan from VHDA to RRHA for the Rental Rehabilitation
Program.
Impact on neighborhood revitalization would be negative. Some houses
needing most extensive rehabilitation may not be repaired under the
Program due to requirements on property-owners to obtain substantial
private financing. Furthermore, the $1#2,000 granted for the Program
by HUD would not revolve back to the City to support additional
improvements.
Cost to the City would be insignificant.
Timing is such that VHDA should be notified immediately of the City's
disapproval, so that VHDA may rescind its approval and processing of
the loan.
V. Recommendation:
Approve the loan by VHDA of $350,000 to the RRHA in support of the 1988
Rental Rehabilitation Program.
Respectfully ~ubmitted
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
W RH/HDP/hdp:Council. 58
Attachment
Page 3
September 12, 1988
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Building Commissioner
Housing Development Coordinator
Grants Monitoring Administrator
Executive Director, RRHA
VIRGINIA
HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT
AUTHORITY
13 SOUTH 13TH STREET
RICHMOND
JLIL 79 8 Jori, .ITCHIE. j,.
· ,I~cCLc[V~c~) Executive Director
July 13, 1988
The Honorable Noel C. Taylor
Mayor, City of Roanoke
Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue, S.W.
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Mayor Taylor:
Pursuant to Section 36-55.39 (B) of the Code of Virginia, a copy of
which is enclosed, you are hereby notified that the Virginia Housing
Development Authority is considering the financing of multi-family
residential housing as described in "Attachment A." The proposed
financing will be carried out pursuant to a Virginia Housing Fund
application submitted by the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority. Should you require additional
information regarding the project, we have been working with Mr. Daniel
Pollock, Jr., Housing Development Coordinator for the City of Roanoke.
If you desire to disapprove thi~ proposal, you may do so by certifying
to the Authority in writing within 60 days of the date hereof. A
certified copy of any resolution disapproving the development proposal
should accompany the above certification. We would ask that any such
certification be in the form attached hereto though the statement of
any reasons for your action is optional.
If you desire to approve the project, Section 36-55.39 (B) also
provides that the governing body of a locality may, by resolution, make
such approval. Such action by the City will expedite the
implementation of this project. A certified copy of the resolution
approving the development must accompany the approval form.
RJA:rl 1
Enclos/dres
cc: ~/~. Robert Herbert,
Daniel Pollock
Very truly yours,
Carolyn ~ Watts
Director of Planning and Research
City Manager
§ 36-55.39. Procedure prinr to financing of housing developments
undertaken by housing sponsors. -- A. Notwithstanding any other provi-
sion of this chapter, }IDA is not empowered to finance any housing
development undertaken by a housing sponsor pursuant to §§ 36-55.31,
36-55.33:1 and 36-55.34:1 of this chapter unless, prior to the financing of any
housing development hereunder, tlI)A finds:
(I) That there exists a shortage of decent, safe and sanitarv housing at
rentals or prices which persons and families of low income or moderate income
can aflbrd within the general housing market area to be served by the proposed
housing development.
(2) That private enterprise and investment have been unable, without assis.
tance, to provide the needed decent, safe and sanitary housing at rentals or
prices which persons or families of low and moderate income can afford or to
provide sufficient mortgage financing for residential housing for occupancy
such persons or families, by
(3) That the housing, sponsor or sponsors undertak'ng the proposed hous ng
development in this Commonwealth, will supply ~ve~l-planned, well-designed
housing for persons or families of low and moderate income and that such
sponsors are financially responsib e.
(4) That the housing development, to be assisted pursuant to the provisions
of this chapter will be &public use and will provide a
(5) That the housin~ d~-~ ............ public benefit.
~, ~,up.,en~ Will De unuerraKen within the authority
conferred by this chapter upon HDA and the hous ng sp n~or or sponsors.
B. HDA shall also find, in connection with the finan~n~ of the new con-
strut~tion or substantial rehabilitation of any nronosed . ·
housing develonment ~ o~ *~.~ ~ . . ~ ~ mult~ family residenti
~ ,.~h ..... ~ ~overntn ~ou of , . . al
housing development is to be oe~t~ h~ · y ...~he.locahty tn which such
...... ,~ no% wt~tlm sixty days after written
notification of the proposed financing has been sent t '
HDA, certified to ttDA in writing its disaun o al aft~ he gover, nlng pody by
o __r v ...... ne proposea multi-family
residential housing development. The foregoing notwithstanding, no such
finding need be made ifHDA shah have received from the governing body its
certified resolution approving the proposed housing development (1972, c.
1975, c. 536; 1978, c. 297; 1982, c. 175.) 830;
The 1978 amendment designated the
former provisions o£this section as subsection A
and added subsection B,
The 1982 amendment added the second sen-
tence of subsection B.
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL
In accordance with Virginia Code Section
the City Council of , Virginia, hereby
certifies to the Virginia Housing Development Authority its
approval of the proposed multi-family residential housing
development called
as expressed in its resolution duly adopted on
19 ', a certified copy of which is attached hereto.
36-55.39 (B) ,
City Council of
, Virginia
By:
Its Mayor
CERTIMICATIOM OF DISAP?ROVAI,
In accordance with Virginia Code Section
36-55.39(Bi, the ~ity Council of
Virginia hereby certifies to the Virginia Housing
Development Authority its disapproval of the proposed
multi-family residential housing development called
, as expressed
in its resolution duly adopted on 19
a certified copy of which is attached hereto.
Optional: Such development is disapproved for the following
reasons:
City Council of
, Virginia
By:
Its Mayor
ATTACHMENT "A"
The proposed housing will consist of approximately 40 rental
housing units to be financed by the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority utilizing loan funds provided by the Virginia
Housing Development Authority. Matching funding will be provided
through the City of Roanoke Rental Rehabilitation Grant Program.
Ail units will be located in neighborhoods designated by the City
of Roanoke as eligible under the Rental Rehabilitation Grant
Program.
RJA:rl 1
CERTIFICATION OF APPROVAL
In accordance with Virginia Code Section 36-55.39(B),
the City Council of Rn~n~e , Virginia, hereby
certifies to the Virginia Housing Development Authority its
approval of the proposed multi-family residential housing
development called Rental Rehabilitation Program ,
as expressed in its resolution duly adopted on September 12 ,
1988~, a certified copy of which is attached hereto.
City Council of
Roanoke
By: Its Mayor
Office of fi~e City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #27
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear ,~4r. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29293, approving issuance of
Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $50,000.00 to the City's
contract with Aaron J. Conner~ General Contracto,, [nc., for
Williamson Road Storm Drain Phase 2, Contract [IA (Lower Segment)
and Williamson Road West Sanitary Sewer, for a new contract limit
of $1,538,873.95, which Ordinance No. 29293 was adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on
Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc:
Aaron J. Conner General Contractors, [nc., P. O. Box
.Roanoke, Virginia 24017
~r. Kit ~. Ciser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles ~. ~uffine, City Engineer
Ms. Sarah Eo Fit ton, Construction Cost Technician
6068,
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
lbe 12th day of September, 1988.
No, 29293.
AN ORDINANCE approving the City Manager's issuance of Change
Order No. 2 to the City's contract with Aaron J. Conner, General
Contractor, Inc., for Williamson Road Storm Drain Phase 2, Con-
tract IIA (Lower Segment) and Williamson Road West Sanitary
Sewer; and providing for an emergency.
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. The City Manager or Assistant City Manager is authorized
and empowered to issue, for and on behalf of the City, upon form
approved by the City Attorney, Change Order No. 2 to the City's
contract with Aaron J. Conner, General Contractor, Inc., dated
November 2, 1987, related to Wllliamson Road Storm Drain Phase 2,
Contract IIA (Lower Segment) and Williamson Road West Sanitary
Sewer.
changes in the work to be performed:
ORIGINIAL CONT~ACr ~0UNT
CONTACT A~0UNT IN~UDING PREVI~JS CK~GE ORDEP~
DESCRIPTION OF (HANGE ORDER NO. 2
Additional Rock excavation
CONT~ACT A~gFNT INCLUDING fI.{AI~E O~ER NO. 9.
Time extension required as a result of this
Change Order.
Such Change Order shall provide for the following
$1,498,057.35
1,488,873.95
$ 50,000.00
$1,538,873.95
No cale.~ar days
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 forc'e and effect upon its passage.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Dear Members of Council:
Subject:
Change Order No. 2
Williamson Road Storm Drain (Lower Segment)
Phase 2, Contract II-A & West Sanitary Sewer
I. Background:
Ao
City Council received and publicly opened four (4) bids for
the subject project on Monday, October 19, 1987 with Aaron J.
Conner General Contractor, Inc. submitting a low base bid of
§1~498~957.35
B. City Council authorized award of contract to Aaron J. Conner
General Contractor, Inc. in the amount of }1,498~057.35 on
Monday, November 2, 1987 and established a contingency fund
for the project in the amount of $149~805.74.
C. Chanse Order No. 1 was issued on February 10, 1988 causing a
reduction of the Contract amount by $9~183.40 with the new
Contract amount being $1,488,873.95. This change was due to
certain engineering revisions which reduced some pipe and
excavation quantities.
II. Current Situation:
Project is 67% complete as of Pay Request No. 6, dated July
25, 1988, and a significant over-run of rock excavation in
the amount of $33,705.37 has occurred.
B. Based on current performanc~ with the project at 67%
complete, it is now estimated that the over-run for the rock
excavation construction item could close out at $50~000.00
and Change Order No. 2 in this amount is necessary.
C. ~urrent Status of funds is as follows:
Original Contract Amount:
Change Order No. 1:
Contract Amount to Date:
Change Order No. 2:
New Contract Amount:
$1,498,057.35
(9~183.40)
$1,488,873.95
50~000.00
$1,538,873.95
Page 2
WRH/ES/mm
CC:
III. Issues in order of importance:
A. ~ngineering Concerns
B. Funding
IV. Alternatives are:
mo
Authorize the City Manager to execute Change Order No. 2 in
the amount of $50,000.00.
Engineering Concerns have been met in that proper align-
ment and profiles for the new storm drain have been
maintained.
2. Funding is available from the current project con-
tingency fund in the amount of $149,805.74.
Do not authorize the City Manager to execute Change Order No.
2 in the amount of $50~000.00.
1. Engineering Concerns have currently been met but a
complete re-design of the project remainder is not cost
effective.
2 o
Fundin~ for the current rock over-run and possible
future over-run would have to be provided for by other
means.
~ecommendation is that City Council authorize the City Manager to
execute Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $50~000.00 to cover
the total estimated over-run in rock excavation in accordance with
Alternative "A", thereby establishing a new contract limit of
$1,538~873.95.
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
Director of Utilities & Operations
City Engineer
Construction Cost Technician
Of'~ce orr he C.yCle~
September 14, 1988
Fi le #27
Mr. John B. Wi~liamson, III
Botetourt County Administrator
P. 0. Box 279
Fincastle, Virginia 24090
Dear Mr. Wiltiamson:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29294, authorizing
appropriate pretreatment agreements to the City's Water Pollution
Control Plant with the City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, Roanoke
County and Botetourt County, to provide for appropriate pre-
treatment standards and requirements, including monitoring,
enforcement and reporting, and further requesting such jurisdic-
tions to enter into said agreements, which Resolution No. 29294
was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enco
24011 (703) 981-2541
CYrfice of ~e City Cle~
September 14~ 1988
File #27
Mr. Elmer C. Hodge
Roanoke County Administrator
P. O. Box 29800
Roanoke, Virginia 24018-0798
Dear Mr. Rodge:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29294, authorizing
appropriate pretreatment agreements to the City's Water Pollution
Control Plant with the City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, Roanoke
County and Botetourt County, to provide for appropriate pre-
treatment standards and requirements, including monitoring,
enforcement and reporting, and further requesting such jurisdic-
tions to enter into said agreements, which Resolution No. 29294
was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely, ~
~4ary F. Parker, C~C
City Clerk
MFP: r a
Eric.
Office of ~e Cii",, Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #27
~r. Randolph ~. Smith
Salem City Manager
P. O, Box ~69
Satem, Virginia 24153
Oear Mr. S,ni tit:
f am enclosing copy of aesolution No. 29294, authorizing
appropriate pretreatment agreements to the City's Water Pollution
Control Plant with the City of Salem, the To~vn of Vinton, Roanoke
County and ~otetourt County, to provide for appropriate pre-
treatment standards and requirements, including monitoring,
enforcement and reporting, and further requesting such jurisdic-
tions to enter into said agreements, which Resolution No. 29294
~as adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on ~onday, September 12, 1988.
Sincere ty,
tqary ~'. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: r a
Eno.
Office of r'he City C?-.'k
September 14, 1958
Fi le #27
,~lr. Ceorje W. Nester
Vintoa Town llanuger
311 South PoZlard Street
Vinton, Virginia 24179
Dear ~r. Nester:
I am enclosing c~py of Resolution No. 29294, authorizin~
appropriate pret,eatment ag,eements to the City's Water Poll~ltion
Control Plant with the City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, Roanoke
County and 6otetourt County, to provide for al~oropriate pre-
t~eatment standards and requirements, including monitoring,
enforcement and reporting, and further requesting such jurisdic-
tions to enter into said agreements, which Resolution No. 29294
was adopted by the Council of the City of ~oanoke at a regular
meeting held on .~tonday, Septe,nber 12, 1958.
Sincerely, ~~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
.~fFP:
Er/c.
Ra'~ur ~56 ',* '~ '~ (! :~ch, A,en,~e SW Rc,;r:;~e ,,rg~ma24011 (703) 981-2541
Of%e of the City
September 14, 1988
File #z'
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City ~anager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear ~4r. tterbert:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 2,9294, authorizing
appropriate pretreatment agreements with contributing jur'isdic-
tions to the City's Water Pollution Control Plant, to provide for
appropriate pre-t.eatment standards and requirements, includin!l
monitoring, enforcement and reporting, and furthe, requestiny
such jurisdictions to enter into said agreements, which
Resolution No. 29294 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988o
Sincere fy,
Mary F. Parker. CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
pc:
Ms. Lorraine ,~I. Hanlon, United Dtates Environmental
Protection Ab, enc¥' 841 (. estnut rJuildiny, Phi ladetphi~l,
Pennsylvania 19107
,~r. Robert ~. ~Jurnley. Regional Directo., Commonwealth of
Virginia, State Water Cont.oI ~oacd, West Cent.al Regional
Office. p. O. Box 7017, Roanoke, Vi.ginla 24019
Ms. havern Corkran, Vir~inla State Water Cont,ol ,9on,d, P. O.
Box. 11143, aichmond. Vi.ginia 23230
Mc. Kit ~. I{ise., Directo. of Utilities and Operations
H.. Steven L. Walke.. ,~,1anage., Sewage T.eatment Plant
24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29294.
A RESOLUTION authorizing appropriate pretreatment agreements
with contributing jurisdictions and further requesting such
jurisdictions to enter 'into said agreements.
WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency requires
publicly owned treatment works to maintain an industrial
pretreatment program; and
WHEREAS, industrial pretreatment programs protect publicly
owned pretreatment works from harmful industrial discharges; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Protection Agency has required
formal agreements between the City of Roanoke and all jurisdic-
tions contributing to the Water Pollution Control Plan to insure
that the City oversees and maintains compliance with pretreatment
standards and requirements.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that the City Manager and the City Clerk are hereby
authorized to execute and attest, respectively, in form approved
by the City Attorney, appropriate agreements with contributing
jurisdictions to the City's Water Pollution Control Plant to pro-
vide for appropriate pretreatment standards and requirements,
including monitoring, enforcement and reporting.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Council hereby requests the
City of Salem, the Town of Vinton, Roanoke County and Botetourt
County to authorize execution of such agreements, and directs
the City Clerk to forward a copy of this resolution to the
appropriate officials of such jurisdictions.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
September 12, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council
Subject: Sewage Pretreatment Agreement with Contributing
Jurisdictions
I. Background:
EPA requires publicly owned treatment works (POTW) to maintain
an industrial pretreatment program.
Industrial pretreatment pro~ramm protect POTW's from harmful
industrial discharges.
C. Roanoke City has an approved pretreatment program.
Contributing jurisdictions have enacted ordinances to
implement their own pretreatment programs.
EPA wants a formal agreement with all jurisdictions to insure
the City oversees and maintains compliance with pretreatment
standards and requirements from the contributing jurisdictions
to include monitoring, enforcement and reporting. (Attachment
A identifies that requirement).
NPDES discharge permit was modified as of September 1, 1988 to
incorporate pretreatment as a regulated parameter. (Attachment
B identifies that requirement).
NPDES permit section Part (I) (G) stipulates the requirement
for the City to execute interjurisdictional pretreatment
agreements. (Attachment B).
II. Current Situation:
EPA has given the City of Roanoke twenty (20) days to reply in
regard to the City's intent to comply with the pretreatment
regulations.
Steps to be taken in regard to obtaining interjurisdictional
agreements are to be submitted within ninety (90) days.
Failure to comply may subject the City to a $25,000 per day
penalty.
The attached letter has been mailed to EPA in order to give a
response within the required 20 day time period.
Page 2
III. Issues in order of importance:
A. Timing
B. Need
C. Compliance
IV. Alternatives:
Council Rive authority to execute an a~re-m-nt with
contributing jurisdictions per attached draft agreement
subject to refinement by the City Attorney's office.
(Attachment C). Also, Council by resolution, request the City
of Salem, Town of Vinton, Roanoke County and Botetourt County
to authorize the execution of an agreement in basic conformity
to the attached draft agreement.
1. Timin~ is important to comply with the stated time table.
2. Need for interjurisdictional agreement will be met.
3. Compliance with NPDES permit will be met.
Council not Kive authority to execute a 3urisdictiona]
agreement in regard to industrial pretreatment.
1. TiminE is a moot issue.
Need for an interjurisdictional agreement will not be
met.
3. Compliance with NPDES permit will not be met.
Recomendation: Council approve Alternative A allowing the City to
execute pretreatment agreements with contributing jurisdictions.
Respectfully,~submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:SLW:afm
Attachments
cc: City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Utilities & Operations
Manager, Sewage Treatment Plant
ATTACHMENT A
,p~,o.,,% UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
%
%,,,..o~*~' Philadelphia. Penn~ Ivania ~ ~ '/c-';" .,N ¢..
Utilities and Operations ~*~?~-,
Roanoke Municipal Bldg, Room 354
215 Church Avenue
S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Re: Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreements
Dear Mr. Kiser=
The City of Roanoke's interjurisdictional contracts do
not adequately address the pretreatment requirements of 40
CFR Section 403.8(f) (a copy of which is attached). Section
403.8(f)(1)(iii) requires the POTW to control, through
permits, contract, order, or similar means the contribution
to the POTW by each Industrial User (IU) to ensure compliance
with applicable Pretreatment Standards and Requirements.
The City has the obligation to ensure that each IU
achieves and maintains compliance. Where an IU is located
in a contributing jurisdiction, the City may enter into an
agreement which allows that jurisdiction to implement the
City's pretreatment program within its boundaries.
However, the City must maintain oversight and have the
authority to take action in the contributing jurisdiction
to ensure that compliance is achieved.
The authority to require the City to amend their
pretreatment lnterjurisdictional agreements is established
in part (I)(G)(2) of the City's NPDES permit. The City's
NPDES permit grants the approval authority the right to
require the POTW to institute changes to its local
pretreatment program if the program is not implemented in a
way satisfying the requirements of the Clean Water Act.
This letter serves as formal notification that EPA is
requiring the City, pursuant to part (I)(G)(2) of the
City's NPDES permit, to obtain adequate legal authority to
effectively regulate all industrial users in its system,
including those located outside City boundaries, and
2
thereafter implement the pretreatment program in accordance
with that legal authority to ensure compliance by all users
of the Roanoke treatment plant.
The City's failure to implement its pretreatment
program is a violation of NPDES permit number VA0025020 and
the General Pretreatment Regulations, 40 CFR 403. Under
the Clean Water Act, the City may be liable for penalties
of up to $25,000 per day for such violations. In order to
avoid the initiation of an enforcement action for
pretreatment violations, the City must implement an
effective pretreatment program in accordance with the
regulations.
Within twenty (20) days of receipt of this letter,
provide a written response to this Agency of the City's
intent to comply with the Pretreatment Regulations. In
particular, please provide a detailed description of the
steps the City will take to obtain the authority, within
ninety (90) days, to effectively regulate all industrial
users in its system, including those located in
contributing jurisdictions.
If you have any questions regarding this matter,
please call Lorraine M. ~anlon at 215/597-8221.
Sincerely,
Joseph T. Piotrowski, Chief
Permits Enforcement Branch
LaVern Corkran
VA State Water Control Board
ATTACHMENT B
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 10 of 12
PATTI
ae
be
The permitt~e sk~]l suk~it to the ap~xoval authority, an anr~m]
~x~rt that ~cribes the permittee,s p~A~ activities over the
later than Januazy 15 of eac~ year and shall include:
(1) An updae~ list of the POTW's significant ~-~ers showin~
the categorical star-m~ds or local ] ~m~ts applicable to each.
(2)
A ~'"~'y of the ~.~pltance status for thcee ir=lustries
affect~~t_ by final Ca~__~-3rical ~tment ~ and/or
(3) A mmmm~y of the ~.~.-~-~ and type of significant
~~s p~rfor~ by th~ POTW.
(4)
Ail informati~ oonoezn/n~ any ir~-~fe~, u~set, or permit
violatic~ experienced at the PU1W 8~wectly attributable to
significant ~nbaz~3mrs, and actions taken to alleviate said
events.
(5)
descriptic~ of any significant char~ms in opexatin~ the
the ~u~2~x~ cc~e~{~ed in the original
(6) A descriptio~l of all e~f~ acticr~ taken against
ncr~-,~ liarfc sig~ificant ~i-~91a~%w.~s
Permit No. VA0025020
Page 11 of 12
PATTI
2e
~e approval authority reta/ns the right to rmquire the PO1W to
institute ~ to its local pretreatment p~m:
a. If the p~-o~m is not implemented in a way satisfyir~ the
requi~,~rfcs of the
b. If probl~ such as interfermnce, pass t~ or sl,__~k3e~
contaminatic~ develc~ or c~ti~ or
c. If other Federal, State or local requ{~,ents (i.e., water quality
statable) chan~e.
/_mmediately upon the effective or modification dat~ of this permit,
the permittee shall ese~hlish and im~-~nt a pmx~re to obtain
f~c~ all significant disc~mi%~s specific informati~ of the quality
and quantity of effluents introduced by such significant
d~chargers. A descripti~ of each significant d~-9=r,
industries to cc~01ete the ~ Significant Dis~ha~9~r Waste Su~y
within 180 days of the permit effective or modificatic~ date.
(*)
A significant ~{~-hai~=r is o~e that: (a) has a process ~ter**
flow of 25,000 gallc~s ~r m~re per averag~ work~ay; (b) c~ntributes a
pr~,~ wast~e~ which mak~ u~ 5 pe_~oent or ~ of the average
dry weather hydraulic = ~%~nic ~.~city of tha PO~W; (c) h~ in its
waste a tuxic pollutant in toxic ~w%~ts as defined in standazds
issued under Secti~ 307(a) of the Act; ~r (d) has si~%ificant
impact, either singularly or in o~abinat/~ with other significant
(**) Process wastewa~ e~clu~es sanitary wastewatar, n~mxmact cooling
water and boiler blowgun.
ATTACHMENT C
~'nls A~reeeenC ~s entered £mCo Chis day of , lgS~_, bec~en
(POTW) and £Concribucin~ Jurl~dicciou - CJ)
~CI:TAL$
Vhereas. (~3TV)
S~Ce~,
Whereas, (POTV) ~C develop arid laple~enc an ~nduscr~a~
p~ecreecmenC program pursuant co conditions contained ~n rcs d~scherse 'per~c
(?er~Lc ~ ) rased by { EPA ~; and
~ereas, (~') desires co continue co uctttze the vascevacer
cceeCaenc syIcee and rtcol~tZll icl ~nduecr~a~ vases concro~ obligations under
~0 CFR &03.
and (.~.~) agree:
Option
IrA]
shall adopt and diligently enforce aa oratnance
~d~tch coa£ormm co che minim.-, lslml requiremmncm coacained to the
Federal Precreacmenc RewuX&ctoas [40 CF~ Parc &03] and vhich
tocorporaces any ocher towel authorities specifically mandated by chis
Olt
Option
®
shall adopt and dilifeucly enforce an ordinance
~hich ts identical co the ordinance adspeed by (POTM)
shall explicitly incorporate the following
provisions taco tee ordinance:
(e)
a provision requir~nW any industrial user respouibZe for a
stfatftcanc accidental dtscharie co ,stiff t~medtacely both
(~OT~) and (~) ;
Ch)
a prohibicioa on the omi of'dilution me a control technique for
colpltaace with dticharia ttmtcs except am alloyed by Federal
P~ecreatmmuc SCafutarde;
(c) · franc o~ auChortCF co t~pose ~a~e dtscharie Ltmtcs La Lieu o{, or
tn conjunction with, concentration dtscherie Limits;
(~t)
(e) A S~AnC 0£ expZ~cLC tuch0rlCF co (C.Z) Co require chi
IneCLL~AC~oG oE A~ eon~cor~n~ iud pricriaCuenc ~Acil~ciie.
(POT~) and (~.J) shaJ. 1 periodLca~y (AC a
operation o~ chi precreaca~c prelim, ~uever (P~)
bec~e a~e of a p~ob~ ~ch chi prat=sapac p~fr~ ~cb c~ be
a~c~aced by a ch~e
an ~nC ~ch (~) ~c ~opc. ~ (~2
his ~opc~
~en~er (~2 · m~. lcio~d~ce (~
sh~ adopc chi ~deuc~ ~ndHnC.
shA~ adopt, Ae parc o£ ice ordinance, and enforce
dlscharfe ~L~cs lecAb~$hed in (POTV) ordlnance.
(C$) ord~flaace shAL~ require chic
precreAcmenc standards pr°e~fAced by chi 0.$. KavironmenCAL P~ociccion
AfencF (EPA) [pFouu~faCed by iuC~rLC7 o~ che~e~ Vicar ~c Sections
307(b) ~d .(c)] be ~c~c~cl~ lncor~raced by ~e~erence Lnco
o~. ~ese Ic~dirdl shi~L su~rcede
spec~E~c ~sehar~e ~C8 Ln C~ o~d~ce ~ch are ~e88 sc~enc chin
chi cac~octca~ oC~a~o as Chef apply co chi parc~c~a~ Lnd~cr~a~
'users o~ perC~n~C caceloT~ca~ standards and ~coF~
cace~o~lca~
adopted b~ (~) (~) ~F ~ke the
[sL~canC ~nduscF~i~ ule~ o~ ~nd=sctta~ ~se~] hued on Ln~o~ac~on
~y ~equeeC ~coe (~)
s~ controL, chro~ Lnduecr~l~ d~sc~e
~et oF tndusct~a~ ~e~] d~icha~a~ thcs chi se~r.
®
~ there ex,eCs any Lndu$Crta~ user d~scharstnl Co
sew~ syeceu bu~ Located o~cstde the ~rtidt~cLonLL ~LltCo of
(C~) , Chert (CJ~ . s~l aqoC~aCe a~ enter
~nco 4~ qcemnc ~ch c~a o~cotde ~uF~Lccton. S~h ~emnc sha~
b~ subsC~C~4~y equivalent co chts ~e~c,
executed by (~ · (~ ~- ~d Chi o~cs~de
ju~tsd~cc~on. Z~ the outside ~u~sdtcc~on
execute 4n 48ce~nC, then (~)
concFacC vtch chi t~CF~iL user ~ co~c~s Ce~ a~ condLcLons
substantially equivalent Co ~) ~fld~cF~ d~schaqe
pe~cs.
shLLl ~tle vtch (POi'~ , · cerc~Led
copy o~ ice ~rdta~ce end ~ny WueaCs chaoses, ocher
L~erJurtsdLcctonaL qc~cs, each tfld~ccta~ vllci dLscharie p~c~tc
easel controL. C~ s~ pcovLde (P~)
accesl co ~d copras of, L~ ceq~iced, a~ Lnd~cF~a~ ~n~cot~nf te~tcs
3on~cottni or re~rc~ requ~rm~cs Lapeled by FederaL, Scare or ~oc&L
· ~ca~ned ~or 4c LdadC chc~ years.
~,~y authorized o~csr or emp~o~es o~ C~O~) lay
CC]) Tho right of entry and tflspecC~on shs~ extend
public scrssco, effluents, and property ~ch~fl ~ch the systec ~s ·
~ocaced. ~dic~onally, (PO~) sh~l be pe~cced.
appropriate, co enter sacs private properc~ co t~specc industrial
d~scha:~ers. (~) shall ~ all aecesiar7 Lqal ~d
~nsp~cc~on sh~X Lnc~e o~s~Ce tnnpeccLon o~ pcecFea~nc a~
~ac~el, obie~aC~on, Muurmuc. s~pLtni,' ceic~, ~d icctil
~vLch chi t~ihc Co copy) a~ pitc~nenc colpLt~ce cecocdI-Lociced on chi
pFe~sel o~ the tnd~ctLa~
tO.
(CJ) and (PO~V) lay enter Lmco ·
preCre&c~e~c aicee~eoc provtdLol (POT~) vf. ch chi
auChorLcy and. rsspo~sLbL~lCy for pec~oL~ance of cechotca~ and
4dmtotsCraCLve &cc~vtctss nicest&Fy ~or LmpLeuencJe~on of a precrsacumnc
pro,ram ~tc~£~ CC]) · These acc~vtttes nay Lnc~wie. among
ochers: L) updac~flf the lnduscrtaL dace survey; 2) providl~ technical
advice; 3) penUcc~nl; ~) coupL~ance eon~cortnl; $) snfocceeeoc support.
~ere prscrsacmenC de~eSacion occurs, (PO~V) sha~ assess
chi cosec Lncurrsd by (P~TV)
conJuocc~on vtch the &d~toLsccac~on of the Pcscrelcmenc Prolcon on
behalf of (C]) POTV sha~ provide
~ch · dec·~ed accounCtni of cbc pricceacmonc costs assessed
(POTV) shall reviev (CJ) ordinance and
amendments thereto, and any lnCsr~urisdl¢CLona~
con~o~ce ~ch ~ C~ Parc ~03, and Co ensure incision o~ a~l ocher
~egal provisions ~aCed by c~s ~e~uc. (~)
shall pe~todicallF revtev c~e en~orcee~c e~orcs o~ (~
and an~ ocher Jurisdiction Co ascertain ~echer preCrea~nc
requir~encs are bela[ dlli~clF enforced. To the extent (~)
choo~e co ~aisCer ice o~ precrea~nc pro~, (~
· a~ peri~lc~iF reviev (~} prec~ea~enC pro[r~
acclv~cies ~d ~ln~ co e~ure c~c (~) [~d
outside J~risd[ccio~] ts ~e~CelF a~niaceri~ ica preCreac~c
progr~ La conferee ~ch the Federal PreCrea~nc ~[~acions (~0
SOl) ~d all (P~) retirees.
Cf (~3l"~) determines chat (CJ';) his
or his refused co f~tflll any pr~treacm~c obl~acio~,
~y d~elop and ~sa~ a r~dil~ plan concil~n~ &-description o~ the
flacure o~ the precreac~nc deficiencies, an en~eraCiou o~ steps co
taken by (~ , ~d a c~ sc~d~e ~or accainiu~
compliance ~ch all precrea~enC requireuencs. ~uch plane shall be
s~cl~tcally enforceable tn 4 court of co~ecenc Jurt~icCion. ~ere
~ls Co satisfy the Ce~ o~ the r~lal plan.
~y, u~n c~rCy days ~lccen aeries. ~e~use co
accept any ind~criat vaace disc~r[es ~r~ (~)
(CJ) shall iade,~A£y (POTV} for all
dischaql frei (~} (~) s~ll
re.bursa (?~} for fines or costs scans [rom tnJury
~actlLc~es, disruption o~ treatment processes or o~rac~ons, deic~acion
~le~· · dJ, l¢~l~'ge Co Chi ~,/elCsvlcsr Crlecae~c cysts-, rs·lousb~,y =,ppse?l
co present en l~saine~C d~nler co the ha·Ich end ~are of per·oas, or
pres·acs or ~y presen~ ~ i~uC dan~er ~o ~he enviro~c, or
threatens Co tacer~ere ~ch Ch· o~rac~ofl o~ the ~ocevaceF crea~nc
s~lc~, (~0~) ~y ~/~iCi~ initiate sCepl co tdeuc~
the souFce o~ the d~sc~rfe, and Co h~C or pr~euc said disc~rfe.
uy ane~ 'injunctive re~lef q~c (~
loc outside Jur~ccious] ~/or ~y i~crl~ ~er concrt~Cl~ Co
ch· e~ri~cy co~lc~ou, ~/or uy ~FO~ scar sell-help r~les.
The Cemu o~ chi· Air··sene My be amended ·sly by written aiwa·meat of
ch· paroles. Ia any event, chi· Agree~euc shill be rovieuld and
reviled, as necessary, AC lease every chris
LT.
This Airseuenc eodifte· sexy Chose provision· o! ch· exia~lnl SeEvice
A~reeuenc becwen ch· cuo paroles dhLch conflict ~rLch Chi Ceru8 of chis
18.
Thio &~rseuenc ~ltL re~.n Ln e£~ecc so lonl an the Secvtce qreeaeac
The pattie· hereto have ezec~ced chis qcie~eflc on ch· dace Ibmdu above.
C'alef ~,zecucive Officer
Accssc ACCioC
($ea~) ($ea~)'.
D,rector of Utilities & Operations
September 8, 1988
Mr. 3oseph T. Piotrowski, Chief
Permits Enforcement Branch
United States Environmental Protection Agency
Region III
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA 19107
Dear Mr. Piotrowski:
Re: Interjurisdictional Pretreatment Agreements -
NPDES Permit No. VA0025020
I received your letter dated August 19, 1988 on August 25, 1988,
which letter, among other things, "serves as formal notification that
EPA is requiring the City, pursuant to part (I) (G) (2) of the City's
NPDES permit, to obtain adequate legal authority to effectively regulate
all industrial users in its system, including those located outside the
City boundaries, and thereafter implement the pretreatment program in
accordance with that legal authority to insure compliance by all users
of the Roanoke Treatment Plant". Further, you require a letter, within
20 days from the receipt of your letter, stating the City's intent to
comply with the pretreatment regulations and a detailed description
within 90 days of the steps the City will take to obtain the authority
to regulate all industrial users in our system, including those in the
contributing jurisdictions.
Please be advised that I protest EPA requiring one local
jurisdiction to enforce EPA's regulations on other local jurisdictions
when EPA and the State have the authority under the definition of a POTW
to enforce your regulations on all POTW's, to include those
jurisdictions owning and operating public sewer lines and/or sewage pump
stations (not just those owning treatment plants).
It is my intent, in any event, to submit to you a draft
interjurisdictional agreement for approval within 60 days, said
agreement once approved by EPA, will be submitted to Roanoke City
Council and the other contributing jurisdictions for approval.
For your information, the City of Roanoke already has an EPA
approved pretreatment program. The contributing jurisdictions have, as
required by our 1972 interjurisdictional agreements (copies of which are
now on file with EPA) adopted and submitted to the City comparable
pretreatment programs. Your agency has also been given copies of these
formally adopted programs.
Room 354 Mun,opol Bu,lding 215 Church Avenue S W Roanoke Virginia 24011 (703) 981-2002
Mr. Joseph T. Piotrowski
September 8, 1988
Page 2
The above mentioned separate interjurisdictional agreement which
you are now requiring will be drafted to require the contributing
jurisdictions to monitor and enforce their pretreatment program and
submit reports to the City so as to permit the City to consolidate all
information to meet EPA's reporting requirements.
Finally, an executed copy of the interjurisdictional agreement(s)
will be submitted to your agency once all affected local jurisdictions
execute that agreement(s) and assuming legal authority exists to do so.
KBK:afm
cc: Ms.
Mr.
Ms.
Mr.
Respectfully,
Kit H. Kiser, Director
Utilities & Operations
Lorraine M. Hanlon, EPA
Robert G. Burnley, %"WCB
Lavern Cockran, VWCB
W. Robert Herbert, Roanoke City Manager
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling, Roanoke City Attorney
Mr. Steven L. Walker, STP Manager
Mr. Randolph M. Smith, Salem City Manager
Mr. Elmer C. Hodge, Roanoke County Administrator
Mr. George W. Nester, Vtnton Town Manager
Mr. John D. Williamson, III, Botetourt County Administrator
Office of ff~e City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #1-53B
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger
Director of Finance
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Schlanger:
I am attachin~ copy of Ordinance No. 29295, providing for execu-
tion of a Paying Agency/Registrar Agreement between the City of
Roanoke and Sovran Bank, N.A., as fiscal agent of the City and
designating the principal office of such Bank as the place of
payment relating to the City's payment of bonds authorized by
Resolution No. 29187, adopted on June 27, 1988, and of the
interest thereon; and providing for the periodic destruction of
the aforesaid bonds and certification of the facts of payment and
destruction in the manner and form required by
Ordinance No. 29295 was adopted by the Council of
Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday, September
~'~ ~ '-~'Sincerely'
Mary F. Parker, C~C
City Clerk
taw, which
the City of
12, 1988.
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc: Mr.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
WilOurn C. Dibling, Jr., City Attorney
24011 (703) 981-254t
DEPARTMS'HT OF FI~ANCF. ~ ? ! ~,
September 12, 1988
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Honorable Mayor and Members of City Council
Joel M. Schlanger
Selection of Paying Agent and Registrar for the City
of Roanoke, Virginia, Public Improvement Bonds, Series
1988, $10,000,000
One of the many aspects of a bond issue is to appoint a
paying agent and registrar. The paying agent acts as an agent for
the municipality in maintaining registration records of the owners
of the bonds, paying interest and principal payments. There were
2,000 bonds printed in $5,000 denominations.
Competitive proposals were requested
Financial Advisor. Ail proposals received were
qualified and were ranked in the order preference
information presented, including fees. The proposal
Bank was deemed to be the most competitive proposal.
by Craigie, Inc.,
considered
based upon
of Sovran
I recommend that Sovran Bank be engaged to provide the
paying agent and registrar services for the Public Improvement
Bonds, Series 1988, $10,000,000.
The fees and charges of Sovran Bank are set out in the
attached schedule. It is recommended that the Director of Finance
be authorized to execute a paying agency/registrar agreement in a
form to be approved by the City Attorney.
JMS:dp
Attachment
cc: City Attorney
~eS~o-r of Finan~
AGREENENT TO ACT AS BOND PAYING AGENT FOR MUNICIPALITY
Agreement, made this 1st day of August, 1988, by and between
The City of Roanoke, State of Virginia (hereinafter called the
"City") and Sovran Bank, N.A., a national banking association
having its principal office in Richmond, Virginia (hereinafter
called the "Bank").
WI TNESSETH :
WHEREAS, the City is desirous of contracting with the Bank
for the purpose of having the Bank act as Paying Agent for the
City in paying the principal and interest on the City of Roanoke
Public Improvement Bonds, Series 1988 dated August 1, 1988, due
serially August 1, 1991 through August 1, 1999, inclusive in
principal amount not exceeding $(10,000,000), {hereinafter called
the "Bonds"), in accordance with the terms thereof, and
WHEREAS, the Bank is desirous of acting as such Paying Agent,
NOW THEREFORE IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the Bank shall act as Paying Agent of the City in
paying, from funds deposited with the Bank by the City the
principal and interest on all or any of the Bonds appertaining
thereto, in accordance with the terms thereof, to the holders of
such bonds upon presentation by such holders to the Bank.
2. That the Bank shall have no investment responsibility for
the cash being held in its capacity as Paying Agent and no
interest shall accrue thereon.
3. That the Bank will, upon payment of Bonds, forthwith
destroy the Bonds by burning or complete mutilation, and make
certification thereof in duplicate to
the of
the in the form
-prescribed by the Auditor of Public Accounts of the Commonwealth
of Virginia, as provided by Section 15.1-184.1, or Section 15-191,
of the Code of Virginia (1950), whichever section shall be
applicable.
4. The Bank further agrees to furnish the required
certification showing the details of the Bonds paid and destroyed
since the last certification within sixty days after each bond
maturity or interest payment date; except that a further and final
certification shall be made showing all Bonds paid through June 30
and not previously certified as paid and destroyed within thirty
days after June 30.
5. The Bank agrees to indemnify the City against any loss
resulting from Bonds being subsequently presented for payment
which have been previously certified by the Bank as being paid and
destroyed, whether occasioned by error, mistake, or suspected or
established fraud.
6. The City for such services shall pay to the B~nk the fees
set forth in the Bank's schedule of fees in effect at the time the
services are performed, and in addition shall reimburse the Bank
for out-of-pocket expenses incurred by it in connection with its
acting as such Paying Agent.
Agreed to and executed this day
of , 19 , pursuant to authority
vested in the person whose signatures are--affixed hereto.
By
ATTEST:
By
(SEAL)
SOVRAN BANK, N.A.
ATTEST:
(SEAL)
DH/ph/D18
CT2B4
BANK
Fee Schedule
for
Sovran Bank, N.A.
as
Paying Agent and Registrar
for
City of Roanoke Public Improvement Bonds,
Series 1988
Trust Account #9371998
Clo~ing Date: August 11, 198g
Acceptance Fee
$1,200
This one-time fee is due at closing or shortly thereafter
and includes the review and execution of the documents;
attendance at the closing, establishment of the required
accounts and issuance of the bonds. (It does not include
out-of-pocket expenses related to attending an out-of-town
closing, if applicable, or courier charges related to
delivery of bonds outside Virginia).
Annual Administrative Fee
$1,000
This fee will be billed semi-annually, in arrears, and
includes activity related to bond transfers, security
holder recordkeeping and principal and interest payments.
~d~ o, pocket expense recovery will be 10,'~- of the total
annual fee. Federal Express charges, call publication
costs, and counsel fees, if necessary, will be billed
at cost.
Sovran Bank, N.A. reserves the right to adjust this fee
schedule on an annual basis.
Approved by:
Date:
Ofttce of the City Clerk
September 14, 1988
File #83-137
Mr. Wilburn C. Dibling,
City Attorney
Roanoke, Virginia
Jr.
Dear Mr. Dibling:
Your report transmitting a proposed Legislative Program for the
1989 Session of the General Assembly, was before the Council of
the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday,
September 12, 1988.
On motion, duty seconded and unanimously adopted, the report was
referred to City Council acting as a committee of the whole for
appropriate action on Monday, September 26, 1988.
On further motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, Council
set a public hearing for Monday, September 26, 1988, at 2:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on pro-
posed City Charter amendments.
Sincerely, /l~t.&~
Mary F. Parker, C~,~C
City Clerk
MFP:ra
pc: Mr. W. Robert Herbert, City qanager
Roan 456 '.~ ~ ,,c,~,,:l D ~d,,',g '~I 5 Ch,.ch A,,en~.,e ) W Re. Ir o!~e ~irg~n~a 2401t (703) 981-254t
OFFICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY
September 12, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Re: 1989 Legislative Program
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
Attached for your review and comment is a draft of a proposed City
Legislative Program for the 1989 Session of the General Assembly.
believe the Program includes all legislative suggestions made by the
Mayor and Council. I emphasize that the Program is in draft form at
this time. Council may amend or delete any provision or add addi-
tional provisions to the Program.
After Council has had a full opportunity for review of the docu-
ment, it is hoped that the Program can be officially adopted at the
Council meeting of September 26, 1988. This will allow Council to
schedule its annual meeting with our legislators at an early date.
Please note that, for the first time in several years, the
Legislative Program includes proposed Charter amendments. For the
most part, these amendments are required to conform our Charter to
provisions of State Code or to take advantage of discretionary
authority generally granted to cities, but unavailable to this City
under our Charter. Charter amendments may be requested of the General
Assembly only after a public hearing which must be advertised ten days
in advance. See $15.1-835, Code of Virginia. I am requesting that
Council authorize such advertisement to permit a public hearing to be
held on September 26, 1988, at the time Council considers the Legisla-
tive Program for formal adoption.
The Program includes many excellent suggestions from members of
Council and the City Manager and his staff, and I wish to gratefully
acknowledge these contributions.
With kindest personal regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
Wilburn C. Dibling, ,Jr.
City Attorney
WCDJr:fcf
Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
September 12, 1988
Page 2
Attachment
CC:
W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk
CITY OF ROANOKE
1989
LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction .................................................. 1
Policy Statements ............................................. 2
Legislative Proposals ......................................... 8
Charter Amendments ........................................... 17
Appendix .................................................... A-1
INTRODUCTION
The City Council is pleased to commend this Legislative
Program for consideration by the 1989 Session of the General
Assembly. 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
was adopted and endorsed by City Council on
1988. See Resolution No. , at App.
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 con-
sists of specific legislative proposals of the City, and the
third part consists of recommended Charter amendments.
The City Council is uniquely qualified to understand the
legislative needs of this City and its people, and I am of
the opinion that this Program is responsive to those needs.
With the support of our legislators, and this City is for-
tunate to have legislators who are most supportive and re-
sponsive 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.
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 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
1989 Session, and their consideration of his communications
is deeply appreciated.
Noel C. Taylor
Mayor
- 1 -
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, sewage treatment and refuse collection.
Local governments and their officials are continually
striving for economy and productivity in delivery of such
services. Unfortunately, the essential services for which
local governments were originally created have been over-
shadowed 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. Further-
more, basic public services cannot be performed in the most
effective way if Virginia adopts the federal model of over-
regulation with the State dictating 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.
With more and more programs and functions being returned
to the states and localities by the federal government, it
is important that local governments be granted greater auton-
omy to manage their own affairs and that the Commonwealth re-
frain from intervention in local policy and administrative
issues.
REVENUE AND FINANCE
The study of local governments conducted by the JLARC in
1983 found that most local governments are fiscally stressed
and that cities are generally more fiscally stressed than
counties. Furthermore, the same study found that the fiscal
stress of localities has been increasing in recent years.
A major factor in the fiscal stress of localities is the
level of State aid and State mandates. State aid to locali-
ties has grown at a rate considerably less than the rate of
growth in State general fund revenues, and, at the same
time, the State has continually imposed new unfunded man-
dates on the localities. These factors are compounded by
rapidly shrinking federal aid.
-2-
The problem of fiscal stress is further complicated by
the continued erosion of the local tax base. The General
Assembly is ~rged not to cap, remove or further restrict any
revenue sources that are currently available to localities,
including taxing authority and user fees. Investigation and
study of additional local revenue sources is also encouraged.
Historically, real and personal property taxes have been the
foundation of local tax revenues. The State's restriction
and erosion of other local resources, however, have resulted
in over reliance on property taxes, placing local govern-
ments in financial Jeopardy. 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
The Report of the Governor's Commission on Virginia'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.
Inadequacy of State funding of education is readily
apparent in our own City. For Fiscal Year 1988-1989, the
General Assembly set the per pupil cost of the Standards of
Quality (SOQ) at $2,397. Actual per pupil cost for City
students, however, is estimated to be $4,236 for Fiscal Year
1988-1989. Moreover, the City schools actually receive only
$976 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.
Full funding of the State's share of the actual cost of
the Standards of Quality and fh11 funding of categorical edu-
cational mandates is a high legislative priority of the City.
SPECIAL NEEDS OF CENTRAL CITIES WITHOUT ANNEXATION POWER
The larger, more urbanized, central cities of the Common-
wealth, such as this City, provide a full range of housing,
health, mental health, transportation, social and humanitari-
an services. School systems in these cities provide excel-
lent special education programs, and private charities
located in central cities provide a broad range of chari-
table assistance. These factors make the Commonwealth's
central cities a magnet for those in need of services. Con-
sider these facts:
-3-
That the City has over 3800 subsidized
ho%sing units while Roanoke County and
Salem have only 460 and 216, respec-
tively;
That the City's elderly population is
at 25% and increasing;
That 19% of the City's population is
below the age of 18 meaning that 44%
of the City's population are consum-
ers of governmental services with little
ability to pay for these services; and
That, by 1987, 36% of children in the City
Public School System came from economic-
ally 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 un-
likely, however, that these recent successes can be sustained
over the long term. In this regard, the major problem fac-
ing 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 un-
developable.
Roanoke's peculiar problems are compounded by the need
of central cities to provide police, fire, 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 ~trong, viable units of govern-
ment, which is in the best interest of the Commonwealth,
decisive action needs to be taken. Among those actions
which should be considered are:
Reinstitution of the annexation power of
central cities;
Creation of financial incentives for local
government mergers which result in stronger,
more viable units of local government; and
-4-
Special funding by the Commonwealth of
th~se services provided by central cities
which benefit the entire region.
REGIONAL ISSUES
The most difficult issues facing Virginia's local
governments today affect more than one Jurisdiction, and
the regional scope of these issues will continue to grow.
For example, siting of landfills and sewage treatment plants,
development of water resources and transportation systems
and dealing with the threats of air and water pollution all
require regional response· Yet in dealing with these
issues, irrational factors often cause the best management,
engineering or technical solutions to be rejected.
If local governments are children of the Commonwealth,
then the Commonwealth, our parent, must not stand by and
allow the health and welfare of the entire region to be
adversely affected~by the failure of local governments to
act in the best interests of the region. Where local
governments are unable to agree with respect to a vital
issue facing the region, for example siting a landfill, then
the Commonwealth must establish a mechanism that will allow
it to step in and impose a solution for the benefit of the
region and the entire State·
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT
Economic development is a way of improving the economy and
tax base of the Commonwealth and its localities. Virginia has,
unfortunately, lagged behind neighboring states in its economic
development programs and activities. The City endorses the em-
phasis of Governor Baliles on economic development, which includes
all those activities that enhance the economic well being of the
Commonwealth and its political subdivisions, and the increased
efforts of the Division of Industrial Development to foster eco-
nomic development in Virginia.
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 cities· Tourism and convention acti-
vity should be recognized as integral components of economic
development. The Commonwealth is also urged to study the
idea of a grant program to allow localities to make the
necessary capital improvements to compete effectively for
economic development opportunities.
-5 -
DRUGS
The Cit~ and School Board are vitally concerned about the
problems caused by drugs in our society and support efforts
to increase programs designed for the prevention and cure
of drug abuse.
GOVERNMENTAL IM~{UNITY
Every session of the General Assembly brings new assaults
on the doctrines of governmental immunity for political sub-
divisions 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 rapid-
ly 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 judg-
ments. 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.
Threat of harassing lawsuits may make local
government officials less likely to act deci-
sively where courageous or difficult actions
are in order. Good government is difficult
to achieve when officials operate under con-
stant fear of lawsuits.
.,
The $25,000 cap on liability under the Virginia
Tort Claims Act is illusory. Constant pressure
will keep the cap spiraling upward.
-6 -
The City is opposed to any extension of the Virginia Tort
Claims Act to localities and supports extension of immunity
to certain ~roups of municipal employees and volunteers who
are particularly vulnerable to suits which jeopardize the
very existence of programs desired by the community. An ex-
ample of a group of employees and volunteers needing immunity
is coaches and officials serving in youth athletic programs
sponsored by the City.
-7 _
LEGISLATIVE PROPOSALS
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 $5.7 million would be generated for
the City's general fund.
FULL FUNDING OF STATE MANDATED PROGRAMS
JLARC's July, 1985, update to its 1984 State Mandates on
Local Governments study recommended that State funding be
~ncreased substantially for special education, social ser-
vices auxiliary grants and State-mandated health programs.
The City strongly supports this recommendation and also
strongly supports full funding of the State's share of the
actual costs of both Standards of Quality education mandates
and categorical education programs, and continued State sup-
port of human services programs. Furthermore, the General
Assembly and the Governor are urged to actively seek the
reduction of excessive regulatory and statutory mandates.
EDUCATION - 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 City Council. Increased State funding
should be achieved without reduction to other funding com-
ponents 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 Standards of Quality and should begin to share in
funding such costs.
Finally, no changes to educational funding formulas,
which would reduce State funding of any school division,
should be recommended without specific notice of such pro-
8
posed changes being given to each school division, each
local government and the Virginia Municipal League and the
Virginia Association of Counties. 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.
EDUCATION - FINANCIAL STRESS OF URBAN SCHOOL DIVISIONS
As an urban school division, the Roanoke City Schools
are faced with the dilemma of educating an increasing number
of disadvantaged youngsters while struggling with decreasing
financial resources as a result of municipal overburden evi-
dent in the cities of the Commonwealth. The fiscal stress
experienced by urban localities and their school divisions
is demonstrated by the 1986 JLARC study of local fiscal
stress and state aid.
Ten of fourteen major urban school divisions in Virginia
were classified by this study as "High Stress--Poor Fiscal
Position" category. The factors which caused the classifi-
cation of these urban school divisions as fiscally-stressed
included: high tax effort, large special education popula-
tion, a significant number of low income housing units, a
transient student population and a high per pupil cost.
One of the prime recommendations of the 1986 JLARC study
was that stressed urban areas should receive special con-
sideration in State funding formulas. The study recommended
that these formulas be periodically reassessed and should
include measures of local fiscal stress. The City Council
and School Board urge the General Assembly to include
measures of local fiscal stress in the formula used for the
distribution of Basic State Aid to local school divisions.
The evidence of the JLARC study also indicates that
Virginia's urban school divisions require improved State
categorical funding assistance if they are to provide the
educational services needed to educate disadvantaged youth.
State funding assistance is required for preschool programs,
remedial reading and literacy programs, dropout prevention,
summer school, special education and innovative technology
programs. Such funding must represent a real increase in
the total State funds received by urban school divisions and
not a mere shifting of funds from one appropriation category
{'o another.
-9 -
EDUCATION - OPPOSITION TO TEACHER SALARY MANDATES
The City strongly opposes State nmndates for teacher
salary increases. These mandates take away local officials'
ability to make appropriate budget decisions and have im-
posed undue financial hardships on local governments. Fur-
ther, the teacher salary mandates have created tensions in
local governments when salary mandates are funded at the
expense of salary increases for other local government em-
ployees.
FUNDING FOR LOCAL SOCIAL SERVICE8 PROGRAMS
State funding of local social services programs has not
kept pace with State and Federal mandates. Examples of
State mandates are as follows:
Care of children found to be in need of
treatment because of emotional and psychi-
atric problems manifested in aggressive
behavior, attempted suicide, truancy,
runaways, etc.;
Placement of emotionally handicapped
children for adoption;
Placement of recipients of Aid to
Dependent Children in jobs or provision
of work related training;
Child abuse and neglect investigation
and treatment services; and
Adult abuse and neglect investigation
and treatment services.
The State Department of Social Services has insufficient
funds allocated to it and has been forced to pass the short-
fall on to the localities. In this City, the shortfall in
the Eligibility Division (ADC, Food Stamps, Medicaid, etc.)
for this fiscal year is $274,000. For the same period,
the shortfall of needed funds to pay for foster care and
day care is over $500,000. The 1989 Session of the General
Assembly is requested to appropriate sufficient funds to
defray State-mandated programs.
RIVER CHANNELIZATON
Flood protection remains one of the highest priorities of
City Council. In this regard, the City is being requested by
the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers to participate in a lO-mile
channelization of the Roanoke River within the boundaries
of the City, The total cost of this project is approxi-
mately $31,000,000, and, with recreation bridges and low
water bridges, the non-Federal cost is estimated at approx-
imately $17,000,000.
It will be vividly recalled that the 1985 flood took ten
lives in the Roanoke Valley and caused $300,000,000 of damage in
this City alone. Subsequent to the flood, the Commonwealth paid
the City $750,000 in reimbursement of eligible costs. Moreover,
the negative effects of the 1985 flood continue. Within the
City, land and buildings having a value of $1,000,000,000 lie
along the Roanoke River. As their financial capability allows,
businesses employing thousands of persons are considering re-
location. Because of its limited land inventory, compounded
by lack of annexation power, it is of great concern that busi-
nesses will leave the City.
With respect to flood control, it is hoped that the Common-
wealth will choose to be proactive rather than reactive. State
funding for flood protection would lessen the need for State
appropriations to deal with the aftermaths of flood disasters
and minimize flood caused reduction of State and local tax bases.
There are, of course, a number of ways in which the Commonwealth
could provide financial assistance for flood control. For ex-
ample, the Department of Transportation could provide funding
for relocation of bridges or construction of bike trails, and
the Commission on Outdoor Recreation could provide funds for
park access and relocation of tennis courts. Careful considera-
tion should be given to the many ways in which the Commonwealth
could assist this important project.
TRADE AND CONVENTION CENTER FUNDING
The City has completed a feasibility study which
establishes the economic viability of a trade and convention
center in downtown. In addition, the study shows that the
facility would generate $2,179,000 in new tax revenue each
year; of this amount, $1,022,00 would be new State tax reve-
nue. At this time, a City Manager appointed task force is
studying location, financing and operation of the proposed
facility. Trade and convention business is a vital and bene-
ficial industry, and the Commonwealth would be the largest
financial beneficiary, through additional tax revenues, of
the facility proposed to be constructed in this City.
More than twenty states around the country have begun to
participate financially in the funding of local trade and
convention centers. The General Assembly is urged to estab-
lish and fund a program for the financing of local trade and
convention centers.
- 11 -
NURSING HOME FUNDING'
As in t~e past, the City requests the General Assembly
to fund locally-owned nursing homes in the same way State-
owned facilities are funded.
OPEN SPACE RECREATION AND CONSERVATION FUND
House Joint Resolution No. 204 enacted by the 1987
Session of the General Assembly created a Joint Subcomit-
tee to study the outdoor recreation needs of the Common-
wealth. This Subcommittee, chaired by Delegate Thomas,
made important recommendations to improve outdoor recre-
ational opportunities in the Commonwealth. One of the
recommendations of the Subcommittee which was not adopted
by the 1988 Session of the General Assembly was the estab-
lishment of an Open Space Recreation and Conservation Fund
to meet the capital outlay needs of State and local parks.
The City urges the 1989 Session of the General Assemb-
ly to provide adequate funding to the Open Space Recreation
and Conservation Fund. Federal funding of park improvements
and expansions has been drastically reduced. The Open Space
Recreation and Conservation Fund should set aside 50% of its
funds to be made available to local governments for park im-
provement and expansion projects on a 50-50 matching basis.
DAY CARE - PROPOSED REGULATIONS SHOULD NOT EXTEND TO PARKS
AND RECREATION PROGRAMS
The Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission is
currently conducting a study of day care programs operated
by local governments. This study results primarily from
complaints of private day care operators that local govern-
ments are unfairly competing with them. Proposed day care
regulations, which would apply to local governments, include
the requirement that inside temperatures be maintained be-
tween 68' Farenheit and 72' Farenheit; requirement of a one
to 20 ratio of staff to children; requirement of one toilet
and one sink per 15 preschoolers; etc.
The City of Roanoke does not operate traditional day
care programs which compete with the private sector. Our
Parks and Recreation Department does operate programs for
children which are designed to promote educational, recre-
ational, athletic or social opportunities for them. Exten-
sion of the proposed day care regulations to these programs
would increase their cost tremendously and/or require that
the number of children participating in these programs be
drastically reduced or even that the programs be eliminated.
The General Assembly is urged to carefully consider the
definition ~f "day care" and not extend State regulation to
programs offered by parks and recreation departments, which
do not provide meals for participants, and are intended to
provide educational, recreational, athletic or social oppor-
tunities for children.
IMMUNITY FOR STAFF AND VOLUNTEERS IN YOUTH ATHLETIC PROGRAMS
The City's non-profit, youth athletic programs are sup-
ported by several City employees and many volunteers. These
volunteers serve as coaches, assistant coaches, league offi-
cials, etc. It is well known that these athletic programs
involve high risk activities which expose staff and volun-
teers 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.
FIRE PROGRAMS FUND
The 1985 Session of the General Assembly created the
Fire Programs Fund which is supported by an assessment in
the amount of eight-tenths of one percent of the total
direct gross fire insurance premium income against insur-
ance companies writing fire insurance in the Commonwealth.
Seventy-five percent of the total amount collected has been
allocated to local governments for the purposes of fire ser-
vice training, constructing, improving and expanding regional
fire service training facilities and purchasing firefighting
equipment or protective clothing. Pursuant to a sunset
clause included in the legislation, it will automatically
expire on July 1, 1990.
In this City, the Fire Department has used allocations
from the Fire Programs Fund to outfit each of the 230 members
of the Fire Suppression Division with new turn-out gear at
a cost in excess of $100,000. In addition, the Department
is in the process of purchasing a breathing air machine at
a cost of approximately $20,000, and the training program
has benefitted by the purchase of badly needed training
manuals and audio visual equipment. If the Program con-
tinues, consideration is being given to dedicating the
City's allocations to a regional training center to be
participated in by this City and neighboring localities.
The Fire Programs Fund has proven itself to be a useful
piece of legislation, and the General Assembly is urged to
repeal the sunset clause.
- 13 -
CORRECTION8 BLOCK GRANT FUNDING FOR JUVENILE FACILITIE~
Since th~ inception of block grant funding for
juvenile facilities in 1982, the State's percentage of
financial Participation in operating this City's juvenile
facilities has significantly decreased. The 1989 Session
of the General Assembly should amend the block grant pro-
gram to provide that localities will receive funds in an
amount at least equal to the amount received under the
reimbursement formulas in effect when the block grant
program was established. In addition, the program should
provide for annual inflation adjustments and adjustments
due to program changes.
TRANSPORTATION - IMPROVED ACCESS TO BLACKSBURG/VIRGINiA TECII
Direct access between the Roanoke Valley and Blacksburg/
Virginia Tech is important to economic development efforts
in Southwest Virginia. The City supports a study commis-
sioned by the Town of Blacksburg which finds that a new road
leading from the Virginia Tech Corporate Research Center
east to a point near the existing intersection of Route 641
with Interstate 81 is the best solution to the problems
associated with access between the Roanoke Valley and
Blacksburg/Virginia Tech. See Resolution No. 28762, August
10, 1987, at Appendix page ~-2-f.
PARKING AS AN ELIGIBLE TRANSPORTATION EXPENDITURE
For urban areas, such as this City, parking structures are
an integral, crucial part of the transportation system and its
planning. Currently, the City gets approximately $6,000,000
annually as its urban allocation out of the State transporta-
tion fund. Legislation should be enacted which would give
urban localities the option of spending some of the urban
allocation funds on parking structures.
EXTENSION OF OCCUPATIONAL DISEASE PRESUMPTION~
Police officers, deputy sheriffs and firefighters have
the advantage of nearly irrebuttable 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 lia-
bility of $2.6 million for heart, hypertension and lung
awards made to public safety officers as a result of the
statutory presumption.
- 14 -
Without voicing any opinion as to 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.
DEMOLITION OF HISTORIC STRUCTURES
State Code $15.1-503.2 authorizes counties and cities to
designate historic landmarks, buildings and structures and
historic areas; to create an architectural review board to
review and approve reconstruction or alteration of historic
structures; and to prohibit the razing or demolition of
historic structures without following certain procedures.
The State statute further provides that a historic structure
may not be razed until it has been offered on the market at
a price reasonably related to its fair market value for a
certain number of days without any bona fide contract for
such structure being executed. For example, a structure
valued at $40,000 to $50,000 must be offered on the market
for five months before it can be razed.
This City has implemented the historic district zoning
authorities authorized by the State Code in the Market
District and in Old Southwest. There is a problem, how-
ever, with the minimal penalties authorized by the State
Code for razing a historic structure without following
the required procedures. Section 15.1-503.2 is part of the
State zoning enabling legislation, and for violations of
local zoning ordinances, §15.1-491(e) authorizes a penalty
of not less than $10 nor more than $1,000.
No person should be permitted to destroy a priceless
part of the community's heritage and pay a mere fine of
$1,000 as a cost of doing business. It is recommended,
therefore, that ~15.1-503.2 be amended to state that razing
or demolition of a historic structure in violation of a
historic district zoning ordinance adopted pursuant ~o
$15.1-503.2 shall be punishable as a Class 1 misdemeanor
which carries a penalty of confinement in jail for not more
than twelve months and a fine of not more than $1,000, either
or both. In addition, such person should be liable for a
civil penalty in the amount of the assessed value of the
historic structure destroyed. Such civil penalty would be
paid to the local government to be used in historic preser-
vation activities.
SEIZURE OF ASSETS OF DRUG DEALERS
Under existing law, assets seized by local law enforce-
ment agencies from drug dealers are sold and the proceeds
- 15 -
are paid into the State Literary Fund after a lengthy court
proceeding. See S$18.2-249 and 4-56, Code of Virginia
(1950), as a~nded. An exception permits a local law en-
forcement agency to make use of a seized motor vehicle for
drug investigation as long as it deems necessary; once the
agency ceases to use the motor vehicle, it is sold pursuant
to statutory procedures and the proceeds are paid into the
Literary Fund. See $18.2-249.C.
The City urges the General Assembly to amend S18.2-249
to permit local law enforcement agencies to retain all
assets seized from drug dealers, including money, for ex-
clusive use in investigation of drug and drug-related of-
lenses or for the purchase of equipment, including vehicles,
to be used in such investigations. Appropriate record keep-
ing procedures should be established, and the program should
operate similar to the Federal asset seizure program.
RELOCATION BENEFITS
Section 25-245 of the State Code requires a local
government to pay relocation benefits to any person who
moves his business or dwelling as the direct result of
federally assisted building enforcement activities.
This section paralleled a similar federal provision
found in 42 U.S.C. ~4637 which was repealed by P.L.
100-17, Title IV, 8415, 101 Stat. 255, enacted April 2,
1987. Thus, neither federal law nor regulation requires
payment of relocation benefits under the circumstances
set out in 825-245.
Relocation benefits can run from several thousand dol-
lars in the case of a renter to more than $15,000 in the
case of a homeowner. City inspectors, some of whom are
federally funded, should not be deterred from enforcing
the building codes to protect lives and safety, by the
State requirement of relocation benefits. Congress has
wisely repealed the requirement of relocation benefits
under these circumstances, and the General Assembly is
requested to follow suit.
COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
Any legislation authorizing collective bargaining for
public employees in general or for any public employee group
should be opposed.
All public employees now have effective.grievance proce-
dures. 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 made.
- 16
CHARTER AMENDMENTS
ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY
Subsection (5) of $2 of the City Charter lists the ways
in which the City can acquire property, enumerating acquisi-
tion by "purchase, gift, devise, condemnation or otherwise."
Such commonly relied upon methods of property acquisi-
tion as lease and lease purchase are not mentioned. Also,
although acquisition by "devise" or gift of real property
under a will is mentioned, no mention is ,made of acquisi-
tion by " ,,
bequest or gift of personal property under a will.
Therefore, it is recommended that $2 be amended to read
"purchase, lease, lease purchase, gift, devise, bequest,
condemnation or otherwise."
SALARIES OF MAYOR, VICE-MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBER~:
Section 6 sets out salaries for the Mayor, Vice-Mayor
and Council members. Section 6, however, is superseded by
$14.1-47.2, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, which
establishes maximum salaries for mayors and council members
of all cities. Therefore, $6 of the Charter should be
amended to conform to general law.
PROCUREMENT - GENERALLY
Section 40 provides that all contracts for more than
$10,000 shall be awarded "...to the lowest bidder, after
public advertisement and competition .... ,, This section
overlooks that in some cases, such as the award of a fran-
chise, the contract will be awarded to the highest bidder.
It also overlooks that, in procuring professional services
pursuant to the competitive negotiation procedure estab-
lished by State Code, actual bids are not received and award
need not be to the lowest proposer. Therefore, it is recom-
mended that §40 be amended to require award "...pursuant to
competition, after public advertisement, as may be prescribed
by general law."
PROCUREMENT - EMERGENCY
Section 41 authorizes the City Manager to make emergency
procurement of any "improvements,, or "public work" without
advertising and receiving bids. Such procurement must be
reported at the next regular meeting of Council. Experience
has proven that emergency procurements do not always relate
to "improvements', or "public work" as these terms are ordi-
- 17 -
narily defined. For example, emergency procurement may be
required with respect to a machine or a part of a machine
required to keep the Sewage Treatment Plant or Water Plant
operating. Therefore, $41 should be amended to permit an
emergency "purchase" as well as emergency procurement of
Improvements or "public work."
CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
Section 61 prohibits Council members or other officers
of the City from contracting with the City. The same sec-
tion prohibits any officer who has the duty of auditing,
settling or providing for payment of claims against the
City, from being an owner or interested in any such claim.
Insofar as §61 attempts to regulate conflicts of inte-
rests, it is inconsistent with and superseded by the State
and Local Government Conflict of Interests Act. The Act
specifically supersedes all charter provisions. See
639.1. Therefore, the Charter provision serves only to
cause confusion and should be repealed.
PENALTY FOR ZONING VIOLATIONS
Subsection (23) of $82 sets out criminal penalties for
zoning violations. Nonwillful violations are punishable by
a fine of not less than $10 nor more than $100. Willful
violations are punishable by a fine of not more than $250.
In each case, a fine of $10 per day is applicable. Section
15.1-491(e), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, authorizes
a local governing body to adopt a fine of not less than
$10 nor more than $1000 for zoning violations. The State
Code provides a more appropriate penalty, and $S2(23) of
the Charter should be amended to conform to the State Code.
- 18 _
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The lOth day of August, 1987.
No. 28762.
A RESOLUTION supporting the improvement of access between the
Roanoke Valley and Virginia Tech.
WHEREAS, direct access between the Roanoke Valley and
Virginia Tech is a key ingredient in the success of economic
development efforts in Southwest Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Governor of Virginia has identified improvement
of transportation facilities as an important part of the
Commonwealth's
WHEREAS, a
that a new road
Center east to a point near the existing intersection of Route
641 with Interstate 8l is the best solution to the problems asso-
ciated with the access of Biacksburg and Virginia Tech to the
Roanoke Valley.
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of
Roanoke that:
1. The Council joins with the Town of Blacksburg and
Virginia Tech in requesting that the Commonwealth Transportation
Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation accept the
corridor solution the Town of Blacksburg has identified as the
best answer to the needs of the Commonwealth and provide the
funds necessary for timely completion of the project.
economic development strategy; and
study commissioned by the To~¥n of Blacksburg shows
leading from the Virginia Tech Corporate Research
Board, the
Blaeksburg,
Tech ·
2. The City Clerk is directed to forward attested copies of
this resolution to the members of the Commonwealth Transportation
Honorable Roger B. Hedgepeth, Mayor of the Tos~rn of
and Dr. William E. Lavery, President of Virginia
ATTEST: ~
City Clerk.
OFFICE OF THE, CITY ATTORNEY
August 31, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Re: 1989 Legislative Program
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
Enclosed for your early review and comment is a draft of
a proposed City Legislative Program for the 1989 Session of
the General Assembly. I believe the Program includes all
legislative suggestions made by the Mayor and Council. I
solicit your comments and suggestions with respect to this
draft prior to the formal presentation of the Program to
City Council.
It is my intention to publicly present the Program at
the Council meeting of September 12, 1988. After Council
has had a full opportunity for review of the document, it
is hoped that the Program can be officially adopted at the
Council meeting of September 26, 1988. This will allow
Council to schedule its annual meeting with our legislators
at an early date.
Please note that, for the first time in several years,
the Legislative Program includes proposed Charter amendments.
For the most part, these amendments are required to conform
our Charter to provisions of State Code or to take advantage
of discretionary authority generally granted to cities, but
unavailable under our Charter. Charter amendments may be
requested of the General Assembly only after a public hear-
ing which must be advertised ten days in advance. See ~15.1-
835, Code of Virginia. At the Council meeting of September
12, 1988, I will request that Council authorize such adver-
tisement to permit a public hearing to be held on September
-26, 1988, at the time Council considers the Legislative Pro-
gram for formal adoption.
I am aWare that some statistical data included in support
of certain proposals may need updating. This will occur prior
Honorable Mayor and Members
of City Council
August 31, 1988
Page 2
to formal presentation of the Program to Council on September
12, 1988. Prior to adoption by Council, the Program will
also be attractively bound.
The Program includes many excellent suggestions of the
City Manager and his staff, and I wish to gratefully acknowl-
edge their participation in the preparation of this document.
Please call me if you have questions or comments or sug-
gestions.
With kindest personal regards, I am
Sincerely yours,
Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr.
City Attorney
WCDJr:fcf
Enclosure
cc: W. Robert Herbert, City Manager
Joe~. Schlanger, Director of Finance
~,M~Y F. Parker, City Clerk
IN THE coUNcIL OF THE CITY OF
The 10th day of August, 1987.
No. 28762.
VIRGINIA,
A RESOLUTION supporting the improvement of access between
Roanoke Valley and Virginia Tech.
WHEREAS, direct access between the Roanoke Valley and
Virginia Tech is a key ingredient in the success of economic
development efforts in Southwest Virginia; and
WHEREAS, the Governor of Virginia has identified improvement
of transportation facilities as an important part of the
Commonwealth's economic development strategy; and
WHEREAS, a study commissioned by the To~n of Blacksburg shows
that a new road heading from the Virginia Tech Corporate Research
Center east to a point near the existing intersection of Route
641 with Interstate 81 is the best solution to the problems asso-
ciated with the access of Blacksburg and Virginia Tech to the
Roanoke Valley.
THEREFORE, BE [T RESOLVED by the Couacii of the City of
Roanoke that:
1. The Council joins with the Town of Blacksburg and
Virginia Tech in requesting that the Commonwealth Transportation
Board and the Virginia Department of Transportation accept the
corridor solution the Town of Blacksburg has identified as the
best answer to the needs of the Commonwealth and provide the
funds necessary for timely completion of the project.
the
A-!
Board, the Honorable Roger E.
Blaeksburg, and Dr. William E.
Tech.
2. The City Clerk is directed to forward attested copies of
this resolution to the members of the Commonwealth Transportation
Hedgepeth, Mayor of the Town of -
Lavery, President of Virginia
ATTEST
City Clerk.
CY~ce of r~e Ci~, Cle~
September 14, 1988
File #22-72
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear ~.lr. fferbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29269, authorizing execution
of State-Local ltosp'italization Plan Agreements with the State
Department of Social Services, certain hospitals and the City
Health Department, to provide for in-patient, ambulatory surgery,
and out-patient care and treatment for certain indigent citizens
at certain rates, which Ordinance No. 29269 was adopted by the
Council of the City of Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August
22, 1988, also adopted by the Council on second reading on
Monday, September 12, 1988, and will take effect ten days
following the date of its second reading.
Sincerely, ~
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enco
pc:
Dr. E. J. Clarke, Director, Roanoke City Health Department,
P. 0. Box 12926, Roanoke, Virginia 24029
Mr. W. R. ~eid, President, Community Hospital of Roanoke
Valley, P. O. Dox 12946, Roanoke, Viryinia 24029
Mr. Peter F. Rapt, Hospital Administrator, Medical College of
Virjinia, MCV Station ~ox 510, Richmond, Virginia 23298
Hr. Donald Love, Hospital Administrator, Gill Memorial
~ospitat, P. 0. Box 1560, Roanoke, Virginia 24007
Mr. Karl N. Miller, Hospital Administrator, Lewis ~ale
Hospital, 1900 Electric Road, Salem, Virginia 24153
Mr. Thomas L. Robertson, President, ~oanoke Memorial
Hospitals, p. 0. Box 13367, Roanoke, Virginia 24033
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
ROor', 456 ~.~, ~ ,i¢,k,,~l ~ :,10;~ ~g 2 ~ 5 ~,}',urch A'~en~e S W Rc~noh, e vlrg,ma 24011 (703) 981-254J
August 22, 1988
Honorable Noel C. Taylor, Mayor,
Members of City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
and
Members of Council:
SUBJECT: STATE AND LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION AGREF_~ENT$
I. Background
State-local hospitalization is a plan whereby the State
Department of Social Services and the City of Roanoke
agree to provide hospitalization, outpatient, and/or
emergency room service and outpatient {ambulatory)
service to medically indigent citizens of the City of
Roanoke. Funds are 75 percent reimbursed to the City.
Provisions of these services is accomplished by the
execution of State-Local Hospitalization Plan
Agreements between the providing hospitals, the City of
Roanoke, and the State Department of Social Services.
Co
Local Health Departments by Chapter 7, Title 63.1, Code
of Virginia, as amended in 1976, are allowed to bill
the State Department of Social Services for outpatient
care provided through their clinics to medically
indigent persons.
City of Roanoke has entered into previous agreements to
allow the local Health Department to receive State
funds for providing outpatient care to medically
indigent citizens.
City Council has annually authorized the City Manager
or his designee to execute these agreements.
II. Current Situation
State-Local Hospitalization Plan Agreement~ have been
executed by the various hospitals wishing to
participate in the program for year beginning July 1,
1988 and ending June 30, 1989. Agreements need to be
executed by the City of Roanoke before being approved
by the State Department of Social Services {copies
attached).
Local Health Department has requested that the City
Manager or his designee sign the State-Local
Hospitalization Agreement for outpatient care for the
period beginning July 1, 1988 through June 30, 1989
(copy attached).
Rate(s) a hospital may charg~ for service(s) are
established by the Uniform Hospital Cost Accounting
System based on each individual hospital's operational
cost.
Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted, receiving
ambulatory surgery, or outpatient services July 1, 1988
through June 30, 1989 under the State-Local
Hospitalization Agreements at the following all
inclusive daily rates:
Hospitals
Community Hospital
of Roanoke Valley
Ambulatory
Inpatient Surgery Outpatient
$ 471.78 $ 320.81 $ 15.00
Gill Memorial
Hospital
477.81 324.91 15.00
Lewis-Gale
Hospital
441.63 300.31 15.00
Medical College
of Virginia
539.44 366.82 15.00
Roanoke Memorial
Hospitals
469.94 319.56 15.00
University of VA
III.
539.44 366.82 15.00
Local Health Department is allowed to bill the State
Department of Social Services at an all inclusive rate
of 215 per visit for outpatient care.
Issues
Need for State-Local Hospitalization Plan.
Budget Concerns.
Patient Care.
IV. Alternatives
Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute
State-Local Hospital Agreements with the participating
hospitals and the local Health Department.
Need for State-Local Hospitalization Plan.
Citizens of the State and City have identified
this program as being necessary for those citizens
who are medically indigent and cannot qualify for
any other health care program. City provided at
an all inclusive rate for FY 87-88 the following:
a) Hospitalization for 64 citizens.
b) Outpatient treatment at local hospitals for
24 citizens.
c) Ambulatory surgery for 27 citizens.
d) Outpatient treatment at local Health
Department for 908 citizens.
Budget Concerns. Appropriation for 1988-89 for
hospitalization and outpatient care is $185~000 of
which ?§ percent of expended funds will be
reimbursed to the City.
Patient Care. Health care will be provided at a
quality level to medically indigent citizens of
the City of Roanoke.
Do not authorize the City Manager or his designee to
execute State-Local Hospital Agreements with the
participating hospitals and the local Health
Department.
Need for State-Local Hospitalization Plan.
Program has been identified as being necessary for
those citizens who are medically indigent and do
not qualify for any other health care program.
City will not have an agreement with the
participating hospitals for an all inclusive rate
for hospitalization and outpatient treatment for
necessary health care for approximately 1,023
medically indigent citizens.
Budget Concerns. Present appropriation of
$185,000 for hospitalization of medically indigent
citizens would not be spent, and the local Health
Department would not receive $15 per visit for
citizens receiving outpatient treatment at that
facility.
o
Patient Care. Care will be provided by local
hospitals which have contracted directly with the
State Department of Social Services, however,
citizens may not receive needed medical services.
Recommendation
Authorize the City Manager or his designee to execute
State-Local Hospital Agreements with the participating
hospitals and the local Health Department {Alternative
A).
OMMON .EALTH of VJ.RC INJA
Roanoke City Health Department
515 EIGHTH STREET, S.W.
P. O. BOX 12926
ROANOKE, VIRGINIA 24029
Mr. James D. Ritchie, Director
Department of Human Resources
Municipal Building
Roanoke, Va. 24011
THROUGH: E. J. Clarke, M.D.
Health Director
Dear Mr. Ritchie:
Enclosed are State and Local Hospitalization Plan Agreements,
which have been executed by hospitals desiring to participate in
the program this year.
A report is attached for a matter of reference.
We will appreciate your taking the appropriate action necessary
to have these documents approved. After this is achieved, if you
will return all signed copies to us, they will be forwarded to
the State Department of Human Resources for proper signatures.
Your early attention to this matter will be appreciated.
Sincerely,
FLS/bc
Attachment
Enclosures
Frank L. Showalter
Administrator
Respectful ly submitted,
City Manager
WRH/JDR/slw
CC'
Wilburn C. Dibling, City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Finance Director
James D. Ritchie, Director of Human Resources
Dr. E. J. Clarke, Director, Roanoke City Health Department
INPATIENT:
FISCAL YEAR 1987/88 REPORT
HOSPITAL
Community Hospital
Lewis-Gale Hospital
Roanoke Memoiral Hospitals
TOTAL:
OUT-PATIENT:
Community Hospital
Roanoke Memorial Hospitals
Roanoke City Health Department
TOTAL:
AMBULATORY SURGERY:
Community Hospital
Roanoke Memoiral Hospitals
TOTAL:
ADMISSIONS
APPROVED
33
4
27
64
4
2O
908
932
9
18
27
DAYS
APPROVED
191
21
160
372
COST
82,924.29
7,819.77
67,984.08
158,728.I4
52.00
264.00
13,161.00
13,477.00
2,622.15
5,244.30
7,866.45
Fiscal Year 1987/88
Fiscal Year 1988/89
Fiscal Year 1987/88
Fiscal Year 1988/89
Fiscal Year 1987/88
Fiscal Year 1988/89
Fiscal Year 1987/88
Fiscal Year 1988/89
Fiscal Year 1987/88
Fiscal Year 1988/89
RATE COMPARISON
Community Hospital
Community Hospital
Gill Memorial
Gill Memorial
Lewis-Gale
Lewis-Gale
Roanoke Memorial
Roanoke Memorial
UVA/MCV
UVA/MCV
Out-Patient rate remains $15 per visit
Ambulatory Surgery rate remains 68% of
$428.46
471.78
428.46
477.81'
376.84
441.63
428.46
469.94
498.35
539.44
in-patient rate
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETION ANOSIGNATURE SYAPPROPRIATE PERSONS,ORIGINAL AND2 COPIES ARE TO eE FORWARDED TO
THE DIVISION OF BENEFIT PROGRAMS. DEPT. OF SOClALSI[RVICES. 800? DISCOVERY DRIVE. RICHMOND, VA 23238
This agreement betweenthe[~crrrr~rdJ-y ~?it-~l QF R~ V~]IF,¥ P. FI P,~y ]?g~A
and the (~/r/]~, or City of Roan~e Ci[¥ is made with the following provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that, if accommodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit and furnish
hospital care and Ireatment to patients upon presentation of an official authorization signed by a referring physician and is.
sued by the Authorizing Agent of the above-named county or city entitling them to assistance under the State - Local Hos-
pitalization Plan as provided by Chapter ?, Title 63. 1, Code of Virginia, as amended.
2. Each authorization issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a period not in excess of fourteen days.
The county/city shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any such patients require hos-
pitalization beyond the period authorized In the event that additional stay is required and notice is given as herein provided
for, such stay shall pe as provided for in Section 63. f-137 of the Code of V/rgm/a. In no case shall the county/city be liable
for the care and treatment of any patient retained for teaching purposes and in such event such care and treatment shall be
borne by the Hospital. A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmission under this contract.
3.la) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $ ~-7] .7~'
per patient
day. This constitutes the total charge to be made to t~e locality or the individual for hospitalization care and treatment.
· lb) Outpatient and/or Emergency Room Service will be provided at an all-inclusive rate of $ ]5.[TJ per visit.
lc) Outpatient (Ambulatory) surgery will be provided at an all inclusive rate of $ 37R RI per visit.
(dj Infants hospitalized concurrently with the mother during the 5-day newborn period are to be cared for without
charge other than that specified for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitalization without the mother,
or at the expiration of the 5~lay period, are to be cared for at 40% of the rate specified above. Sick infants requiring hospitali-
zation without the mother, or at the expiration of the S-day newborn period, are to be cared for at the full rate specified
above.
4. Payment will not be made for services rendered prior to date of authorization except in case of emergency admis-
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to the authorizing agent who will receive an application from and investigate
the eliqibility of the patient.
5. The Hospital agrees that the total payment, regardless of source, for the care of patients under this agreement will
not exceed the rates specified herein. If the hospital receives payment for the care of patients under this agreement from a
third party source following payment by the locality, the hospital shall reimburse the authorizing agent the total of such
amount paid by the third party or the amount of payment made by the Inca ty whichever is the lesser.
6. The Hospital agrees to notify the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours following the admission or readmission of a
patient hospitalized under this agreement.
7. Immediately upon discharge of a patient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the county or city on the form
furnished for this purpose.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide outpatient care, that service will be at an all-
inclusive rate of $ per visit.
9. This agreement may be terminated upon thirty days written notice by either party or the Department of Social
Services. Otherwise, the agreement shall remain in effect from:
,MIy l: I9AA
to. ~ 30, 1~89
FOR HOSPITAL
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT ~OTl'lt~_t¥ Hosp~.[al of' I:~e Valley ~-~ ~ ~'~_~
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE COUNTY OR CITY: F~r~4e City
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
*Optional
Chapter ? of E3. 7 of the Virginia Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent I~er~ons
(State/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program is to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by $~ction 63. ~-139 of the above chapter to administer the program in the locality.
Under the provisions of this program, ~ocalities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services, are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and health department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
residents of the rocality.
A standard contract form is provided to local authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are mailed to the authorizing agent just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and clinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health department clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the locality. In the meantime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbursed from state funds for payments made to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital will be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbursable rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subject to reimburse-
ment to the focality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate persons and returned to the authorizing
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to sign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor, Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved,
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic.
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SLH region is t 15% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of-state hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine services is established by the State Board for ali
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge par visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETION AND SIGNATURE BY APPROPRIATE PERSONS,ORIGINALANO2 COPIES ARE TO BE FORWAROEDTO
THE DIVISION OF B~NEFIT PROGRAMS. DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES. 8007 DISCOVERY DRIVE. RICHMOND. VA
This agr~ment betw~n the Gi 11 ~rtR1 ~J~a] 7[~ ~h ~FFe~ S[~t~ S.~.
and the ~ or City of
is made with the followi~ provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that, if accommodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit a~ furnish
hospital ~re and Ireatment to patients upon pre~ntation of an officiM authorization signed by a referri~ ~ysician and is-
sued by the Authorizing Agent of the above-named ~unty or city entiHing them to assistance under the State * Lo~l
pJtalizatlon Plan as provided by Chapter 7, T/t/e 63. ~ . Code of Virgin/a. as amended.
Each authorization issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a ~riod not ~n ex.ss of fourteen days.
The county/city shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any such ~tients r~uire hos-
pitalization beyond the period authorized. In the event that additional stay is required and noti~ is given as herein provided
for, such stay shall be as provided for ~n Eection 63. ~-137 of the Code of V/rg~. In no case shall the county/city be liable
for the care and treatment of any patient retained for teaching purposes and in such event such care and treatment shallbe
borne by the Hospital A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmJssJon under this ~ntract.
3.(a) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $ _~77.~1 ~r patient
day. This constitutes the total charge to be made to the lo.lily or the individual for hospitalization care and treatment.
'(bi Outpatient and/or E~rgency Room Service will be provid~ at an all-incluslve rate of $ ~.~ per visit.
(c) Outpatient (Ambulatory) surgery will ~ provided at an all inclusive rate of $ ~2~-~[
per visit.
(d) Infants hosp*taliz~ concurrently with the mother during the 5-day newborn ~riod are to ~ cared for without
charge other than that s~cifi~ for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitalization without the mother.
or at the expiration of the 5~ay ~riod, are to ~ ~red for at 40% of the rate s~cified above. Sick infants requiring hospJtali*
zation without the mother, or at the expiration of the 5~ay newborn period, are to ~ ~r~ for at the full rate s~cJfi~
above.
4. Payment wi~/ not be made for ~rvi~s rendered prior to date of authorization ex.pt in ~ of emer~ncy admis.
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to
the eliqlbi ty of the patient, the authorizing agent who will receive an appli~tion from a~ in~stigate
5. The Hospital agrees that the total payment, r~ardless of source, for the ~re of patients u~er this ~r~ment will
not exc~d the rates specified herein. If the hospital receives payment for the care of ~tients under this ~r~ment from a
third parW source following payment by the lo.lily, the hospital shall reimbur~ the authorizi~ a~nt the total of su~
amount paid by the third party or the amount of payment made by the I~ality, whi~ever is the J~r.
6. The Hospital agrees ~o nobfy the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours followi~ the admission ~ re. mission of a
~tient hospitaliz~ under th,: agreement.
7. Immediately u~n dis~arge of a patient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the ~unty or city on the form
furnished for this purpo~.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide out~tient ~re, that ~rvim will ~ at an all-
inclusive rate of $ ~ ~r visit.
9. Th~s ~r~ment may ~ terminat~ u~n thirty days written notice by either party or the De~rt~nt of ~cial
~rvices. Otherwise, the agreement shah remain in effect from:
July 1. 1~88
FOR HOSPITAL
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE ~)~t/~/T/Y OR CITY:
'Optional
to_ /'~ ~0, 1989
Roanoke
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
By_
Chapter 7 of 63. I of the V/rg/n/a Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent ~rsons
State/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program is to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by Section 63. 1-159 of the above chapter to administer the program in the locality.
Under the provisions of this program, localities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services, are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and health department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
residents of the locality.
A standard contract form is provided to local authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are maited to the authorizing agent just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and clinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health department clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the locality. In the meantime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbt, rsed from state funds for payments mede to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital will be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbursable rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subject to reimburse-
ment to the locality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate parsons and returned to the authorizing
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to sign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor, Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved,
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic.
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SLH region is 115% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of-state hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine services is established by the State Board for all
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge per visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF SOC)ALSERViCES
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETION AND SIGNATURE BY APPROPRIATE PERSONS,ORiGINALAND2COPiESARE TO BE FORWARDED TO
THE DIVISION OF BENEFIT PROGRAMS, DEPT. OFSOCiALSERViCES, 8007 DISCOVERY DRIVE, RICHMOND, VA 23288
This agreement between the Lewis Gale Ho.spit:al IgC0 Electric Road Salen, Virginia
and the C{~t~/~,./~m4/y of ... Roanoke
is made with the following provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that, if accommodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit and furnish
hospital care and treatment to patients upon presentation of an official authorization signed by a referring physician and is-
sued by the Authorizing Agent of the above-named COunty or city entitling them to assistance under theState. Local Hos-
pitalization Plan as provided by Chapter 7, Title 63. I, Code of Virginia, as amended.
2. Each authorizahon issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a period not in excess of fourteen days.
The county/cdy shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any such patients require hos-
pitalization beyond the period authorized. In the event that additional stay is required and notice is given as herein provided
for, such stay shall be as provided for in Section 63.1-I$? of the Code of Virginia. In no case shall the county/city be liable
borne by the Hospital. A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmission under this contract.
3.(a) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $ .. /4Z41o63 per patient
day. This constitutes the total charge to be made to t~e locality or the individual for hospitalization Care and treatment.
'(b) Outpatient and/or Emergency Room Service will be provided at an all-inclusive rate of $ ~.~[~.____ per visit.
(c) Outpatient (Ambulatory) surgery will be provided at an all inclusive rate of $ ~[], ~1
per visit.
(d) Infants hospitalized concurrently with the mother during the §-day newborn period are to be cared for without
charge other than that specified for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitalization without the mother,
or at the expiration of the 5<Jay period, are to be cared for at 40% of the rate specified above. Sick infants requiring hospitali-
zation without the mother, or at the expiration of the 5<Jay newborn period, are to be Cared for at the full rate specified
4. Payment wi!l not be made for services rendered prior to date of authorization except in Case of emergency admis-
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to the authorizing agent who will receive an application from and investigate
the eligibi ty of the patient.
5. The Hospital agrees that the total payment, regardless of Source, for the care of patients under this agreement will
not exceed the rates specified herein. If the hospital receives payment for the care of patients under this agreement from a
third party source following payment by the locality, the hospital shall reimburse the authorizing agent the total of such
amount paid by the third party or the amount of payment made by the locality, whichever is the lesser.
6. The Hospital agrees to notify the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours following the admission or readmission of a
patient hospitalized under this agreement.
7. Immediately upon discharge of a patient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the county or city on the form
furnished for this purpose.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide outpatient care, that service will be at an all-
inclusive rate of $ per visit.
9. This agreement may be terminated upon thirty days written notice by either party or the Department of Social
Services. Otherwise, the agreement shall remain in effect from:
July 1, 1988 JLre ~0, 1989
FOR HOSPITAL to
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE COUNTY OR CITY:
*Optional
· (S~neture) (Title)
,s,,..,u,., ,T,,,.,
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
By..
.Chapter ? of 63. 1 of the Virginia Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent P-crsons
(~ate/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program ia to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by $~ction 63.1-139 of the above chapter to administer the program in the locality.
Under the provisions of this program, localities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services, are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and health department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
residents of the locality.
A standard contract form is provided to local authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit ProgFams, Virginia Depart ment of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are mailed to the authorizing agent just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and clinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health department clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the locality. In the meantime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbc, rsed from state funds for payments made to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital will be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbu~seble rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subiect to reimburse-
ment to the locality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate persons and returned to the authorizing
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to sign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor, Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved,
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic.
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SLH region is 115% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of~tate hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine services is established by the State Board for all
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge par visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETION ANG SIGNATURE BY APPROPRIATE PERSONS, ORIGINAL AND2 COPIES ARE TO BE FORWARDED TO
This agreement between the ~Bdical Colleqe of Virginia Hospitals Box 277 MCV S~ation Richmond, Virgini~
and the C~7~/or City of Roand<e
is made with the following provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that, if accommodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit and furnish
hospital care and treatment to patients upor~ presentation of an official authorization signed by a referring physician and is-
pitalization Plan as provided by Chapter 7, Title 63. 7 , Code of Virgin~b, as amended.
2. Each authorizahon issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a period not in excess of fourteen days.
The county/city shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any such patients require hos-
pitalization beyond the period authorized, In the event that additional stay is required and notice is given as herein provided
for, such stay shall be as provided for in Sect/on 63. 1 137 of the Code of V/rg/nia. In no case shall the county/city be liable
for the care and treatment of any patient retained for teaching purposes and in such event such care and treatment shall be
borne by the Hospital. A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmission under this contract.
3.(a) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $_
per patient
day. This constitutes the total charge to be made to t~e locality or the individual for hospitalization care and treatment.
· (b) Outpatient and/or Emergency Room Service will be provided at an all.inclusive rate of $ ]5,00 per visit,
(c) Outpatient (Ambulatory) surgery will be provided at an all inclusive rate of $ ~.82 per visit.
(d) Infants hospitalized concurrently with the mother during the 5-day newborn period are to be cared for without
charge other than that specified for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitabzation without the mother,
or at the expiration of the 5~lay period, are to be cared for at 40% of the rate specified above. Sick infants requiring hospitali.
zat~on without the mother, or at the expiration of the 5~ay newborn period, are to be cared for at the full rate specified
above.
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to the authorizing agent who will receive an application from and investigate
the eligibility of the patient.
5. The Hospital agrees that the total payment, regardless of source, for the care of patients under this agreement will
third party source following payment by the locality, the hospital shall reimburse the authorizing agent the total of such
amount paid by the third party or the amount of payment made by the locality, whichever is the lesser.
6. The Hospital agrees to notify the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours following the admission or readmission of a
patient hospitalized under this agreement.
7, Immediately upon discharge of a patient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the county or city on the form
furnished for this purpose.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide outpatient care, that service will be at an all-
~nclusive rate of $ per visit.
9. This agreement may be terminated upon thirty days written notice by either party or the Department of Social
Services. Otherwise, the agreement shall remain in effect from:
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT _i,4p~H~] ~'n~ l~f~, of' Vi~_nia Hospit:als<''~ ~
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE C_~7~ OR CITY: Roanoke
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
°Optional
By
Chapter ? of 63. I of the Virginia Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent I~=rsons
(~,tate/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program is to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by Section 63. 1-139 of the above chapter to administer the program in the locality.
Under the provisions of this program, localities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services, are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and heatth department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
residents of the locality.
A standard contract form is provided to Iocat authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit Progr~ams, Virginia Department of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are maiJed to the authorizing agent just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and ciinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health deDartment clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the locality. In the meen[ime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbursed from state funds for payments made to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital wilt be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbu~sable rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subject to reimburse-
ment to the locality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate parsons and returned to the authoriziog
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to sign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor, Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved,
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic.
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SI.H region is 115% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of-state hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine services is established by the State Board for all
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge par visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETION AND SIGNATURE BY APPROPRIATE PERSONS,ORIGINAL AND2 COPIES ARE TO BE FORWARDED TO
THE DIVISION OF BENEFIT PROGRAMS. D[PT. OF SOCIALSERVICES. 8007 DISCOVERY DRIVE. RICHMOND. VA 2;]288
This agreement between the Roanoke City Health Depav~t
and the (~t~ or City of Rc~d<e
P 0 Box 12926 Roar~e~ Virginia 2402~
is made with the following provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that, if accommodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit and furnish
hospital care and treatment to patients upon presentation of an official authorization signed by a referring physician and is-
sued by the Authorizing Agent of the above-named county or city entitling them to assistance under the State- Local Hos-
pitalization Plan as provided by Chapter ?, Tit/e 63. I , Code of Virginia, as amended.
2. Each authorization issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a period not in excess of fourteen days.
The county/city shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any such patients require Los-
pitalizat*on beyond the period authorized, In the event that additional stay is required and notice is given as herein provided
for, such stay shall be as provided for in Section 63. 1.137 of the Code of V/rgmia. In no case shall the county/city be liable
for the care and treatment of any patient retained for teaching purposes and in such event such care and treatment sha~lbe
borne by the Hospital. A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmission under this contract.
3.Ia) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $ per patient
day. This consbtutes the total charge to be made to the locality or the individual for hospitalization care and treatment.
'(b) Outpatient and/or Emergency Room Service will be provided at an all-inclusive rate of $ per visit.
(c) Outpatient (Ambulatory) surgery will be provided at an all inclusive rate of $ per visit.
Id) Infants hospitalized concurrently with the mother during the 5-day newborn period are to be cared for without
charge other than that specified for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitalization without the mother,
or at the expiration of the 5~a¥ period, are to be cared for at 40% of the rate specified above. Sick infants requiring hospitali-
zation without the mother, or at the expiration of the 5<Jay newborn period, are to be cared for at the full rate specified
above.
4. Payment wig not be made for services rendered prior to date of authorization except in case of emergency admis-
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to the authorizing agent who will receive an application from and investigate
the eligibility of the patient.
5. The Hospital agrees that the total payment, regardless of source, for the care of patients under this agreement will
not exceed the rates specified herein. If the hospital receives payment for the care of patients under this agreement from a
third party source following payment by the locality, the hospital shall reimburse the authorizing agent the total of such
amount paid by the third party or the amount of payment made by the locality, whichever is the lesser.
6. The Hospital agrees to notify the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours following the admission or readmission of a
patient hospitalized under this agreement.
7. Immediately upon discharge of a patient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the county or city on the form
furnished for this purpose.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide outpatient care, that service will be at an all-
inclusive rate of $ ] 5_ r~] per visit.
9. This agreement may be terminated upon thirty days written notice by either party or the Department of Social
Services. Otherwise, the agreement shall remain in effect from:
July !,
FOR HOSPITAL
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE C(~¢"~ OR CITY:
to ,Ire 7~.
Roanoke City Health Departmmt ,/J'.i~,~.~?i~,~-~,i ~,.y/,~,,~..~ /,
~e
(County /Citv)
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
*Optional
By
Chapter 7 of 63.1 of the Virginia Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent ~rson$
~State/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program is to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by Sect/on 63. 1-139 of the above chapter to administer the program in the locality.
Under the provisions of this program, localities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services. are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and health department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
residents of the locality.
A standard contract form is provided to local authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are mailed to the authorizing agent just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and clinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health department clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the locality. In the meantime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbbrsed from state funds for payments made to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital will be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbursable rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subject to reimburse-
ment to the locality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate persons and returned to the authorizing
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to ~ign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor, Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved.
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic.
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SLH region is 115% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of-state hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine services is established by the State Board for ali
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge per visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETtON AND SIGNATURE BY APPROPRIATE PERSONS,ORIGINAL AND 2 COPIES ARE TO eE FORWARDED TO
THE DIVISION OF BENEFIT PROGRAMS, DEPT. OF SOCIAL SERVICES, 8007 DISCOVERY DRIVE, RICHMOND, VA 232aa
This agreement between the Rr~,T~ iVi=mnr~l Hr-~.. ~fn~ P. 0- ~× ~7 Roanoke. Vi _r~ia
and the ~ or City of ~D~oke is made with the following provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that, if accommodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit and furnish
hospital care and treatment to patients upon presentation of an official authorization signed by a referring physician and is-
sued by the Authorizing Agent of the above-named county or city entitling them to assistance under the State - Local Hos-
pitalization Plan as provided by Chapter ?, Title 63. f, Code of Virginia, as amended.
2. Each authorization issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a period not in excess of fourteen days.
The county/city shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any such patients require hos-
pitalization beyond the period authorized. In the event that additional stay is required and notice is given as herein provided
for. such stay shall be as provided for in Section 63. 1-157 of the Code of Virginia. In no case shall the county/city be liable
for the care and treatment of any patient retained for teaching purposes and in such event such care and treatment shall be
borne by the Hospital. A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmission under this contract.
3.(a) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $ /.~,9.9~. per patient
day. This constitutes the total charge to be made to tlle locality or the individual for hospitalization care and treatment.
· (b) Outpatient and/or Emergency Room Service will be provided at an all-inclusive rate of $ ] c~_[~r-] per visit.
(c) Outpatient {Ambulatory) surgery will be provided at an all inclusive rate of $ ~l_q.~ per visit.
(d) Infants hospitalized concurrently with the mother during the 5.day newborn period are to be cared for without
charge other than that specified for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitalization without the mother,
or at the expiration of the §<lay period, are to be cared for at 40% of the rate specified above. Sick infants requiring hospitali-
zation without the mother, or at the expiration of the 5-day newborn period, are to be cared for at the full rate specified
above.
4. Payment will not be made tor services rendered prior to date of authorization except in case of emergency admis-
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to the authorizing agent who will receive an application from and investigate
the eligibility of the patient.
5. The Hospital agrees that the total payment, regardless of source, for the care of patients under this agreement will
not exceed the rates specified herein. If the hospital receives payment for the care of patients under this agreement from a
third party source following payment by the locality, the hospital shall reimburse the authorizing agent the total of such
amount paid by the third party or the amount of payment made by the locality, whichever is the lesser.
6. The Hospital agrees to notify the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours following the admission or reedmission of a
patient hospitalized under this agreement.
7. Immediately upon discharge of a patient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the county or city on the form
furnished for this purpose.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide outpatient care, that service will be at an all-
inclusive rate of $ ~I/A per visit.
9. This agreement may be terminated upon thirty days written notice by either party or the Department of Social
Services. Otherwise. the agreement shall remain in effect from:
July 1, 1988 to ,'~ J~e ~0, 1989/~
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT ~)aqoke [v~l~orJ_a]. Hospital.
(Nameof Hospilal, Heaith Oel:~rt~nent) r
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE C~/~ OR CITY:
Roanoke
Sr. Vice-Pres.
City)
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
*Optional
Chapter ? of 63. I of the Virginia Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent ~cr~ons
[State/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program is to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by Section 63. 1.139 of the above chapter to administer the program in the IocaliW.
Under the provisions of this program, localities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services, are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and health department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatment to
residents of the locality.
A standard contract form is provided to local authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are mailed to the authorizing agent just prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and clinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health department clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the Iocality. In the meantime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbursed from state funds for payments made to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital wilt be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbursable rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subiect to reimburse-
ment to the locality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate parsons and returned to the authorizing
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to sign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor. Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved,
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic.
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SLH region is 115% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of-state hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine services is established by the State Board for all
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge per visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
STATE - LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION PLAN - VIRGINIA
AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE HOSPITALIZATION AND TREATMENT OF INDIGENT OR MEDICALLY
INDIGENT PERSONS
FOLLOWING COMPLETION AND SIGNATURE BY APPROPRIATE PERSONS,ORIGtNAL AND 2 COPIES ARE TO BE FORWARDED TO
This agreement between the Ihiwrsi~y nf Virginia Hosoilal Charlottesville, Vi~nia
and the ~/or City of ~P is made with the followi~ provisions:
1. The Hospital agrees that. if ac~mmodations are available at the time the request is made, it will admit a~ furnish
hospital ~re and treatment to patients u~n presentation of an official authorization signedbyareferri~ysicianand
p[talization Plan as provided by Chapter 7, T/tie 63. I, Code of Vi~inia, as amended.
2. Each authorization issued by the Authorizing Agent is to be made for a ~riod not in excess of fourteen days.
The county/city shall be notified by the hospital at the direction of the attending physician if any su~ patients r~uire hos-
pitalization beyond the period authorized. In the event that additional stay is required and noti~ is given as herein provided
for, such stay shall ~ as provided for in Section 61 I. 137 of the Code of V;7gmia. In no case shall the county/city be liable
borne by the Hospital. A separate authorization shall be required for each admission or readmission under this ~ntract.
3.(a) The Hospital agrees to care for persons admitted under this agreement at the rate of $ ~-~ ~r patten(
day. This constitutes the total charge to be made to t~e Io~lity or the individual for hospitalization ~reand treatment.
' (b) Outpatient and/or E~rgency Room Service will be provid~ at an all-[nclus~ve rate of $ ] 5-~ ~r visit.
(c) Outpatient (Ambulatory) surgery will ~ provided at an all inclusive rate of $ ~ R? per visit.
(d) Infants hospitaliz~ ~ncurrently with the mother during the 5-day newborn ~riod are to be cared for without
charge other than that s~cified for the care of the mother. Premature infants requiring hospitalization without the mother,
or at the expiration of the 5day ~riod, are ~o ~ ~red for at 40% of the rate s~cified above. Sick infants requiri~ hospitali-
zation without the mother, or at the expiration of the 5~ay newborn period, are to be ~r~ for at the full rate s~cifi~
4. Payment win not be m~e for ~rvi~s revered prior to date of authorization ex~pt in ~ of emer~ncy admis-
sion which should be reported within 72 hours to the authorizing agent who will receive an appli~tion from a~ in,st/gate
the eligibility of the patient.
5, The Hospital agrees that the total payment, r~ardless of ~urce. for the care of patients u~er this ~r~ment will
third party ~urce following payment by the Io~lity. the hospital shall reimburse the authorizi~ a~nt the total of su~
amount ~id by the third party or the amount of payment made by the I~lity, whi~ever is the I~r.
6, The Hospital agrees to notify the Authorizing Agent within 48 hours followi~ the admit/on or re, mission of a
7. Immediately u~n dis~arge of a ~tient, the hospital bill is to be rendered to the ~unty or city on the form
furnished for this purpo~.
8. When this contract is with a Health Department Clinic to provide out~tient ~re, that ~rvi~ will be at an all-
inclusive rate of $ ~r visit.
9. This ~ree~nt may ~ terminat~ u~n thirty days written notice by either party or the Oe~rt~nt of ~cial
~rvices. Otherwise, the agreement shah remain in effect from:
~ly 1, 19~ to ~ ~' 1~
FOil HOSPIT~k
OR HEALTH DEPARTMENT ~ive~ity of Vi~nia ~i~al
FOR GOVERNING BODY OF
THE C~,Ig~ OR CITY:
APPROVED: DEPARTMENT OF SOCIAL SERVICES
ey
'Optional
· Chapter 7 of 65. I of the V/rg/n/a Code is the legal basis for the program of Hospitalization and Treatment of Indigent Rcrsons
~$tate/Local Hospitalization program). The governing body of each locality participating in the program is to appoint an
authorizing agent who is empowered by Sect/on 63. 1.139 of the above chapter to administer the program in the locality.
Under the provisions of this program, localities, with the approval of the State Board of Social Services, are authorized to
enter into contracts with hospitals and health department clinics to provide inpatient and outpatient care and treatrr~nt to
residents of the locality.
A standard contract form is provided to Ioca~ authorizing agents by the Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of
Social Services. Sufficient forms are mailed to the authorizing agent lust prior to the beginning of the fiscal year to renew
contracts with hospitals and clinics with which there is a current contract. Additional contract forms will be sent at any
time to the authorizing agent on request.
The authorizing agent is to submit three contract forms to the hospital or health department clinic which agrees to provide
services to residents of the locality. In the meentime, each hospital will receive from the Division of Benefit Programs the
maximum reimbursable rate on which the locality will be reimbursed from state funds for payments made to the facility. The
maximum rate for any hospital will be provided to an authorizing agent on request.
The hospital is to enter the rates it receives if the rates are acceptable. In the event the maximum reimbu;'sable rate is not
acceptable, the amount of an agreed upon rate that is in excess of the maximum reimbursable rate is not subject to reimbursa-
ment to the locality from state funds. All three copies of the contract are to have the rates and the period covered entered
and are to be signed by the administrator of the hospital or clinic or other appropriate persons and returned to the authorizing
agent. The authorizing agent or other designated representative of the locality is to sign all three forms and forward them to
the Supervisor, Medical Care Section, Division of Benefit Programs, Virginia Department of Social Services. When approved,
the original will be retained by the Division of Benefit Programs and two copies returned to the authorizing agent. One copy
is to be retained by the authorizing agent and the other is to be forwarded to the hospital or clinic·
A maximum reimbursable inpatient rate is established for each hospital. That rate is the average daily cost of inpatient care
over the hospital's last cost accounting period, less depreciation on buildings, subject to a regional maximum rate that is
established by the State Board of Social Services. The maximum established rate for each SLH region is 115% of the weighted
average cost of care of all hospitals within the region. The maximum established rate for out-of-state hospitals is 115% of
the weighted average cost of care of all hospitals within the state.
A maximum reimbursable outpatient and emergency room fee for routine serwces is established by the State Soard for all
hospitals and clinics. The rate is not based on any costing formula and is an all inclusive charge par visit.
A maximum reimbursable rate for outpatient (ambulatory) surgery based on 68 percent of each hospital's inpatient rate
is established by the State Board.
September 14, 1988
File #28
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
I am attaching copy of Ordinance No. 29271, authorizing execution
of a deed of release releasing the City's interest in a public
easement reserved by the City by Ordinance No. 16584, adopted on
August 23, 1965, upon certain terms and conditions, which
Ordinance No. 29271 was adopted by the Council of the City of
Roanoke on first reading on Monday, August 22, 1988, also adopted
by the Council on second reading on Monday, September 12, 1988,
and will take effect ten days following the date of its second
reading.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enco
pc: Mr. Evans B. Jessee, Attorney, representing~Our Lady of
Valley, 404 Shenandoah Building, 305 First Street, S.
~oanoke, Virginia 24011
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Charles M. ~uffine, City Engineer
Mr. Kit D. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
Mr.-M. Craig Sluss, ~anager, Water Production
the
W. ,
Room 456 Municipal Building 215 Church Avenue SW Roonoke V~rq~nia 24~11 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29Z71.
VIRGINIA,
AN ORDINANCE authorizing execution of a deed of release releasing
the City's interest in a.public utility easement reserved by the City
by Ordinance No. 16584, adopted August 23, 1965, upon certain terms
and conditions.
WHEREAS, in a report dated August 22, 1988, the City Manager has
requested that Council authorize the release of the City's interest in
a public utility easement lying within a vacated and closed portion of
Harrison Avenue, N. W., reserved by Ordinance No. 16584, adopted
August 23, 1965, upon the removal therefrom of any water lines, sewer
other public improvements presently located within such
lines, drains,
easement area.
THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that the Mayor and the City Clerk be and they are hereby authorized
for and on behalf of the City, upon receiving notice from the City
Engineer that any and all existing water lines, sewer lines, drains
or other public improvements presently located within the herein-
described easement area have been removed or abandoned by the City,
to execute a deed of release, releasing the City's interest in the
public utility easement reserved by Ordinance No. 16584, adopted on
August 23, 1965, said deed of release to be for a nominal considera-
tion and to be upon form approved by the City Attorney.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Roanoke, Virginia
August 22, 1988
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Members of Council:
Subject: Our Lady of the Valley, Inc.
Utilities in Closed Street Right-of-Way
I. Background:
City Council closed a portion of Harrison Avenue, N.W. between
Gainsboro Road, N.W. and North 3efferson Street by Ordinance
No. 16584, dated August 23, 1965. Ordinance specified that
the City reserved to itself an easement for existing or future
utilities within the street right-of-way, and forbids
construction of permanent structures over that easement.
II. Current Situation:
Our Lady of the Valley, Inc. proposes to erect a home for
adults on land adjacent to North Jefferson Street. Structures
will encroach upon the closed portion of the right-of-way of
Harrison Avenue, N.W.
Two (2) public utilities exist within the closed right-of-way,
a four (4) inch City water line and a buried telephone cable.
Our Lady of the Valley, Inc. will move those two utilities to
approved new locations. They have requested that City Council
abandon or release the easement restrictions remaining on the
closed right-of-way. (See attached letter).
III. Issues:
A. Need
B. Timing
C. Cost to City
IV. Alternatives:
A. Council authorize the release of the easement restrictions
remaining on the closed portion of Harrison Avenue, N.W.
between Gainsboro Road, N.W. and North Jefferson Street upon
the satisfactory relocation of existing utilities.
Honorable Mayor and City Council
Page 2
Need by Our Lady of the Valley, Inc. for use of closed
street right-of-way is met.
Timing to permit construction to enter area immediately
is met.
Cost to City is zero. The petitioner will move City
water line.
B. Council refuse to release easement restrictions in closed
portion of Harrison Avenue, N.W.
1. Need by petitioner for use of right-of-way not met.
Vo
2. Timing disrupted causing construction delays.
3. Cost to City is moot.
Recommendations: Council authorize the release of easement
restrictions remaining in closed portion of Harrison Avenue, N.W.
in accordance with Alternative "A".
Respectfully submitted,
W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
WRH:RVH:afm
Attachments
CC:
City Attorney
Director of Finance
Director of Public Works
City Engineer
Manager, Water Department
AVENUE
~H
LOT A
2.74 9 Ac
134.35 f'
~719 59
07S OLV
es CITY OF
ROANOKE
i~,~,~¥ POND N~ I
VE
LY VACA (ED
16584,
~G.
0.156 Ac RESERVED
FOR STORM WATER
MANAGEMENT
;04
EVAN,S B. dES.SEE
~o~,~'-~o~:e, v~G~s~^ 2.~on
August 5, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of Council
City of Roanoke
Municipal Building
215 Church Avenue
Roanoke, Virginia 24011
Re:
Release of retained easement in a
portion of Harrison Avenue, N.W.
now vacated
Dear Mayor and Members of Council:
I represent Our Lady of the Valley, Inc., the home for
adults that is being constructed on N. Jefferson Street under
the auspices of the Catholic Diocese of Richmond.
The home is being constructed upon a portion of Harrison
Avenue, N.W. between N. Jefferson Street an'd Gainsboro Road,
which was vacated by Ordinance No. 16584, adopted on August
23, 1965. The Ordinance contained the following reservation
of easement: "however, reserving unto itself an easement in
said property for any existing water lines, sewer lines,
drains, or other public improvements presently located in
said street, together with the right of ingress and egress
for the maintenance, repair, and construction of any such
lines or improvements and provided that no permanent
buildings or structure be erected thereon so long as such
water lines, sewer lines, drains, and other public
improvements-remain upon said land".
It is our information that the only utility left in the
vacated street is a waterline. This waterline is being moved
and a new easement is being arranged for this purpose.
However, since our building is to constructed on a portion of
the vacated street, where the waterline is located, we felt
that it would be advisable for us to obtain from the City a
complete release of the easement.
We would therefore appreciate your consideration of this
matter at the earliest possible time. The new waterline
easement has already been recorded, and it is my information
that the new waterline will be installed within about two
weeks.
August 5, 1988
The Honorable Mayor and
Members of City Council
Page 2
Thanking you in advance for your consideration of this
request, I am,
Yours very truly,
Evans B. Je~see, Attorney for
Our Lady o~lthe Valley, Inc.
EBJ/mjs
Office of the Cit./Engineer
August 11, 1988
Evans B. Jessee, Esquire
Shenandoah Building
Roanoke, VA 24011
Dear Mr. Jessee:
Re: Our Lady of the Valley Catholic Home
We have investigated the existence of underground utilities within
the right-of-way of the closed section of Harrison Avenue, N.W., between
North Jefferson Street and Gainsboro Road, N.W.
To the best of our knowledge, two (2) underground utilities exist
in that street right-of-way; the four (4) inch water line previously
discussed by Mr. Kiser (which is now marked on the street with a blue
mark), and underground telephone service in the northerly shoulder area
(which is now marked in orange) extendin8 from Gainsboro Road, N.W. to
3efferson Street.
If we can provide additional infor~tion, please let me know.
Sincerely,
Richard V. Hamilton
Right-of~Way Agent
RVH:afm
cc: Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities & Operations
Room350 MunicipalBuilding 215ChurchAvenue, S.W. Roanoke, Virginia 2401'~ (703]981-2731
C)ffice of ~he Ci~y Cterk
September 14, 1988
File #17-132
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs; Bowles and Gentlemen:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 29299, cancelling the
meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke scheduled for
Monday, October 3, 1988, at 2:00 p.m., inasmuch as a majority of
the members of Council will be in attendance at the Virginia
~unicipal Legue on October 2-4, 1988, in Virginia Beach,
Virginia, which Resolution No. 29299 was adopted by the Council
of the City of Roanoke at a regular meeting held on Monday,
September 12, 1988.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
Mr,
Mr.
W. Robert Herbert, City Manage,
Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City Manager
Wilburn C. Dibling, .Ir., City Attorney
Joel M. Schlanger, Director of Finance
Mr~ Von W. ~oody, III, Di,ector of Real Estate Valuation
Mr. William L. Brogan, ~funicipal Auditor
Mr. William F. Clark, Director of Public Works
Mr. Kit ~. ~iser, Oirector of Utilities and Operations
Mr. James. D. Ritchie, Director of liuman Resources
Mr. George C. Snead, Jr., Director of Administ,ation
Public Safety
and
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Page 2
September 14, 1988
pc: Mr. Rick Mosher, WDBJ-TV, Channel 7, Roanoke, Virginia 24022
Mr. Jeff Gillan, WSLS-TV, Channel 10, P. O. Box 2161
Roanoke, Virginia 24009
Ms. Laura Taylor, WSET~TV, Channel 13, 2116 Colonial Avenue,
S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015
Air. Nick Pantaze, WFIR/WPVR, p. O. Box 150 Roanoke, Virginia
24002 '
Ms. Laurie Ware, WSLC/WSLQ, P. O. Box 6002 Roanoke, Virginia
24017
,~s. Sandy Belton, WROV, P. O. Box 4005, Roanoke, Virginia
24015
Ms. Tracy Kingsley, Roanoke Headline News, 1909 Salem Avenue,
S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Mr. Joel Turner, Roanoke Times & World News, P. O. Box 249I
Roanoke, Virginia 24010
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE,
The 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29299.
VIRGINIA,
A RESOLUTION cancelling the meeting of the Council of the
City of Roanoke scheduled for Monday, October 3, 1988, at 2:00
p.m.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Due to the Virginia Municipal League Annual conference
scheduled to be held on October 2 through 4, 1988, in Virginia
Beach, Virginia, which a majority of the members of City Council
desire to attend, the meeting of City Council regularly scheduled
for Monday, October 3, 1988, at 2:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers
of the Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., is hereby
CANCELLED.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to take whatever
steps are deemed necessary to notify the public of such cancel-
lation.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
Office of the City Cler~
September I4, 1988
File #132-228
The Honorable ~!ayor and ~fembers
of Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mrs. Bowles and Gentlemen:
I am attaching copy of Resolution No. 29300, cancelling the
meeting of the Council of the City of ~oanoke scheduled for
Monday, December 5, 1958, at 2:00 p.m., inasmuch as a majority of
the Members of Council will be in attendance at the National
League of Cities Annual Conference on December 3-7, 19~8, in
Boston, Massachusetts, which Resolution No. 29300 was adopted by
the Council of the City of Roanoke ut a regular ~neeting held on
Monday, September 12, 1988.
Mary F. Parker, CMC
'ity Clerk
MFP:ra
Enco
pc: ~r. W. Robert Herbert, City ~anage, Mr. Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., Assistant City ~lanage-
Mr. WilOurn C. Dibling, .lt., City Attorney
Mr. Joel M. Schlanger, Director of ~inance
Mr. Van W. Moody, III, Oirector of Real ~state Validation
Mr. Wi l liam L. ~.ogan, ~unicipol ~udi tot
~4r. William F. Clark, Directo, of Public Works
Mr. Kit B. Kiser, Director of Utilities and Operations
M,. .lames' D. Ritchie, Director of lluman aesources
~4r. George C. Snead, ,lt., Director of 4dministration
Public Safety
and
Rat,'--, 456 ~ ,,,: ~,Ji D i:~ ,:~ £15 ~i ,,ct A,,e~,~e SW Rc,)m:~ke ,~rg~ma 24011 (703) 981-254t
The Honorable Mayor and Members
of Roanoke City Council
Page 2
September 14, 1988
pc:
Mr. Rick Moshe., WDBJ-TV, Channel 7, Roanoke, Virginia 24022
Mr. Jeff GiIlan, WSLS-TV, Channel I0, P. O. Box 2161,
Roanoke, Vi.ginia 24009
Ms. Lau.a Taylor, WSET-TV, Channel 13, 2116 Colonial Avenue,
S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24015
Mr. Nick Pantaze, WFIR/WPVR, P. O. Box 150, Roanoke, Virginia
24002
Ms. Lau.ie Ware, WSLC/WSLQ, P. O. Box 6002, Roanoke, Virginia
24017
Ms. Sandy BeIton, WROV, P. O. Box 4005, Roanoke, Virginia
24015
MS. Tracy Kingsley, Roanoke Headline News, 1909 Salem Avenue,
S. W., Roanoke, Virginia 24016
Mr. Joel Turner, Roanoke Times ,~ World News, P. O. Box 2491,
Roanoke, Virginia 24010
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
lhe 12th day of September, 1988.
No. 29300.
A RESOLUTION cancelling the meeting of the Council of the
City of Roanoke scheduled for Monday, December 5, 1988, at 2:00
p.m.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke that:
1. Due to the National League of Cities Annual Conference
scheduled to be held December 3 through 7, 1988, in Boston,
Massachusetts, which a majority of the members of City Council
desire to attend, the meeting of City Council regularly scheduled
for Monday, December 5, 1988, at 2:00 p.m., in the Council Cham-
bers of the Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S.W., is hereby
CANCELLED.
2. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to take whatever
steps are deemed necessary to notify the public of such can-
cellation.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
September 14 1988
File #17-132
Mr. R. Michael ~,myx
Executive Director
Virginia lfunicipat League
P. O. Box 12203
Richmond, Virginia 23241
Dear Mr. Amyx:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29301, designating a Voting
Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate for the Annual Business
Session of the Virginia Municipal League ar~d for any meetings of
the Urban Section of the League, which Resolution No. 29301 was
adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, Septembe. 12, 1988.
Sincere ly,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
Enc.
Room 456 Municif:~l Building 2! 5 Church Avenue SW Rc.~noke V~rg~nia 24011 (703) 981-2541
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
Ybe 12th day 0f September, 1988.
No. 29301.
A RESOLUTION designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting
Delegate for the Annual Bus£ness Session of the Virginia Municipal
League and for any meetings of the Urban Section of the League.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as follows:
1. For the Annual Business Session of the Virginia Municipal
League to be held in Virginia Beach, Virginia, on October 4, 1988,
Mayor Noel C. Taylor and Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., are
hereby designated Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate,
respectively.
2. For any meetings of the Urban Section of the Virginia
Municipal League to be held in conjunction with the League's 1988
Annual Conference, Mayor Taylor and Vice-Mayor ~itzpatrick shall
also serve as Voting Delegate and Alternative Voting Delegate,
respectively, and W. Robert Rerbert, City Manager shall be desig-
nated Staff Assistant.
S. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, is directed to complete any
forms required by the Virginia Municipal League for designation of
Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate and to forward such
forms to the League.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
CITY OF ROANOKE
INTERDEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Mr. WiIburn C. DibIing, Jr., City Attorney
Mayor Noel C. Taylor
Preparation of Measures Designating a Voting Delegate
and Alternate Voting Delegate for the VML Annual Con-
ference; Designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate
Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Meeting of the
Congress of Cities; and Cancelling the Council Meetings
Scheduled for Monday, October 3 and Monday, December 5,
1988
DATE: August 29, 1988
Please draft the appropriate measures for consideration by
Council at its regular meeting on Monday, September 12, 1988, as
follows:
A Resolution declaring Noel C. Taylor as Voting Delegate and
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. as Alternate Voting Delegate at
the Business Session of the Virginia Municipal League Annual
Conference on Tuesday, October 4, 1988. Also, please note
that the abovenamed individuals will serve as Voting and
Alternate Voting Delegates at the Urban Section and Mr.
W. Robert Herbert will serve as Staff Assistant.
A Resolution designating Noel C. Taylor as Voting Delegate
and Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. as Alternate Voting Delegate
at the Annual Business Meeting of the Congress of Cities to
be held in Boston, Massachusetts, December 3 - 7, 1'988.
A Resolution cancelling the regular meeting of Council sche-
duled for Monday, October 3, 1988, at 2:00 p.m., inasmuch as
the majority o~ the members of Council will be attending the
Virginia Municipal League Annual Conference in Virginia
Beach, Virginia, October 2 4, 1988; and the regular meeting
of Council scheduled for Monday, December 5, 1988, at 2:00
p.m., inasmuch as the majority of the membe~,s of Council will
be attending the National League of Cities Annual Conference
,in Boston, Massachusetts, December 3 - 7, 1988.
Your usual prompt and courteous assistance will be appreciated.
NCT:se
VIRGINIA
MUNICIPAL
LEAGUE
Local Governments
Working Together
Since 1905
OFFICERS
Roanoke Mayor
Noel C. Taylor
President
Warrenton Mayar
J, WIIlard Ltneweaver
First Vice President
James Ctfy Courtly
Board Member
Jack D, Edwards
Second Vice President
Blocksburg
Council Member
Fronces Parsans
Third Vice President
Waverly Mayor
William R, Hartz
Foudh Vice President
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
R. Michael Amyx
Magazine
ViRGINIA TOWN
& CI1Y
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Key Officials
R. Michael Amyx,
August 22, 1988
Executive
Director
L~tters and attachments on the 1988 Annual Conference
are enclosed. Below is a list of the enclosures and
the action to be taken on each.
SUBJECT/ TO BE COMP- RETURN WHERE TO
ATTACHMENT LETED BY DATE RETURN
Conference All
Registration
Information
& Form
Preliminary
Conference
Program
Golf Tournament
Registration Form
Attendees
Information
Only
9/19/88 VML
Guest Program &
Registration Form
Locality Row
Exhibit Form
Certification
of voting
delegate
Attachment A
Time & Place
Selection
Attachment B
Those Interested
9/26/88
Those Interested
9/19/88
Those Interested
9/12/88
Ail voting
member
localities 9/19/88
Ron Spiggle
Appomattox
Town Hall
VML
VML
VML
~U~ 1988 ~ Section Voting
~E(~ ~. i ' Procedures
~: ~ VED
MAYOR'S OFFICE ~ Attachment C
~ ~, Nomznations
~//~ ~[ Procedures
~O.J~L. - ~ Attachment D
Room Reserva-
tion Form
P.O. 8ox 12203
80d/6~9-8d71
Localities to
be considered
for 1995
Conference 9/19/88
Localities Over
35,000 popula-
tion 9/19/88
Those Interested
9/19/88
VML
VML
Charles
Robinson,
Vienna Town
Hall & VML
Persons 9/2/88 VA Beach
needing Housing
rooms Bureau
We look forward to seeing you at the Conference.
C~f~ce c~ ~ne ~ir~ ~fe~
September 14, 1988
File #17-228
Mr. Alan Beals
Executive Director
National League of Cities
1301 Pennsylvania Avenue,
Washington, D. C. 20004
N. W.
Dear Mr. Beals:
I am enclosing copy of Resolution No. 29302, designating Mayor
Noel C. Taylor as the Voting Delegate and Vice Mayor Beverly T.
Fitzpatrick, Jr., Alternate Voting Delegate for the Annual
Business Session of the Congress of Cities, to be held in Boston,
Massachusetts on December 3-7, 1988, which Resolution No. 29302
was adopted by the Council of the City of Roanoke at a regular
meeting held on Monday, September 12, 1988.
Sincerely, pi~t~..
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
Enc.
pc: The ~onorable Noel C.
The Honorable Beverly
Taylor, Mayor
T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Vice Mayor
456 ~'~ ~lc,~,~l ~n,:,iO;ng 215 (hu~ch A,.,en~e SW R~ar~o~,e virg~ma 2401 t (703) 981-254. t
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROANOKE, VIRGINIA,
The 12th day 0f September, 1988.
No. 29302.
A RESOLUTION designating a Voting Delegate and Alternate
Voting Delegate for the Annual Business Session of the Congress
of Cities.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke as
follows:
1. For the Annual Business Session of the Congress of
Cities to be held in Boston, Massachusetts, on December 3 to
December 7, 1988, Mayor Noel C. Taylor and Vice-Mayor Beverly
T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., are hereby designated Voting Delegate and
Alternate Voting Delegate, respectively.
2. Mary F. Parker, City Clerk, is directed to complete any
forms required by the National League of Cities for designation
of Voting Delegate and Alternate Voting Delegate and to forward
such forms to the National League of Cities.
ATTEST:
City Clerk.
1988 CONGRESS OF CITIES -- BOSTON,
Chalr~au, Credentlals Co~ttee
National Leasue of Citiee
1301 Penneylvnala Avenue,
Washington, B.C.
MASSACHUSETTS
l~t (~FICS USE ~y
· o. of Votes
The official voting delegate and alternates of the City of
are ae follovs:
Oe~Site ~e.
VOTII~ CArD ISSU~ TO
Sinecure
VOTING DELEGATE
1. Noel C. Taylor Mayor
TI~
Room 452~ Municipal Building~ 215 Church Avenue, S. W.
STaz~r ADDRESS (FLKA~' DO IB3T Uf~ P,,O~ ~ llg~)
Roanoke VA
24011
STATE
ZIP CODE
ALTERIqATE VOTING DELEGATES
Beverly T. Fitzpat~tick, 3r.
aV~rVrce Mayor
TI~ Room 456, Municipal B~il~ing
215 Ch~¢h Avenue, S. W.
STEEL~ADDRESS(DOm~m~-~)
Roanok~ VA 24011
CITY, STATE, ZIP CODE
TITLE
STREET ADDRESS (~0 B0T US~ P~ Be~B0~)
CITY, STATE, ZIP CODK /~
Each direct ~her city is entitled to one voting delegate and two alternate
voting delegates. The number of votes which can be cast is based on the
city's population as determined in the 1980 Census.
l. pT~A~R DO NOT FTTJ. IN SHADED AR~A. THXS IS FOR NLC OFFICE USE ONLY
2. Please type or print~your city name in the space provided
3. Please type or print the na~e, title, city, state and zip code of your voting
delegate and alternate(e).
4. Please eisa the ~HITK form and return to Chairman, Credentials Committee; send the YKLLO~
copy to your State Leasue Director; and keep PINK copy for your records.
Office ofrne City Clerk
September 22, 1988
Fi le #301
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manage.
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, September 12. 1988, Council Member Howara E. Musser
inquired as to the extent of utilization of personal computers by
City staff. He also inquired if th.e City's information systems
area is divorced from the main frame of computer operations.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the inquiry was
referred to you fo. appropriate response.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:ra
456 MuniciOa~ Builc~ing 215 Church Avenue SW Roanoke V;rg~nia 2401 t (703) 981-254~
CY~ce of the Ci~' Cler~
September 14, 1988
File #27-66
Mr. W. Robert Herbert
City Manager
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Mr. Herbert:
At a regular meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke held
on Monday, September 12, 1988, Mr. Michael B. Smith, 4708
Edgelawn Avenue, N. W., appeared before Council and presented a
petition signed by fifteen persons with regard to a storm
drainage system on Edgelawn Avenue in order to eliminate
excessive water run-off.
On motion, duly seconded and unanimously adopted, the matter
referred to you for investigation and report to Council.
Sincerely,t~ ~~' /~
,Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP: ra
~ .~[d.. ,s 215 , k,~,~cr~ Aver,~e SW Rc~)r',ohe virginia 2401t (703) 981-2.541
Roo: ¢56 '^, .,c,~.,~; n, -
Misc. 9/12/88 Council
August 30, 1988
This is a formal petition s~ing the situation on Edgelawn Ave. N.W.
Roanoke, Va. concerning the in~allment of storm drains or a simular system
on our street to eliminate the excessive water that runs off the road during
a storm and goes down into some of the houses basements, under the houses
that would eventually warp the foundation, or into some garages & ruin the
personal belongings of that particular resident. I hereby state that the preceding
statment is a reasonable complaint:
O/rice of f~e City Cler~
3eptembe. 9, 1988
M.. Michael B. Smith
4708 Edgelawn Avenue,
Roanoke, Vi ~
rg,n,a 24017
Dear Mr. Smith:
[ wish to acknowledge .ecelpt af you.; conmunication of August 30,
1988, with regard to water drainage p'oble~s on Edgelawn Avenue
N. W. ,
Please be assured
· ~tembers of Roanoke
that a copy has been forwarded to t~e Hayom' ~]nd
City Council for the~ information.
Sincerely,
Mary F. Parker, CMC
City Clerk
MFP:se
Room456 Munl¢il:~ll]uilding 215C~urchAve,que, S.W. Roonoke,,,~rg~ia24011 (703)98'1-2541
~ Mis~. 9/12/88 - Council
~708 Edgelawn Ava. N.W.
Roanoke, Wa, 24017
On June 15, i979 we purchased this house at 4708 Edgela~ca Ave.
Roanole, Va. and to ~be best of oar knowledEe we did not have any problems
with storm .~ater seeping into our basement. Shortly after we moved into
nut house the City of Roanoke bul]t up our street, approxlmatelv t~:~ to
foot higher than it originally was. This was when our problems began. We
have complained numerous times about this problem. The City came out and
put asphalt ct~rbing up in front of our house and others on the street.
This didn't eliminate our water drainage problems.
We have had the City Engineer out to check on the problem twice and have
talked to him once on the phone. He came out to the house and the Hardys
residence next door. We were informed that he could not come on to our
property w~tbout a work order to check where the Water was running into, or
to check the Hardvs property to see where the ~¢ater was running into their
garage.
We realfze that we do not lfve in the bi~lhest~lass neighborhood
Roanoke, but as taxpayers we feel that if it's necessary to put sto~ drains
in to correct the problem, than it should be done. 1,7e f~el we should have
some satisfaction by having this problem corrected hecaose it rnins a lot
of property on our Street. Therefore we are filing a petition to C~ty CotmcfI
to fight for
,nat we feel should have been done to begin with. It seems tfke
the City is anxious to spend a lot of moue}, on the ~:ew River Project, l'~en
in fact other places in the City need i~ediate attention, like our Street
We would upprecfate a rapid reply. .
Mr. & 5frs. M~chael B. Smith
P.S. Th~s ?roporty was purchased in the City of Rosnokc ~
in !97r~, not ~n the County.