HomeMy WebLinkAboutMins 01/03/06 - 06/05/06
I
I
I
1
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION----ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
January 3, 2006
9:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Tuesday,
January 3,2006, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Council Member M. Rupert Cutler
presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section
2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by
the Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Member M. Rupert Cutler----------n------n---------nn---n---------l.
ABSENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson
~arris --------.---------------------------------------.---------.---------------------------------------------.--------6.
COUNCIL: Due to the lack of a quorum, Council Member Cutler advised that
the Council meeting would stand in recess until 2:00 p.m., in the City Council
Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W.,
Roanoke, Virginia.
At 2:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 3, 2006, the Council meeting reconvened
in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris
presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, Brianj. Wishneff, M. Rupert
Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor
C. N e I so n ~ arri s _nn____nnn_______nn_m_____nn_nnn_n_nnm_n___n_nnmnm_nn________00--007.
ABSENT: None-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag ofthe United States of America was led
by Mayor ~arris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: NONE.
2
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one
motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was
desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. ~e called specific attention to two requests for Closed Session.
COMMITTEES-~OUSING/AUT~ORITY: A communication from Mayor
C. Nelson ~arris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss
vacancies on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed
by Council, and to interview an applicant for a vacancy on the Roanoke
Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code
of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council convene in Closed Session as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r ~ arri s ________n_n_______n_n______________n_n____________________________n___n__________________7 .
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
CITY ATTORNEY-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Attorney
requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to consult with legal counsel
on a speCific legal matter requiring the provision of legal counsel, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(7), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council convene in Closed Session as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r ~ arri Sn________________________n_n______n_n_n____nn__m______________n_n_________n_________7 .
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
BUDGET: A communication from the City Manager recommending that
Council adopt the following Calendar of Events for Budget Preparation Activities
for fiscal year 2006-2007, was before the body.
April 10-14, 2006
City Manager briefs City Council on
recommended budget.
3
April 14, 2006
Recommended budget document delivered
to City Council Members.
April 17, 2006
Recommended budget presented to City
Council at regularly scheduled meeting;
meeting continued to April 27.
April 18, 2006
Advertisements of public hearings on
recommended budget and tax rates appear
in newspapers.
Note:
State Code requires the advertisement of
the real property tax rate for the fiscal year.
April 27, 2006
Public hearings on recommended budget
and tax rates at 7:00 c.m.
May 4, and 5, 2006
Budget Study - 8:30 a.m. - 5:00 c.m.
(continuation of May 1 City Council
meeting).
May 11,2006
City Council adopts General Fund, School
Fund, Proprietary Fund budgets and an
Update to the ~UD Consolidated Plan and
approves an annual appropriation ordinance
at 2:00 p.m.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the recommendation of
the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
and Mayor ~arris-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------7.
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC ~EARINGS:
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, January 3,
2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a
proposal to lease City-owned property located at 32 Market Square, S. W., to Elias
Azar, d/b/a Azar Jewelry, Inc., for use as office space for a term of three years, the
matter was before the body.
4
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, December 26, 2005.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke owns the City Market Building, located at 32 Market Square and began
management of the building on May 1, 2005, after the former management
company, Advantis Real Estate, terminated the management contract.
It was further advised that Elias Azar, owner and operator of Azar Jewelry,
Inc., has requested a lease agreement for approximately 418 square feet to sell
and/or repair jewelry; the proposed lease agreement is for a period ofthree years,
beginning January 3, 2006 through January 2, 2009; the proposed agreement
establishes a base rent rate of $23.50 per square foot, with an increase of three
per cent each year thereafter, and a common area maintenance fee of $125.00 per
month that will increase by three per cent upon each anniversary of the lease; in
addition to base rent and common area maintenance, the tenant will also pay
$72.00 per month for 34 months, totaling $2,448.00, for reimbursement of costs
incurred by the City associated with framing two open doorways, installation of
hot and cold water supply and waste line and a sink provided by the tenant with
two ground fault outlets, and removal of existing carpet; and the lease contains no
renewal provision.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a lease
agreement with Elias Azar d/b/a Azar Jewelry, Inc., for approximately 418 square
feet of space in the City Market Building, for a period of three years, beginning
January 3, 2006 and ending January 2, 2009, subject to approval as to form by the
City Attorney.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37278-010306) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of approximately
418 square feet of space located within City-owned property known as the City
Market Building, located at 32 Market Square, for a term of three (3) years
beginning January 3, 2006 and expiring January 2, 2009, with a base rent rate of
$23.50 per square foot, authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute a
Lease Agreement therefor; and dispensing with the second reading of this
ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 123.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37278-
010306. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in connection with the proposed lease agreement. There being none, he
declared the publiC hearing closed.
5
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37278-010306 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r ~ arri s ----------n----________n_______________n_________________n_n-------n----------------n-----7 .
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Fire Programs Fund was established by the
General Assembly, effective October 4, 1985, pursuant to Section 38.1-44.1, Code
of Virginia, 1950, as amended; and the sunset clause requiring expiration of the
Fund on July 1, 1990 was removed, thus, the City's annual allocation of State
funds will continue indefinitely.
It was further advised that program guidelines require that funds received
are non-supplanting and may not be used to replace existing local funding; funds
must be used in accordance with provisions established by the State Department
of Fire Programs; and the City of Roanoke's allocation of $215,029.00 was
deposited in Account No. 035-520-3335-3365 from the Department of Fire
Programs.
It was explained that the City's portion of the Roanoke Regional Fire-EMS
Training Center debt service is $60,000.00, which was paid annually from the
revenue source; remaining grant funds will be used to purchase replacement
turnout gear as needed, small supplies such as tools and helmets and other
personal protective equipment; and in accordance with provisions ofthe program,
action by Council is needed to formally accept and appropriate funds to authorize
the Director of Finance to establish revenue estimates and to appropriate accounts
in the Grant Fund.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept the grant
and to accept and file any documents setting forth conditions of the Fiscal Year
2006 Fire Programs Funds Grant, and to provide such additional information as
may be required. She further recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
6
establishing a revenue estimate for Fire Program Fiscal Year 2006 - State Account
No. 035-520-3335-3365, and appropriate funds in the amount of $215,029.00 in
various expenditure accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in the
Grant Fund.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37279-010306) AN ORDINANCE appropriating funding for the Fire
Program Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006
Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 124.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 72 79-0 10306.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r ~ arri S______nn_______n_______n_____n_________________nn_n____n_n_______n_______nn___ooo___7 .
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37280-010306) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance ofthe FY2006
Fire Programs Funds Grant made to the City of Roanoke by the Virginia
Department of Fire Programs and authorizing the execution and filing by the City
Manager of any documents required by the grant.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 125.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37280-
010306. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r ~arri s_________n______n______________________n____n_nn____________________________________ooo__n7 .
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
GRANTS-~UMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that on October 17, 2005, Council adopted criteria for
funding non-profit organizations; criterion on board member participation was not
worded as agreed upon by the Funder's Circle and the Carilion Foundation; and
board member participation will be changed from each board member has an
annual average attendance rate of at least 75 per cent to an annual average board
meeting attendance of 75 per cent in the aggregate.
7
It was further advised that as a result of conversations with representatives
from the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge, Council of Community Services, ~uman
Services Advisory Board, and the Roanoke Arts Commission, additional revisions
are recommended which include changing the term "criteria" to "guidelines" in
order to note specific requirements that agencies are expected to adhere to when
applying for funding; while non-adherence to guidelines will not necessarily
prohibit an agency from receiving funds, adherence will be used as one ofthe key
factors in determining the award of funding; a threshold minimum request of
$25,000.00 will be used for application of the guidelines; any agency requesting
$25,000.00 or more will be expected to adhere to the guidelines; and the
$25,000.00 threshold will be applied at the agency level, so that individual
program applications will be aggregated.
It was explained that the "semi-annual" reporting of results will be changed
to "periodic" reporting of results in order to provide flexibility to report results on
a more frequent basis if needed; and corrected wording which is proposed for
adoption by Council is as follows:
The following guidelines apply to agencies that request $25,000.00 or more:
1. Organizations must develop a business plan that includes
evidence of community involvement and outlines long-term
plans for financial sustainability.
2. Boards of organizations must demonstrate engagement with
their organization by certifying financial commitment at 100
per cent and annual average meeting attendance at 75 per
cent.
3. Organizations must agree to an annual site visit and periodic
reporting of results achieved through funds received.
4. Organizations in existence for two years or more with an
annual budget of $50,000.00 must perform an annual audit.
It was noted that the City of Roanoke will be joined by Carilion Foundation
and the Funders Circle in this approach; other private foundations are also
considering the criteria in their funding process; and all past recipients of City
funds will be informed of the new requirements upon adoption of guidelines for
funding non-profit organizations.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt guidelines, as amended.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
8
(#37281-010306) A RESOLUTION adopting a revised policy pertaining to
funding for non-profit organizations that request $25,000.00 or more in future
budget cycles, and repealing Resolution No. 3721 5-101705 adopted on
October 17, 2005.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 126.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37281-
010306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
Pam Kestner-Chappelear, President, Council of Community Services,
representing a group of local non-profit organizations that are concerned about
the criteria for funding non-profit organizations as adopted by Council on Monday,
October 17, 2005, advised that changes recommended by the City Manager will be
helpful; changing the term "criteria" to "guidelines" will reflect the intention that
adherence to the guidelines is expected, but non-adherence to the guidelines will
not necessarily prohibit an agency from receiving funds; and the revisions will also
encourage non-profit organizations to work toward adhering to the guidelines.
She stated that creation of a threshold minimum request of $25,000.00 to be
used for application guidelines will help smaller non-profit organizations because
some may not have available resources to meet guidelines. She added that at this
point, the impact of the guidelines is unknown and with experience, it is hoped
that there will be an opportunity for refinement. She spoke in support of the
appointment of a task force to oversee the guidelines and their impact on non-
profit organizations and the services that they provide to ensure support by all
organizations, which will result in funding guidelines that will strengthen non-
profit organizations and will focus on the impact oftaxpayers' dollars on the lives
of Roanoke's citizens. If a task force is not appointed, she advised that the non-
profit community respectfully requests that as the City engages in future actions
related to funding and/or management of non-profits, that input be sought from
representatives of the non-profit community prior to implementation of any
policies or guidelines.
Council Member Cutler stated that serious consideration should be given to
Ms. Kestner-Chappelear's suggestion to create a task force to review future
evolving criteria. ~e spoke in support of adoption ofthe amended guidelines and
called attention to the receipt of letters from approximately 20 non-profit
organizations expressing concerns with regard to the original criteria. ~e stated
that prior to submitting the guidelines to Council for adoption, criteria should
have been drafted with input from the affected non-profit organizations and
representatives of Council appointed committees that dispense City grants to non-
profit organizations, both to receive suggestions regarding content and as a sign
of respect for non-profit organizations. ~e advised that the needs of the citizens
of Roanoke are met by three groups: the business community that provides jobs
and pays taxes; the government that provides public safety, education and other
aspects of public welfare; and by the charitable, non-profit community that largely,
9
through the work of volunteers, addresses the well-being of those who need help
and those who desire such amenities as museums, music, historic preservation,
and other activities that neither the business community nor government can
provide inasmuch as they are not appropriate uses of taxpayers' money. ~e
referred to the local grant application criteria adopted by the United Way of
Roanoke Valley and mentioned that the City might, over time, seek to combine its
criteria with United Way criteria to keep the paperwork burdens of non-profit
organizations at a minimum. ~e advised that the City has good reason to require
groups requesting funds to demonstrate that they have the capacity to handle the
funds in a responsible manner; the City also owes charitable organizations a note
of appreciation for their assistance to the community and the organizations
should be treated not as supplicants, but as partners in the care of residents of
the City of Roanoke.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the suggestion of Ms.
Kestner-Chappelear with regard to appointment of a task force to oversee
guidelines would be referred to the City Manager for report to Council.
There being no further discussion, Resolution No. 37281-010306 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
and Mayo r ~ arri S-m--------------_____________________________________________----------------------------------7.
NAYS: None------------"---------------------------"---______---------------------------------------------0.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the
Financial Report for the month of November 2005.
(For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
There being no discussion and without objection by Council, the Mayor
advised that the Financial Report for the month of November 2005 would be
received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINIS~ED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
NONE.
10
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BYT~E MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
YOUT~-SNOW REMOVAL-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP: Council
Member Lea referred to inquiries from senior citizens who state that they are
physically unable to remove ice and snow from the sidewalk in front of their
residence and inquired if the City can be of assistance.
The City Manager advised that pursuant to a City ordinance, individuals who
have sidewalks in front oftheir properties are responsible for the removal of snow
from the sidewalks by a certain time follOWing the snow activity and there is no
provision for exemption; however, the City's Office on Youth has compiled a list of
young people who serve as volunteers, or for minimum compensation, will clean
City sidewalks. She advised that the response by citizens this year to clearing
sidewalks has not been good, therefore, following the most recent snow event,
Public Works employees and Police Officers were instructed to remind citizens of
the City's ordinance requiring the removal of snow which is a critical element as to
when children will return to school, inasmuch as this is one ofthe measures used
by the school system in determining whether or not schools will be open. She
called attention to problems associated with vacant properties or absentee
landlords, and advised that on occasion, if the problem exists for an extended
period of time, the City will remove snow and bill the property owner in much the
same way as the City bills for trash and debris removal. She also suggested that
Robert Clement, Neighborhood Coordinator, be contacted with regard to
assistance by neighborhood organizations.
SC~OOLS: Council Member Cutler advised that the new Patrick ~enry ~igh
School was officially opened on Monday, January 2, 2006.
The Mayor advised that a community open house will be held on Sunday,
January 8, 2006, from 2:00 to 5:00 p.m., at the new Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
BONDS/BOND ISSUES: Mr. Allen Scanlan, 1631 Center ~ill Drive, S. W.,
raised the following hypothetical scenarios: assuming that all projects included in
bond issue Series 2002A had been completed, with the exception of the Crystal
Spring Water Filtration Plant for about $5.4 million; assuming that the drought is
over and water reservoir levels are full, and the Council decided to purchase a tract
of land and to construct a roller skating arena with a majority of the funds that
were previously speCified for the Water Filtration Plant. ~e stated that a governing
body has broad control over the use of General Obligation Bond funds, but
questioned if such an extreme variation as above referenced, would raise concerns
by those bond holders who invested in the bonds with a specifiC indication as to
1 1
the use of the proceeds. ~e also questioned if taxpayers would support such a
variation, even if it were proven to be legal. ~e advised that having served as a
former registered representative with the National Association of Security Dealers,
with an affiliated registration as a broker dealer, he would not want to encounter
such questions from an institutional or a private client without knowing that such
actions are appropriate, and asked that Council give consideration to calling for an
investigation of the appropriateness of the use of bond funds for Roanoke's high
school stadium construction. ~e noted that detailed requests have been
submitted to the appropriate departments of the Securities and Exchange
Commission and to the Municipal Securities Rule Making Board, including material
from the bond prospectus, resolutions adopted by Council authorizing issuance
and sale of the bonds, and minutes of City Council meetings in which the matter
was referred to as a stadium/amphitheater. ~e pointed out that there is no
connection in the Council minutes and resolutions regarding the pending use of
funds for construction of high school stadia. ~e referred to a Council/School
Board workshop that was held on January 22, 2002, in which such topics as
teamwork, leadership, understanding the quality of education, definition of quality
education, understanding the desires and needs of the children, the definition of
the best education in Roanoke and listening to the community were discussed. ~e
suggested that the minutes of the meeting be reviewed by Council, inasmuch as
only one member of both the City Council and the School Board are currently in
office and in light of recent happenings.
Mr. Scanlan's remarks were referred to the City Manager and Director of
Finance for report to Council.
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Ms. Anita Wilson, a City Market
building tenant, advised that she has operated her business for three years
without a formal lease agreement with the City. She stated that earlier in the
meeting, Council approved a three year lease agreement with Elias Azar, d/b/a
Azar Jewelry, Inc., for the lease of space in the City Market building and advised
that other tenants in the Market building also deserve a formal lease agreement
with the City. She added that Market building tenants would like for vacant space
in the City Market building to be rented in order to generate more income for the
building; and she would like to make needed improvements to her business
and/or to combine businesses, but references have been made with regard to
disenfranchising tenants in connection with the comprehensive market study. She
stated that the City Market building has lasted beyond its initial expectation, for
25 years the same furniture has been used and many of the same tenants continue
to operate a business out of the Market building. She advised that if the City will
work with Market building tenants and if tenants will work with the Market
consultant, many good things can be accomplished in the City Market Building and
in the downtown area in general.
12
The City Manager advised that earlier in the meeting, the first City Market
Building lease was approved by Council, and will be immediately followed by
Economic Development staff attempting to negotiate leases with those Market
building businesses that are operating with expired leases, which will include Ms.
Wilson's business. She pointed out that until City staff took over operation ofthe
Market building, the City was not involved in lease development; Economic
Development staff devoted considerable time to developing a lease; the exclusivity
clause, which created much anxiety for some businesses, was brought to Council
for review; and past due accounts by certain tenants are now in compliance. She
explained that inasmuch as Council has acted favorably on the first lease, City
staff is in a position to move forward with discussions leading to individual leases.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: The City Manager advised
that she hoped the Members of Council had a happy holiday season and she
looked forward to working with the Council in the year 2006.
At 2:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for two
Closed Sessions in the Council's Conference Room.
At 3:50 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor ~arris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council
Member McDaniel moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of
his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2)
only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any
Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r ~arri s------------------------~----------------------------------------------"------------------------7.
NA'(S: NClI1E!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-~OUSING/AUT~ORITY: The Mayor advised
that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority
created by the resignation of Mornique E. Smith, for a term ending August 31,
2008; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the name of Joseph W. Lee, III.
1 3
There being no further nominations, Mr. Lee was appointed as a
Commissioner of the Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority, to fill the
unexpired term of Mornique E. Smith, ending August 31, 2008, by the following
vote:
FOR MR. LEE: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor ~arris -----------------------m-'-----------------------m------____________7.
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP-OAT~S OF OFFICE:
The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the Roanoke Neighborhood
Advocates to fill the unexpired term of Earnest C. Wilson ending June 30, 2007,
and called for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Council Member Cutler placed in nomination the name of Carol j. Jenson.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Jensen was appointed as a member
of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates, to fill the unexpired term of Earnest C.
Wilson, ending June 30, 2007, by the following vote:
FOR MS. JENSEN: Council Members McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe,
F i tz pat ri c k, Le a and Mayo r ~ arri s ------------------------------------------------------------------------7.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting
adjourned at 3: 5 5 p.m.
APPROVED
?\~¡~
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
C(1{iL~
C. Nelson ~arris
Mayor
14
SPECIAL MEETlNG--m-ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
January 17, 2006
12:00 p.m.
A special meeting of the Council of the City of Roanoke, acting as the
Personnel Committee, was called to order on Tuesday, January 17, 2006, at
12:00 p.m., in the City Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, pursuant to
Section 10, Meetings of Council Generally, of the Charter of the City of Roanoke,
with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.,
Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson ~arris----------------------------------------------------4·
ABSENT: Council Members Brian J. Wish neff, Sherman P. Lea and M. Rupert
Cut I e r ___________________000______000______000_________________________000-----------------------.---------------------- 3 .
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
COUNCIL: The Mayor advised that the special meeting of Council was called
pursuant to the following communication:
'~anuary 10, 2006
The ~onorable Vice-Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Members of Council:
Pursuant to Section 10, Meetings of Council Generally, of the Charter ofthe City of
Roanoke, I am calling a special meeting of the Council on Tuesday, January 17,
2006, at 12:00 p.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building. The purpose of the meeting will be to convene in Closed
Session as the Personnel Committee to discuss the mid-year performance ofthree
Council-Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended.
With kindest regards.
Sincerely,
siC. Nelson ~arris
C. Nelson ~arris
Mayor"
1 5
Council Member McDaniel moved that Council convene in Closed Session as
the Personnel Committee to discuss the mid-year performance of three Council-
Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor ~arris-------4.
NJ\'(S: NClI1E! ----------------------------------------------------__________________________________________().
(Council Members Wish neff, Cutler and Lea were absent.)
At 12:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one
Closed Session.
At 1 :45 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council's Conference
Room, with all Members of the Council in attendance, with the exception of
Council Members Wishneff, Cutler and Dowe, Mayor ~arris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Session just concluded, Council
Member McDaniel moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of
his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business mattes lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2)
only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any
Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor ~arris-------4.
NJ\'(S: NClI1E! -------------------------------------------------_____________________________________________().
(Council Members Wishneff, Cutler and Lea were absent.)
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the special meeting
adjourned at 1 :47 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST: 0
f\~ -J (iM/,J__
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
L(~~~
c. Nelson ~arris
Mayor
16
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
January 17, 2006
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Tuesday,
January 17, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City
Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris presiding, pursuant to
Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of
Procedure, Rule 1, Reaular Meetinas, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by the Council
on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T.
Fitzpatrick, Jr., Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson ~arris ---------------------------5.
ABSENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler and Sherman P. Lea ---------------2.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Rolanda B. Russell, Assistant City Manag-er for
Community Development; William M. ~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all,
Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag ofthe United States of America was led
by Mayor ~arris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Dennis Robarge,
President, Roanoke Dazzle, declaring January 22 - 28, 2006, as Dazzle Blue and
Gold Week in the City of Roanoke.
ZONING: The Mayor announced that Council's public hearing on the petition
to amend the previously approved site plan at Patrick ~enry ~igh School in order
to permit construction of a high school sports stadium will be rescheduled until
Monday, February 6, 2006, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chamber. ~e advised
that the public hearing is being rescheduled because of concern regarding the
adequacy of the content of the legal ads that were run to notify the publiC of the
hearing, and the hearing conducted by the City Planning Commission on
December 21, 2005. ~e stated that the February 6 hearing will be conducted as a
17
joint public hearing ofthe City Planning Commission and City Council; and further
information on the proposals to amend and add to the conditions which apply to
the development of the Patrick ~enry campus and the construction and operation
of a high school sports stadium thereon may be obtained from the Department of
Planning Building and Economic Development.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one
motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was
desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. ~e called specific attention to one request for Closed Session.
PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: A communication from the City
Clerk advising of the resignation of James C. ~ale as a member of the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board, was before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the resignation be accepted and that the
communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council
Member Dowe and adopted by.the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ëlrris-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------,------------5.
Nt\'(S: N()I1E!-----------------------------------------------___---------------------------------------------Cl.
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-~OUSING/AUT~ORITY-ARC~ITECTURAL
REVIEW BOARD-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP-CABLE TELEVISION-
ZONING: The following reports of qualification were before Council:
Joseph W. Lee, III, as a Commissioner of the Roanoke Redevelopment
and ~ousing Authority, for a term ending August 31, 2008;
William D. Poe as a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, for a
term ending December 31, 2008;
James A. Schlueter as a member of the Architectural Review Board, for
a term ending October 1, 2009;
Diana B. Sheppard as a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, for a
term ending December 31, 2008;
18
Carla L. Terry as a member of the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable
Television Committee, for a term ending June 30, 2008; and
Martha C. Williams as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood
Advocates, for a term ending June 30, 2008.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reports of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~élrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
Nt\'(S: NOIlE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager.requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711
(A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council convene in Closed Session as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Council ME!mber Dowe and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ arri s------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 5.
Nt\'(S: NOIlE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC ~EARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-COMMONWEALT~'S ATTORNEY-GRANTS: A
communication from the Commonwealth's Attorney advising that in May 2005, the
Commonwealth's Attorneys for Roanoke County and the City of Roanoke filed a
joint application for a Virginia Domestic Violence Victim Fund Grant to be
administE!red through the City of Roanoke; the grant would fund a prosecutor who
would split his/her efforts between the two localities; the 18-month grant (with
possible 18-month renewal period) would fully fund the position without
contribution from either locality; as part of the grant application, the Roanoke
19
County Administrator and the City Manager concurred in the application and the
anticipated administration thereof; and the joint application was accepted by the
Department of Criminal Justice Services, which awarded a grant entirely for salary
benefits to the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney for the 18-month period
beginning July 1, 2005; the approved amount of DqS grant funding must be
expended during the period of July 1 , 2005 and December 31 , 2006; and no local
match is associated with the grant.
The Commonwealth's Attorney recommended that Council adopt a
resolution accepting grant funding from the Department of Criminal Justice
Services, Grant No. 06-A4967DV06, to fully reimburse the salary and benefits for a
Domestic Violence Prosecutor for the specified grant period and any extensions
approved by the Department of Criminal Justice Services; authorize the City
Manager to execute any forms required by the Department of Criminal Justice
Services in order to accept funds, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney;
and adopt an ordinance establishing a revenue estimate in the amount of
$99,446.00 and appropriating funds in the same amount to expenditure accounts
in the Grant Fund to be established by the Director of Finance.
A communication from the City Manager concurring in the request of the
Commonwealth's Attorney was also before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37282-011706) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Domestic
Violence Victim Fund Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the
2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by
title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 127.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37282-011706.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
Council Member Dowe advised that he serves on the Department of Criminal
Justice Services Board without remuneration and inquired if he has a conflict of
interest in voting on the abovereferenced ordinance.
The City Attorney advised that there would be no conflict of interest
inasmuch as Mr. Dowe serves in an unpaid position and could therefore cast his
vote on the budget ordinance.
20
Ordinance No. 37282-011706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ëlrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
NA'(S: N()I1E!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37283-011706) A RESOLUTION accepting the Virginia Domestic Violence
Victim Fund Grant offer made to the City by the Virginia Department of Criminal
Justice Services and authorizing execution of any required documentation on
behalf of the City.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 128.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37283-
011706. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ arri s---------------------------------------------------------___________________000___________________________________ 5 .
Nt\'(S: N()I1E!--------------------------------·--------------------------------------------------------------().
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES-PENSIONS: Clarence R. Martin, representing the
Roanoke City Retirees Association, requested that City of Roanoke retirees be
given an additional cost of living raise in fiscal year 2007 and a supplement toward
health insurance for retirees 65 years of age and over.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the request would be
referred to fiscal year 2006-2007 budget study.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
21
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
POLICE DEPARTMENT-BUDGET-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the City of Roanoke has received notification that an
application for funds under the Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention WDP)
Title II, One-Time System Improvement Grant program was reviewed and approved
by the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS); funds will be used
to provide a consultant, equipment, and supplies for a volunteer work group that
will be established under the Director of Social/~uman Services, in order to
address the disproportionate minority contact, i.e., over-representation of
minority youth involved with the juvenile justice system in the City of Roanoke; the
goal of the work group will be to compare data of the City of Roanoke's juvenile
population against the representation of minority juveniles at each stage of the
juvenile justice system; accessibility by minorities of intervention programs and
the cultural competency of providers will be addressed; and action steps will be
developed to address minority overrepresentation.
It was further advised that the approved amount of JjDP One Time System
Improvement Grant funding is $25,000.00, with no local match; and funds must
be expended or obligated during the award period between January 1 and
December 31 , 2006.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution accepting
$25,000.00 in JjDP Title II One Time System Improvement: funding from the
Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, Grant No. 06-A5 112Jj04, for the
City of Roanoke's Disproportionate Minority Contact in the Juvenile Justice System
grant program; authorize the City Manager to execute the required grant
acceptance, and any other documents required by the Department of Criminal
Justice Services, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney; and adopt a
budget ordinance establishing a revenue estimate in the amount of $25,000.00
and appropriate funds in the same amount in accounts to be established by the
Director of Finance in the Grant Fund.
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37284-11706) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Juvenile
Justice and Delinquency Prevention Title 11- One-Time System Improvement Grant,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title ofthis ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 129.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37284-
011706. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
22
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~arris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
NAYS: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37285-011706) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of Juvenile Justice
and Delinquency Prevention Title 1I-0ne-Time System Improvement Grant funds
from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services on behalf of the City,
authorizing execution of any and all necessary documents to comply with the
terms and conditions of the grant and applicable laws, regulations, and
requirements pertaining thereto.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 130.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37285-
011706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ëlrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
Nt\'(S: N<>lle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-SC~OOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
appropriation of the following funds, was before Council.
· $640,027.00 for the Title I Winter Programto provide remedial reading,
language arts and mathematics instruction for students in targeted
schools, to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds.
· $15,000.00 for the FY2005-06 Chess Program to pay for chess materials
and tournament participation costs through a private donation.
· $5,000.00 for the 2005-06 GED Expanded Testing Program to provide
additional instructors and supplies for GED preparation classes and for
administration of the GED examination, to be funded with State grant
monies.
23
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request, was also before the body.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37286-011706) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the Title I
Winter Program, FY06 Chess Program, and FY06 GED Expanded Testing Program,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 School Fund
Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title ofthis ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 131.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37286-
011706. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~élrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
Nt\'(S: NClIlE!--------------------------------------------------_____________________________________________().
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
UNFINIS~ED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY T~E MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
NONE.
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY S~ERIFF: Ms. ~elen E. Davis, 35 Patton
Avenue, N. E., advised that two years ago, when there was a vacant seat on City
Council to fill the unexpired term of C. Nelson ~arris, there was Widespread
speculation among RoanokE!'s citizens that the person who received the next
highest number of votes in the 2002 Councilmanic election would be appointed by
the Council to fill the unexpired term; however, another individual was
appointed.
24
She stated that had the person who received the next highest number of votes
been selected by the Council, Council would have done the right thing by reaching
across political party lines. She stressed the importance of people of all races
reaching across political party lines, congratulating each other on ajob well done,
and working together with integrity.
Ms. Davis commended Octavia L. Johnson, Sheriff, on her swearing in
ceremony which was attended by persons from all races and political persuasions.
COMPLAINTS-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29th Street, N.
W., spoke with regard to real estate assessments, a reduction in the City's tax
rate, better paying jobs for young people, racism, nepotism within the City's work
force, inadequacies in the pay scale for City employees, and the need for increased
activity in downtown Roanoke in order to attract more people to the area.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
BRIDGES: The Assistant City Manager for Community Development advised
that the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Bridge Committee will select an artist
to construct the King statue during the latter part of February 2006.
CITY EMPLOYEES: The Assistant City Manager for Community Development
advised that on Thursday, January 12, 2006, the City of Roanoke hosted the
Service Awards Luncheon for long time City employees and over 188 employees
were honored for 10, 15, 20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 years of service.
At 2:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one
Closed Session.
At 3:10p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
with all Members ofthe Council in attendance, except Council Members Cutler and
Lea, Mayor ~arris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council
Member Wishneff moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of
his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted
from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act;
and (2) only such publiC business matters as were identified in any motion by
which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by
City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
25
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Dowe Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ëlrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
Nt\)'S: NClrlE!--------------------------------------------------_____________________________________________().
(Council Members Cutler and Lea were absent.)
At 3:12 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia.
At 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, January 17, 2006, the Council meeting
reconvened in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor
C. Nelson ~arris presiding.
PRESENT:' Mayor C. Nelsorl ~arris -----------------------------______00__________-------________1 .
ABSENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, jr., Beverly T.
Fitzpatrick,Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Brianj. Wishneff----oom----6.
The Mayor advised that a quorum was not present.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Rolanda. B. Russell, Assistant City Manager for
Community DeVelopment; William M. ~ackworth, City Attorney; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
PUBLIC ~EARINGS:
ZONING: The Mayor announced that Council's public hearing on the petition
to amend the previously approved site plan at Patrick Henry ~igh School in order
to permit the construction of a high schoClI sports stadium will be rescheduled
until Monday, February 6, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber. ~e
stated that the public hearing will be rescheduled because of concern regarding
the adequacy of the content of the legal ads that were published to notify the
public of the Council's public hearing and the hearing conducted by the City
Planning Commission on December 21, 2005. ~e further advised that the
February 6 public hearing will be conducted as a joint public hearing by the City
Planning Commission and the City Council; and information on the proposal to
amend and add to the conditions which apply to the development of the Patrick
~enry campus and the construction and operation of a high school sports stadium
thereon may be obtained from the Department of Planning Building and
Economic Development, Room 166, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W.
26
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
There were no citizens in attendance who wished to speak.
Due to the lack of a quorum, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned at
7:05 p.m.
APPROVED
?r:"7 J f ~
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
Œ.~~~
C. Nelson ~arris
Mayor
27
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
February 6, 2006
9:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
February 6, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building,
215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris
presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council,
Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Regular Meetings, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505
adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian j. Wishneff (arrived
late), M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P.
Lea (arrived late) and Mayor C. Nelson ~arris-----------------m-----------m--m--------m7.
ABS ENT: Non e ____nn_____________________________________________________________ ----------- -----0.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was to conduct a joint
meeting of Council and the Roanoke City School Board.
SC~OOL TRUSTEES PRESENT: Jason E. Bingham, David B. Carson,
William~. Lindsey, Alvin L. Nash, Courtney A. Penn, David B. Trinkle and
Kathy G. Stockbu rge r, Chai r------------------m____m____________________________m_m____________ 7 .
A BS ENT: Non e __________nn________________________________ n_______________ ----------------------0.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
OT~ERS PRESENT: Representing the City of Roanoke: Rolanda B. Russell,
Assistant City Manager for Community Development; and James Grigsby, Acting
Assistant City Manager for Operations.
Representing Roanoke City Public Schools: Marvin T. Thompson,
Superintendent; Cindy ~. Poulton, Clerk to the School Board; Bernard J. Godek,
Associate Superintendent for Management; August Bullock, Associate
Superintendent for Instruction; Sharon Richardson, Executive Director for
Student Services; Dana Thurston, Director for Resource Development and
Communication; and Timothy R. Spencer, Assistant City Attorney and Legal
Counsel to the School Board.
28
SC~OOLS-COUNClL: The Mayor welcomed the School Board and
administrative staff to the meeting.
Chair Stockburger advised that on September 16, 2005, the Roanoke City
Public Schools (RCPS) contracted with MGT of America, Inc., to conduct an
Academic Auditing Services study of the school division; and the audit focused
on reviewing the financial, organizational and operational effectiveness of the
delivery of services to the school system. She called upon the Superintendent
of Schools for remarks.
Mr. Thompson reviewed the overall performance and organizational
structure of divisions and various departments within the Roanoke City School
system. ~e advised that a primary purpose of the study was to identify some of
the positives and some of the areas in need of improvements in the delivery of
services; when the School Administration reviewed achievement scores which
reflect how an organization operates and accountability in a system-driven
process, MGT was selected from a group of vendors, primarily for the degree of
detail that the company provides, and recommendations contained in the
findings will be helpful in connection with strategic planning efforts. With
reference to planning, he stated that the School Administration will primarily
focus on the findings contained in the report which are the most important
components and allow the School Board/administration, as leaders, to help staff
begin to examine practices and develop systems that will improve Roanoke City
Public Schools.
~e introduced Dr. Joan Ann Cox and Dr. R. S. (Skip) Archibald, Ed. D.,
representing MGT of America, Inc., for remarks with regard to the audit.
Dr. Cox and Dr. Archibald reviewed the following Executive Summary:
Overview of the Methodoloav
The following section describes the methodology MGT used to
prepare for the Academic Audit Services. To be successful, an
audit of a school division must:
· be based upon a very detailed work plan and time
schedule;
· take into account the speCific student body involved and
the unique environment within which the school division
operates;
· obtain input from School Board members,
administrators, and staff;
· identify the existence, appropriateness, and use of
specific educational objectives;
· contain comparisons to similar school divisions to
provide a reference point;
29
· follow a common set of guidelines tailored specifically
to the division being reviewed;
· include analyses of the efficiency of work practices;
· identify the level and effectiveness of externally
imposed work tasks and procedures;
· identify exemplary programs and practices, as well as
needed improvements;
· document all findings; and
· present straightforward and practical recommendations
for improvements.
Methodology primarily involved a focused use of Virginia review
guidelines, as well as MGT's audit guidelines following the analysis
of both existing data and new information obtained through
various means of employee input. The following strategies were
used:
EXHIBrr 1
OVERVIEW OF THE WOIlK PLAN FOR THE ACADEMIC AUDmllO SERVICES
ROANOKE an PU8UC SCHOOLS
PHASEI - PROJECTINITIA71ON
=---- I- ..~--_..-...-
PHASE" . STAIŒHOU1ERINVOI.VEMENT AND £¥AGNO/I1TIC IlEMEW
_u
............--
AtiIIIt_AJdllInD.......
_u ,.....
~ _ .aR .... --
...... ............,. ~ .._~ ...........
"CNlnJCMIat -. I u" -. --....-
At , I ......... II . .......... ...--
-- --
...
FHASE'III ·fi..DEPTHON -SlTEACAlJf!.Ilft:AUDI7'INOSØlM'ŒS
1 ::::.....~..... ... ...4............
............~_CMiIlIIØIU .
15=~;,::,=:.-;~-1
I~':",:-'" .... - I
1=:'":--"- I
lM1I'·oI~ nc
1--
,::-..- --.--
--
t
PfMSEN·
11;;::::1
I J
I
1-'"
...........-...........
Pop-
30
TIMELlNE FOR THE ACADEMIC AUDITING SERVICES
TIME FRAME ACTIVITY
September 2005 · Finalized contract with RepS.
September 2005 · Conducted initial meeting with RepS officials.
· Designed tailor-made. written surveys for central office
administrators. prlnc'pals/ass;stant principals. and teachers.
September and · Collected and analyzed existing and comparative data available
October 2005 from the school division.
· Produced profile tables of RepS.
October 2006 · Disseminated surveys to administrators and teachers.
October 10 and 11. Visited with RepS.
2005 · Conducted diagnostic review.
· Collected data.
· Interviewed Schoo' Board members and Cay of1lcJals.
· Interviewed central office administrators.
· Interv;ewed business and community leaders.
October 2005 · Analyzed data and information that had been collected.
October 2005 · Tailored review guidelines and trained MGT team members using
findings from the above analyses.
October 31 - · Conducted formal on-site review. including school visits.
November 4. 2005.
November and · Requested additional data from the school division and analyzed
December 2005 data.
November and · Prepared DraM Final Report.
December 2005
January 9. 2006 · Submitted DraM Final Report.
January 2006 · Solicited input from RepS staff on the Draft Report.
January 2006 · Made changes to the Draft Report.
January 31. 2006 · Presented Final Report.
Review of Existina Records and Data Sources
During the period between project initiation and beginning the on-
site review, many activities were conducted simultaneously.
Among these activities were the identification and collection of
existing reports and data sources that provided recent information
related to the various administrative functions and operations to be
reviewed in the Roanoke City Public School Division.
More than 100 documents were requested from RCPS. Examples of
materials requested included, but were not limited, to the
following:
· School Board policies and administrative procedures;
· organizational charts;
· program and compliance reports;
· technology plan;
31
· school improvement plans;
· curriculum and instructional guides;
· classroom observation tools;
· annual performance reports;
· independent financial audits;
· plans for curriculum and instruction;
· annual budget and expenditure reports;
. job descriptions;
· salary schedules; and
· personnel handbooks.
Data from each of these sources were analyzed and the information
was used as a starting point for collecting additional data during
the on-site visit.
Diaanostic Review
A diagnostic review of Roanoke City Public Schools was conducted
on October 10 and 11, 2005. An MGT consultant interviewed
central office administrators, community leaders, School Board
members, and parents concerning the management and operations
of Roanoke City Public Schools.
Emolovee Surveys
To secure the involvement of central office administrators,
principals/assistant principals, and teachers in the focus and scope
of the Academic Auditing Services, three on-line surveys were
prepared and disseminated in October 2005. Through the use of
anonymous surveys, administrators and teachers were given the
opportunity to express their views about the management and
operations of Roanoke City Public Schools. These surveys were
similar in format and content to provide a database for determining
how the opinions and perceptions of central office administrators,
principals/assistant principals, and teachers vary.
RCPS staff were given from Tuesday, October 11, through Friday,
October 21, 2005 to respond. The RCPS response rates for the
three surveys were good. Ninety-one percent of central office
administrators returned a survey, as did 86 percent of principals
and assistant principals and 39 percent of teachers. MGT compared
all survey responses among the three employee groups and
compared all RCPS administrators and teachers to those in the
more than 30 other school districts where similar surveys have
been conducted.
32
A complete survey analysis can be found in Chapter 2 of the full
report. A copy of the survey appears in Appendix A, and exhibits
showing all survey results are provided in Appendix B. Specific
survey items pertinent to findings in the functional areas MGT
reviewed are presented within each chapter.
Conductina the Formal On-Site Review
A team of seven consultants conducted the formal on-site review of
Roanoke City Public Schools during the week of October 31, 2005.
As part of the on-site review, the following RCPS systems and
operations were examined:
· Division Administration
· Personnel and ~uman Resources Management
· Financial Management
· Purchasing, Warehousing, and Fixed Assets
· Educational Service Delivery and Management
· Technology Management
Prior to the on-site review, each team member was provided with
an extensive set of information about RCPS operations. During the
on-site work, team members conducted detailed reviews of the
structure and operations of Roanoke City Public Schools in their
assigned functional areas. Most RCPS schools were visited at least
once, and many schools were visited more than once.
Systematic assessment of Roanoke City Public Schools included the
use of MGT's Guidelines for Conducting Management and
Performance Audits of School Districts. In addition, the
Commonwealth of Virginia school efficiency review guidelines were
used. Following the collection and analysis of existing data and
new information, our guidelines were tailored to reflect local
policies and administrative procedures; the unique conditions of
Roanoke City Public Schools, and the input of administrators in the
school division. On-site review included meetings with appropriate
central office and school-level staff, as well as City officials, and
reviews of documentation proVided by these individuals. In
Chapter 2, MGT presents a statistical analysis of how RCPS
compares with five comparison school divisions. The practice of
benchmarking is often used to make such comparisons between
and among school divisions. Benchmarking refers to the use of
commonly held organizational characteristics in making concrete
statistical or descriptive comparisons of organizational systems
and processes. It is also a performance measurement tool used in
conjunction with improvement initiatives to measure comparative
operating performance and identify best practices. Effective
benchmarking has proven to be especially valuable to strategic
planning initiatives within school divisions.
With this in mind, MGT initiated a benchmarking comparison of
Roanoke City Public Schools to provide a common foundation from
which to compare systems and processes within the school division
with those of other, similar systems. It is important for readers to
keep in mind that when comparisons are made across more than
one division, the data are not as reliable, as different school
divisions have different operational definitions, and data self-
reported by peer school divisions can be subjective. Sources of
information used for these comparisons include the U. S. Census
Bureau and the Virginia Department of Education.
Exhibit 3 illustrates how the peer school divisions compare to RCPS
in terms of enrollment, number of schools, and number of school
division staff. In the 2004-05 school year:
· Charlottesville and Alexandria are within the same
cluster identified as "6," while the other comparison
divisions are within the cluster identified as "1 ";
· the student population of RCPS (13,655) is lower than
the peer division average (20,583);
· RCPS (144) is both third-highest of comparison
divisions and above the average for the comparison
divisions with regard to the number of student
population per 1 ,000 general population;
· the average number of schools is 33, with RCPS having
the third-fewest (29);
· RCPS has the third-highest number of staff per 1,000
students with 122.05; and
· RCPS is slightly above the comparison average of
121.55 total staff per 1 ,000 students.
33
34
EXHI8IT a
OVERVIEW OF PEER PUBLIC SCHOOL IWISICltB
..05 SCHOOL SR
NDItlIk Pulic llcIIIlII 1 G
PEER ICtIClIllL IllOIOIl It. ._ 1ft ft
AVIIWII
SOtJnx Vlrgm.llI lñIØ1I 01 BIUc8IIan WIII_, D16¡ UI'Md SIIBIllIIrBlB ø..., 2ÐlIO llø!IIUIIll8b.
Other items of interest found in the peer comparisons show that
RCPS had the:
· Lowest percentage of students in Grade 5 meeting or
exceeding Standards of Learning (SOL) in Mathematics in
Spring 2002 (48.8 per cent);
· ~ighest percentage of students in high school meeting or
exceeding Standards of Learning (SOL) in Algebra I in Spring
2002 (79.6 percent);
· ~ighest percentage of students in high school meeting or
exceeding Standards of Learning (SOL) in Algebra II in Spring
2002 (85.3 percent);
· ~ighest percentage of students in high school meeting or
exceeding Standards of Learning (SOL) in World ~istory II in
Spring 2002 (91.2 per cent);
· Second highest percentage of students in high school
meeting or exceeding Standards of Learning (SOL) in
Geometry (73.0), Biology (79.5), and Chemistry (79.3) in
Spring 2002;
· Lowest percentage of schools achieving Adequate Yearly
Progress (AYP) in the 2005-06 school year (48.3 percent);
· ~ighest number of guidance counselors and librarians per
1,000 students in the 2003-04 school year (6.98);
· Lowest percentage of revenue received from federal funds in
the 2003-04 school year (9.3 percent);
· ~ighest percentage of revenue received from sources other
than local, state, or federal funds in the 2003-04 school year
(7.3 percent);
· Lowest number of dollars spent for administration
disbursements in the 2003-04 school year ($2,208,012.38),
but second lowest per pupil cost ($171.75);
· ~ighest per pupil cost in facilities disbursements in the
2003-04 school year ($1 ,040.24); and
· Lowest per pupil cost in technology disbursements in the
2003-04 school year ($200.21).
Commendations
RCPS has implemented many commendable practices that are
detailed in the full report.
.. The School Board, Superintendent, administration, and
staff of Roanoke City Public Schools are commended
for developing a comprehensive meeting agenda
information packet that can be electronically
transmitted effiCiently and effectively to all members.
· The School Board, Superintendent, and Executive Team
are commended for establishing division improvement
goals· and taking proactive. steps towards
implementation of related strategies.
· The Superintendent and Associate Superintendent have
initiated processes to increase the accountability of
central office staff, school administrators, and
teachers.
· RCPS is commended for the development and
implementation ofthe Section 504 procedures manual.
· RCPS is commended for the selection and
implementation of an electronic system for developing
IEPs and managing the compliance of special education
programs.
· RCPS is commended for the implementation of the
kindergarten . through twelhh grade International
Baccalaureate Programme.
· RCPS is commended for the development of effective
recruitment initiatives and programs to recruit
minorities and other prospective teachers to RCPS.
Commendations also to the division for sponsoring
their own successful job fair to hire highly qualified
teachers and for their efforts in attracting prospective
college seniors and RCPS assistant teachers into
teaching in the division.
35
36
· RCPS is commended for its orientation and training of
new substitutes and the outstanding array of resources
provided.
· RCPS is commended for providing tuition assistance to
its employees to further their education.
· The Fiscal Services Department is commended for
virtually eliminating returned grants over the past two
years.
· RCPS is commended for having four-year auditor
contracts and ensuring the partners in charge on the
audit engagements are rotated periodically.
· The RCPS Purchasing Department is commended for
utilizing the City of Roanoke Purchasing Card system,
which has the potential to reduce the number of
purchase orders, invoices, and payments that have to
be processed.
· RCPS and the City of Roanoke are commended for their
continuing efforts to reduce the administrative costs
associated with the purchasing function, while still
encouraging and ensuring competition.
· RCPS is commended for establishing a representative
group of qualified educators to create a Technology
Plan.
· RCPS is commended for developing an instructional
technology plan that effectively addresses technology
use by students and teachers.
· The Office of Technology and Information Services is
commended for taking time to work with the City of
Roanoke to explore collaboration possibilities.
Recommendations
The full report has a total of 116 recommendations, highlights of
which appear below.
DIVISION ADMINISTRATION
. New School Board members are not provided with a
comprehensive orientation to acquaint them with local
division organization, the Board's role and responsibilities,
and the many details associated with carrying out their
responsibilities. School Board members are offered
opportunities to attend meetings of the Virginia School
Boards Association (VSBA), which provides various orientation
sessions. These sessions focus primarily on Commonwealth-
related matters rather than local issues.
· MGT recommends that RCPS develop and implement a local
new School Board member orientation program (Chapter 4,
Recommendation 4-1).
· MGT's review of records and interviews with RCPS personnel
during the on-site visit found that the School Board has not
had a budget or policy committee other than an Audit
Committee (of the whole School Board) and various ad hoc
type committees. The School Board has not established a
mechanism for direct involvement of Board members in
policy or budget development, facilities, and strategic
planning. Rather, the School Board depends upon the
administration for all primary work in these areas, with
recommendations brought to regular Board meetings. The
School Board has not routinely scheduled work sessions for
strategic planning input or other matters. Consequently, the
School Board has limited input in the budget's development
and other processes and has not been involved in overall
division strategic planning (at the time of the on-site visit the
Superintendent was preparing a recommendation for School
Board involvement in strategic planning). RCPS should
establish standing committees for Budget, Facilities, Policy,
and Strategic Planning to ensure appropriate School Board
involvement (Chapter 4, Recommendation 4-2).
· The School Board does not conduct self-assessments of its
performance. There is no formal method for determining its
effectiveness or process for establishing Board performance
goals. During interviews, principals, other school-level staff,
and central office personnel consistently raised questions
regarding the role of some of the School Board members
versus expectations of the duties to be performed by
employees. The Board should develop and implement an
annual School Board self-assessment system (Chapter 4,
Recommendation 4-5).
· The School Board has not developed for implementation a
performance review system for evaluating the
Superintendent. Interviews with School Board members
revealed that they plan to assess the Superintendent's job
performance, but have neither discussed how they intend to
accomplish this nor developed specific performance-related
goals. ~owever, it is clear to the Superintendent that among
his prime responsibilities are to bring about changes
resulting in the accreditation of all schools, to improve the
overall academic performance of students, and to increase
high school graduation rates. MGT recommends that the
division develop and implement a Superintendent
Performance Assessment system. (Chapter 4,
Recommendation 4-6).
37
38
. Since his appointment, the Superintendent has reorganized
various departments of the central office to improve services
to schools and other issues; however, the Associate
Superintendent for Instruction has 25 direct reports,
exceeding the number for effective supervision and
monitoring of overall department responsibilities.
Additionally, the ~uman Resources Department is headed by
an executive director position reporting directly to the
Superintendent; in many school systems of this size, a lesser
position would administer the function and report to an
assistant or associate superintendent. This same situation
exists for the Student Services Department. The
Communications Department is administered by a director
position that reports to the Superintendent, but has
responsibilities more aligned with coordination activity. The
Associate Superintendent for Management, reporting to the
Superintendent, is assigned broad responsibilities including
technology, business affairs, facilities, transportation, food
service, and other functions. The combining of fiscal and
non-related functions (transportation, facilities services, and
supply services) with other operation areas creates a
significant work overload that should be addressed. Within
the Instruction. and Student Services departments, three
director (magnet and gifted, adult and adjunct, and
secondary guidance) and two coordinator (elementary
guidance and truancy and court liaison) positions could be
effectively managed with fewer positions and reorganization
of services. MGT recommends that the administration be
reorganized to operate the various central office functions
more effiCiently and effectively. MGT conservatively
estimates that the division could save $107,005.00 over a
five-year period if this recommendation were implemented
(Chapter 4, Recommendation 4-10).
. The Superintendent's Executive Team, composed of key
central office executive positions, does not have principal or
school-level representation. Surveys of central office
administrators and principals asked questions related to
principals' work and other related matters. When asked to
respond to the statement Authority for administrative
decisions is delegated to the lowest pOSSible level,S 1 per cent
of administrators and 23 percent of principals disagreed or
strongly disagreed, while 22 percent of administrators and
41 per cent of principals agreed or strongly agreed.
Interviews with school-level personnel revealed a strong
39
sentiment that more principal engagement in decisions
affecting schools is needed. MGT consultants could not
identify evidence of systematic involvement of principals.
RCPS should reorganize the Superintendent's Executive Team
to include three principal representatives (Chapter 4,
Recommendation 4-12).
· There are no provisions in the Superintendent's scheduling
protocol for systematically establishing protected blocks of
time expressly allotted for necessary planning and reflective
thinking. MGT reviewed the Superintendent's work schedule
and calendar to ascertain the extent of his time commitments
to various activities. While he has limited his community
commitments to ensure adequate attention to division
internal matters, he has not set aside time for executive
reflection and to complete his doctoral work (which is a
requirement of his employment contract). The
Superintendent maintains an open door policy, and the MGT
consultants observed numerous instances of walk-in
interruptions. The Executive Assistant to the Superintendent
. maintains the Superintendent's calendar of activities and
processes his mail. Interviews revealed that the
Superintendent seldom carves out time for himself. In short,
the Superintendent is heaVily scheduled, and if this situation
is not modified systematically, MGT consultants believe that
it could reduce his effectiveness. MGT recommends that the
Superintendent's calendar provide for protected time to
permit reflective and planning activity and designated
vacation time (Chapter 4, Recommendation 4-13).
EDUCATIONAL SERVICE DELIVERY
· The departments delivering curriculum and instructional
services must be organized to maximize funds, better
align functions in the division, and more effiCiently
provide instruction and services to students. Based on the
current organizational structure, the Department of
Student Services is overstaffed. Given a population of
12,645 students, one guidance administrative position is
sufficient at the central office level. The Southern
Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS) recommends a
minimum of one guidance counselor to every 1,500
students. RCPS far exceeds the requirements of SACS with
a guidance to student ratio of one guidance counselor to
243 students. This ratio includes the Guidance
Coordinators who also maintain a caseload of students.
This excessive number of guidance counselors is not
warranted. Also, based upon a review of the
40
organizational chart, job descriptions, interviews, and
best practices in other school divisions, the Department of
Special Education is overstaffed. In addition, staff are not
aligned with similar functions in other departments within
the Division. MGT recommends that the division
reorganize the Departments of Student Services and
Special Education. Key changes include, but are not
limited to, eliminating one Coordinator of Elementary
Guidance along with 14 guidance positions; eliminating
the Director of Magnet and Gifted Programs; eliminating
the Director of Alternative and Adjunct Programs while
creating a Supervisor for same program; and transferring
several positions to other departments. These changes
would create a five-year cost savings of over $1.8 million
for the school division (Chapter 5, Recommendation 5-1).
. While RCPS has a vision of where it wants to go with
regard to curriculum and instruction, it does not
uniformly communicate that vision across the division and
to all personnel through written goals, objectives, and
procedures; timelines; and benchmarks for achievement
for individual units. Thus, there is no overarching plan
that links curricular and instructional operations to
agreed-upon goals and objectives or ties together those
units of the department with· related responsibilities.
Specific procedures are lacking, such as there is no
strategic plan for the Department of Curriculum and
Instruction or for units within the department; no specific
walk-though guidelines for central office staff and school
principals to use when evaluating/observing instruction;
no specific, researched-based template for creating school
improvement plans (further discussed in a later finding);
and no systemwide calendar for updating curriculum. The
division does have a document called the School Planning
Guide; however, it is just a compendium of various
documents on characteristics of effective schools, how to
establish a core team and examine data, and definitions
for school improvement plans and components. Moreover,
it is not well organized or presented in a logical,
systematic manner. RCPS should develop procedures that
describe program details and expectations and related
documents (such as walk-through instruments) to
facilitate effective communication and implementation of
the division's curriculum and instruction mission and
vision (Chapter 5, Recommendation 5-4).
· RCPS has a written template for the development of
school improvement plans; however, it is causing
confusion among school staff and, consequently, not very
effective. Many principals are not satisfied with the format
and content of the template. MGT's review of the school
improvement plans shows a wide disparity in the quality
and length of the division's plans. Exemplary plans
reviewed include, but are not limited to, those of Oakland,
Preston Park, Fallon Park, and Garden City, all of which
had the key components of a comprehensive plan. Several
schools need to use these plans as models as well as
using the Commonwealth of Virginia's comprehensive
guide to improve their plans. Effective school
improvement plans should be based on an analysis of
data and provide the road map for school leaders to
improve the delivery of services to students. RCPS should
revise the school improvement template to reflect best
practices and to be more user-friendly for school staff
(Chapter 5, Recommendation 5-5).
· RCPS does not have a strategic plan for special education
services. Strong administrative leadership and strategic
planning are characteristiC' of effective special education
programs. Strong leadership in general and special
education is characteristic of the effenive delivery of
special education services. Given the legislative
requirements of NCLB and the reauthorization of IDEA,
students with disabilities must be provided access to the
general education curriculum. The instruction of students
with disabilities who are seeking a standard diploma is
equally the responsibility of general education. RCPS is
lacking this clear and consistent mission and strategic
planning document for the delivery of special education
services in conjunction with general education; therefore,
the division should develop an annual special education
strategic plan including a mission, vision, goals,
objectives, activities, evaluation, and a scope and
sequence timeline of training and education support
activities for its schools (Chapter 5, Recommendation 5-
9).
· General education and special education teachers do not
have adequate time to plan for co-teaching at the
elementary level. RCPS should review the schools'
schedules to determine the effective use of instructional
delivery time and provide options for school staff that will
permit common planning time for teachers. Effective
instruction of students with disabilities can occur when
general education and special education teachers work
41
42
together in a collaborative process. This is evidenced by
adequate time in teachers' schedules to plan together,
share information, and evaluate their instruction. In the
full report, MGT provides examples of how other sc:hool
divisions have addressed the issue of not having common
planning time. RCPS should develop strategies to allow
common time for special education and general education
teachers to allow appropriate consultation and
collaborative planning for their students, including those
with disabilities (Chapter 5, Recommendation 5-11).
. RCPS does not have an explicit and systematic language
and literacy framework for kindergarten through second
grade. Explicit refers to the important skills and types of
knowledge that are taught directly by the teacher;
students are not expected to infer key skills and
knowledge only from exposure or incidental learning
opportunities. Systematic refers to a planned and logical
sequence of instruction. Without an explicit and
systematic reading program in the early grades, students'
diverse learning needs will continue to fall further behind
in reading. Students with diverse learning needs have
difficulty learning to read only from exposure or
incidental learning opportunities; they need explicit and
systematic instruction. Without, explicit and systematic
instruction, closing the achievement gap for students with
diverse learning needs will not occur. RCPS should
implement an explicit and systematic reading program
plan in kindergarten through grade 3 (Chapter 5,
Recommendation 5-20).
. Each of the magnet schools has a specific focus on an
academic theme. Examples include visual arts, performing
arts, science, and technology. The majority of magnet
programs do not demonstrate visibility of the magnet
theme, nor are they in alignment with the Virginia SOLs.
The federal funding for magnet programs was
discontinued in 2002. RCPS does not have a funding
source to continue the level of support for the magnet
programs as it once did. As a result, the majority of
magnet programs have declined in quality and no longer
meet one of the original objectives of providing enriching
alternative programs. RCPS must revisit the purpose and
commitment to magnet programs. With the implications
of NCLB, it is imperative that all schools in RCPS align
curriculum and instruction with the Virginia SOLs. RCPS
also may find that ineffective magnet programs need to
be discontinued or changed in focus (Chapter 5,
Recommendation 5-22).
PERSONNEL AND ~UMAN RESOURCES
· The Department of ~uman Resources (~R) does not have
a receptionist to greet visitors or take incoming calls.
Currently, staff members in the department take turns
managing the receptionist desk, taking calls, and greeting
visitors to the office. When MGT did a comparison of staff
in the ~R Department of RCPS to staff in ~R departments
in the five peer divisions chosen by RCPS, we found that
RCPS has the fewest staff members of all the ~R
departments with the exception of Charlottesville City
Schools. Like ~R, the administrative building is in need of
a receptionist. Visitors enter the building near the ~R
offices, but no one is on duty to greet or sign in visitors.
The lack of such a security measure is unsafe and puts
personnel assigned to the administrative building at risk.
RCPS should hire a receptionist to answer general
information calls to the administrative building and
~uman Resources office and to greet and sign in visitors
to the building (Chapter 6, Recommendation 6-1).
· The Human Resources Department does not have a
process in place to survey school division employees to
evaluate the nature and quality of its services as well as
the overall job satisfaction of employees. No feedback
system is in place to assess the quality of services to
employees. Without such input from employees, the
department does not receive feedback on ways in which
services could be improved. Nor does the department or
division executive staff receive valuable feedback from
employees and teachers in particular to provide insight
into teacher retention and to determine teacher
satisfaction with efforts to reduce the high teacher
turnover rates (around eight percent) witnessed by RCPS.
MGT recommends that the division develop and
implement a customer feedback system to assist the
department in evaluating the nature and quality of its
services and the satisfaction level of RCPS employees
(Chapter 6, Recommendation 6-3).
· RCPS does not have an effective position control system,
and the procedures the division does have are not
accomplished automatically by electronic means. ~uman
Resources miscalculated the number of staffing positions
in 2004-05 and over-hired 21 teachers for 2005-06. Such
miscalculations have a negative financial impact on the
division. The new Executive Director who came aboard to
43
44
head the ~R Department in December of 2004 worked
with principals (mostly secondary) to make position cuts.
Finally, attrition cut most of these additional positions.
RCPS should implement a position control system
(Chapter 6, Recommendation 6-7).
· RCPS lacks an automated application process. While
applicants for professional and classified positions can
access application forms on-line, a hard copy application
must be submitted to the ~uman Resources Department.
The process is inefficient and should be streamlined. The
division should research and implement an on-line
automated application system (Chapter 6,
Recommendation 6-8).
· A high number of RCPS teachers are absent each school
year. Staff absences increased by 20 percent from 2002-
03 to 2004-05. The reason classroom teachers are "absent
from duty" is not tracked. Enormous effort and cost are
expended for finding substitutes to fill positions when a
teacher is absent from duty. To help reduce absences,
RCPS offers $100.00 to every employee who has perfect
attendance. RCPS substitute teachers are paid $80.00 a
day or $120.00 a day if on assignment for more than 20
consecutive school days. Substitute teachers must hold a
minimum of a two-year degree with a four-year degree
preferred. RCPS should track and determine the reasons
for the high absentee rate and develop strategies for
reducing absenteeism (Chapter 6, Recommendation 6-
11).
· RCPS has no comprehensive divisionwide staff
development master plan to guide it in its efforts to
deliver staff development to all employees. The staff
development program now in place is fragmented and
pieced together from many different school units.
Currently, staff development for professional staff is
provided through the Department of Instruction by
instructional coordinators. A myriad of courses and events
are offered throughout the year. School divisions that
have a master staff development plan to clarify their
mission, set goals, coordinate and evaluate efforts, set
timelines, and designate staff to carry out their goals are
those that deliver the most highly effective staff
development to their staff. That kind of master plan is
missing in RCPS, and leaders should develop a
comprehensive divisionwide Staff Development Master
Plan that links the division's priorities with the
opportunities provided in staff development (Chapter 6,
Recommendation 6-13).
FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
· Documentation of policies and procedures for many
processes and activities conducted in sections of the
Fiscal Services Department is not comprehensive. In
interviews, Fiscal Services staff indicated that most
functions were performed with very limited, if any, written
procedures. Most staff learned their duties from another
department employee. There does appear to be more
documentation regarding budget preparation and payroll
than other areas. The review team did find limited written
procedures for some activities. The lack of complete
documentation will put the department at risk in the event
of loss of key personnel due to retirement, extended sick
leave, or other events that may substantially impair
employees' abilities complete all the duties required to
maintain accounting, payroll, and budgeting activities.
RCPS should create, adopt, and implement a formal,
complete financial policies and procedures manual that
can be used to train new employees, cross-train current
employees, and provide guidelines and checklists to help
ensure all work is performed as required (Chapter 7,
Recommendation 7-1).
· The current accounting information system is not meeting
the division's or School Board's needs. The financial
information system, including accounting and purchasing
functions, is maintained in a mainframe-based accounting
system that was supposed to have been replaced by a
new, browser-based accounting system. The existing
system is still in place due the postponement of the
deployment of the new system. Numerous primary,
secondary, tracking, balancing, and backup documents
are maintained on spreadsheets or other off-line tools
rather than being supported by a fully integrated financial
system. RCPS should complete the installation of the new
accounting system as soon as possible (Chapter 7,
Recommendation 7-6).
· The site-based budgeting portion of the budget process
may not be operating as envisioned. There appears to be
a communications lapse between the time the requested
budget for the activity fund allocation is submitted and
the final funding is determined. In fact, the notice
received at the beginning of the school year indicated
some amounts had changed significantly from what was
requested in the allocation, and that one line item,
"Technology," was still not determined. This creates
significant planning issues for site-based budget
45
46
managers. With more timely notifications of changes, they
could change their spending plans based on their
priorities. When changes are so late, funds may have
already been spent on items with a lower priority.
Concerns about guidelines and insufficient training were
also noted. Although the Fiscal Services Department offers
to assist managers with budget preparation, it is believed
that a workshop would be more useful, especially for new
principals and bookkeepers. RCPS should improve the
communication of budget information with school
principals and enhance training opportunities for site-
based budget managers (Chapter 7, Recommendation 7-
8).
. The RCPS payroll functions are lacking in important
internal controls. The payroll system is antiquated and
requires manual steps and off-line spreadsheets. There is
no Position Control System (PCS) to help ensure only
properly authorized and budgeted positions are paid and
are paid the authorized amount. The system produces
reams of paper time sheets and lists that require manual
entries and reviews. The entire payroll process is
intensively manual and requires many hours of labor to
prepare up to four payrolls per month. MGT recommends
that the division replace the current payroll system to
include a Payroll Control System (Chapter 7,
Recommendation 7-9).
. The current organizational structure allows for the
management of grant-funded resources only. Multiple
grants and special revenue resources are uncoordinated
and therefore are not as effective as a unified effort. The
grants section needs to be adjusted to allow for
underutilized or under-realized resources to be marshaled
in support of the goals and objectives of the school
division. There has been very little growth in grant
funding in the past few years. According to department
personnel, there is a program in place to train
administrators in pursuing new grants/special revenue
sources, but no program to train grant administrators in
fiscal management. Grant/special revenue information is
maintained in the grants section, but it is not accessible
to grant administrators. The division should reorganize
the grants section to enhance the responsibility and
authority of the Grants Management team by making it a
department-level unit reporting directly to the Associate
Superintendent for Management (Chapter 7,
Recommendation 7-11).
47
PURC~ASING. WAREHOUSING. AND FIXED ASSETS
· Within approved budgetary limits, each school or
department may submit purchase requests to satisfy the
needs of the school division. The Board allows individual
schools to purchase and pay for items related to
educational needs through school activity funds. If the
purchase exceeds $1,000.00 or comes out of the A or B
account, the purchase order must be routed through the
Purchasing Department. Schools use a different financial
system for their purchases called the MANATEE System.
This is a legacy system that has been around since the
1980s. Purchases for less than $2,500.00 are processed·
at the schools through MANATEE. The departments and
schools are responsible for obtaining their own quotes if
the purchase is less than $25,000.00. To improve in
effiCiency and effectiveness, RCPS should automate the
purchase requisition/order process (Chapter 8,
Recommendation 8-1).
· The division's Procurement Manual, December 17, 2002,
is document that was developed to guide the Purchasing
Department and its customers in delivering and using
procurement services. This document is available only to
Purchasing staff and has not been updated since August
2003. Administrators and principals have an Operations
Manual that contains purchasing procedures. Based on an
analytical review of this document, a review of Board
policies, and various analyses of processes and
procedures, MGT found that revisions are needed to
reflect current policy and procedures, organizational and
reporting structures, and operations; enhance
communications; and improve the effectiveness and
effiCiency of the Purchasing Department. RCPS should
revise the Procurement Manual to reflect current policies
and procedures and make them available on-line (Chapter
8, Recommendation 8-4).
· Cooperative purchasing, according to the RCPS
Procurement Manual, "n. may be defined as joint
purchasing of common or similar commodities and
services by two or more jurisdictions." RCPS benefits from
collaborative purchasing efforts with the City of Roanoke
and other governmental units. The Director of Purchasing
regularly monitors external contracts for competitive
pricing advantageous to the school division. Purchasing
staff participates in local purchasing cooperatives in an
effort to identify best purchasing opportunities. Such
associations provide for more efficient bidding in terms of
48
operational savings as well as savings due to better
pricing. Purchasing staff regularly "piggyback" on bids of
other governmental units instead of developing entirely
new bids for items currently on valid bids. The
"piggyback" process reduces the amount of time spent on
the solicitation process. An example of a "piggyback"
process can be found in the use of the City's Purchasing
Card Program, and the City's contract to purchase canned
and frozen food. The results of this effort are substantial
savings of administrative time and expense. RCPS should
conduct an analysis during the 2006-07 school year to
determine if the RCPS and City of Roanoke Purchasing
Departments should be combined (Chapter 8,
Recommendation 8-6).
. The warehouse uses an informal, sometimes paper-based
work order system. Normally, when the Warehouse
Supervisor receives calls for pickups and deliveries from
schools and departments, notes are made and sometimes
turned into work orders for the Trades Workers. This
work order process is inefficient and makes record
keeping and reporting difficult. An automated work order
system would keep work load statistics (e.g., type and
number of deliveries, pickups accomplished on a monthly,
yearly basis) and make record keeping and reporting more
efficient. MGT recommends that RCPS automate the work
order process (Chapter 8, Recommendation 8-14).
ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
. Involving stakeholders in decisions about technology use
is vitally important, and the planned committee will
certainly do that. ~owever, the creation of a committee
that exceeds 25 members will prove to be problematic. It
is difficult enough to gather a group of 1 5 busy people for
a meeting, much less 25. Moreover, if most members
attend, chances are good that meetings will last longer
than desired, and that some members of this large group
may not be willing or able to interject their comments or
questions about topics under discussion. A smaller group
would be more productive and spend less time on
committee functions. Additionally, the committee should
be composed primarily of users of technology, not
members of the technology staff. Clearly the technology
staff must playa key role in the actions and deliberations
of the committee; however, when it comes to voting, it
would be best if the voting members were educators and
administrators within the school division, not technology
staff members. RCPS should create a smaller, more
educator-oriented Technology Advisory Committee that
will allow for more productive meetings while still being
representative of key stakeholders (Chapter 9,
Recommendation 9-1).
· The Office of Technology currently reports to the
Associate Superintendent for Management but until
recently reported to the Associate Superintendent for
Instruction. In fact, neither place is a good fit for the
Office of Technology. Frequently, when a technology
office reports to an administrator such as the head of
management or business services, the area to which the
office reports gets higher priority than do other
administrative offices. Usually that is not intentional, but,
because there is a tendency to look after one's boss first,
frequently the work of other offices is allocated a lower
priority. MGT believes the division should move the Office
of Technology and Information Services into the new
Office of Planning, Accountability, Technology, and
Communication to improve the delivery of technology
services (Chapter 9, Recommendation 9-2).
· As of the date of MGT's on-site visit to Roanoke City
Public Schools, there were approximately 6,320
computers in use in the division. There are no standards
or guidelines that RCPS staff must follow in purchasing
computers. The result is that schools decide for
themselves the hardware that they should purchase.
Some problems that may occur when there are no
standards include: equipment may not conform to the
technology implementation plan under which the school
and/or school system is operating; multiple brands of
equipment add complexity to the technical support
function, thereby making an already difficult task more
challenging; computers may not adhere to minimum
power and speed standards, meaning they will become
obsolete much more rapidly; and new equipment may
introduce compatibility problems. The division should
establish computer acquisition standards to ensure that
Roanoke City Public Schools will acquire only state-of-the-
art computers, thereby maximizing the useful life of new
equipment (Chapter 9, Recommendation 9-7).
49
50
. An approach to professional development that is
becoming very popular today is on-line or Web-based
training. Teachers with computers at home, or with
computers they check out from school for home use, sign
on to the Internet to take courses. Because the courses
are on-line, teachers can access the material whenever it
is convenient for them, whether that is on a Sunday
afternoon, or at 1 :00 in the morning. If teachers are
already comfortable with the technology, this is a low-
cost, high-impact approach to professional development.
One objective of the Office of Technology and Information
Services should be to expand upon the number of
teachers taking courses on-line. Another good function of
the Technology Committee would be to work with the
Office of Technology to identify Web-based courses that
are good fits for the division. RCPS should review all of
the options for offering additional Web-based professional
development and strongly encourage teachers to take
advantage of these opportunities (Chapter 9,
Recommendation 9-10).
. A strategy that some school divisions have found to be
successful in improving technical support without
increasing costs is to draw upon the expertise ofa
resource available in every division, but not often tapped:
the students. A growing number of divisions have found
that one way to enhance technical support is to
implement a program similar to those in place in a
number of secondary schools around the country where
students actually provide technical support services to
teachers and students in their school. This has been done
effectively in middle/junior high schools and in high
schools. Frequently these student technical support units
operate as a club, although participating students usually
have one class period that is dedicated to installing
equipment, installing software upgrades, working on
equipment failures. Of course, such a program requires a
teacher who is sufficiently proficient in using technology
to guide the efforts of those students, but it has proven to
be an excellent way to augment technical support. RCPS
should implement a program that involves students as
providers of technical support for their schools (Chapter
9, Recommendation 9-12).
. The Virginia State Superintendent of Public Instruction
informed superintendents in January of 2005 that the
General Assembly had appropriated funds that could be
used by school divisions to improve the integration of
technology into the curriculum. While RCPS has done an
51
excellent job of providing instructional support for
teachers in the classroom, the division has not done so
well with respect to providing technical support to the
classroom. Although the Commonwealth provided enough
funds to the division to hire one technician for every
1,000 students (the same number of technicians as
instructional technology specialists-11), the division
opted to hire only four technicians. Since there were
already four technicians on staff, that brought the total
number of technicians to eight. The division needs to take
action to address these support problems and reallocate
the funds from the state to support three more
technicians (Chapter 9, Recommendation 9-15).
Recommended Reoort Follow-Uo
MGT recommends the division convene a Task Force and conduct
quarterly meetings so that report updates and discussions will be
meaningful and demonstrate significant implementation
accomplishments by area.
For the administration, the first step in a successful
implementation process is the assignment of one staff member to
oversee. the implementation process and report progress to the
Board. This person should possess good organizational skills and
have the ability to work well with individuals from all areas of the
school division.
Next, each recommendation in the report should be assigned to an
individual in the school division. Assigning someone to the
recommendation does not commit the division to implement that
recommendation. Rather, it makes one individual responsible for
researching the issue further, and reporting to the administration
and the Board as to whether the recommendation is practical,
feasible, or implementable as written; whether the costs or savings
promised by the recommendation are realistic; and whether there
are alternative implementation strategies that will achieve the same
goals in a more palatable manner.
Assigning an individual does not mean that the individual must do
everything it takes to implement the recommendation. Rather, it
means that the individual will oversee the efforts of everyone
involved in the implementation process, report progress back to
the implementation project manager, and assist with presentations
to the Board on items requiring Board approval.
52
In those situations where recommendations cross divisional
boundaries, it is even more critical to assign the task to someone
with the authority to cross those boundaries in order to thoroughly
research and implement the recommendation.
The division may wish to consider the formation of teams to
address functional areas, such as personnel, curriculum, and the
like. Team meetings may provide support to implementation team
members. A team can generate a level of excitement and an
environment for creative thinking, which leads to even more
innovative solutions.
Once the recommendations have been assigned to individuals, a
method to monitor and follow up needs to be established by the
Board and Superintendent.
This methodology should, at a minimum, contain the following
elements:
· periodic (weekly, monthly) checkpoints or meetings of
implementation team members to discuss progress;
· decision points where the Superintendent and the Board
give additional guidance or direction to individual team
members;
· monthly reports to the Board concerning findings and
progress;
· quarterly meetings of the Board;
· a system for tracking the savings and benefits derived
from implementation; and
· regular, open two-way communication with the public and
the media. Public recognition for successful
implementation efforts may very well be one of the best
ways to ensure continual progress.
Additional mechanical processes that might help the
implementation process would include a PC-based tracking system
for recommendations and a filing cabinet in which to retain all
documentation provided by implementation team members,
records of School Board decisions, and other information for each
recommendation.
Finally, the Board must receive timely action, reports, and
information, and it must be prepared to act swiftly when presented
with difficult decisions. Indecision on the part of the Board will lead
to inaction on the part of the implementation team. If, after the
team has researched an issue and brought options to the Board for
53
consideration, the Board fails to act, the Board will find fewer and
fewer items being brought forward. If, however, the administration
clearly does not want to implement a recommendation, its reasons
should be clearly stated and documented.
Fiscal Impact of Recommendations
Based on the analyses of data obtained from interviews, surveys,
community input, state and division documents, and first-hand
observations in Roanoke City Public Schools, the MGT team
developed over 115 recommendations in this report. Twenty-three
(23) recommendations have fiscal implications. It is important to
keep in mind that the identified cost savings are incremental
and cumulative. It is equally important to recognize that
savings should be redirected to meet student needs.
As shown below in Exhibit 4, full implementation of the
recommendations in this report would generate a gross savings of
over $12 million over five years (total savings plus one-time
savings) with a net savings of approximately $11.3 million. It is
important to note that costs and savings presented in this report
do not reflect increases due to salary or inflation adjustments.
Exhibit 4 shows the total costs and savings for all
recommendations.
EXHIBIT 4
SUrlltARY OF tEl SAVINGS
ctIi.lIIE(COS'TS) OR SAYIHQS
OTAl AVE- YW NET SAVI_INClUDlNG ONE-lIIE (COSTS) SAVINGS
$11.311..
54
Exhibit 5 provides a chapter-by-chapter summary for all costs and
savings.
It is important to keep in mind that only recommendations with
fiscal impacts are identified in this chapter. Many additional
recommendations to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the
school division are contained in Chapters 4 through 9.
Justifications, implementation strategies or suggestions as
appropriate and fiscal impacts follow each recommendation in this
report. The justification/implementation section associated with
each recommendation identifies specific actions to be taken. Some
recommendations should be implemented immediately, some over
the next year or two, and others over several years.
MGT recommends that the Roanoke City Public School Division give
each of these recommendations its most serious consideration,
their develop a plan to proceed with their implementation and a
system to monitor subsequent progress.
EXHIBIT .
CHAP1Eß.IIY-CHAPlER SUMMIIY OF COSJSICOST AN) SAVIIIGS
$0
$0
7.!i
M -...
¡.,; PrwldoFundll1llofP I
_.l¡>.7-15)
7-6 CcnaJct. CcImpono- tnd a.. 8llct¡o ~ AIClIi
_~(p.7-18)
7-2!J _EROP ,
CllJ,PfEA 7 SUBTOTAL ICOSTSlISAYlNCS
10,000
S90 000
lSi
'1M
lSl,ooo
,
1'10,OOO¡
,.
'0
l$*l.QOll)
so
AD
Si....
'0
$720 000
SBl,OlD
so so 1l6.(OO)
"'5,01D .1_ 1"'0001
55
EXHIBIT 5 (Continued)
CHAPTER-BY-CHAPTER SUMMARY OF COSTS/COST AND SAVINGS
ANNUAltCOSTS) OR·SAVINGSlREveNUE TOTAL
FIVE ONE·
YEAR TIME
(COSTS) (COSTS)
OR OR
CHAPTER REFERENCE '.....7 2007'" 2OO8-Ofl .......'0 2010.11 SAVtNGS SAYINGS
CHAPTER 8: PURCHASING, WAREHOUSING AND FIXED ASSETS
a·. Update the Equipment and Sottware lor the Bid Fax SO SO SO SO SO $0 ($5,000)
Servlce (p. 8-21)
8-14 ObIain and Implement an Automated Texlboo'l SO SO SO SO SO SO ($5,OOO)
Managemenl System (p.8-28)
8-15 Oblàln and Implement an ALIklmaled Work Order Syslem SO SO SO SO SO SO ($3,000)
lor lhe W.rehouse (p.8-29)
8-18 Eliminate the E " Clerk P06illon· (D. 8~34 $14,490 528,980 $28,980 528,980 S28,9BO $130,410
CHAPTER 8 SUBTOTAL COSTS AVlNGS $1',490 128,980 $28,980 121,980 $28,880 $130"10 ($13,000)
CHAPTER II: ADMINISTRATIVE AND INSTRUCTIONAL TECHNOLOGY
... Acauire Modem NelWork Monitor! Tools .9·21 $39,5(0) ...suo ($4,500 $4,500) $4,500 1$57,500)
8-11 Implement Personal Professional Developmenl Plans ($31,000) ($31,0(10) ($31,000) ($31'<lOO) ($31,000) (5155,000)
In:a_as\
9-16 Purchase He DeskSu Software .9-47 SO SO SO SO SO SO $20,000
CHAPTER 9 SUBTOTAL COSTS ...vtNGS 1$70,500) ($35,SOO) 1$35,500) ($35500) 1$35500) ($212,500 1120,0(0)
TOTAL SAVINGS $1 997541 $2 252 039 $2 412 031 $ 732 039 $2 172 031 $12445705
TOTAL COSTS $274505 190305 $191305 $192 305 194305 $10"12725
TOTAL NET SAvtNGSI(COST) $1723 S2061734 $2 300 734 $2~g 734 7T1 734 $11402 Ø80 ($91,000)
TOTAL FIVE·YEAR NET SAVINGS INCLUDING ONE~TIME SAVIN COSTS $11,311,980
Discussion:
Council Member Dowe asked the following questions:
~ow many positions are proposed to be eliminated? Will there be a
phasing out process or immediate elimination.
Dr. Archibald responded that MGT reviewed the positions by
sections within the school system; and an overall recommendation
on the Executive Leadership of each school department was
prepared and how it should be changed and thereafter included in
the implementation strategy with a timeline. ~e stated that he
could not recall the impact in terms of the total number of
positions proposed to be eliminated since a number· of other
persons participated in the audit, and he would respond to the
question after conferring with other individuals who were involved
in the study.
Dr. Cox also responded that the recommendation for elimination of
positions was in the range of 43 - 45 within curriculum instruction.
Council Member Dowe inquired about enrollment participation in
the William Fleming ~igh School Aviation Program and, in view of
the September 11, 2001 terrorist attack, what securities are in
place to ensure checks and balances to identify the types of
students who are enrolled in the Program.
56
Dr. Cox responded that the school system spends approximately
$40,000.00 per airplane for maintenance; no historical data was
available to determine the maximum number of students who have
participated in the Program; and currently seven students
participate, with two students utilizing air time. She stated that
given test scores of the school system, this is an exorbitant sum of
money to be spent on a program and funds could be redirected to
other programs.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the recommendation to
eliminate the performance audit provision which was included in a
Council ordinance adopted on September 17, 2001.
Dr. Archibald responded that laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia
address the issue inasmuch as there is a resent requirement in
Virginia that audits be conducted. Therefore, he stated that the
options are to conduct an external or internal audit, or a full
compendium of an internal audit, which is the route that the City
has chosen. ~e added that it is common practice nationally for
School Boards to conduct internal audits.
Council Member Cutler requested a clarification of the definition of
audit; whereupon, Dr. Archibald explained that in the context of
school education, a performance audit would include student
performance, and a variety of areas in the school system to
determine how well the school is performing overall. ~e stated
that an internal audit would include such issues as principle funds
found within elementary, middle schools, and high schools,
athletics, operations, transportation, food service, warehousing,
purchasing, internal controls in financial services, human resources
issues, risk management portfolio, etc.
Council Member Cutler inquired about combining the City and
School Purchasing Department and who should take the lead in
such an initiative; whereupon, Dr. Archibald stated that MGT was
employed by the school system and would submit its
recommendations to the School Board and the School
administration, which places the burden of initiating discussion in
the hands of the School Board; and inasmuch as the City of
Roanoke is the fiscal agent, the City would have a significant
interest and would make a determination as to whether or not it is
in the City's best interest to combine the two departments.
57
Council Member Cutler asked if information is available from other
school systems that have combined various functions; whereupon,
Dr. Archibald advised that other localities have combined vehicle
maintenance, purchasing, facility maintenance, risk management,
etc.
Council Member Wishneff asked the following questions:
Does the City of Roanoke have the necessary organizational and
financial resources to recruit and retain teachers?
Dr. Cox responded that Roanoke's school system is doing an
excellent job of recruiting, particularly minority recruiting to
balance the teacher/student ratio with the teacher ratio of
minorities; MGT has recommended initiation of an awards program
to recognize school employees; and it is believed that the school
system is doing an excellent job of maintaining teachers, but an
incentive program is needed for the future.
Council Member Wishneff expressed concern with regard to the
Magnet School program, and advised that the original goals were
admirable, but some where along the way, the focus has been lost
insofar as teaching the children.
Council Member McDaniel inquired if the Magnet School programs
have been successful in other school systems; whereupon, Dr. Cox
advised that the program is more prevalent in the Roanoke City
School System, it was found that the some of the programs are not
in alignment with the Standards of Learning, Federal funds have
been exhausted, and the program is currently supported by local
funds. She added that similar school systems with the same
dilemma are now refocusing and are in alignment with the
Standards of Learning; and Roanoke City Public Schools lack data to
support Magnet School successes.
Ms. McDaniel inquired as to how information with regard to the
elimination of 44 positions be handled?
The Superintendent responded that the school system will not
react, but will review the findings of MGT to determine the best
practices. ~e stated that findings are the key component, not
necessarily as much as the recommendations; and
recommendations will serve as guiding points, following which the
school administration will engage employees in an exercise to
identify some of the data that needs to be used to help the school
system move forward. ~e advised that the school system must
develop policy on what it is accountable to, looking long term, and
58
strategically planning the capacity of the organization both
financially and personnel wise to meet strategic plans. ~e stated
that since school achievement is the number one threat to the
school system, all decisions within the next two years will focus on
the issue.
The Mayor expressed appreciation to Dr. Cox and to Dr. Archibald for
their presentations and commended the Superintendent of Schools for initiating
the audit study.
With regard to the recommendation to combine School and City
functions, Mayor ~arris suggested that the Superintendent of Schools and the
City Manager and their executive staffs study the proposed recommendations,
and that their findings be discussed during the upcoming months as a part of
the monthly meetings of the Mayor, School Board Chair, Superintendent of
Schools and City Manager.
There being no further business, at 10:40 a.m., the Chair declared the
meeting of the School Board adjourned.
At 10:40 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess.
The Council meeting reconvened at 10:50 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, with Mayor ~arris presiding and all Members of the
Ceuncil in attendance.
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson ~arris
requesting that Council convene in Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on
certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council,
pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(l), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before
the body.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
~ a rri s ------- noon _nn_ _nnnn n n__nn nnnn__n_nn noon __nn__n____ - noon noon __nn nnn_n__n - 5 .
NAYS: Non e nn__nn -- n_nn_ _nn_ _n____n__nn__ _____n_nn_____n_n_n_n__n_ noon _no_nO .
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the
vote was recorded.)
59
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., Chair, City Council Personnel Committee, requesting that Council
convene in Closed Meeting to discuss the mid-year performance of two Council-
Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(l), Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended, was before the body.
Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request to
convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by
Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H arri s nn_n_nn___n_nnn_____n_n_n___n n_nn__ _n_n__nn__nn ____nn_nnn__nn__n____ _n_n__n 5 .
NAYS: Non e _n_nn__ _nn_ nnn__nnn__ ____nnn______n_nnn_nn_nn____nnnn_ ----nn-O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the
vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in Closed Meeting to discuss the disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request to
convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by
Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
~ arri s _____n__nn__nnn nnn_ __nn__nn__ ___nnn_n____n_n__n_n_nn_nn__ __00__00__ __nn__n_n___ 5 .
NAYS: Non e _00_ _n__nn_n___n__nnnn_ __n_n_n____nnnn____nn_nn_ __n__nnn ____ nn-O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were not present when the
vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in Closed Meeting to discuss expansion of an existing
business where no previous announcement has been made of the business'
interest in expanding its facilities in the community, pursuant to Section 2.2-
3711 (A)(s), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request to
convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by
Council Member Lea and adopted by the follOWing vote:
60
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and
Mayo r ~ a rri S_n_n_n_____n__nnn_nn__nnnn______nn_nn___ un__ _nn_n__n___n__nnnn____ nn6.
NAYS: Non e 00__ _n_n__ __nn__ nnn__n__nn_ nnn ____nnnnn __nn _nn__nnnn_n_nnn_O.
(Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.)
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY T~EMAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
ITEMS LISTED ON T~E 2:00 P. M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING
DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO T~E 2:00 P. M.,
AGENDA: NONE.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AT A MEETING OF T~E ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL,
T~E ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND T~E WESTERN VIRGINIA
WATER AUT~ORITY ON MONDAY, MARC~ 6, 2006, AT 12:00 P.M.:
The Mayor requested that Council Members provide items for discussion
to the City Clerk.
BRIDGES: Phillip C. Schirmer, City Engineer, advised that the 1978
Surface Transportation Act enacted by Congress requires that all in-service
bridge structures be included in an Annual Bridge Inspection Program;
whereupon, he reviewed the follOWing power point presentation:
City of Roanoke Bridaes and Structures
· 95 Bridges and Structures are required to be inspected
· 27 are inspected annually
· 68 are inspected bi-annually.
· Annual cost for inspections is $150,000.00
Total Replacement Cost (2001)
$169,475,000.00
The City of Roanoke has every type of bridge from large concrete and
steel structures that cross rivers and railroad tracks to small
neighborhood bridges over streams.
Bridae Insoection Reoorts
· Rate the condition of each structural element
· Identify and document any needed repairs
· Identify needed maintenance items
· Cost estimates for repairs and maintenance
61
Bridae Insoection Summary Reoort
23-Jan-06
Summary
Brid~es Scheduled for General Maintenance
~IJ!EET RT
_J!~'ER UNDER
GEN MAT SH COST EST
1&16
W.lmu A_ (116) RDanoke 1m...
5/112006
$6.000
&044
WmsideBlvd Peœnc-k
5/112006
$&,500
OJ-F.b4)6
Summary
Bridges Scheduled for Major Repairs
BRIDGE_NO
1822
1817
STREET_RT
·:.Mài~~~q2il) .
OVER_UNDER MALREP ...$H COST_EST
..'...... -- -..... ,'-,.. "-""';'<'
Roahob{~¡'~;.ðiN$:R~· 2J112OQ6 ': $'91'3.000
Fnmkljn Road (220)
NS Railway
8054
Wise Avenue
Tinker Creek
;;~~j~ajl""'af::'
31112006 $195.000
41J12006$7iS,OOO
5/112006 $205.000
$53.000
121112006 $276,000
l2IiliOÖ6 $228.000
. ·:l'~li.:'>·'-~';· :'¥~'I'r14t':Â~n~_(16) ··~Ù;~il~Y:.- '
.,........,.-:..;,...,.... -",-':"'-"':'
", -'j;¡~.S.reet- :.-
1850
Melrose Avenue
P.eten; Creek
C··'i
8012
" >...-:,-,...,;.,....;.-.,..,-.:,.....
'OL:lMIn.Road(60s) ',Tin-Creek
· Current Repair and Maintenance
o Maintenance and Repair
. Repairs
o Total Major Repairs
. Repairs
· Bridge Replacement
· Totals
$ 812,000.00
<$ 50,000.00
$7,314,500.00
>$ 50,000.00
$ 490.000.00
$8.616.500.00
· Equivalent to 5% of Replacement Value
Fundina for Maior Reoairs
· 1996 Bonds - $5,246,000.00
o Completed Projects:
· Jefferson Street over Railroad
· 9th Street over Roanoke River
· Main Street over Roanoke River
62
· Williamson Road over Railroad
· Cove Road over Peters Creek
· Peach Tree over Peters Creek
Fundino for Maior Reoairs
· 1999 Bonds - $2,800,000.00
o Completed Projects:
· Brambleton Avenue over Murray Run
· Broadway Street over Ore Branch
· Memorial Avenue over Roanoke River
· Walnut Avenue over Railroad
o Advertised for bids:
· Martin Luther King Jr. Memorial Bridge
Maintenance Resources
· No dedicated maintenance or repair staff
· Transportation Division $ 10,000.00
· Annual General Fund $150,000.00
· Equivalent to 28% of annual needs
Immediate Needs
· Wasena Bridge - Sidewalk and joint repairs - estimated cost
$425,000.00
. Franklin Road Bridge over Railroad Sidewalk repairs
estimated cost $350,000.00
63
· Walnut Avenue over Railroad Superstructure and substructure
concrete repairs - estimated cost $735,000.00
Prosoect Road Bridae
· Closed to traffic
· Major deck and abutment repairs are needed to return to service
· Estimated Cost - $172,000.00
Recommendations:
· Provide Capital Project Funding to complete major renovation
and repairs over five years; approximately $1,500,000.00
annually
· Increase Annual Maintenance funding to approximately
$500,000.00
· Create a dedicated staffing resource for minor bridge
maintenance
Council Member Cutler inquired about the relationship between the City,
the Virginia Department of Transportation and Norfolk Southern Corporation
with regard to City bridges; whereupon, the City Engineer advised that VDOT
and Norfolk Southern Corporation are responsible for inspections of bridges
that they own; and if a bridge covers a City public street right-of-way,
maintenance thereof is the City's responsibility.
64
Council Member Cutler inquired if the City participates in a Federal bridge
repair assistance program; whereupon, the City Engineer advised that additional
funds are generated at the Federal level which may be passed down to the City
from the State, but he could not speculate on the amount of funds or the
timeframe.
With regard to stormwater management, Council Member Cutler inquired
if any capital construction budget needs are paired together; whereupon, the
City Engineer responded that the City's infrastructure needs are extensive, such
as streets, buildings, bridges, storm drains, etc., and bridges are one of the
components to maintain infrastructure.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick inquired if the City of Roanoke is responsible for
inspecting the bridge over the railroad tracks by Carilion Roanoke Memorial
~ospital; whereupon, the City Engineer advised that bridge maintenance and
inspection is handled by the Norfolk Southern Corporation.
Council Member Lea inquired about current maintenance costs;
whereupon, the City Engineer advised that annual maintenance costs are
approximately $160,000.00. The City Manager added that for several years,
the City has tried to increase funds in its annual operating budget for recurring
expenditures due to lack of maintenance, and, on an annual basis, funds have
accumulated for repairs and maintenance of all City public buildings which also
have similar problems. In addition, she stated that the City has endeavored to
set aside funds to pave 57 lane miles of streets and to increase funds in the
operating budget for technology and fleet replacement. She further stated that
now that the City has been able to generate a higher dollar amount on an
annual basis, larger items, such as bridges, have received major repairs that
were previously discussed through the use of bond funds.
On behalf of the Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation for an
informative briefing on the City's Bridge Inspection Program.
At 11: 10 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for three
Closed Sessions, as previously approved by the Council.
At 12:00 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia,
for a joint meeting of Council and the Architectural Review Board, with Mayor
C. Nelson ~arris and Chair Lora J. Katz presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.,
Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor C. Nelson ~arris----------n_------n---------------n-------------7.
Ab sent: Non e-n- ____n_nn__u_nn__n___nn_n_un __nn__nn__nn____nn_ nnn __nn__nO.
65
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
Architectural Review Board members present: Alison S. Blanton,
Barbara A. Botkin, Donald C. ~arwood, Robert N. Richert, James A. Schlueter,
Jon J. Stephenson, and Lora j. Katz, Chair-----------------------------------------------n------7.
A BS ENT: Non e ----- n______ _n_nn _____nn_____n_ n_______n_ n--n-----__n_________n_____n__O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
Representing the Architectural Review Board: Robert B. Townsend, Agent;
Anne S. Beckett, Agent; Martha P. Franklin, Secretary.
Mayor ~arris recognized Lora J. Katz, Chair and Robert N. Richert,
Immediate Past Chair of the Architectural Review Board.
Chair Katz stated that the Architectural Review Board (ARB) made great
strides over the past year; there was an increase of over 30 per cent of citizens
appearing before the ARB during the past year, with only one appeal, which is
an indication that the Arçhitectural Review Board is working with citizens to
reach solutions that are affordable and will enhance the neighborhood.
The Chair presented the following Annual Report of accomplishments and
attendance for the year 2005.
· Last year, the ARB met 12 times to consider 64 requests for
Certificates of Appropriateness. Of the 64 requests, 54 were
approved, five were denied, three were withdrawn, and two were
continued. Of the five that were denied, two applicants appealed
to City Council; one appeal was withdrawn and the other is
pending. Sixteen items were located in the downtown ~-1
District, while 48 were in the residential ~-2 District. This is a 31
per cent increase in activity from 2004. In addition, staff
approved 52 Administrative Certificates of Appropriateness.
Major ARB activities during 2005:
As a Certified Local Government (CLC), with the Department of
~istoric Resources (D~R), the City of Roanoke had direct support
from the State and Federal governments with grant money for
historic preservation studies and for ARB training.
1. Worked in coordination with D~R for nomination of the
Gainsboro ~istoric District to the National Register of ~istoric
Places.
66
2. Staff and the Co-Chair received training through the National
Alliance of Preservation Commissions. These workshops
train local historic preservation commissioners and staff in
community revitalization methods.
3. Review and approve National Register nominations for the
City of Roanoke.
· Continued the annual ARB Recognition Program for
rehabilitation/design awards for City Council during National
~istoric Preservation Week. Four awards were given in May for
exemplary projects undertaken in the ~-1 and ~-2 districts.
· Continued annual spring mailings to all property owners in the
historic districts and contractors in the Roanoke Valley to
increase awareness of the historic districts. The Department of
Real Estate Valuation also sends notices to all new property
owners in the historic districts.
· Continued the Design Assistance Review Committee comprised
of two ARB members to review applications prior to Board
meetings. Two members and staff attend the monthly meetings,
and notify the applicants of preliminary recommendations.
· Continued annual in-house ARB workshops to improve the
application process and Board meetings.
The Board's current initiatives:
· Review and update the ~-2 Architectural Design Guidelines to
incorporate information on new materials that were not available
when the 1995 guidelines were written, delete out-dated
information or materials, and to comply with new zoning
restrictions from the recent adoption of zoning ordinance.
Mayor Harris called for questions or comments:
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick commended members of the Architectural Review
Board for their efforts to compile information for the City's 2006 Legislative
Program that would provide a mechanism for the City to require building
permits for certain improvements/projects in the ~istoric Districts, and
although legislation was not introduced at the General Assembly this year, it
was forwarded to the Department of ~ousing and Community Development for
review.
67
Council Member Cutler inquired as to what extent the ARB could provide
technical advice to property owners with respect to alternatives or other
measures to decrease building costs. The Chair advised that she offers her
expertise and City staff is available to assist, often on site, which sometimes
results in more appropriate property enhancements.
Council Member Cutler also inquired about the relationship between the
new Zoning Ordinance and the ARB; whereupon, it was advised that the Board
offered suggestions with regard to lighting, landscaping and parking in
unpaved areas within the ~istoric Districts.
Mayor ~arris inquired about the status of updating and creating new ARB
guidelines; whereupon, the Chair advised that the project will be completed in
2006 and it is anticipated that funding assistance will be requested; and when
the review process has been completed, workshops and public hearings will be
scheduled prior to submission of the guidelines to Council.
Council Member Cutler inquired if a Cradle to Cradle house could be
constructed in the ~istoric District; whereupon, the Chair advised that a Cradle
to Cradle house will be constructed in the Day Avenue area.
Ms, Blanton advised that the 30 per cent increase in persons appearing
before the ARB over the last year has created more work for City staff, it is
believed that an increase to staff time allocated to Architectural Review Board
matters is necessary, and follow up is important to enforce Board decisions.
Mr. ~arwood advised that some of the most difficult decisions of the ARB
involves an applicant who had been issued a stop work order at a point where
. sizable investments, have been made in certain elements of construction such
as siding, windows and roof replacement, and although great strides have been
made to educate the public during the past two years with regard to permitted
improvements in the ~istoric Districts, the Board must deny certain requests or
set an unfavorable precedent. ~e stated that the requirement of a building
permit would raise a red flag before a homeowner would need to come before
the Architectural Review Board.
Mr. Richert called attention to better quality in the construction of
significant infill houses/projects in the ~istoric District during the past year,
I.e.: two single-family homes under construction at· the end of Allison
Avenue; a proposal for new townhouses along Woods Avenue; and a larger
project on a three and one-half acre site at the end of Jeanette and King George
Avenues, with the potential for 20 new town homes to be constructed in a
fashion consistent with the ~-2 District, all of which will present a significant
increase in the City's tax base over the next few years.
68
Ms. Blanton stated that membership by the Board in the Certified Local
Government program has been beneficial and has offered financial, technical,
networking and training resources; and the City's financial support has gone a
long way in educating the public and has resulted in fewer property owners
having to appear before the ARB.
Ms. Beckett stated that the ~-2 Overlay assessment evaluation prepared
by the Director of Real Estate Valuation reflects how assessments have
increased in the ~istoric Districts.
There being no further business, at 12:40 p.m., the Chair declared the
meeting of the Architectural Review Board adjourned.
At 12:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess.
The Council meeting reconvened at 12:50 p.m., in Room 159, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor
Harris presiding.
The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke has received approval
by the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT), for the Martin Luther
King, Jr., bridge replacement/renovation project.
CITY MARKET: The City Manager introduced Tom Low, Consultant, Duany
Plater-Zyberg and Company (DPZ), for a presentation on the City Market study,
including the Market Building, Century Station Parking Garage, Market Square
and Farmer's Stalls, Streetscape Improvements and Paving.
Mr. Low stated that a charette process was used with workshops
consisting of small and large groups of persons that generated considerable
input throughout the process. ~e referred to a previous Council briefing which
addressed the beginning of the City Market through the planning work of
John Nolen in the early 20'h century, the concept of forming cohesive
neighborhoods, and that the downtown operated as a neighborhood of its own;
over time the City Market evolved and eventually eroded in the 1970's, and
through rebirth as a result of the Design '79 Plan, the Market became a
phenomenal success, all of which provided a grounding point as what should
be reviewed 25 years later.
General Recommendations:
Preservino the ~eritaoe - Recommendations were developed
through focusing on preserving the heritage as the starting point
and foundation, with the idea it is a Farmers' Market, and farmers
come first. Simple things like placing identifying plaques adjacent
to each farmer's stall or vending site, which state the farmer's story
including the regional connection, makes it more authentic and
unique to anywhere else in the world. The idea is that within the
Roanoke Valley, this has been the central place and operates as a
very compact, walkable, tight-knit destination for people from far
away.
Site Boundary and Existino Buildinos - Within a five-minute walk, a
person could encircle the entire City Market area, which is a great
scale that is not too spread out, with plenty of things to do within
the market area proper. More attention and effort must be focused
on the City Market area, the Market should be emphasized as an
urban center and the remainder of downtown will follow as fruits of
the labor of redesigning the City Market area.
Missino Buildinos and GaDs - Over time and for various reasons,
things have eroded, leaving many gaps and missing pieces, which
could potentially be filled in various ways, including new buildings,
parks, but not necessarily exposed parking lots. Drawings were
used to show missing buildings and gaps, the existing building
footprint and proposed build-out, and the proposed Master Plan
sketch. The sites exposed vacant gaps, such as surface parking
lots, which should be used for construction of new mixed-use
buildings with street level retail shops.
Shoo Front Facades - Ground floor shop front facades vary in
quality and functionality. There are ways to improve shop front
facades by considering the types of retail space to incorporate on
the ground floor, by utilizing used-to-be designs that are inviting,
and how some designs are not necessarily as inviting as they could
be from a loading-dock perspective. The consulting team
recommends creation of a façade improvement program to provide
a design kit-of-parts to existing and potential building owners and
tenants.
Parkino Count and Ground Floor S~uare Footaoe - There is
sufficient parking to meet the needs of the existing amount of
ground floor commercial space, but parking needs to be better
organized. Once this is established and reinforced as a
destination, the "park once" mentality will take over, and people
will be willing to spend time walking around the market as opposed
to the "fast food drive through mentality". Better signage and
access is needed to direct shoppers to available parking spaces.
The City Market area should be promoted as a "park once for all
your shopping" destination; and additional parking garages should
be encouraged as part of the new fill development.
69
70
Franklin Road Area - The area between the City Market study area
and Elmwood Park (Franklin Road area) does not feel like an
interesting or inviting urban place to be. The Franklin Road
corridor presents an opportunity for further review, as solutions to
problems caused by the 1960's urban redevelopment are not easy
to come by. One solution is "edge development" that will help to
make the City more urban and less suburban.
Merchandizino Plan - Laying out a merchandizing plan for the area
will help the local commercial real estate industry attract the right
tenants to the right location.
Findino More Anchors - The City Market area needs more anchors.
The Western Virginia Art Museum will be a new anchor for the
market area. Careful programming and use of the old ~eironimus
Building could become amenities and viable junior anchors. Using
a merchandizing plan to advertise and market the entire City
Market area as a shopping and tourist destination is a way to
attract more desired junior anchor and small-scale specialty shops
collectively.
Becomino a "Park Once" Destination - The City Market area will
become a "park once" destination once redevelopment starts filling
in the gaps and existing pieces of the market start to compliment
each other and visitors will realize that there is a lot to do in the
area, thus reinforcing the "park once" extended shopping over the
"drive-thru only one farmer's stall" shopping.
Kirk Alley - Kirk Alley from Jefferson Street to Market Street could
be a special intimate arts enclave, and is currently considered a
walking street and intimate shortcut. Some areas are under
utilized. Ideas include development of a mini-outdoor theatre, or
projection of films on the blank wall, or enhancing the small pocket
park at the corner of Kirk Avenue and Jefferson Street to make the
park more urban with more landscaping, expansion of Century
Plaza into the parking lot behind Lunsford Insurance to create a
multi-use lawn area, and renovation of the pocket part at Jefferson
Street and Kirk Alley as an urban plaza with a small building for
active retail (restaurant) masking the blank wall of the parking
garage.
Public Art - The City Market area is an ideal location for public art,
not only adding art, but integrating art along the way so that it is
incorporated into the design as it evolves. The City needs to be
proactive when incorporating public art into the redevelopment
program.
Special projects include:
Market BuildinQ - The City Market Building needs a major
renovation. It needs to be updated, modernized and celebrated
with active tenant leases. Space utilization needs to be turned
inside out. There is the possibility of placing seating on the
periphery of the building and placing a traditional farmer's market
inside the hall, bringing in additional vendors to provide items that
people living downtown would need.
· The City Market Building type should be considered the most
important for the City Market Square area. Efforts should focus
on enhancements to reinforce the character of the building.
Important features of the building, such as signage and trace
lights, are in good repair and bright.
· Emphasize the height of interior space by illuminating the
pressed tin ceiling.
· Turn the uses inside out, remove food court seating, relocate
dining along the periphery of the building, turn the interior into
an expanded market area for vendors, including vendors that
can provide for the daily needs of the growing downtown
residential population.
· Construction of additional restrooms on the first floor.
· Replace individual bay doors and windows with all-glass rollup
doors or French doors.
· Convert a portion of the perimeter bays on both sides to
common dining areas, with doors that separate the dining areas
from food preparation.
· Allow the dining area to extend out onto the sidewalk to create
sidewalk cafés and extend into the street during certain hours
for outdoor dining and special events.
· Second floor - Keep the mezzanine level as is; provide new
structural support of the canopy to allow the mezzanine to open
onto the roof over the canopy; relocate existing restrooms so
the prime building corners overlooking the Market Square;
program the space for one or two medium to large upscale
restaurants, which can include a bar, private dining, and a café;
and extend the seating and lounge areas onto the reinforced
canopy at one or both ends.
· Third floor - Program and renovate the space as a flexible venue
for live music, weddings, conferences, receptions, etc.; add
restrooms, projection room and concession stand; and improve
the acoustics and high quality audio/visual systems for a first
rate entertainment venue.
71
72
Centurv Station ParkinQ GaraQe - Renovations and additions to the
Century Station Parking Garage should add desirable downtown
housing, create anchor retail, increase the number of parking
spaces, and enhance the overall City Market area.
· Suggest adding a covered colonnade along the walkway facing
the Norfolk Southern office building.
· Designate one section of the ground floor center bay of the
parking garage exclusively for farmer and vendor storage binds
with adjacent truck parking.
· Provide space for publiC restrooms.
· Program the ground floor retail space for a new retail anchor,
such as an FDA-approved, commercial style kitchen similar to
Blue Ridge Food Ventures in Asheville, North Carolina.
· Add four stories of residential units on the top of the deck with
units facing Church Avenue or Mill Mountain; include a
courtyard garden on the top residential floor; and, as an option,
program the proposed residential levels for use as a boutique
hotel.
· Construct a new façade for the parking garage, including the
ground floor retail; new façade design would provide a more
functional and historically accurate architecture for a major City
Market structure.
Market SQuare and Farmers' Stalls - The Market Square needs to be
updated and its image as the heart of the area, if not the region,
should be reinforced. Existing glass and steel canopies around
Center in the Square are too short, nondescript, ineffective and
normally dirty. The pavement is uneven and patched. The
pedestrian experience is that of wading through car bumpers and
other impediments that degrade the experience. Vendors' use of
the Market Square will normally conflict with the possibility of
outdoor dining; yet vendors' use is the historically correct
precedent; therefore, vendors should be given first priority.
Nighttime activities in Market Square should be further promoted.
The average tourist does not know where the functions inside
Center in the Square are located because entrances are not
obvious, nor is signage effective. The Market Square needs
attention to details such as paving, canopy configurations and
signage.
· Suggest replacement and addition of new second story
balconies for the full depth of the sidewalk around the perimeter
of both East and West Market Square; extension of balconies
down the first block of Market Square to Kirk Alley; and design
details should include provisions for farmers' market stalls
below, including awning extensions, lighting, heaters, fans,
water, tables, storage and seating.
· Renovate Center in the Square building exterior to best activate
the Market Square and better serve as an entry to internal
venues; including replacement of the top floor sign with a
vertical blade sign and a theater marquee at the northeast
corner, introducing a box office ticket 'kiosk on the street
corner, adding an exterior staircase to invite people to actually
walk up to the balcony, reprogram the upper floor space with
active uses such as a tearoom that opens onto the new balcony,
and program the balconies on both sides to be available for use
by live bands and other productions.
· Celebrate the Roanoke Weiner Stand in its existing location as a
local institution and tourist destination.
· Balance the needs of farmers, restaurants, festivals and street
life by increasing opportunities for dining outdoors, using the
proposed second floor balcony around the perimeter of the City
Market Square; program the City Market Square for more events
that utilize the balcony as a stage; grade and resurface the
pavement; enlarge and reorganize the farmers' stalls using the
full perimeter of the City Market Square; and enhance the
physical presence of Center in the Square with a ticket office
kiosk and a handsome vertical blade sign.
Market Square - Farmers' Stalls - Market stalls between the City
Market Square and Church Avenue (including the canopies, tables,
infrastructure, location and design) need to be updated. Fabric
awnings are in need of repair or redesign; canopies leak and do not
enhance the ambience of the market; circulation between sidewalks
and tables is congested; canopies in the second block of Market
Street hide historic facades; existing designs are institutional and
do not compliment the elegant shop front facades and historic
downtown; and stalls located in the second block are considered
overflow space during off-season and off-peak days.
Option 1:
Option 2:
Option 2A:
Free standing, center of the street market stalls
Field test the new canopy idea as follows:
Modify the design and slide it from the middle of
Market Street to a location consistent with the current
stall location.
Use a taller version of the center canopy concept to
allow diagonal parking underneath.
Option 2B:
73
74
Option 2C:
Use a combination of low ends and a taller center for
the canopy.
Reverse the street center canopy design to allow
customers to walk down the middle of the area with
the farmers vending from one or both sides.
Reintroduce market vendors around the perimeter of
the City Market ~all.
Make minimal improvements.
Extend the proposed balcony design from the Market
Square and the first block of Market Street to the
second block.
Option 2 D:
Option 3:
Option 4:
Option 5:
Market Square - Canooies - Replacing canvas canopies over the
farmers' stalls may be a shortsighted option. Replacing fabric
canopies and upgrading infrastructure is included in the study, but
it is considered shortsighted and is not highly recommended.
Streetscaoe Imorovements and Pavinq - Streets cape elements are
dissimilar; and lack a recognizable theme. Seating is
recommended for sidewalk cafés and public seating, benches for
parks, seating for public squares and plazas, bike racks, bollards,
light poles with coordinated hangers for baskets, signage and flag
holders, kiosks and canopies, seating for pick-up truck tailgaters,
and shoeshine stands.
. Lighting, Signage and banners - Lighting, signage and banners
are not unified or organized. It is suggested that a company be
selected that provides a fully coordinated system of lighting and
urban accessories; either add Union Metal elements to the
original fixtures as recommended in the Design '79 plan, or
consider other companies (especially NERI) to completely
upgrade the entire lighting, signage and information system.
. Pavement - Pavement is in poor condition and not unified.
Suggestions are: Option 1 - standard asphalt; Option 2 -
embossed asphalt with a special Roanoke stamped star pattern
(should be chosen with caution; Option 3 - recycled salt glazed
star brick; and Option 4 - brick pavers. Cost estimates should
be completed for each option and presented to the
stakeholders.
Williamson Road Develooment - The corner of Williamson Road and
Church Avenue can become a destination area anchored by
surrounding infill development. On the east side of the
intersection of Williamson Road and Church Avenue, build a street
level retail building with a parking lot to the rear, develop a cinema
complex above the retail, and redevelop the parking lot on the
75
northwest corner as a mixed-use project that includes housing,
parking and additional shops. On the existing Norfolk Southern
building site, develop a sister building or low rise infill building
along Church Avenue and on the side facing Williamson Road, and
internalize the service function in a motor court.
Steooed Plaza - Create cascading stair steps to draw people from
the pedestrian bridge over the railroad tracks to the City Market.
This idea is similar to the Spanish Steps in Rome albeit on a smaller
scale for Roanoke. The stepped plaza will become a destination for
social interaction between Roanoke's citizens and tourists and
serve as a public plaza and forecourt for the new art museum. The
stepped plaza would be a perfect site for political rallies or a
grandstand for performances and parades passing down Salem
Avenue. Creation of a set of cascading stair steps is suggested
similar to the Spanish Steps in Rome. It has been conceived as a
destination for socializing, a public plaza and a forecourt for the
new art museum, a site for political rallies, and a grandstand for.
performances and parades passing down Salem Avenue. As an
option, include a miniature incline for accessibility and to serve as
a tourist draw.
Drawing shoppers to Jefferson Street - Renovation of the Century
Square Parking Garage will result in more pedestrian shopping on
Church Avenue. The City should support efforts to make Fire
Station No. 1 as visually inviting as possible, while preserving its
function as a working fire station. This includes encouraging those
staffing the fire station to enjoy the front porch environment. The
Fire Department should also mount a plaque, similar to the
proposed farmers' information plaque, to describe the history of
the station house. Although there is some degree of public
outreach, it needs to be more obvious. The leasing of ground floor
space as offices needs to be phased out to provide additional space
for inviting retail businesses. Owners of the ~eironimus building
should seek a strong anchor tenant as part of the merchandizing
goals of the City Market area and Jefferson Street. Upscale national
tenants would be ideal along this section of the streetscape. More
local/regional venues, including an urban public library or a large
bookstore like the original Borders, would enliven the street.
· Jefferson Street Streetcar - Bring the streetcar back to Jefferson
Street. The City should support the concept of the streetcar line
and act quickly to energize Jefferson Street.
76
. Jefferson Street needs help - Use the Merchandizing Plan to
attract the best retail tenants for Jefferson Street; produce a
pattern book or kit-of-parts for the design of shop fronts
(storefronts) to be used for restorations, which would provide
examples of first-rate retail facades that would compliment the
historic character of downtown Roanoke.
. Jefferson Street Grade Crossing - Enhance Jefferson Street north
of Campbell Avenue including restoring the grade-crossing
across the tracks. Enhancement of the streetscape on Jefferson
Street north of Salem Avenue is suggested, and supporting the
idea of reconnecting Jefferson Street with a grade crossing to
directly connect the cultural district with the downtown.
Public Enthusiasm - Citizens of Roanoke share the enthusiasm
about the City Market Project. Make it happen in 2006.
The Mayor left the meeting during the presentation by Mr. Low.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation for Mr. Low's presentation
and called for questions and/or comments by Council Members:
Council Member Dowe advised that one of the advantages of traveling is
an opportunity to see first hand what other communities do to make visitors
feel at home; however, the City of Roanoke has relegated itself to what its
citizens might enjoy versus what a person not from the Roanoke area would
enjoy. Therefore, he stated that some of the things discussed, particularly with
regard the third floor area of the City Market Building, is commendable. ~e
further stated that there is a natural investment that water related activities
would bring, and suggested that the consultant look at an aesthetically
pleasing, man-made water attraction for the downtown area. ~e further
suggested that the market area be made more pedestrian friendly, and, in that
regard, the City has already turned some of the one-way streets into two-way
streets.
Mr. Low stated that water could be incorporated as an amenity to be
looked at, such as a fountain or for recreation (to run through) and both
concepts could be used on Kirk Alley as a part of public art; the environmental
movement and greening of the buildings will incorporate some interesting ways
of dealing with storm water by interfacing with public spaces in a fun way; and
thought engaging artists and architects could be used to suggest various
methods of using water. ~e added that the Market building mezzanine would
be an excellent place to create a college-student destination.
77
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that about 32 per cent of college students
native to Virginia attend schools in this region, and providing shuttles from
~ollins University, Roanoke College, Ferrum College and Virginia Tech have
proven that there are two very different sets of people using the City Market.
Council Member Lea inquired about community involvement in the study
in terms of the business sector, young persons, and persons from the minority
community, as compared to the last study. Mr. Low stated that City staff did an
excellent job of bringing all of the right people to the table which included
stakeholders representing every faction, and the personalities of the individuals
and groups that came forth represented the greater component of their faction,
periodic reality testing was conducted of ideas and follow-up meetings were
held.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if the study addressed matters such as
the economics of renovating the City Market Building.
Mr. Low replied that it would be necessary for budget experts to review
the various issues to determine the type of return on investments, inasmuch as
some improvements could cost several million dollars; however, there would
also be several million dollars worth of real estate to sell which could be a
profitable venture. In summary, he stated that the study did not include
improvements to the Market Building over a period of time or professional
management issues, and it would be necessary for someone with more
professional expertise to evaluate some of the more complex issue.
The City Manager advised that the briefing was intended to be the first
opportunity to share preliminary information with the Council, and a final
report will be completed and forwarded to Council at· a later date; and the
report does not include a cost benefit analysis, or suggest which improvements
should be publicly committed to versus private sector commitment.
Council Member Cutler spoke in favor of private corporations in the
Roanoke Valley subsidizing quality of architecture which would help the City to
improve architecture in the downtown area. ~e stated that there is water in the
downtown area which comes from Lick Run. ~e added that the proposed
architecture looks a lot like architecture in New Orleans because it invokes the
thought of music and it is hoped that the Dumas ~otel will be included in the
same way.
Council Member McDaniel inquired as to what could be done relatively
soon and inexpensively that would create a level of excitement. Mr. Lowe
responded that illuminating the ceiling in the Market ~all would help and the
installation of balconies around Center in the Square would provide an
interesting and dynamic impact.
78
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that it was important to understand that the
City has gone through a metamorphous for many years in downtown Roanoke,
downtown is a very important part of the economy of western Virginia, and how
the City Market area is renovated will have an impact on a large number of
people far beyond the Roanoke City limits. ~e cautioned that if the core of the
City is not strong in terms of changing and growing, it will not be advantageous
to pump money into the surrounding area.
On behalf of the Council, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation
to market consultants for staying within the boundaries of the City's request
and for their creative vision and sense of functionality.
At 1 :50 p.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, February 6, 2006, the Council meeting
reconvened in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor
C. Nelson ~arris presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian j. Wishneff
and Mayor C. Nelson ~arris _______n____________nn____________n______n__________________________n7.
A BS ENT: Non e nnn______n_nn - ---- n___nnn ___n___ ______n _nn_ ------- n______n_nnn_ --0.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor ~arris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-SISTER CITIES: The Mayor recognized the
following middle school students from Wonju, Korea:
Jang, ~yun Woo
Kang, Sung Tak
Lee, Gil ~yun
Park, Sung Bae
Yang, Ji Won
Jung, Mok In
Lee, ~ang
Lee, Su Ji
Lee, Sol Gi
Song, Yeon ~ee, Chaperone
79
The Mayor advised that the City of Roanoke and Wonju, South Korea, will
celebrate the 42nd Anniversary of their Sister Cities relationship this year; and
the year 2006 also marks the third opportunity for students from Roanoke and
Wonju to have the experience for a cultural and educational exchange. ~e
stated that currently nine middle school youth from Wonju have been welcomed
into Roanoke homes; and host families with children of complimentary ages
have provided unique opportunities for personal enrichment during a three-
week visit from January 20 to February 12. ~e expressed appreciation to
Robert Roth, David Lisk, and Jennifer Mulligan, representing Roanoke Valley
Sister Cities, for coordinating the visit.
The Mayor presented each student with an ~onorary Citizen Certificate
and a Roanoke pin. ~e presented Ms. Song, Chaperone, with an ~onorary
Citizen Certificate and a crystal star which is symbolic of the star on Mill
Mountain.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by
one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if
discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday,
November 21, 2005, Monday, December 5, 2005, and Monday, December 19,
2005, were before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be
dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi s h n eff an d Mayor ~ arris --------n---------------n----------n____----------__________________n___7.
NAYS: Non e n__n n______ nn_n___n__n__'nn_-n-_n _nnn______nn'_n____nn__n__nnn___O.
ANNUAL REPORTS-ARC~ITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: A communication
from the Architectural Review Board transmitting the 2005 Annual Report, was
before Council.
(See pages 65-68.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the 2005 Annual Report of the
Architectural Review Board be received and filed. The motion was seconded by
Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
80
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wish neff and Mayor ~arris nnn_n_n______nn______________n_____________________nnn______n___7.
NAYS: Non e_nn_u_nn _nnnn___ __ nnn___ __nnnn__ ___00_ noon ___nnnn_n_n___nn_ -n--O.
ANNUAL REPORTS-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP: A
communication from the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates transmitting the
2005 Annual Report, was before Council.
It was advised that the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates Committee was
established in August 2003 by Council; and the Committee moved rapidly
forward during the 2004-2005 period to better define ways to meet its assigned
mission to improve communication between government and neighborhoods
and to help improve neighborhoods.
The following accomplishments were summarized:
Code Enforcement Priority:
RNA chose Code Enforcement as its priority issue a year ago after
polling neighborhood organizations.
Imoroved Communications on Zonino Issues:
Put in place a system whereby each RNA member receives copies of
Board of Zoning Appeals requests that affect the neighborhoods
that a specific member is assigned as the contact.
Exoanded Efforts to Encouraoe Citizen Communication:
Two RNA members are working with member councils at Roanoke
Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority sites to encourage public
housing members to become involved with the neighborhood
organizations in their area.
Education of Committee Members:
RNA members have been present at most major issue gatherings in
the past year, from discussions about housing and retail
development in South Roanoke and Southern ~ills, to proposed use
for land near the Roanoke Regional Airport, to presentations on
proposals for school stadiums and plans for a Social Security office
in Gainsboro.
Oversaw Neiahborhood Grants Proaram:
RNA reviewed grant applications and awarded, with City Staff,
$49,025.00 in grants to improve neighborhoods.
Suooort for Brownfields Grants:
RNA worked with ~ousing and Neighborhood Services to support
the department's grant proposal to EPA in which it seeks funds to
assess and pOSSibly clean up two Brownfield areas.
Contributions to ~ousina and Neiahborhood Services Efforts:
RNA members have contributed to the neighborhoods' newsletters,
most recently on the grants program.
RNA members conducted grant training for neighborhoods and
attended overall grants information sessions.
An RNA member is overseeing the grants application process
working with City staff.
Resource Centers in Librarv:
RNA has helped to establish neighborhood information centers in
three libraries: Gainsboro, Melrose and Jackson Park.
Plannina:
RNA is submitting requests for funds through ~ousing and
Neighborhood Services in the next budget year for workshops and
publications that can strengthen neighborhood groups.
There is a need to work on the following:
· Establishing and/or reinforcing neighborhood groups.
· Efforts to set up a neighborhood organization in the Gilmer
area have not been successful, but meetings that have been
held for that purpose allowed residents to hear about the
City's new zoning ordinance and to hear about the Gateway
project by representatives of the Roanoke Redevelopment and
~ousing Authority.
· Membership
81
82
. RNA's membership now stands at 11, with two vacant
positions. RNA has never had a full participating membership,
but movement in and out of the committee has resulted in a
strong core group of people dedicated to the committee's
mission.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the 2005 Annual Report of the
Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates be received and filed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wish neff and Mayor ~arris------nmnn------mnnn----mn------nm---------------------------7.
NAYS: Non e-nn noon _nnn_n_n_nnn__nn_nnnn_____nnnnnn_ ___n__ nnn_n__n_nn_O.
COMMITTEES-TOWING ADVISORY BOARD: A communication from Tommy
Wood tendering his resignation as a member of the Towing Advisory Board, was
before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the resignation be accepted and that
the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council
Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor ~arris------nn---nmnnn---------------mnm---m--m---m----------m 7.
NAYS: Non e _nn__nn__nnn _nnnn__n_ _nnn__ nnn__nn ___00_ noon - n____ noon nnn___nO.
CITY MARKET-LEASES: A communication from the City Manager
requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, February 21,
2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with
regard to execution of a lease agreement with Juan E. Garcia, d/b/a Paradiso
Cuban Restaurant, for space located in the City Market Building, 32 Market
Square, for a three year period, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor ~arris___---nnmn-----nnmnn-m----------mn------------------------m7.
NAYS: Non e n_nn__n____nnn _nn___ __nn nn__nn_nnnnn _nn__noo__nn__n_n_nn__n_O .
83
Y.M.C.A.-LEASES: A communication from the City Manager requesting
that Council schedule a public hearing for Tuesday, February 21, 2006, at 7:00
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in connection with
execution of an amendment to the lease with the YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc.,
was before the body.
It was advised that on January 9, 2004, the City entered into a lease with
the YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc., to lease certain City properties to the YMCA;
the lease provides that the City will lease to the YMCA Official Tax Map Nos.
1113408, 1113409, 1113410, 1113411, 1113412, 113413, which are located
lIirectly north of the new YMCA facility and, in addition, the lease provides that
after the City receives from the YMCA, three additional lots on which the old
YMCA is located and most of the adjoining parking lot, Official Tax Map Nos.
1011206, 1011209, and 1011210, the City will also lease the lots to the YMCA.
It was further advised that the YMCA has requested an amendment to the
leases that instead of leasing Official Tax Map Nos. 1011206, 1011209, and
1011210 to the YMCA, the City would lease Official Tax Nos. 1113508,
1113509,1113510,1113511,1113512,1113513,1113514,1113515, and
1113516 which are vacant lots located at the corner of 5th Street and Luck
Avenue S. W.
It was explained that the term of the original lease and the requested
amendment shall be on a month-to-month basis until the City constructs a
public parking structure in the West Church Avenue corridor; and a public
hearing is required as a prerequisite by Council to authorize amendment to the
lease
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize a public hearing
to be held on February 21, 2006 at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the
matter may be heard.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor ~arris --------------n-----n----------------_____________________nnn___..___n7.
NAYS: Non e ___On _nnn___n_n___n_nnn_ - _n_n_n__n_nn _n___ nn_n__n --nn-n_n__n___O.
CITY EMPLOYEES-EMERGENCY SERVICES: A communication from the City
Manager advising that Section 44-146.19, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
requires Council's concurrence in the appointment of a Coordinator of
Emergency Management; and Michael Guzo, formerly with the North Carolina
Department of Emergency Management, was selected for the position, was
before the body.
84
The City Manager recommended that Council concur in the appointment
of Michael Guzo as Coordinator of Emergency Management for the City of
RÐanoke, effective February 1, 2006.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor ~arris___n________________mn___n_-n___n___-m______nn___-n____________n7.
NAYS: Non e ___nn -- _n_n_. _n_n__nn nn ___00 __ nnnn _nn___nnnnnn_nnn _nnn_n___nO.
COMMITTEES-ZONING-~UMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE-OAT~S OF
OFFICE-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP: A report of qualification of
the following persons, was before Council:
Cheri W. ~artman as a member of the ~uman Services Advisory
Board, for a term ending November 30, 2009;
Carol J. Jensen as a member of the Roanoke Neighborhood
Advocates, to fill the unexpired term of Earnest C. Wilson, ending
June 30, 2007; and
Joseph F. Miller as a member of the Board of Zoning Appeals, for a
term ending December 31, 2008.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi s h neff and Mayor ~arrisnnn___n______n_______nmn______n___mnmn______n______n_·__·__7.
NAYS: Non e _nnnn n___nn_nnn ____ nn n_nn ___nn_ noon _n___n_nn__nn__nnn_nn_n_O.
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC ~EARINGS:
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday,
February 6, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on a proposal to lease City-owned property located at 32 Market Square,
S. W., to Louis and Anita Wilson, d/b/a Burger in the Square, to be used as a
food service establishment, for a term of three years, commencing March 1,
2006, the matter was before the body.
85
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, January 27, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke owns the City Market Building located at 32 Market Square; and the
City began management of the building on May 1, 2005, after the former
management company, Advantis Real Estate, terminated the management
contract for the property.
It was further advised that Louis and Anita Wilson, owners and operators
of Burger in the Square, have requested a lease agreement for approximately
462 square feet to operate a restaurant serving hamburgers and hotdogs for a
period of three years, beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009, and
the proposed agreement establishes the following base rent:
First Floor Soace
Per Square Monthly Annual Rent
Period Foot Rent Amount Amount
3/1/06 - 8/31/06 $32.26 $467.77 $2,806.62
9/1/06 - 2/28/07 $28.00 $406.00 $2 436.00
3/1/07 - 2/29/08 $28.84 $418.18 $5,018.16
3/1/08 - 2/28/09 $29.71 $430.73 $5,168.70
S
d I
S
econ F oor ,Dace
Per Square Monthly Annual Rent
Period Foot Rent Amount Amount
3/1/06 - 2/28/07 $10.00 $240.00 $2,880.00
3/1/07 - 2/29/08 $10.30 $247.20 $2,966.40
3/1/08 - 2/28/09 $10.61 $254.62 $3 055.39
It was explained that the initial two six month periods of the proposed
rent for first floor space provides a transition from the lease rate in Mr. and
Mrs. Wilson's previously expired lease into the new per square foot rent
structure that has been identified in the Market Building for food court tenants;
rent for the second floor space is for a secured food prep area used solely by
the tenant and is not a part of the common area space; the common area
maintenance fee is $300.00 per month for first floor space and $100.00 per
month for second floor space that will increase by three per cent upon each
anniversary of the Lease; Burger in the Square restaurant has been a tenant in
the City Market Building since June 1, 1999, and there is no renewal provision
in the lease.
86
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
lease agreement with Louis and Anita Wilson, d/b/a Burger in the Square, for
approximately 462 square feet of space in the City Market Building, for a period
of three years, beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009, said lease
agreement to be subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37287-020606) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of approximately
462 square feet of space located within City-owned property known as the City
Market Building, located at 32 Market Square, for a term of three years
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009; authorizing the
appropriate City officials to execute a lease agreement therefor; and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 132.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37287-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No. 37287-020606 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi s h neff and Mayo r ~arri S______nm___mnn____nnm____________m___m_______nmn___n_____7 .
NAYS: Non e-n-- __n__ nnn__nnn _nn__nnnn__n____ nn__nn_n_n n_nn _n_n__ --00-- -00000.
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, February
6, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the
proposal to lease City-owned property located at 32 Market Square to Adel
Eltawansy, d/b/a Zorba's, to be used as a food service establishment, for a term
of three years, commencing March 1, 2006, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, January 27,2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke owns the City Market Building located at 32 Market Square, and the
City began management of the building on May 1, 2005, after the former
management company, Advantis Real Estate, terminated the management
contract for the property.
87
It was further advised that Adel Eltawansy, owner and operator of Zorba,
has requested a lease agreement for approximately 210 square feet to operate
a restaurant serving Greek and Mediterranean cuisine for a three year period
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009; and the proposed
agreement establishes the following base rent rate:
Per Square Monthly Rent Annual Rent
Period Foot Amount Amount
3/1/06 - 8/31/06 $36.03 $630.53 $3,783.15
9/1/06 - 2/28/07 $28.00 $490.00 $2,940.00
3/1/07 - 2/29/08 $28.84 $504.70 $6,056.40
3/1/08 - 2/28/09 $29.71 $519.84 $6,238.09
It was explained that the initial two six month periods of the proposed
rent provides a transition from the lease rate in Mr. Eltawansy's previously
expired lease into the new per square foot rent structure that has been
identified in the Market Building for food court tenants; common area
maintenance fee is $300.00 per month that will increase by three per cent upon
each anniversary of the lease; and Zorba's restaurant has been a tenant of the
Market Building since November 1, 1989, and there is no renewal provision in
the lease.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
lease agreement with Adel Eltawansy, d/b/a Zorba, for approximately 210
square feet of space in the City Market Building, for a period of three years
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009, said lease agreement to
be subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37288-020606) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of approximately
210 square feet of space located within City-owned property known as the City
Market Building, located at 32 Market Square, for a term of three years
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009; authorizing the
appropriate City officials to execute a lease agreement therefor; and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 133.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37288-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
88
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No. 37288-020606 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor ~arris___mm______m__nnmnn______m___nmnnnn_______nm____n___7.
NAYS: None n_ _n_nn__nn_______n_nnnn_nnn ____nnnnnnnn ___nn nnnn n___n_n_nO.
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday,
February 6, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the proposal to lease City-owned property located at 32 Market
Square to David Z. Estrada, d/b/a Chico's Big Lick Pizza, to be used as a food
service establishment, for a term of three years, commencing March 1, 2006,
the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, January 27, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke owns the City Market Building, located at 32 Market Square; and the
City began management of the building on May 1, 2005, after the former
management company, Advantis Real Estate, terminated the management
contract for the property.
It was further advised that David Z. Estrada, owner and operator of
Chico's Big Lick Pizza, has requested a lease agreement for approximately
680.5 square feet to operate a restaurant serving pizza; the proposed lease
agreement is for a three year period, beginning March 1, 2006 through
February 28, 2009; and the following base rent rate is proposed:
Per Square Monthly Rent Annual Rent
Period Foot Amount AmOunt
3/1/06 - 8/31/06 $31.85 $1 806.16 $10.836.96
9/1/06 - 2/28/07 $28.00 $1.587.83 $ 9,527.00
3/1/07 - 2/29/08 $28.84 $1.635.47 $19,625.62
3/1/08 - 2/28/09 $29.71 $1,684.53 $20,214.39
It was explained that the initial two six month periods of the proposed
rent provides a transition from the lease rate in Mr. Estrada's previously expired
lease into the new per square foot rent structure that has been identified in the
Market Building for food court tenants; and the common area maintenance fee
is $400.00 per month that will increase by three per cent upon each anniversary
of the lease; and Chico's Big Lick Pizza restaurant has been a tenant of the
Market Building since August 1, 1995, and no renewal provision is contained in
the lease agreement.
89
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
lease agreement with David Z. Estrada, d/b/a Chico's Big Lick Pizza, for
approximately 680.5 square feet of space in the City Market Building, for a
period of three years, beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009,
said lease agreement to be subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37289-020606) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of approximately
680.5 square feet of space located within City-owned property known as the
City Market Building, located at 32 Market Square, for a term of three years
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009; authorizing the
appropriate City officials to execute a lease agreement therefor; and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 134.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37289-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No. 37289-020606 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi s h n eff an d M ayor ~arri Snm----------mn_____mnn__n_______m____m______n___nm________7 .
NAYS: Non e ___n__nn__ __nn __nn__ _n_n_nn_nnn_n__n__ _nnnn__n____nn_n____n_nn_O.
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday,
February 6, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the proposal to lease City-owned property located at 32 Market
Square to Georgia Raines Crump, d/b/a Nuts N Sweet Things/LicketySplit, to be
used as a food service establishment, for a term of three years, commencing
March 1, 2006, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, January 27, 2006.
90
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke owns the City Market Building, located at 32 Market Square; and the
City began management of the building on May 1, 2005, after the former
management company, Advantis Real Estate, terminated the management
contract for the property.
It was further advised that Georgia Raines Crump, owner and operator of
Nuts n Sweet Things/LicketySplit, has requested a lease agreement for
approximately 290 square feet of space to operate a restaurant serving sweets,
ice cream/frozen yogurt cuisine; the proposed lease agreement is for a three
year period beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009; and the
follOWing base rent rate is proposed:
Per Square Monthly Rent Annual Rent
Period Foot Amount Amount
3/1/06 - 8/31/06 $33.62 $812.48 $4,874.90
9/1/06 - 2/28/07 $28.00 $676.67 $4,060.00
3/1/07 - 2/29/08 $28.84 $696.97 $8.363.60
3/1/08 - 2/28/09 $29.71 $717.88 $8,614.51
It was explained that the initial two six month periods of the proposed
rent provides a transition from the lease rate in Ms. Crump's previously expired
lease into the new per square foot rent structure that has been identified in the
Market Building for foqd court tenants; common area maintenance fee is
$300.00 per month that will increase by three per cent upon each anniversary
of the lease; Nuts n Sweet Things/LicketySplit restaurant has been a tenant of
the Market Building since October 1, 1995, and no renewal provision is
included in the lease.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
lease agreement with Georgia Raines Crump, d/b/a Nuts n Sweet
Things/LicketySplit, for approximately 290 square feet of space in the City
Market Building, for a period of three years, beginning March 1, 2006 through
February 28, 2009, such lease agreement to be subject to approval as to form
by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the follOWing ordinance:
(#37290-020606) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of approximately
290 square feet of space located within City-owned property known as the City
Market Building, located at 32 Market Square, for a term of three years
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009; authorizing the
appropriate City officials to execute a lease agreement therefor; and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 135.)
91
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37290-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
NÐ. 37290-020606 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wis h neff and Mayo r ~arri s--m---------------------mnnnmm______n_m_________nm_m___n_7.
NAYS: Non e __n___ __nnn__n___n_nn n__ _nn__n____ _nnn_nn__nn_n___nnnn_ -n___nn_O.
CITY MARKET-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday,
February 6, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the proposal to lease City-owned property located northwest of the
former City Nursing ~ome at Coyner Springs to Ned Jeter for agricultural use,
for a term of one-year, with an option for four one-year renewals, commencing
March 1, 2006, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, January 27, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that property
owned by the City of Roanoke in Botetourt County located northwest of the
former City Nursing ~ome at Coyner Springs has been leased for agricultural
purposes to several individuals since the early 1970's; through the years, the
City has reduced the size of the leased tract, which is now approximately 7.41
acres; the current lease which has been in effect since April 20, 1982, with
Richard B. and Ned B. Jeter has expired and the Jeters have requested that Ned
Jeter be granted a one-year lease, with four mutually agreed upon one-year
renewal options, under the same terms as the previous lease at $74.10 per
year.
It was further advised that farming of the tract of land serves the primary
purpose of eliminating the need for City forces to keep the land cleared and
mowed; lease rate is $10.00 per acre per year; the lessee will be required to
maintain fencing as necessary and assume all liability for damage to and by his
actions, or the actions of livestock, machinery, equipment, employees and
guests; and the lessee will provide liability insurance listing the City of
Roanoke, its officers, agents, employees and volunteers as additional insured.
92
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
lease agreement with Ned Jeter for approximately 7.41 acres of land in
Botetourt County, for a period of one year, subject to four additional renewals
of one year terms, upon mutual agreement of the parties, beginning March 1,
2006 through February 28, 2007, said lease agreement to be subject to
approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37291-020606) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of an
approximate 7.41 acre tract of City-owned land in Botetourt County, located
northwest of the former City Nursing ~ome at Coyner Springs, for agricultural
purposes, for a term of one year beginning March 1, 2006, and expiring
February 28, 2007, with four mutually agreed upon one year renewal options
under the same terms, at an annual rental of $10.00 per acre per year;
authorizing the appropriate City officials to execute a lease agreement therefor;
and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 136.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37291-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No. 37291-020606 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi s h neff and Mayor ~arri S_________m___n___n_____m___n__________mn___m___________nn__n__ 7 .
NAYS: Non e _________n_____noo_n_____n________n__nn_n__nnnnn___nnnn_n_nn_n___nnO.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
~OUSING/AUT~ORITY-TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY: A
communication from Theodore J. Edlich, III, President, Total Action Against
Poverty (TAP) advising that:
. TAP purchased the Terrace Apartments last year; in doing so, it
has been TAP's intent from the beginning to manage and
renovate the property in such a way that it will increase the
quality of life for families residing there and add value to the
neighborhood and to the City of Roanoke.
· After much consideration of the various financing options, TAP
has concluded, and its Board of Directors supports, the
submission of a low income housing tax credit application in
order to fully renovate the property.
· By using this financing mechanism, TAP can reduce unit density
from 225 units to 199, incorporate ten per cent of the units with
families at 80 per cent AMI, and invest at least $40,000.00 per
unit.
· This funding source will allow TAP to make improvements to the
major mechanical systems, improve accessibility within the
complex, modernize outdated units, provide additional
amenities to the complex and improve landscaping.
· In addition to the benefits to residents, renovation will provide
an increase in the amount of annual property taxes from the
current rate of $58,000.00 to approximately $125,000.00.
· To maximize the amount of private funds, TAP is applying for
credits in two phases, Terrace North and Terrace South, and will
submit two successive low income tax credit applications over
two consecutive years, 2006 and 2007, to provide resources for
renovating the entire complex.
· If TAP is successful in obtaining low income tax credits, it plans
to proceed with applying for tax deferred bond funding which is
not competitive, but will provide far less funding ($25,000.00
per unit), prohibit TAP's ability to reduce density, limit
additional landscaping and not allow TAP to consider any
apartments that are above 60 per cent of median income.
· While this will improve the existing property, it will not give TAP
the resources to do the substantial improvements that low-
income tax credits will provide.
· TAP has sought to place itself in the best possible position to be
successful by putting together a competent team which includes
J. M. Turner Construction Company, Art & Architecture,
Development Initiatives, Inc., Gentry, Locke, Rakes & Moore,
Terrace residents, the Greater Raleigh Court Civic League and
the Wasena Neighborhood Forum.
93
94
. Several design sessions were held with residents and community
meetings were held with neighborhood organizations in order to
make certain that they understand the project, to provide the
opportunity to make comments and suggestions and to keep
open the lines of communication as the process moves forward.
. TAP recognizes and understands the City of Roanoke's position
with regard to the support of tax credit applications to create
additional low-income housing and is not attempting to create
more low-income housing, but rather to improve the quality of
low-income housing that already exists and to further reduce
the density of the complex; and, in addition, the project will
enhance residential housing in surrounding neighborhoods and
increase property taxes coming to the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Edlich introduced ~eather Polson, Chair, TAP Board of Directors;
Angela Penn, TAP Director of ~ousing and Community Development; Susheela
Shanta, President, Development Initiatives, Inc.; Tim Barnett, representing
Turner Construction Company; and Rick ~aynie, representing Art and
Architecture.
Mr. Edlich advised that in order to move the project forward and to be
successful in the application process, TAP is asking for the City of Roanoke to
support the application and to provide financial support from the City's
allocation of ~UD funds in the amount of $500,000.00 over a four year period,
which is less than three per cent of the total investment on the project and will
be returned to the City in taxes within seven years.
Ms. Polson advised that the Terrace Apartments Project will provide a
unique opportunity for the City of Roanoke and TAP to form a partnership
inasmuch as the City has expressed an interest in reducing housing density,
while maintaining a model of mixed income development. She stated that
residents of the Terrace Apartments have been good neighbors which could be
attributed to the long-term and stable management group that was retained by
TAP; TAP wishes to make improvements to the apartments by reducing density,
performing the necessary systems improvements, and making exterior
improvements such as landscaping. She called attention to letters of support
from the Greater Raleigh Court Civic League and the Wasena Neighborhood
Association and advised that the City has been presented with information
outlining three financing options; TAP will proceed with some renovations to
the Terrace Apartments; however, the extent of renovations will depend upon
funding and the level of the City's support. She explained that the minimal
financing option would be a non competitive bond financing that would provide
approximately $25,000.00 per unit and allow for certain systems upgrades, but
no exterior improvements, and will not allow for a reduction in the percentage
of low income housing; an intermediate option would require a letter of support
95
from the City of Roanoke, but no financing by the City, would provide more
funds per unit for systems upgrades, and would also reduce density in terms of
the actual number of apartments in the complex. She stated that the final
option, which requires both a letter of support from the City and $500,000.00
over a period of several years, would allow TAP to both reduce the density of
the number of apartments and reduce the percentage of low income residents
by setting aside ten per cent of the units with no income restriction, and
providing that type of mix would be viable, espeCially to senior citizens because
the apartments are located within walking distance of all of the various
amenities in the Grandin Road area.
Ms. Penn advised that the neighborhood development process has been
inclusive of all parties that would be impacted by renovation of the Terrace
Apartments; the process started with organizing and conducting several design
charettes which offered participants the opportunity to provide input; the first
charette was held in September, 2005 and included members of the TAP Board,
senior staff members, property management staff, and project architects; the
second charette was conducted in November, 2005 with over 75 residents of
the Terrace Apartments participating in round table discussions regarding
children, grounds, outdoor spaces, accessibility, laundry facilities, community
spaces and various services; and the third charette involved talking with
neighbors through the Greater Raleigh Court Civic League and the Wasena
Forum which provided an opportunity for TAP to explain the project and
available options in order to move forward with implementation; and both
groups chose to support the project in written format. She added that while
each session targeted different groups, there was a similarity of comments; I.e.:
removal of trash receptacles from view, access by those who do not live in the
community, increasing outdoor lighting, improving accessibility throughout the
complex, a need for community space, and appropriate play areas for children.
She stated that TAP is pleased with the· process which has been one of
openness and inclusion of all stakeholders.
Susheela Shanta, President, Development Initiatives, Inc., advised that
when TAP acquired the property, one of its goals was to renovate the complex
and to provide a better quality of housing for tenants already living in the
Terrace Apartments, which included upgrading and updating all appliances in
the units, a new roof, modification of the heating system from gas to electric;
when the cost of completing all renovations was evaluated, which are projected
at over $20 million, it was decided to approach the project in two phases,
Terrace North and Terrace South; the Low Income ~ousing Tax Credit Program,
offered by the Virginia ~ousing Development Authority, includes a ceiling on
the number of credits that can be accessed at anyone time for a project in any
given year, or 650,000 credits which converts to approximately $5.8 million in
investment; and when broken down into two projects over two separate funding
years, TAP would be able to generate about twice as much in funds, therefore,
96
TAP made the decision to complete the project in two phases. She noted that
reducing housing density was previously discussed; currently the complex
consists of 225 apartments, and by dividing the project into Terrace North and
Terrace South, Terrace North, which currently has 93 units will be financed first;
and by reducing density, the number of apartments will be reduced to 78 which
is approximately 18 per cent of total units.
Council Member Cutler stated that he was in support of the concept to
improve the Terrace Apartments; however, assuming that the City of Roanoke
provides $500,000.00 toward renovation of the apartments, how much
additional property tax would be paid per year to the City beyond what would
have been paid without the City's subsidy; and, in effect, the City would be
reimbursed through increased property taxes for its front end investment.
Ms. Shanta advised that TAP estimates if the City supports approximately
$500,000.00, TAP could invest about $60,000.00 or more in hard costs per
unit, thereby increasing property taxes or assessment by over two times; and
currently, property taxes are approximately $58,000.00 per year for the entire
complex, and it is anticipated that property taxes will at least double and will
payoff the City's investment.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the request should be referred to the
City Manager for study and report prior to any action by Council.
Council Member Dowe referred to a statement in Mr. Edlich's letter that if
TAP is not successful in obtaining low income tax credits, it will proceed with
applying for tax deferred bond funding which is not competitive and will
provide far less funding. ~e stated that it appears that certain things may need
to happen before TAP makes a decision on whether to apply for a tax credit or
tax deferred bond funding.
Ms. Shanta advised that TAP will apply for low income housing tax credits
for Terrace North by March 11, 2006, which is the deadline for applications; the
only unknown is that housing tax credits involve a highly competitive process
and if TAP scores high enough and has the support of the City, it will be
funded.
There was discussion with regard to external changes to the complex and
whether the changes would aesthetically alter the façade; whereupon, Ms.
Shanta advised that the complex is a historic structure; therefore, certain
standards imposed by the Secretary of the Interior will apply to renovation and
will require TAP to obtain authorization by the Department of ~istoric
Resources and the National Park Service to perform the necessary
modifications. She stated that any exterior changes will be more in line with
improving the quality of life for occupants, sidewalks currently do not connect
and residents cannot traverse the sidewalk without walking in the road,
therefore, sidewalks will be redesigned to make travel a more continuous
97
process with landscape improvements, exterior windows will be replaced
and/or repaired as needed, some storm windows will be installed to make the
building more energy efficient, the area designated for trash will be sheltered
and fenced in, motion sensitive lights will be installed, playgrounds will be
constructed with a proper basketball court and playground equipment, traffic
calming measures will be implemented, and sheltered mailboxes and other
desirable features could be added subject to funding.
During further discussion, Ms. Shanta advised that ten per cent of the
units will be reserved for persons with mobility impairments and will be
handicap accessible; currently, there are no elevators in the complex and due to
costs in excess of $50,000.00 each, no elevators will be installed, however,
stairwells currently exist on two sides of the building at each entrance; and the
site is hilly, but access to at least ten per cent of the units is available from the
street on the first level.
Council Member Lea inquired if TAP is working within a time frame in
which to receive the City's letter of support; whereupon, the City Manager
advised that the City has until March 25, 2006, to respond to the request of
TAP, as well as two other requests that have been received. .
Council Member Lea spoke in support of renovating the Terrace
Apartments which is a quality of life issue.
Council Member Wishneff inquired about incentives available to residents
as a result of TAP's involvement in the project; whereupon, Mr. Edlich
responded that one of the virtues of TAP owning the apartments is that TAP is a
local organization and there is a certain amount of accountability to people in
the community and to Council; and TAP offers a wide variety ofresources that
can be made available to residents.
Council Member McDaniel inquired about schematic drawings for the
buildings; whereupon, Mr. Edlich advised that TAP is required to negotiate with
the Department of ~istoric Resources with regard to exterior enhancements and
when actual schematic drawings are available and follOWing approval by the
Department of ~istoric Resources, the plans will be submitted to Council for
review.
Under the scenario of improvements of $25,000.00, $45,000.00 and
$60,000.00 per unit, Council Member McDaniel inquired if the amount will
actually go toward improving each unit, or if the number was based on the
number of housing units. Ms. Shanta responded that the number was
calculated by using total hard costs for the project, and hard costs are
construction costs divided into the number of actual units.
98
Question was raised with regard to the difference between the
$45,000.00 and $60,000.00 scenarios; whereupon, the architect advised that it
could make the difference between the actual number of units to be modified.
~e stated that handicapped accessibility is an issue, currently there is no air
conditioning in any of the buildings, three bedroom units have one bathroom
and the goal is to install two bathrooms that are ADA compliant; if funds are
decreased, the most logical approach would be to decrease the number of units
to be renovated; and first floor units will be needed in order to meet
handicapped accessibility requirements.
There was discussion with regard to median income of residents;
whereupon, Ms. Shanta advised that the tax credit program requires that all
tenants be held to income limits of 60 per cent AMI, and going above 60 per
cent AMI automatically removes that number of units from the basis on which
tax credits are calculated; however, when looking at the market analysis in
Roanoke, potentially 80 per cent of area median income residents would be
interested in living in the complex.
Mr. Edlich advised that if TAP receives the full support of the City, which
includes not only a letter of support, but $500,000.00 over a four year period,
the density of low income housing will be reduced by 45 units, or 200 units as
opposed to 225 units; and a specific number of units would be available to
persons at any income level in order to create mixed income residency.
Mayor ~arris advised that the Raleigh Court area is one of the most
economically and ethnically diverse neighborhoods in the City of Roanoke
which provides the area a certain dynamism, synergy and vitality. ~e stated
that TAP has presented three options which the Vice-Mayor has suggested
should be referred to the City Manager for study and report, and .if Council
wishes to proceed, the matter should be referred to the City Manager for a
recommendation to Council within 30 days. ~e added that the request should
also be referred to the Director of Finance, particularly as it relates to Option
No.3 which includes a request for $500,000.00 over a period of four years.
Mr. Edlich requested that TAP receive some indication of the City's
interest prior to March 5, 2006.
The City Manager advised that TAP has been requested to furnish
additional information, all of which will be necessary to complete a
comprehensive review. She stated that if the City were to make a commitment
of $500,000.00, or some other amount over a period of time, such action
would be in advance of the normal process for identifying either CMERP needs
or on-going capital needs; and it is difficult to consider TAP's request without
giving consideration to all other requests for assistance.
99
Following further discussion, it was the consensus of Council to refer the
request of Total Action Against Poverty to the City Manager for report to
Council prior to and no later than the regular meeting of Council on Monday,
March 6, 2006.
(Council Member Wishneff leh the meeting.)
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
CITY EMPLOYEES-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager
introduced Stuart Mease, Special Projects Coordinator, Economic Development.
She advised that his primary responsibilities will be to attract and retain young
people to the Roanoke area and to serve as liaison between City of Roanoke
businesses and area institutions of higher education.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that on August 11, 2000, the Virginia Fire Services
Board (VFSB) adopted a policy of providing grants, termed "Mini-Grants" from
interest earned by the Fire Programs Fund; the VFSB Committee on Fire
Prevention and Control was charged with the responsibility of administering
such programs in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Fire Programs
(VDFP); a provision was adopted to restrict such grant activities - projects and
programs which positively impact and/or further fire service training within the
Commonwealth of Virginia; the maximum award for any Mini-Grant is
$10,000.00; and in fiscal year 2001, the Mini-Grant's first award cycle, the
Virginia Fire Services Board made 27 awards, totaling over $100,000.00.
It was further advised that the Virginia Department of Fire Programs
recently announced that the Roanoke Fire-EMS Department was awarded a
$7,500.00 Department of Fire Programs (DFP) "Mini-Grant", which requires no
local match; the award will be used by the Fire/EMS Department for
construction of a forcible entry simulator at the Roanoke Valley Regional
Training Center; and with the grant, the Training Center will be able to
purchase a simulator to provide forcible entry classes that now require
appropriation of a vacant building that is ohen difficult to obtain.
100
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the
required grant agreement and any other related documents, subject to approval
as to form by the City Attorney, in the amount of $7,500.00; and that Council
adopt an ordinance establishing a revenue estimate, in the amount of
$7,500.00, and appropriate funds in the same amount to an expenditure
account to be established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37292-020606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth for the Department of Fire Programs Training Mini-Grant,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 137.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37292-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ arri s _______'___n_______nnnn_ ___n_ - n__n___nnn___n_________nn___nnn_________n__nn__n6.
NAYS: Non e--nnn---- _n_____ ______n____nn_ n_n__n__________n____n_____n_______n___nn__O.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37293-020606) A RESOLUTION accepting a mini-grant offer made to
the CitY by the Virginia Fire Services Board and authorizing execution of any
required documentation on behalf of the City.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, page 137.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37293-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
MélYClr ~élrris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15.
NAYS: Non e __n_____n__n___ _n___nn____nnnnn ------- ______n______n___ _n___________n___nO .
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
101
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-EMERGENCY SERVICES-GRANTS-EQUIPMENT:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Virginia
Department of ~ealth, Office of Emergency Medical Services, administers a
Rescue Squad Assistance Fund (RSAF) grant program which is awarded twice
annually; and Roanoke Fire-EMS applied for the grant in September 2005 in
order to purchase a Ford Type 111 Ambulance and medical monitoring
equipment.
It was further advised that in January 2006, the State Office of Emergency
Medical Services awarded Roanoke Fire-EMS a grant of $42,235.00 to be used
toward the purchase of an ambulance with an apparent bid, if accepted, of
$89,794.00; the grant requires a $47,559.00 local match; and sufficient
matching funds are budgeted in Fleet Management - Vehicular Equipment,
Account No. 017-440-2642-9010.
The City Manager added that the State Office of Emergency Medical
Services has also awarded Roanoke Fire/EMS a grant, in the amount of
$19,500.00, to be used toward the purchase of medical monitoring equipment
requiring a $19,500.00 local match; and funding for the local match is
budgeted in Local Match Funding for Grants, Account No. 035-300-9700-541 S.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute any
required grant agreements or documents, subject to approval as to form by the
City Attorney; and that Council adopt a budget ordinance establishing revenue
estimates, in the amount of $61,735.00 (RSAF Grant) and $67,059.00 (RSAF
Local Match), transfer $47,559.00 in local match funds from the Fleet
Management Fund, Account No. 017-440-2642-9010, transfer $19,500.00 from
Local Match Funding For Grants, Account No. 035-300-9700-5415; and
appropriate funds totaling $128,794.00 to an expenditure account to be
established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37294-020606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia for the Rescue Squad Assistance Fund (RSAF) Grant,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 138.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37294-
020606. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
102
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ arri s _______________nn_________nnnnnn___________n___n_____nn_____nn___n_n_______nnn_6.
NAYS: No n e _______nnn_ ____nn_____nnn_ _________n___nn_ ------ __nn nn___ _00___ __n___nnO.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
BUDGET-~OUSING/ AUT~ORITY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in order to receive Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG), ~OME Investment Partnerships (~OME) and Emergency Shelter
Grant (ESG) funding, the City of Roanoke must submit a five-year Consolidated
Plan and Annual Updates to the U. S. Department of ~ousing and Urban
Development (~UD); substantial amendments to the Plan must undergo a 30-
day public review and be approved by City Council; and it is recommended that
the City's 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan be amended to add the 2006 World
Changers project, and revise the Belmont Community ~ealthcare Center project.
It was further advised that World Changers, a volunteer ministry of the
North American Mission Board, Southern Baptist Convention (World Changers),
brings together youth and adults from across the nation to participate in
housing and related community service projects; last year, under a subgrant
agreement with Blue Ridge ~ousing Development Corporation, Inc. (BR~DC),
which provided CDBG funding for materials and other support, approximately
350 World Changers volunteers assisted in repairing over 30 homes in the City
of Roanoke; given three consecutive successful years with the project and the
productive working relationships that have been established, the City, BR~DC
and World Changers are looking to conduct another project during the week of
July 10, 2006; and a total of $80,000.00 in CDBG funds is to be committed to
the 2006 project.
The City Manager stated that the Belmont Community ~ealthcare Center
(BC~C) project was originally designed to use $42,000.00 in CDBG funding for
predevelopment costs associated with constructing a healthcare center to serve
the Belmont and Fallon neighborhoods; and uncertainties in other Federal
resources have required postponing development of the faCility to allow CDBG
funds to assist with obtaining health services needed by residents to be
provided at neighborhood or other sites through partnerships with other health
providers.
It was explained that the required 30-day public review period for the
amendments began on December 21,2005, with comments due by the close of
business on January 23, 2006; no objections to the proposed amendments were
received; in order to implement activities, authorization by Council is required
to execute subgrant agreements; with regard to World Changers, a subgrant
103
agreement will outline activities to be undertaken; the $80,000.00 in CDBG
funds must be appropriated from approximately $404,000.00 in 2005-2006
program income in excess of current revenue estimates which includes
$445,000.00 excess program income received from The ~otel Roanoke, less
other planned program income still to be collected from other sources; and the
balance of excess program income will be appropriated for use in the 2006-
2007 budget.
With respect to the BC~C project, the City Manager advised that the
subgrant agreement is still in development, and it is anticipated that the
agreement will be submitted at the February 21 , 2006 Council meeting.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to amend the
2005-2010 Consolidated Plan Annual Update to add the World Changers project
and to revise the Belmont Community ~ealthcare Center project, including
submission of the necessary documents to ~UD; that Council adopt a budget
ordinance increasing the revenue estimate in Account No. 03s-G06-0600-2634
(Hotel Roanoke Section 108 Loan) in the amount of $80,000.00 and appropriate
funds in the same amount to Expenditure Account No. 03s-G06-0620-s468
(World Changers 2006 Funds); and further authorize the City Manager to
execute a CDBG Subgrant Agreement with Blue Ridge ~ousing Development
Corporation, Inc., to be approved as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37296-020606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate Community
Development Block Grant funding for the World Changers Program, amending
and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations,
and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 140.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37296-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
~a,,()r ~arris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------E5.
NAYS: Non e __n___n___________ n______n___nn______n___n____________n_n____nn_ __n____ n---O.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
104
(#37297-020606) A RESOLUTION authorizing the appropriate City
officials to execute an amendment to the Consolidated Plan for FY 2005-2010,
providing for the addition of the 2006 World Changers project and the revision
of the Belmont Community ~ealthcare Center project, and to execute and
submit necessary documents to the U. S. Department of ~ousing and Urban
Development ("~UD"), including a subgrant agreement, upon certain terms and
conditions.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, page 141.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37297-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
~ély()r ~élrris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15.
NAYS: Non e ________nn____nnn_______n__n_______n____n____n___ __n____nn___ ________n___nO .
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
CITY EMPLOYEES-COMMUNITY PLANNING-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that on May 10, 2005,
Council adopted an ordinance establishing a pay plan for officers and
employees of the City, as well as providing for annual salary increments for
certain job classifications which require the use of privately owned motor
vehicles used in the course of conducting City business.
It was further advised that in September 2005, the Department of
Planning Building and Development was reorganized to include the Department
of Economic Development; a job classification of Director of Planning Building
and Economic Development was also created and filled; in December 2005, a
Special Projects Coordinator position in the Department of Planning Building
and Economic Development was advertised and the position was filled in
January 2006; because of the nature of the position, the employee will be
traveling and using a personal vehicle on a daily basis; and neither
abovereferenced job classification was included in the ordinance adopted by
Council on Tuesday, May 10, 2005, to provide for the salary increments.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
amending Ordinance No. 37047-051005 to include an annual salary increment
for personal vehicle use of $2,000.00, each, for the Director of Planning
Building and Economic Development and the Special Projects Coordinator
(Position No. 2181 only).
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
105
(#37298-020606) AN ORDINANCE amending Ordinance No. 37047-
OS 1005, which adopted and established a Pay Plan for officers and employees
of the City, effective July 1, 2005; and dispensing with the second reading by
title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 142.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37298-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ arri s n__n__n_nnn_____nnn_______n --nn_____n_nn__n_nnnn__n__nn_nn___n_nn___n6.
NAYS: Non e nnnn_n____n_nn__n__nn_nn___nn_n_____nn_nn -___n_nn_n~___n_n__n_O.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
BUDGET-EMERGENCY SERVICES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Commonwealth of Virginia mandates that
localities take responsibility for answering wireless E-911 calls, rather than
having the calls routed and answered by the State Police; the Virginia State
Wireless E-911 Service Board provides funding to localities for equipment and
limited sala'ries to provide the service; the State currently collects $.75 per
month for each wireless telephone user to fund localities for expenses
associated with the services; on December 1, 2005, the Virginia State Wireless
E-911 Services Board awarded the City of Roanoke an additional $144,808.00
for fiscal year 2005-2006, with no requirement for matching funds; and the
additional funds will be used to upgrade system hardware and software.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance
accepting the increase in the revenue estimate for E-911 Wireless, in the
amount of $144,808.00 and appropriate funds in the same amount to Account
No. 013-430-9870, E-911 ~ardware/Software Upgrades.
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37299-020606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth for E-911 Wireless Service, amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2005-2006 General and Department of Technology Funds
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 143.)
106
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37299-
020606. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
~él,,()r ~élrris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------/).
NAYS: No n en---------- __nn___nn______nnn _n___n __n____n__________n______n___n____n___O.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that Verizon ~opeLine is a nationwide program designed to support
domestic violence victims; and donated cellular phones are recycled and
provided to domestic violence victims, while other proceeds of the program
provide grants and training to support recognized domestic violence prevention
programs.
It was further advised that recognizing the needs of domestic violence
victims, the Roanoke Police Department wishes to participate with the Verizon
~opeline Program through the Virginia Attorney General's Office by serving as a
collection point for phones donated by citizens and by donating phones which
have come into police possession that are not returnable to their owners and
are not evidence in any legal proceeding; and the Police Department will then
ferward the phones to the Virginia Attorney General's Office located on Peters
Creek Road to be given to the Verizon ~opeline Program.
It was explained that Section 2-263, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979),
as amended, requires approval by Council for acceptance of any gift exceeding
$5,000.00 in value; and although the actual value of most of the phones
donated to the program is minimal, at some point it is anticipated that the
cumulative value of phones donated to the Police Department will exceed the
$5,000.00 level.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to receive
donated cellular phones for the Verizon ~opeLine Program through the Police
Department; and that she be further authorized to dispose of cellular phones in
the custody of the Police Department that are unclaimed and not subject to any
claims or legal holds to be delivered to the Office of the Attorney General of the
Commonwealth of Virginia for subsequent donation to the Verizon HopeLine
Program or to a comparable charitable program.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
107
(#37300-020606) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to
receive, on behalf of the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke City Police
Department, out-of-service cellular phones, and unclaimed cellular phones in
the possession of the Police Department that are not evidence and are in no
way subject to any claims or legal holds, such phones to be delivered to the
Office of the Attorney General of the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Verizon
~opeLine Program (~opeLine).
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, page 144.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37300-
020606. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
MélYClr ~élrris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------€i.
NAYS: Non e nnn __nn_n_ _n_n__ _n_ _n.-nnn-- _nnn_n_____nnnn__nn _n_n__n____nn_O .
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
BUDGET-~OUSING/AUT~ORITY-FLEET MANAGEMENT FUND: The City
Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke Circuit
Court in the case of Walter S. Claytor, et. al. v. Roanoke Redevelopment and
~ousing Authority (RR~A), ruled in favor of the plaintiffs; following the ruling,
judgment in the amount of $503,338.50, plus per diem interest was granted to
the plaintiffs, and the Board of Commissioners of the RR~A has recommended
that an appeal not be filed; the Board of Commissioners has submitted a
resolution to the City requesting that the necessary funds be provided for
fulfillment of the obligations of the judgment; and total funding, in the amount
of $504,127.00, which includes per diem interest, needs to be appropriated to
fulfill obligations of the judgment.
The City Manager recommended that $300,000.00 be transferred from
Roanoke Neighborhood Development Corporation Crew Suites, Account No.
008-002-9651-9003, and $204,127.00 be transferred from Undesignated Fund
Balance, Account No. 001-3323, to Risk Management Miscellaneous Claims,
Account No. 019-340-1262-21 73; and that $168,611.00 be transferred from
Undesignated Fund Balance, Account No. 001-3323, to Motor Fuels
Contingency, Account No. 001-300-9410-3012.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
108
(#37301-020606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Capital Projects Fund and General Fund Undesignated Fund Balance for the
Claytor Settlement and Motor Fuel Contingency, reordaining certain sections of
the 2005-2006 General, Capital Projects and Risk Management Funds, and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, page 145.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37301-
020606. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ arri s ___n_nn__ nnn _n_n__n_nn_ - nnn ___n_ _n_n__ nnn _n____ _nn_nn _nnnn___nnnn6.
NAYS: No n e_nnnn_ -------- nnn__nn_____nn__nnn nnn n____ _nn_nnn_nnn________n_O.
«Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
CITY ATTORNEY:
REGIONAL COOPERATION-WATER RESOURCES: The City Attorney
submitted a written report advising that the State has adopted regulations
requiring all local governments to submit water supply plans to the State; for
localities participating in regional water supply plans, the deadline for notifying
the State is November 2008; and Council Member Cutler requested that a
resolution be prepared expressing the intent of Council to participate in
development of a regional water supply plan along with the Counties of
Bedford, Botetourt, Franklin and Roanoke, the Cities of Roanoke and Salem, and
the Towns of Boones Mill, Rocky Mount and Vinton.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37302-020606) A RESOLUTION expressing City Council's intent that
the City participate in a regional effort to develop a regional water supply plan
in accordance with Virginia's local and regional water supply planning
regulations.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, page· 147.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37302-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
109
Council Member Cutler advised that the City of Roanoke is required by
State law to apprise the Virginia Department of Environmental Quality as to how
the City plans to meet the new requirement for a long-range water supply plan;
i.e.: either a City only plan or a regional plan; and neighboring jurisdictions in
the Upper Roanoke River Watershed and around Smith Mountain Lake have
expressed an interest in participating in a regional plan. ~e stated that the
Western Virginia Water Authority and the Roanoke Valley-Alleghany Regional
Commission stand ready to be of assistance; much of the work has already
been completed with the SO year water supply option study prepared by Black
and Veatch Consultants approximately two years ago; some specifics such as a
timetable for construction associated with development in a more robust
interconnected regional water supply system will need to be added; and an
interconnected water system should have the compatibility to address potential
terrorists attacks and natural disasters. ~e spoke in support of adoption of the
resolution.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that Montgomery County has a water line
located less than one mile from Spring ~ollow. and suggested that Montgomery
County be invited to participate; whereupon, Council Member Cutler advised
that the invitation has been extended and declined.
Resolution No. 37302-020606 was adopted by the follOWing vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ a rri s ---- n____ ________n__n n----__nn____n______n_nn___________nnn____________nn_n__n___6.
NAYS: Non e nn _______________nn___ n________n__nn______nn____n___ _______n____ n____ ---n--O.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the
Financial Report for the month of December 2005.
(For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Director of Finance advised that the City's overall revenues are up
just over nine per cent, which is about a four per cent positive variance over
budget anticipation; the City received approximately $2.5 million from the State
for highway maintenance allocation earlier in 2006 than the allocation was
received last year, general property taxes are ahead of budget, sales taxes are
trending along at about three per cent, the meals tax is at about four per cent,
and transient room taxes are up a little over ten per cent compared to last year,
which is indicative of the fact that more people are staying over night in the
City of Roanoke. ~e added that the City recently received bids on the sale of
about $35 million of general obligation bonds; and financing was completed on
110
Patrick ~enry ~igh School, expansion of the Civic Center, and the last phase of
financing on the Riverside Centre for Research and Technology. ~e called
attention to active bidding on the sale of bonds and the City received an
excellent interest rate of 4.1 per cent on the majority of the 20 year bonds,
which leaves the City with approximately $236 million in total tax supported
debt outstanding; and the City has a certain other lesser amount of debt that
have their own funding streams, such as user fees or reimbursement by the
State, etc. As a part of the bond issuance process, he explained that the bond
rating agencies assigned a credit rating to the City of Roanoke which has been
confirmed as a double A bond rating; the City's debt level is termed as
moderate; and the City has been commended for its annual strategic planning
process and adoption of a Five Year Capital Improvement Program. On the
contrary, he pointed out that bond rating agencies note that wealth levels as
measured in household income in Roanoke are somewhat below the State and
national averages which is an issue that is targeted for the Council's strategic
planning process. ~e stated that for the past five years, the City has been able
to finance a number of significant capital projects, and also refinance
essentially all of the outstanding debt at interest rates varying from
approximately 4 to 4 ~ per cent for 20 year debt.
There being no questions or comments and without objection by Council,
the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of December would
be received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINIS~ED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY T~E MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
STATE ~IG~WAYS: Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to the
Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) for planting a total of 229
trees, including oaks and maples, redbuds and others, and SO shrubs along the
1-581/220 Expressway corridor (located at the Route 419/Tanglewood
interchange, Wonju Street, Franklin Road, Peters Creek Road, and various
locations along 1-581). ~e added that VDOT also planted 25,000 day lilies and
25,000 daffodils at the Elm Avenue, Wonju Street, Franklin Road and Orange
Avenue interchanges.
111
SPORTS ACTIVITIES-SC~OOLS: Council Member Dowe congratulated the
Roanoke Chapter of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference and the
Roanoke Chapter of the NAACP on the success of their annual banquets. ~e
advised that he attended an activity at William Fleming ~igh School in which the
No. 1 football jersey worn by John St. Clair, who currently plays professional
football for the Chicago Bears, was retired.
PUBLIC WORKS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick commended Robert K. Bengtson,
Director, Public Works, and Kenneth ~. King, Manager, Division of
Transportation, and their staff for collecting the last cycle of leaves in the City
of Roanoke.
FIRE DEPARTMENT: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised on January 28, 2006,
the "To The Rescue" exhibit was displaced from Tanglewood Mall. ~e stated
that Roanoke is known all over the world for its railroad heritage and for the
first volunteer rescue squad in the United States. Therefore, he inquired if the
"To The Rescue" exhibit could be temporarily housed at the City's Number One
Firehouse.
The City Manager advised that she previously met with representatives of
the "To The Rescue Museum", at which time the City's assistance was
requested. She stated that City staff will identify potential sites and while every
effort will be made to locate another site, a smaller space than that which was
previously occupied at Tanglewood Mall may be offered.
POLICE DEPARTMENT: Council Member Lea advised of the appointment
of the City's Domestic Violence Task Force. He noted that the first meeting will
be held on February 17, 2006, at 10:30 a.m., in the Police Department
Community Room, 348 Campbell Avenue, S. W., and expressed appreciation to
Assistant City Manager for Community Development, Rolanda Russell, for her
assistance in establishing the task force.
LIBRARIES: Council Member McDaniel called attention to a series of
workshops that will be held at the Roanoke Public Library with regard to
navigating the Internet.
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
COMPLAINTS: Mr. Robert Craig, 701 12'h Street, S. W., advised that four
of the present Members of Council have been in office for four or more years
which is too long to be able to blame their predecessors for past mistakes. ~e
stated that the Director of Real Estate Valuation has been placed under the
direct supervision of the Director of Finance which may be a conflict of interest.
~e advised that after listening to the Victory Stadium fiasco for the past six
11 2
years, he has reached the conclusion that Victory Stadium is nothing more than
a red herring used to divert attention from other important issues, such as a
failing school system which is under the direction of a School Board that is
appointed by and responsible to City Council· and has never been held
accountable for its actions. ~e stated that those persons who have served on
the Council for four or more years are more of a problem than a solution,
specifically to the school system; whereupon, he called for their resignations
and suggested that they seek reelection in the next Councilmanic election to
validate their leadership.
COMPLAINTS-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. John E. Kepley, 2909 Morrison
Avenue, S. E., called attention to an article that was recently published in The
Roanoke Tribune that raises certain questions and provides certain answers,
i.e.: Question: Who is controlling City Council and how they vote on the issue
of Victory Stadium? Does Carilion ~ealthcare Systems want the land on which
Victory Stadium now stands; if they want the land, how have they planned to
obtain it? ~ave they influenced members of City Council? ~ave members of
City Council been bought out and are they not in Carilion's pocket? ~e stated
that these are all questions that should be answered, but what are the facts?
He advised that the newspaper article contends that an inspection of campaign
(ontributions at the Registrar's Office revealed that several Carilion officers
made substantial contributions to the campaigns of several City Council
Members; two members of the City Planning Commission are directly tied to
Carilion and others; and one member of the City Planning Commission is
(urrently serving as architect for the Patrick ~enry ~igh School
improvements/stadium. ~e stated that he has been told that at the public
hearing to be held this evening on the Patrick ~enry ~igh School stadium
rezoning, the City Planning Commission will vote to rezone the land at Patrick
Henry ~igh School for a stadium and a member of City Council will offer a
motion to call for the immediate demolition of Victory Stadium. ~e added that
if the motion passes and the demolition of Victory Stadium occurs before the
May Councilmanic election, three events will follow this violation of the rights of
citizens: (1) the independent ticket of Dowe, Mason and Trinkle will be soundly
defeated; (2) when the new City Council is sworn into office, they will
immediately call for the resignation of the City Manager, and (3) he would
personally lead a crusade for the Mayor's impeachment.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT: Ms. Zoe Stennett, 3531 Peters
Creek Road, N. W., advised that she has addressed Council on numerous
occasions with regard to increased wages for Roanoke's publiC safety
employees. She expressed concern with regard to a recent newspaper article in
The Roanoke Times which stated that the City of Roanoke ranks second in the
Commonwealth of Virginia for incidents involving violent crime; therefore, the
City should allocate more funds to support public safety employees.
11 3
ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, ~ardy, Virginia,
advised that Victory Stadium is not only a memorial to World War II veterans,
but a historic site ranking number two behind The ~otel Roanoke. ~e advised
that when Victory Stadium was no longer maintained by the City's Department
of Parks and Recreation, it fell into a state of disrepair; however, if the City were
to appropriate sufficient funds, the stadium could be renovated at less cost
than constructing a new stadium and could be enjoyed by all citizens of the City
of Roanoke.
COMPLAINTS-ARMORY /STADIUM-ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-SCHOOLS: Mr.
Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., advised that Council acted illegally in
the appointment of an attorney to the Roanoke City School Board. ~e called
attention to inadequate parking at the Roanoke Civic Center on the night of
Wednesday, February 1, 2006, when two simultaneous events were. held;
directions to the City's parking garages were not clear, out of town visitors
parked their vehicles on the Post Office Parking lot, and vehicles were towed,
costing the owners $300.00 - 400.00 to retrieve their cars, therefore, it is
unlikely that those same visitors will return to Roanoke. ~e added that the City
needs to move away from the Victory Stadium issue. and concentrate on other
pressing needs of the City; if the City constructs a .new parking garage with
municipal bonds, the facility should be constructed in the vicinity of the
Roanoke Civic Center which would eliminate the need for shuttle buses.
COMPLAINTS-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29'h Street,
N. W., .called attention to the need for more attractions in the downtown area to
generate tax revenue, the need to improve the appearance of older buildings in
downtown Roanoke, and the need for improvements to the City's infrastructure.
~e expressed concern with regard to the City's high crime rate, wages that are
not sufficient to retain and to attract young people to the Roanoke Valley, a tax
base that prevents the average person from purchasing a home, City leaders
who should be replaced because citizens have lost trust in them, and
renovation of Victory Stadium. ~e stated that Roanoke's leaders are too
conservative and too slow to make changes for the betterment of the
community and its people.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-FIRE DEPARTMENT-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised
that there is vacancy on the Board of Fire Appeals created by the resignation of
Bobby Lavender, for a term ending June 30, 2008; whereupon, he opened the
floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Richard B.
Sarver.
114
There being no further nominations, Mr. Sarver was appointed as a
member of the Board of Fire Appeals, to fill the unexpired term of Bobby
Lavender, ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote:
FOR MR. SARVER: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
M cDan ie I and Mayo r ~arri Sn_________nn___nm_______n_m_mnnnm_mn______mn______n__6.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
OAT~S OF OFFICE-~OUSING/AUT~ORITY-COMMITTEES: The Mayor
advised that the three year term of office of Sherman V. Burroughs, IV, as a
member of the Fair ~ousing Board will expire on March 31, 2006; whereupon,
he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Sherman V.
Burroughs, IV.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Burroughs was reappointed a
member of the Fair ~ousing Board for a term ending March 31, 2009, by the
following vote:
FOR MR. BURROUG~S: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
M cDan ie I and Mayo r ~arri S_________nnnm_n_nn___n_____m_n___nn_mn______n_______m___6.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
At 4: 15 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber for a joint meeting of
Council and the City Planning Commission.
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, February 6, 2006, the Council meeting
reconvened in joint session with the City Planning Commission; in the City
Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris presiding.
The purpose of the meeting was to conduct a public hearing by the
Council and the City Planning Commission to consider the Second Amended
Petition to Amend Proffered Condition, filed by the City of Roanoke on
December 23,2005, for property located at 2102 Grandin Road, S. W., Official
Tax No. 1460101, said amendment of proffers dealing with the construction
and operation of a school sports stadium, practice fields and tennis courts at
Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
11 5
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff
and Mayor C. Nelson ~arrisn-----m---------n-------------------nmnnm_nnnm____________n7.
A BS ENT: Non e _000000____00__ _nn_nnnn_n_n__oonnnn_n_______nnnnn__n_n_ _nnnn_O.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT: Gilbert E. Butler, Jr.,
D. Kent Chrisman, Robert B. Manetta, Paula L.. Prince, Richard A. Rife, ~enry
Scholz (arrived late) and Frederick M. Williamsm-m-------------------m--nnnmn------7.
ABS E NT: Non en_nnnn_nn___nnn__nnn_nn________ __nn_nn_ __nnoo____nnnnn_n__O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
OT~ERS PRESENT: R. Brian Townsend, Agent, City Planning Commission;
and Martha P. Franklin, Secretary, City Planning Commission.
Richard Rife, Chair, City Planning Commission, read the followi:1g
statement:
"I, Richard Rife, of Rife and Wood Architects, located at 1326
Grandin Road, S. W., Roanoke, Virginia, state that I have a personal
interest in the rezoning matter involving Official Tax No. 1460101,
the lot on which Patrick ~enry ~igh School is located. Therefore,
pursuant to Virginia Code Section 2.2-3112(A)(1), I must refrain
from participation in this matter. I ask that the Secretary for the
Planning Commission accept this statement and ask that it be
made a part of the minutes of this meeting for the Planning
Commission and be retained for five years, as required by Section
2.2-3115 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended."
Mr. Rife then seated himself in the audience for the remainder of the
public hearing.
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor ~arris.
116
PUBLIC ~EARING:
ZONING: Pursuant to instructions by the Council and the City Planning
Commission, the City Clerk and Secretary to the City Planning Commission
having advertised a joint public hearing for Monday, February 6, 2006, at
7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of
the City of Roanoke to delete a proffered condition and to have certain revised
and new proffered conditions apply to certain property located at 2102 Grandin
Road, S. W., Official Tax No. 1460101, Patrick ~enry ~igh School, for the
purpose of development of a high school sports stadium, tennis courts, and
practice fields, the matter was before the two bodies.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, January 23, 2006, and Monday, January 30, 2006.
The Mayor reviewed the following process for conducting the public
hearing: 37 individuals previously signed up to speak, and each person would
be allotted up to three minutes, with no extension of time; the petitioner would
be called upon to make a presentation, followed by citizen comment; and at the
conclusion of citizen comments, the City Planning Commission would conduct a
public hearing, entertain comments and vote on the matter,to be followed by
the Council's public hearing comments and vote.
R. Brian Townsend, Agent, City Planning Commission, stated that Bernard
Godek, Associate Superintendent for Management, Roanoke City Public Schools,
and Richard Rife, representing Rife and Wood Architects, would present a
summary of the proposed project, followed by the recommendation of City
Planning staff, which would be followed by public comments.
Inasmuch as Mr. Rife, Chair, City Planning Commission, had excused
himself from presiding over the meeting and the Vice-Chair was not present,
Mr. Manetta inquired if the City Planning Commission could continue to
conduct business.
The City Attorney advised that according to by-laws of the City Planning
Commission, in the absence of the Chair and the Vice-Chair, the Planning
Commission could elect a temporary chair, and upon arrival, the Vice-Chair
would automatically preside over the remainder of the meeting.
In the absence of the Chair and Vice-Chair, Mayor ~arris called for
nominations by the City Planning Commission of a Temporary Chair;
whereupon, Mr. Chrisman placed in nomination the name of Robert B. Manetta.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Manetta was elected as
Temporary Chair of the City Planning Commission by the following vote:
117
FOR MR. MANETTA: Commissioners Butler, Chrisman, Prince, Williams
and Man etta n_nnn_n____________nnnn_n_n_____nnn_nn___ _nnnn__n _nnnnnnn____nnn_n 5 .
(Commissioner Scholz was absent.)
The following is a summary of Mr. Godek's presentation:
· Roanoke City Public Schools reaffirms its desire to develop a
multi-purpose athletic facility at Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
· Since the School Administration is charged with the
responsibility of doing what is in the best interests of Roanoke's
students, it is requested that Council approve the petition to
amend the zoning of property located at 2102 Grandin Road,
S. W.
· On October 27, 2005, the Superintendent's Athletics Committee
presented an interim report to the School Board as a part of a
workshop session which recommended that a 3,000 seat multi-
use stadium and new track facilities be constructed at both
Patrick ~enry and William Fleming ~igh Schools.
· In addition to the interim report, the Committee provided the
School Board with a detailed cost estimate for construction of
the two proposed stadiums.
· The cost of each stadium, including track facilities, is $4.1
million.
· Subsequent to the filing of the Petition to Amend the Proffers,
and at the direction of the Superintendent of Schools, four
community engagement meetings 'were held by the school
system at Patrick ~enry ~igh School on November 17, November
22, December 1 and December 8, 2005, which were hosted by a
third-party facilitator.
· The purpose of the meetings was to solicit community input and
to disseminate information regarding the proposed siting and
construction of a stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
· Information was provided to community members in the form of
a resource panel which included representation from the school
administration, staff from the Department of Planning, Building
and Development, the City of Roanoke Police Department, Rife
and Wood Architects and civic organizations.
118
· ~andouts were also provided depicting the proposed siting,
graphic renderings, lighting equipment information, and
information pertaining to artificial turf surfaces.
· Community members were given the opportunity to
communicate concerns during question and answer sessions, a
telephone hot-line was established, question response cards
were used, and an internet survey was available.
· Concerns were synthesized into key issues that the school
administration worked diligently to address.
· Community concerns were categorized as follows: traffic,
parking, pedestrian control, noise, lighting, litter and security.
· Formal written responses were provided to community members
upon request.
· The school administration listened well and' took the various
concerns and recommendations seriously, and as a direct result
of input that was received· from the community, the school
administration and the School Board provided substantial
proffers that were incorporated into a Second Amended Petition
to Amend Proffered Condition.
· The substantial proffers are a sign of the school system's
commitment to both students and to community members who
may be impacted in some way by including a multi-use sports
facility as part of the new Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
· It is the goal of the school administration and the School Board
to provide students with a complete and quality educational
experience and Roanoke's students should expect nothing less
from their leaders.
· Building complete schools that contain all of the educational
and supplementary facilities needed by students are key
elements to providing a quality educational experience.
Mr. Godek advised that the School Administration respectfully requests
that the City Planning Commission and City Council approve the Second
Amended Petition to Amend Proffered Condition with regard to property located
at 2102 Grandin Road, S. W., to allow for development of a proposed multi-use
athletic facility.
Vice-Chair Scholz entered the meeting at 7: 17 p.m. and took the Chair.
_.0...-...
~i
~--".....
--
~-':L
l.!... ---
~'~'::;:J
I . .
.!!;.- *~ .;
-w -,)) ...1
..-. --
ifl\liIilÊ¡¡¡.¡g¡p....
@_.......A11
..._--....
1Il1it.lP'--=- .It
~..!
...~.,.-
....--
1lIlIJr"";- I
-----
U~-.-
"Tili
~:iii:3~1.
-
..---~-_.._-
.-------..-----
--
~··~~~".v' .... 'I . ."
ö- -".~. ~,.. ··c\'·t"
_i Ì-:l."!. -~- "irl~~~' -, _."J~ [": "
.~. \':J~~lI:~t~ lJ~' ~~' Ei
---.....
·I~-..
--
~~.....
,
,
{
~..--,
III '- '.
11 9
,......
. . I L ,
__C'lL.'=-
_C.~..
Rife-__
~-
'-
-.¡¡¡
--
--~
---
to.:
.......
--
-
~
----
..--
--
Ïí
~
_or
--
fQl1A1lIlÞ.I.IO.
""""'-
-
-
--
FClUR
Mr. Rife reviewed the above proposed site plan amendment to the
previously proffered site plan for Patrick ~enry ~igh School and pointed out
orientation of the school and surrounding facilities.
· Gibboney ~all will remain as included in Phase I of school
construction and was occupied last month.
· Phase II construction will be devoted to fine arts, including an
auditorium, art classrooms, blackbox theatre, music spaces, and
athletics and physical education gymnasium, locker rooms,
training facilities, etc.
· Parking was reworked so that the primary entrance into the
school will remain as is, there will be a bus loop with teacher
parking, as well as locations for entrance to the school by those
students who ride the bus and those who drive; parking areas at
the school, as well as additional parking beside Gibboney ~all
and Raleigh Court Elementary School, will be used to support
the proposed stadium.
120
. Primary entrance and artificial turf field will support football,
Virginia ~igh School League Championship soccer dimensions,
lacrosse, a visitor side containing approximately 1,000 seats
and a home side of about 2,000 seats.
"--_....~
.~.."l'
............
.
--...-
.
.
. ~..
..
..
..
..
..
..
..
.
~
..
~
.
.~.
@lI!'11'·....
. . . . I . .
~ . I .. ..
:.=~;;=-ã;.:;
ltiff: t Wood [ij
...r.l1lru·
-=.~~~-=
.--
-~.,ü;¡
--
--.--=---==
_¡"WI
---.
-~iiii
-'~m
~
..--
- ......
-...
.-
.
~
STMlIUI6
....
-
~
SIX
..:<;T,ft,nIUM PLAN.dan 121221200'2:2$,.9 PIo'
· The stadium is unique in that it is contained in a sunken bowl,
with the entrance at the ticketing point.
· Visiting fans would ascend up the sidewalk ramp, which is
handicap accessible with a five per cent grade, and the
concourse level would step down into concrete bleachers built
into an earthen berm, with separate concession and toilet
facilities for visiting fans.
· ~ome fans would go to the other side, ascend up a similar
sidewalk ramp, which is handicap accessible with a five per cent
grade, from the concourse level, fans could step down for 1,000
seats, or go up for a second 1,000 seats, with total seating of
2,000 seats; and included are male and female restroom
facilities, concession area, six field lighting supports, sidewalk,
and an earthen berm wraps around the field.
1 21
. A small service road leads to a service/storage building under
the elevated portion of the home stands, and continues around
to a small tunnel that allows vehicle access to the field at grade
level.
... . . .. .
.. . .. L
---='=- -=-=
..=',=:-~_"I:
lifotWood.
.IC·lttlr1t.
''''''':i,1:;..''';":C:
0_-
-~
_Miii
--.-.--
. --Au
-='l---
=~tuÜi
SECTION THROUGHST ADIUIA
@) ~!.,~D-YARD LINE
SECTION THROUGH ST ADIUIA
§~.,SAST END ZONE·
-'-ä
~.
'A'I'IICl tBM' ¡
~-~ I
..
@ ~;~~ON THROUGH STAOIUM AT 50-YARD LINE
t ~
- ..
STADIUM
SECTIONS
-
~
-
· The field is dug down in an effort to reduce height, bulk and
impact on the surrounding neighborhood.
· The dotted line represents the existing grade, field level was
sunk by an average of seven feet, and the earth that was
excavated out was berméd up into a bowl around the building
so that on the visitors side, from the concourse level, visiting
fans would step down into seating areas, with a concession
area, a press box above, and with broadcast areas and coaching
positions; and on the home side, from the concourse level, half
of the seats are down, half are elevated up, with storage room
underneath accessible by a grade level.
· One of the advantages of sinking the field down is that it helps
to contain sound and noise to some degree, and allows a
reduction in the height of the lighting poles; and poles are
dependent on being
122
· either 55 or 60 feet above the playing surface, not necessarily
above the ground, so when the playing surface is pulled down,
the top of the lights are also pulled down..
· Moving through the home side, cutting through a cross section
at the ten-yard line, will be the playing surface, a small retaining
wall, a grassy berm with a walkway at the top, rounding back
down to about the existing grade, and continuing out about 80
feet to the alley behind the home stands that parallel Brandon
Avenue.
· When looking to the end of the stadium on the east end, toward
Blenheim Road, there is a similar situation, including a playing
area, small retaining wall, earthen berm up to a concourse level
and then back down to a practice field.
'~/ (~"Y!?lfJ¡l-I7NJ::-Y.c ~~=
f
!
.----~:
.--
-...
_Jiii
--.--
_.fiil!ft
=........
---~
_._~
..--
~
-
t? ,-I. 1-:....,.1.'./-
~-
. An aerial view of the entire campus shows the main entrance into
the campus, Raleigh Court Branch Library, the Governor's School,
Raleigh Court Elementary School, the existing track which will
remain and be converted to a metric configuration with a
rubberized topping, and the existing baseball field will remain.
123
· Part of the project will include the three existing tennis courts and
three additional non-lighted tennis courts will be added to provide
for a total of six tennis courts, which is the proper number for
tennis competition on campus, and in keeping with the desire of
the school system to playas many competitions on campus as
possible.
· With regard to the new building portion that will soon be under
construction, parking will feed into a central ticketing point,
visiting side, home side, an additional practice field set up for
soccer, football and lacrosse; and a softball field will remain in its
current location, and will be expanded to reach regulation
dimensions.
Mr. Rife reviewed a fly-over tour of 3-D images of the stadium and the
campus and how the stadium would fit on the campus:
· At night, stadium lights would be contained within the stadium
bowl; photometric data prepared by engineers representing a light
manufacturer substantiates that lighting on sèhool property can be
contained; at residential property lines, there will be no more than
one-half foot candle of light produced by stadium lighting at the
property line, which is one of the proffered conditions and will be
submitted to the Board of Zoning Appeals if the request for
Amendment of Proffered Condition is approved by Council.
· The existing practice field contains a large amount of stored soil
that will be used as controlled fill material for Phase II.
· Trees that will be planted are a combination of pine and redbuds,
and will be added as part of Phase II regardless of the decision
pertaining to zoning; and additional landscaping surrounding the
stadium is contingent upon the stadium being constructed.
Mr. Rife advised that 12 proffers have been submitted as part of the
proposal to strictly limit utilization of the stadium, three of which pertain to
traffic control, the tenth proffer states that manual traffic control will be
provided before and after all home varsity football homes and graduation
ceremonies at the intersections of Brandon Avenue and Grandin Road, Grandin
Road and Laburnum Avenue, Grandin Road and Avenel Avenue, and Guilford
Avenue and Lofton Road in coordination with the City of Roanoke Police
Department; and all three traffic related proffers were the direct result of
meetings with residents of the area and at their request. ~e added that the 11 th
proffer states that the intersection of Lofton Road. Finally, he stated that the
12th proffer states that the service entrance to the school from Blenheim Road
will be locked and secured to prevent any parking or access, excluding
emergency vehicles and team buses, before, during and after every home
varsity football game.
124
Mr. Townsend presented the following overview of staff's
recommendation:
· The site is currently zoned Institutional Planned Unit
Development ("INPUD"), the petitioner seeks to amend the
previously approved proffers on the development INPUD plan,
and requests amendment of the 3,000 seat sports stadium, one
additional practice field and three additional tennis courts.
· The City is the owner of the property and the City's petition was
initiated by Council on November 7, 2005 and filed with the City
Planning Commission on November 9, 2005; the First Amended
Petition was filed with the City Planning Commission on
December 9, 2005; on December 19, 2005, the School Board
endorsed proffers as contained in the First Amended Petition;
the Second Amended Petition, which is presently before the
Council, was filed on December 23, 2005, containing certain
minor amendments requested by the City Planning Commission
at its meeting which was held on December 21, 2005; and such
amendments at that time were agreeable to School
administration representatives who were in attendance at the
City Planning Commission meeting.
· The proposed stadium, practice field and tennis courts are
permitted uses in the INPUÒ District as accessory uses to the
existing school. .
· The lighting of the stadium and any other outdoor lighted
athletic field would require a special exception from the Board
of Zoning Appeals.
· The subject property borders approximately 99 parcels of land,
the vast majority of which are Single-family dwellings; however,
the site is surrounded by a number of zoning categories,
including the R-7, Single-family Residential District, IN,
Institutional District, which includes a number of churches on
the west side of Grandin Road, R-s, Residential Single-Family
District, and MX, Mixed Use District, which includes the
Shenandoah Life Insurance Company complex, ROS, Recreation
Open Space District, RM-2, Residential Multi-family District, RMF,
Residential Multi-family District, and CN, Neighborhood
Commercial District, which includes the BP Convenience Store
and the All Sports Café at the intersection of Guilford Avenue
and Grandin Road.
Mr. Townsend stated that:
· Exhibit Four of the Second Amended Petition contains
information relating to proposed district boundaries and
location of all public rights-of-way, drive way and loading areas,
as well as information on the location and use of all proposed
125
structures and those existing structures proposed to remain on
the site; the location and extent of all remaining and proposed
off-street parking spaces are illustrated, in addition to
pedestrian routes and the use of open spaces, areas of the site
to be maintained in a natural wooded condition which include
primarily Shrine ~i1I; and on site lighting details and proposed
lumen levels are depicted and quantified on Exhibit Four to
ensure that there is no glare beyond district boundaries.
· Exhibit Five details the provision of public water and sewer and
storm water infrastructure on the redeveloped site.
· Exhibit Six illustrates the proposed stadium plan and details the
layout of the playing field, seating, concession, toilets and
lighting.
· Exhibit Seven contains proposed stadium section and structural
elevation, all of which are conditions that would be maintained
with the petition, if approved.
· The School Administration held four community engagement
meetings on the campus of Patrick ~enry ~igh School to solicit
input from the community on design of the school sport
stadium; during the meetings, participants expressed particular
concern with regard to traffic, parking, lighting and noise, and
City staff examined each concern in detail.
· With regard to traffic generated from a large stadium event,
which is different from school day traffic, much of the load
occurs over a one to two hour period prior to the event, and
load out occurs typically over a much shorter time period during
off-peak traffic hours; to address loading issues, the petitioner
has proffered to utilize the City of Roanoke Police Department
to direct traffic ingress and egress from the high school
property, and also proffered that certain access points would be
closed during operation of the stadium for high school varsity
football.
· Upon completion of Phase II of high school construction, over
650 parking spaces will be available on the entire campus, with
the addition of temporary event parking on Shrine Field to
supplement permanent on-site parking; City staff does not
recommend additional permanent parking spaces on the site
due to policies of Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive
Plan, that discourage excessive surface parking lots and
impervious surfaces.
126
· The Petitioner proffers that Patrick ~enry ~igh School stadium
lighting would only be used for varsity football games and in the
event of darkness in order to complete other sporting events
that began during daylight hours; the Petitioner also proffers
that stadium lighting would not be used for practices, only for
game play; lighting is not proposed for practice fields or for
proposed tennis courts; and Exhibit Four contains lumen levels
that are proposed for the stadium and at the property line, as
well as the design and model that would be used.
· Section 36.2-403(f) of the current Zoning Ordinance requires
that sport stadium lighting standards shall be established by
special exception granted by the Board of Zoning Appeals; and
Chapter 21 of the City Code, Section 21-43.1, provides that the
operation of any lighted athletic faCility that is contiguous to
residentially zoned parcels is prohibited after 10:00 p.m., and
the rule would apply to the Patrick ~enry ~igh School location.
· The Petitioner has proffered that the stadium public address
system will be used only for varsity football games, daytime
varsity games and future graduation assemblies, and the
stadium has been oriented so that home seating faces Shrine
~ill, thereby directing the loudest crowd noise away from
residential areas.
· The City Planning Commission held a public meeting on
December 21, 2005, and re"quested that several of the proffers
be clarified, which clarifications" are included in the Second
Amended Petition; during the meeting, the Planning
Commission also heard comments from 23 citizens and those
comments are annotated in the staff report.
In summary, Mr. Townsend advised that given the comprehensive nature
of the proffered conditions, both as they relate to design and operation of the
facility and the overall relationship of the site to adjacent properties, staff
supports the Second Amended Petition to Amend Proffered Condition,and the
City Planning Commission should recommend approval of the petition to City
Council.
(For full text, see staff report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Mayor advised that 37 persons had signed up to speak; whereupon,
the follOWing persons addressed the Council and the City Planning Commission:
127
Mr. Kurt Navratil, 1877 Arlington Road, S. W., spoke in support of
construction of a football facility at Patrick ~enry ~igh School and urged
Council, as responsible elected officials, to vote in favor of the Second
Amended Petition. ~e stated that it is a good solution, supported by students,
the PTSA, the Boosters Club, the City administration, and most of the
surrounding neighborhood either wants the stadium, or could care less one way
or the other. ~e added that it is a responsible and prudent decision for the
future of high school athletics in the City of Roanoke and the least that he, as a
neighbor who lives eight houses from the Patrick ~enry ~igh School campus,
can do is support the stadium and help to make it successful. After stadia on
both of the high school campuses are built, he advised that the reality is that
two or three Friday nights may introduce some parking issues for the
surrounding neighborhoods; playing football games in the neighborhood offers
an opportunity for numerous persons to walk to the games, thereby reducing
demands on parking; some traffic congestion will occur on two or three Fridays
and Saturdays out of the year; there will be crowds, noise and lights on two to
three Fridays and Saturdays out of 52, but the noise will be joyful and fun,
lasting no more than about three hours. ~e advised that a complete school
campus will increase the likelihood that some students will elect to stay in
school for a number of reasons. ~e applauded the PTSA, the Boosters Club,
students, the school community, and parents and neighbors who have
encouraged Council and the City Planning Commission to listen to the
groundswell of support for the stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
Mr. Nick Brash, 2259 Westover Avenue, S. W., spoke in favor of
construction of high school stadia. ~e stated that 30 years ago, he grew up in
a community in West Virginia that had a stadium adjacent to the high school,
which is a good indication of how far below par school facilities are in the City
of Roanoke. ~e added that he did not understand the repugnant attitude of
some persons who oppose high school stadia; having lived adjacent to his high
school stadium for ten years, it generated a sense of community, did not lower
property values, and provided a great benefit to students; therefore, all citizens
should consider the ramifications for Roanoke's children if the City continues to
follow its present direction. ~e stated that if he were a war veteran, he would
want a facility to be constructed that would be used by a majority of the City's
population that would develop a sense of community, and not a "white
elephant" that is located in a floodplain and is rarely used, and he would want a
facility that is cost effective and would benefit a majority of the community
such as an amphitheater or a similar facility. ~e. stated that funds that pay for
renovation of both Victory Stadium and high school stadiums are derived from
the same basic source, however, amenities for Roanoke's children should not
be delayed until the Victory Stadium issue is resolved. ~e advised that
Council's vote should be reflective of a concern for the future of Roanoke's
children, and not promises that were made during an election year.
128
Ms. Carol Brash, 2259 Westover Avenue, S. W., spoke as a mother of
current and past students of the Roanoke City Public School System, as an
advocate for children of Roanoke City Public Schools, as a PTA Board member at
the District Council and individual school levels, and as a resident of the
Greater Raleigh Court neighborhood. She stated that the best stadium solution
for the City of Roanoke is to construct stadiums at each high school for reasons
of student safety, reduction of travel time and costs, opportunities for Boosters
Clubs to raise funds for athletics and band activities, build school spirit,
strengthen school communities, and make the school system more attractive to
potential businesses that might consider locating in the Roanoke area. She
further stated that while she understood some of the concerns expressed by
residents of the area, those same concerns have been satisfactorily addressed
by the stadium design and proffers to the rezoning; and other reasons
expressed by some persons who are opposed to the two stadium concept cause
concern. She added that it is the goal of Roanoke City Public Schools to provide
a public education for every child in Roanoke City; it is the motto of the PTA to
speak for every child with one voice; and all of Roanoke's students deserve to
know that they are valued and welcomed by Roanoke's schools and
neighborhoods. She also expressed concern about the example set by some
persons who have spoken in the past and while it is their right to express their
opinion, it is also their responsibility to do so in a positive and respectful
manner and not engage in personal attacks on the Members of Council, or
accuse people of having questionable motives, Simply because they are not in
agreement with the speaker. She advised that many people have worked long
and hard to bring the option of high school stadia to the forefront and they
have done so because they believe it is right for Roanoke City; therefore, she
urged Council to move forward with a vote to accept the recommendation of
City Planning staff.
Ms. Estelle McCadden, 2128 Mercer Avenue, N. W., advised that Council
voted for the two high school stadiums before reviewing all of the facts. She
stated that some taxpayers will not choose to use the high school stadiums,
therefore, she asked what type of facility will be constructed for that segment
of Roanoke's population. She further stated that the City failed to maintain
Victory Stadium for many years which led to its current state of deterioration
and inquired as to who will be responsible for funding the maintenance of two
high school stadiums. She advised that if the school system funds the
maintenance of the two stadiums, less funds will be available for classroom
instruction, leading to more students failing the Standards of Learning.
Mr. Alan C. Scanlan, 1631 Center ~ill Drive, S. W., advised that he was
told at a recent community meeting that Roanoke's children deserve nothing
but the best; however, a school system that spends $40,000.00 annually to
maintain three airplanes might be expected to give such an answer. ~e used an
analogy of the average '~oe Roanoke", who has worked hard for many years and
has done his best to take care of his family and to support his community, he
deserves the best, but in reality, what can '~oe Roanoke" afford? ~e rides in an
129
old high mileage pickup truck with a slipping transmission, he lives in a small
house with one bathroom, his furniture has seen its better day; therefore, when
average '~oe Roanoke" and the City of Roanoke examine what is needed, they
must also look at what they can afford. ~e inquired as to why other options
have not been considered in lieu of looking at only a $4.1 million facility for
each high school stadium. ~e stated that while he is suspect of various
motives, there are good people on both sides of the issue, and there is a
solution at hand if City officials would stop and take the time to review other
alternatives and to examine the school stadia issue, the process of which is the
antithesis of planning, which has been rushed, flawed, riddled with
inconsistencies, and conflicting and inadequate information; and no responsible
Planning Commission could support such a proposal. ~e stated that those
persons who speak as community leaders and others in support of high school
stadia should show the same level of interest in the school system's academic
problems by attending School Board meetings.
Ms. Mary A. Scanlan, 1631 Center ~i11 Drive, S. W., spoke in opposition to
the Patrick ~enry ~igh School zoning amendment for the following reasons:
the stadium is too large for the small tract of land on which it is proposed to be
constructed; the stadium will be located directly behind a block of residential
houses on Brandon Avenue, the site is surrounded by a densely populated and
established residential neighborhood, there is insufficient parking on the site,
major traffic congestion currently exists at Grandin Road and Brandon Avenue,
a new traffic study specifically for a 3,000 seat stadium facility was not
prepared, and there was very little input from adjacent property owners and/or
immediate property owners with regard to the zoning. She stated that a
commitment to proffered conditions with regard to lights, noise, litter, security,
problems associated with visitors and parking in the neighborhoods is needed,
and over 15 questions were not specifically answered at Patrick ~enry ~igh
School community input meetings. She stated that the questions were
resubmitted at the William Fleming ~igh School community meeting on January
19, however, no reply has been received to date. Prior to the December 21,
2005 meeting of the City Planning Commission, she stated that she did not
know of the bias and conflicts within the City Planning Commission, she did not
know that similar problems would surface with the Board of Zoning Appeals,
she did not know that Parks and Recreation, as well as other youth and sports
groups, would sponsor events at the facility, and she did not know that the
school administration appears to have understated attendance in order to
qualify for the limited size of the stadium.
Mr. Winfred Noell, 2743 Northview Drive, S. W., advised that since
November 7, 2005, he has not talked with a single student who supports the
demolition of Victory Stadium, and while some favor a new stadium at their
school, they also want Victory Stadium to be preserved. ~e stated that he could
talk about the stadium in Wilmington, North Carolina, which is a large, older
venue similar to Victory Stadium that is used by area high schools for football
games; or he could talk about conflicts of interest on the City Planning
130
Commission; or he could talk about City Council Members who think that tax
credits for Victory Stadium are a bad idea, but grants and Federal and State
money for trolley cars are alright; or he could talk about a government taking
land for economic development, or in Roanoke's case ruining people's land; or
he could talk about the fact that Roanoke will not have a large enough venue
after Victory Stadium is demolished to accommodate any large sporting events
in the future; or he could talk about Freedom of Information Act requests that
were submitted to the City Manager, only to be told that no such documents
exist, yet certain documents were produced for a recent newspaper article. ~e
stated that he seriously respects the laws of the· United States of America and
advised that he is a citizen of the City of Roanoke, he pays taxes and he is very
concerned about the City's present and future.
Ms. Suzanne Osborne, 1702 Blair Road, S. W., advised that she was
especially concerned that no formal traffic study was prepared, and if a formal
independent traffic study were completed, it would support the level of traffic
that will be generated on Brandon Avenue at the intersection of Grandin Road
and Brandon Avenue as a direct result of the proposed stadium at Patrick ~enry
~igh School. She expressed concern with regard to parking and called
attention to a comment made by Mr. Rife at one of the community meetings
that when the parking lot reaches capacity, the overflow would park on
neighborhood side streets, particularly at the end of Blenheim Road which
would allow visitors to access the stadium through the track and through many
of the paths that go through the greenway trails to the stadium. She expressed
further concern that the process appears to be moving rather quickly, and no
one understands why the normal public hearing could not have been held on
February 20 following the City Planning Commission's meeting on February 16;
therefor, she requested an explanation as to why there is such a rush to make a
decision. She added that there appears to be conflicts of interest with members
of the City Planning Commission and suggested that those persons recuse
themselves from the issues to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.
She called attention to concerns about vandalism, and the fact that ten potential
games, five by each high school, could create an environment where persons
who would be emboldened by the cover of darkness could sell illegal
substances· and engage in fights, vandalism, and property damage in the
neighborhood, none of which have been adequately addressed in the proffers.
At community meetings, she advised that City staff stated that proffers can be
changed by going through the same process, therefore, any of the proffers that
have been submitted to date could be changed. She asked that Council reject
the proposal for rezoning.
Ms. Margaret Keyser, 2701 Guilford Avenue, S. W., advised that she is a
next door neighbor to the Patrick ~enry ~igh School campus and during the 35
years that she has lived in her home, she has enjoyed hearing the band practice
and the cheerful voices from baseball and soccer games, but an all sports
stadium that will attract large numbers of people will present a different set of
circumstances. She stated that on numerous occasions, residents of the area
1 31
have presented concerns with regard to the problems that the proposed
stadium would impose upon their compact neighborhood of narrow streets
where residents must depend upon on street parking for vehicles that are too
large for small garages, or in some cases where no garage exists, who will be in
direct competition with stadium users for parking spaces near their own homes.
She added that the City Planning Commission agreed that proposed parking
plans, as presented by staff, were not adequate; therefore, she requested that
parking plans be modified. She stated that the four meetings with the school
administration and the City Planning Commission's public hearing did not allay
all of her concerns, and the report of Planning staff was not reassuring or
complete; and one paragraph of the staff report stated that neighbors should
be encouraged to walk to events and that visitors should be encouraged to car
pool, whereupon, she raised questions with regard to enforcement issues. She
expressed concern that visitors will park on the school campus as long as there
are sufficient parking spaces and then they will park in front of her house.
Mr. Abney S. Boxley, 301 Willow Oak Drive, S. W., advised that both time
and money have been spent on studying the stadium issue without solving the
problem; and every conceivable point of view has been considered, yet no
consensus has been reached that appeases every constituency, or solves every
problem. ~e quoted a previous statement he made regarding Victory Stadium,
"Today we are trying to save an old memory, hold outdoor concerts, play one
college football game, host a festival, host a football championship maybe, and
play high school sports. No reasonable group could agree on a facility that
meets all of those needs in a cost effective manner. We cannot have it all." ~e
stated that neither Patrick ~enry nor William Fleming ~igh Schools have the
athletic facilities that Roanoke's children deserve, nor are they consistent with
the school system's goal of creating a world class educational environment; and
tonight, Council could take a positive step by amending the Patrick ~enry ~igh
School site plan, which will enable the schools to complete the job at Patrick
~enry. ~e further stated that should the Council vote in favor of the petition, it
will have solved a problem for Roanoke's students that no other Council has
been willing to do and create a home for at least ten football games at Patrick
~enry ~igh School alone; and Council will have sent a clear message that it
cares about the future of Roanoke's children, rather than arguing over the past.
While the fog of another political campaign hangs low over the City, he advised
that it is clear that the need exists for athletic facility improvements in the City
of Roanoke, it is clear that athletic facilities are consistent with building a sense
of community at the high schools; and it is clear that the problem can be solved
in a fiscally prudent and progressive manner. Therefore, he asked that Council
vote in favor of the petition.
132
Ms. Jeanne M. Duddy, 1816 Greenfield Street, S. W., advised that the
neighborhood surrounding Patrick ~enry ~igh School is small and the City
proposes to construct a very large athletic field. She expressed concern with
regard to traffic and asked that Council think twice before constructing a large
stadium in an already congested area. She expressed further concern that
eminent domain may take some private residences.
Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, ~ardy, Virginia, advised that Victory
Stadium is one of the best stadiums in the country; and when the stadium was
under the direction of the Department of Parks and Recreation it was properly
maintained. ~e spoke to the need for a stadium that can be used by all citizens
of Roanoke that would be large enough to accommodate college football games
and other types of outdoor activities. ~e advised that Victory Stadium was
constructed as a memorial to World War II veterans and should be maintained
for that purpose; and the National Guard Armory could be used as a location for
a ~all of Fame to honor those persons who played football at Victory Stadium
and went on to achieve higher positions. ~e referred to the agreement between
the City of Roanoke and the N & W Railway Company which states that the City
will maintain the stadium first, followed by the National Guard Armory.
Mr. John Kepley, 2909 Morrison Street, S. E., advised that Carilion Medical
System wants the land on which Victory Stadium is presently located, therefore,
City Planning Commission Members Robert B. Manetta, who is a Carilion legal
staff member, and ~enry S. Scholz, who is an associate or employee of Edwin C.
~all & Associates, that has ties to various Carilion commercial properties
including exclusive leasing agent for the Riverside Park, have vested interests in
the property due to their individual associations with Carilion. ~e stated that
he resides in the South Roanoke area of the City and like. numerous other
persons who have addressed the Council, and certain members of the Roanoke
City School Board, City Council and the City Planning Commission, the stadium
to Patrick ~enry ~igh School will not affect his property, but he has a concern
for those persons who live in the Raleigh Court area who have worked long and
hard for their homes, only to have construction of a large stadium to devalue
their property. ~e advised that it is not the right, moral or ethical thing to do
and asked that Council deny the Second Amended Petition to Amend Proffered
Condition. ~e stated that a centrally located and rebuilt stadium, with William
Fleming ~igh School on one side and Patrick ~enry ~igh School on the other,
and with ample parking would be ideal and would provide a venue for
enjoyment by all of Roanoke's citizens.
Ms. Virginia Craig, 701 12th Street, S. W., advised that pursuant to Roberts
Rules of Order, she would like to yield her time to the next speaker without
prejudice to his allotted time; whereupon, the Mayor advised that her request
could not be honored under Council protocol, and she would be allotted three
minutes to address the Council.
133
Ms. Craig inquired as to why all emphasis has been placed on Patrick
~enry ~igh School when it would appear that William Fleming ~igh School
should be addressed first in order to equalize school facilities, and it also
appears that William Fleming ~igh School has been mentioned as an
afterthought.
Mr. Robert L. Craig, 701 12th Street, S. W., advised that some Roanoke
City school students have stated that they need a stadium to improve school
spirit; however, he would have been much more impressed if those same
students had complained about the $1.2-$3 million the School system/School
Board wasted during the 2004-2005 school year, with 23 overhires in a failing
school system. ~e asked for an explanation from Mr. Godek as to how school
spirit is measured and how a school stadium will improve academic
performance in the Roanoke City School System. ~e stated that he favors
athletic facilities at the schools, but after ten years of talking about Victory
Stadium, he objects to the sudden rush to move forward with high school
stadia. ~e further stated that the reason could be because three City Council
Members may not be sitting on the Council next year which could affect the
outcome of the vote; and since the Mayor and Vice-Mayor have publicly stated
that they have the best interests of Roanoke at heart, they should have no
objection to resigning from their Council seats and campaigning for reelection
as a means of validating whether or not this is the right course of action for the
City.
Mr. Randy ~arrison, 2311 Westover Avenue, S. W., expressed concern
with regard to the spending of taxpayers' money on consultant fees, and more
speCifically the consultant's fee to study Victory Stadium, which was followed by
a Council decision to construct stadia at the two high schools instead of
renovating Victory Stadium. ~e advised that Victory Stadium could be
refurbished for the same amount of funds that the City will spend to construct
two stadiums at two different high schools; and the centralized location of
Victory Stadium, which has a better traffic pattern, would be preferable to the
Patrick ~enry ~igh School site. ~e added that a 3,000 seat stadium is not
sufficient for a high school football game, and if the City of Roanoke is to be a
progressive City, it should think larger and bigger.
Ms. Freda Tate, 4556 Van Winkle Road, S. W., advised that Victory
Stadium would not be a "white elephant" located in a floodplain if present and
past City Councils had provided for the proper maintenance of the facility. She
asked why the City did not rush to save Victory Stadium in the same way it
seems to be rushing into a decision to construct stadiums at the two high
schools. She advised that regardless of the remarks of the Superintendent of
Schools, a stadium will not improve test scores of Roanoke's students; and
Roanoke's leaders should pay as much attention to ensuring quality education
and classroom instruction as they do to constructing high school stadia.
134
She added that Roanoke's voters placed their trust in Council to represent and
to do what is best for every citizen of the City of Roanoke, but citizens believe
that their trust has been betrayed. She requested that the City Planning
Commission and Council deny the request inasmuch as there is insufficient
room on the site to construct a high school stadium.
Mr. Dick Kepley, 550 Kepplewood Road, S. E., advised that any person
who works for or receives renumeration from the City should not be a member
of a major board such as the City Planning Commission; and even though a
member can excuse himself from voting, he cannot excuse himself from his
influence over other members of the board. ~e stated that any member of the
City Planning Commission should have abstained from making a decision on
the issue when that person had previously expressed his or her beliefs prior to
the time that a public hearing was held on the issue. ~e added that the
necessary studies have not been completed in order to make an informed
decision; stadia at Patrick ~enry and William Fleming ~igh Schools will cost
more than $8.2 million; if the stadium at Patrick ~enry is projected to cost $4.1
million, how can it be said that the stadium at William Fleming will cost the
same when the facility is not scheduled to be constructed until 2010; and a
3,000 seat stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh School will not be large enough to
accommodate a winning football team, inasmuch as officials of the Virginia
~igh School Football League have advised that a playoff game cannot be held at
a stadium that will only accommodate only 3,000 persons. ~e added that there
will be insufficient parking for football games at Patrick ~enry and Mr. Rife was
quoted in August 2004, as follows: "It is questionable if the school's parking
would be adequate for a football crowd. The over crowd would likely find its
way into the neighboring residential áreas and cause problems." ~e advised
that stadiums at Patrick ~enry and William Fleming ~igh Schools will not serve
the needs of all citizens of the City of Roanoke and with over 94,000 citizens,
Roanoke needs a stadium large enough for all of the people to enjoy. ~e called
attention to the work of a 13 member Stadium Study Committee which met nine
months and reached the conclusion that there would be too many problems
associated with stadiums on the two high school campuses; Members of
Roanoke City Council applauded the work of the Study Committee and now the
same Council is disregarding the opinion of its own committee and changing
direction. ~e advised that for the past four years, Victory Stadium has been
under the direction of the Roanoke Civic Center without routine maintenance,
which has led to its current state of deterioration. ~e recommended that
Council appoint a committee of citizens representing the school system to
determine what needs to happen in order to make Victory Stadium acceptable
for football during the 2006 school season.
Mr. John Graybill, 2443 Tillett Road, S. W., advised that the neighborhood
will be intruded upon with construction of a stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh
School. ~e stated that contrary to the remarks of the Superintendent of
Schools, student performance will not improve as a result of constructing a high
school stadium. ~e called attention to municipal stadiums in the Cities of
135
Salem and Lynchburg, Virginia, and advised that the City of Roanoke should
have its own municipal stadium for the enjoyment of all citizens. ~e stated that
if Roanoke's students do not already have pride in their schools and school
spirit, it will not be developed as a result of constructing high school stadia,
because school pride and school spirit must be addressed on a continuing
basis.
Lisa Link, representing the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce,
advised that the issue is one of land use, and a stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh
School would make good use of existing school property, make effective use of
existing parking while adding additional parking, enhance the high school
campus, and improve neighborhood amenities. She stated that a high school
stadium at Patrick ~enry would not increase crime, or significantly increase
traffic, or change the character of the neighborhood since a high school is
already located in the area; however, at the heart of the issue is the question of
whether a stadium is a good fit for the existing school and the neighborhood.
She advised that timing of the stadium is ideal with construction currently
underway at Patrick ~enry ~igh School and the stadium would be a good fit for
the community and the high school. On behalf of the Roanoke Regional
Chamber of Commerce, she urged the City Planning Commission and City
Council to move forward and to approve the zoning for a stadium at Patrick
~enry ~igh School.
Mr. Phillip Wright, 1646 Center ~ill Drive, S. W., advised that a community
must be resolved to hold its elected officials accountable fo~ the statements
that they make to the voters in order to be elected; and beyond public
accountability, the stadium issue is about public trust, integrity and whether or
not voters and taxpayers can trust the recorded words of their elected officials,
or, as voters have found out over the past several weeks, do the words and
positions of elected officials change with each passing day, each meeting, and
each hearing. ~e stated that the issue is about apparent conflicts of interest
and self dealing individuals who work with and for the City of Roanoke who also
sit on boards and commissions and are charged with the responsibility of
protecting the interest of the public; and moreover, the issue is about abuse of
process, arrogance, dupliCity, blatant dishonesty, and the point of view that
voters and taxpayers work for the City. ~e stated that a flawed, manipulated
scheme designed to impose two surrogate City sports complexes, one in a
quiet neighborhood where a sports complex is not suitable and will fracture a
community, and a scheme which creates disunion and ill will is not the answer;
and high school stadia will not cure the well documented problems of
Roanoke's schools and will not be the most efficient use of taxpayers' dollars.
136
~e added that the Stadium Study Committee suggested modest size daytime
stadia at the two high schools, and construction of a first class facility to serve
all of the needs of the community; the Study Committee's report speCifically
stated that the best use of taxpayers' money is the renovation of Victory
Stadium; therefore, why waste another $2 million of tax money, in addition to
what was spent at the Orange Avenue site, to demolish Victory Stadium. ~e
asked why there is such a rush to pursue a policy based on fanciful projection
and false assumptions.
Mr. Stuart Revercomb, 2408 Stanley Avenue, S. E., advised that certain
Members of Council are using the School Board as an excuse to tear down
Victory Stadium at all costs, regardless of what the City's paid consultants and
the City's Traffic Engineer says, and without regard to the wishes of Roanoke's
own citizens. ~e stated that the School Board has no problem with being used
in the process in order to have new athletic fields, but what the School Board
has failed to realize is that it will jeopardize any chance of ultimately having the
kind of high school stadiums that the School Board desires and students
deserve. ~e added that by moving forward without traffic or parking studies as
recommended by the City's engineers, the City now faces a well organized
group of over 500 citizens from the neighborhood around Patrick ~enry ~igh
School who have hired what is reputed to be the best land use attorney on the
east coast in an effort to lock the City up in a law suit that will waste hundreds
of thousands of tax dollars; Roanoke's children will not see a new stadium for
many years to come, if ever. ~e inquired as to how many law suits the City will
defend itself against from the very people that the Council was elected to
represent. ~e advised that the stadium issue was one of the best examples of
dysfunctional local government that the Commonwealth of Virginia has ever
seen, and it has been said that Council will soon vote to tear down Victory
Stadium, which would be an attempt to destroy Victory Stadium before the
citizens that Council represents have a chance to speak through the local
Councilmanic election. ~e stated that if the Council is so limited in its vision
and so caught up in accomplishing its own agenda that it would order the
destruction of a City resource before voters can speak, he would ask that all
Roanokers join in a process by which their voices will be heard by contacting
Council en mass and attending the next City Council meeting on Monday,
February 20, 2006 at 7:00 p.m.
Mr. W. Alvin ~udson, 1956 ~ope Road, S. W., advised that the Members
of City Council and the City Planning Commission have already made up their
minds about the stadium issue. ~e stated that a high school stadium is not the
best use of the property and will not be advantageous to preserving the
neighborhood around Patrick ~enry ~igh School. ~e expressed concern with
regard to the unprofessional conduct of certain City and School staff during
neighborhood meetings that were held at Patrick ~enry ~igh School and staff
did not satisfactorily respond to questions that were raised by concerned
citizens.
137
Ms. Suzi Wright, 1646 Center ~ill Drive, S. W., expressed concern with
regard to increased traffic at already crowded residential intersections, the
closing of streets for football games, the alley at Blenheim Road which would be
used as a cut through, noise and lights in a residential neighborhood, and a
reduction in property values. When reaching a decision, she asked that Council
consider those residents who have lived in the surrounding residential
neighborhoods for many years and that Council not permit the construction of
a stadium on a small tract of land.
Mr. John Tisdell, 1724 Wilbur Road, S. W., spoke in support of high school
stadia. ~e advised that many persons have expressed concern regarding
parking issues and traffic congestion, but it is much more important to think
about education and the quality of Roanoke's schools. ~e stated that a school
must provide for the needs of the entire school population, including athletics
and extra curricular activities; nothing affects quality of life, property values,
and future job opportunities more than a locality's school system; therefore, it
is important to support Roanoke's schools, regardless of whether school age
children reside in a household. ~e expressed appreciation for the efforts of
Council in support of the City of Roanoke, and advised that it is regrettable that
Council Members have had to endure recent personal attacks by certain
citizens.
Ms. Virginia Mercer, 220 1 ~unters Road, S. W., advised that she has
become increasingly disturbed to learn that existing zoning regulations can be
.negated with very minimal regard for residents of the area; and expressed
concern that her neighborhood will be adversely affected by the proposed
stadium to be constructed on a small tract of land at Patrick ~enry ~igh School.
She stated that she moved to her present neighborhood because she. believed
that it would be safe, it would be a neighborhood where she could enjoy
walking in the evenings, however, with construction of the stadium, many of
the neighborhood amenities could be impacted in a negative way. As a life long
educator, she stated that she is appalled at the declining graduation rate in the
City of Roanoke, however, iUs hoped that the City Planning Commission and
others will realize that an on campus stadium is not the solution to the
problem; and professional journals are filled with ideas that could be
implemented to help Roanoke's school system. She stated that a single,
shared, modern stadium would be far more beneficial to Roanoke's students,
would benefit the entire community, would serve as a model to show children
how cooperative ventures can bring a City together, and would serve as a
resource to other cities that are experiencing similar problems throughout the
country. As a taxpayer, she asked that her tax dollars be used in a manner that
will benefit all of the citizens of Roanoke and that the City Planning
Commission and City Council deny the request for amendment of the proffer.
138
Mr. Eric Mercer, 2201 ~unters Road, S. W., advised that before rushing
into construction of high school stadia and forcing an unmandated project on
the community, the Victory Stadium issue should be resolved and the necessary
resources should be identified to address the educational needs of Roanoke's
schools. ~e stated that the questions are: Does Roanoke need a stadium?
Does Roanoke want a stadium? Can Roanoke afford a stadium? Can Roanoke
afford not to have a stadium? Should Victory Stadium be rehabilitated,
demolished or replaced? ~e advised that some persons have tried to make the
argument that by questioning the wisdom of the City's current stadium plan,
opponents are not sympathetic to the needs of Roanoke's students, when, in
fact, the opposite is true. ~e stated that most people believe that athletics are
an integral part of a high school, but athletics should be integrated into the
complete educational experience and it makes no sense to build a trophy
stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh School when the schools in Roanoke are failing
students; after depriving the citizens of Roanoke of a municipal stadium that
will have the ability to generate both revenue and civic spirit, William Fleming
~igh School will be forced to play football at the Patrick ~enry stadium for
several years, and that situation, combined with the possibility that the William
Fleming stadium may never be built, will have an adverse affect on morale and
will be divisive to the City as a whole. ~e stated that the City of Roanoke is in a
crisis mode, as reflected in part by an abysmal high school graduation rate;
meanwhile, solutions addressing the City's academic crisis have not been
forthcoming from the City Council, which is ultimately responsible for the
performance of the School Board. Before planning for new high school stadia,
he asked that the City resolve the Victory Stadium issue and, more importantly,
address the City's educational crisis.
Mr. Mark McConnel, 532 Linden Street, S. W., advised that for the past
four and a half years, he has observed City Council to see how much of an
impact citizens actually make, and he was saddened to say that citizens do not
make a great impact. ~e added that it is hoped that a normal functioning
governmental process involving evaluation, citizen input, decision making, and
implementation can be accomplished in Roanoke, instead of a form of
government that is dictated by: decide, implement and evaluate. For example,
he inquired as to why Council would spend hundreds of thousands of tax
dollars to study an issue, only to discard the results and embark on a course of
action that needs to be studied. ~e stated that it would seem that the City
Planning Commission would listen to evidence and to the advice of experts who
have recommended completion of a traffic study. ~e added that the two
stadium decision is inexplicably tied to the Victory Stadium issue; and it was
tied in that way on November 7, 2005, when a motion was adopted by Council
to discuss Victory Stadium and to move forward on the two stadium issue. ~e
advised that he is an environmentalist and the City of Roanoke encourages
environmentalism; the City's Vision 2020 Comprehensive Plan is tied to the
environment, and the City sponsors sustainable housing design competitions
and encourages recycling; however, on the other hand, the City is willing to
take millions of dollars worth of concrete and steel to be discarded in a landfill
139
which is hypocritical, unconscionable, anti-environmental, and sends a message
that Roanoke does not care about the environment. ~e referred to the Dave
Matthews concert that was held several years ago at Victory Stadium which
yielded over $100,000.00 to the City; and if Victory Stadium could generate
those kinds of dollars on several occasions, the debt service could be funded on
a completely renovated stadium. ~e advised that, in general, most of the
citizens of Roanoke would not object to a solution that came about as a result
of a carefully thought out and appropriate process.
Mr. Tom Skelly, 2402 Avenel Avenue, S. W., referred to the graphic
renderings included in Mr. Rife's presentation in which a lighted stadium looks
like a bird's eye view or a view from an airplane; however, he pointed out that
the view that residents of the area will be subjected to will not be the aerial
view; and a person standing at the corner of Brandon Avenue and Blenheim
Road will see lights that are about 250 feet above a horizontal line of sight and
not 1 SO feet above the floor of the stadium as reported by Mr. Rife.
Mr. Bart Wilner, 2709 Crystal Spring Avenue, S. W., advised that no more
studies, public hearings, speeches or law suits are needed, but what is needed
is leadership and action. ~e asked that Council vote to construct the two high
school stadia and move on with the business of the City.
Ms. Carol Via, 2139 Sherwood Avenue, S. W., advised that the Victory
Stadium issue has been on going for the past eight years; and following the
report of the Stadium Study Committee, it appeared that Victory Stadium would
be renovated until recently when it became apparent that a high school stadium
might be constructed in her backyard. She stated that she does not have
children in the public school system and she is not interested in football
stadiums or in football, but she is interested in a good quality of life and in
good schools that will attract people to the neighborhood. She called attention
to concerns with regard to traffic congestion, noise, and a decrease in property
values if the stadium is constructed on the Patrick ~enry ~igh School campus;
no formal traffic studies have been completed, the site is too small for a
stadium, and the entire character of a historic district will be changed. She
added that a stadium does not equate to good grades or to school pride; she
would prefer that her tax dollars be spent on a stadium that all of the citizens
of Roanoke can enjoy; therefore, she endorsed a comprehensive, shared, and
modern stadium. She requested that Council and the City Planning Commission
vote against the petition.
Ms. Patrice Rantz, 2029 Laburnum Avenue, S. W., called attention to
existing problems associated with daily parking in her neighborhood by
students attending Patrick ~enry ~igh School. She stated that the problem will
be compounded by those persons who visit the school stadium for athletic
events.
140
Mr. Robert Turcotte, 6744 Christopher Drive, S. W., advised that the
practical decision is to build stadia at the two high schools. ~e stated that
having spent over a decade in planning activities at Patrick ~enry ~igh School,
two issues continued to surface, i.e.: a practical decision to build a practical
school and the subject of athletics and arts that tend to be left out after
academics have been addressed in the operating budget. ~e introduced the
word "talkability" which cannot be found in the dictionary, however, his
definition of "talkability" is the éase with which a subject can be talked about
and the likelihood that a subject will be talked about; "talkability" is more
powerful than noteworthy and more attention grabbing than interesting,
therefore, the stadium issue has the highest "talkability" of any subject in recent
memory in Roanoke and the topic has grown to epic proportions; and talkable
subjects are also emotional subjects, therefore, experts in the fields of
medicine, law, finance, etc., urge that decisions not be made by individuals who
are acting in an emotional frame of mind. ~e asked that the City Planning
Commission and Council reach a practical decision, one that makes athletics as
important as academics and clears the way to build stadia at Roanoke's two
high schools.
Mr. John Phelps, 1915 Canterbury Road, S. W., spoke in support of on site
high school stadia. ~e advised that the City's high school sports teams do not
have a home field on which to play soccer, lacrosse and football; and football,
which is the major revenue sport for any school program, does not have a home
field for the fall 2006 season. ~e requested that the issue not become a
political decision, but a decision in favor of Roanoke's children.
There being no further speakers, and following a brief recess, the Mayor
turned the meeting over to the City Planning Commission.
~enry Scholz, Vice-Chair, City Planning Commission, called for comments
and/or questions by City Planning Commission members.
Commissioner Williams called attention to concerns expressed by several
citizens of the area that there could be a tendency for some students who have
been suspended from school to attend an activity at the high school sports
stadium, act out in a disruptive manner, and problems could have the potential
to spill over into the adjoining neighborhoods. ~e inquired as to how the
School administration would propose to address those kinds of issues.
Mr. Godek advised that a student who has been suspended for whatever
reason from a City school is also suspended from and not allowed to attend
after school activities, and administrators of the affected school would have the
responsibility to ensure that the student was not allowed access to the activity.
141
Commissioner Williams also called attention to certain comments made
by persons who reside in the area that there could be a decline in property
values as a result of the proposed high school stadium. ~e advised that he
talked with a number of real estate brokers and staff of the City's Department
of Real Estate Valuation who indicated that there are very little grounds for
concern on the question of real estate value; however, he takes the concerns of
property owners regarding the affect of the proposed stadium on property
values very seriously. ~e added that the persons he spoke with cautioned that
whether or not there is an adverse affect on property values will depend not on
the stadium per se as a venue, but on how the stadium is maintained and how
events at the stadium are managed. ~e stated that this is a prime opportunity
for the City to demonstrate that Roanoke is a city of neighborhoods; and if the
stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh School is mismanaged, any remaining trust that
exists between the City and its neighborhoods will be forfeited. Therefore, he
suggested consideration of the following proffers:
Preparation of a final, detailed design of the façade, concession
buildings, press stand and restrooms. As a part of securing more
broad base support from the community, final design should be
completed through a broad, community oriented, visually based
design charette, similar to the process that was used for the City
Market plan.
Preparation of a traffic management plan to address what would
happen when there are more vehicles than parking spaces will
accommodate; and the types of mitigation measures that could be
undertaken with respect to traffic signal timing, or traffic direction
by police officers.
Mr. Rife advised that a traffic management plan could be provided, but
expressed concern that as a result of community meetings, specific controls
were proffered at Blenheim Road and Lofton Road in response to neighborhood
concerns; and what should be done if a traffic management plan revealed a
better flow of traffic if Lofton Road is left open. ~e stated that potentially, a
subsequent traffic management study might force the City to violate a proffer,
and a traffic management plan has been proffered that is effective, clear, direct,
and can be policed.
Commissioner Williams clarified his intent with regard to a traffic
management plan and advised that any plan should not undo any of the
existing proffers, however, the risk of not having a traffic management plan is
the unknowns as to where visitors would park if on-site parking spaces are full.
~e stated that it is not unreasonable to have a specific idea of what to do in
142
terms of directing traffic to an identified off-site location, or locations, and how
visitors would be informed that they should go elsewhere to park if the parking
lot is full. ~e added that there may be other issues to be considered and a
traffic management plan would leave in place any specifics that have been
proffered with respect to traffic not going through any roads that are proposed
to be closed.
Mr. Godek advised that the school division intends to develop a traffic
management plan for Patrick ~enry ~igh School, if given approval to construct
the stadium; and he was confident that school personnel, working with the
Chief of Police and the City's Traffic Engineer, could prepare a comprehensive
traffic management plan.
Mr. Godek expressed concern that depending upon the cost associated
with a comprehensive traffic management plan, he may not have the authority
this evening to make a commitment which would require approval by the School
Board. ~e stated that his second concern deals with the design plan since
development of an athletic facility must be carefully coordinated with
construction of Phase II improvements at Patrick ~enry ~igh School which are
currently ongoing.
Since the City of Roanoke is the petitioner, Commissioner Manetta
inquired if the City would be willing to have a traffic management study
prepared by a professional firm.
The City Manager advised that the traffic management plan that was
initiated at the Roanoke Civic Center was prepared, in large part, by City staff
with some outside consultation; proffers presently before the City Planning
Commission were jointly agreed to by the City of Roanoke and the School
Board; she could not unilaterally respond on behalf of the School Board, but the
resources of the City of Roanoke in terms of the City's traffic management skills
could be made available, and resources of the Police Department would also be
an integral part of the traffic management plan.
During a discussion of the additional proffers suggested by
Commissioner Williams, Mr. Townsend advised that proffers should be
measurable and definable; and definable points in a construction project occur
either when a building permit is issued, or when a Certificate of .Occupancy is
approved.
There was discussion between Mr. Williams and Mr. Townsend with
regard to a Certificate of Occupancy in which it was noted that the stadium
would require a separate Certificate of Occupancy, and completion and
approval could be tied to the Certificate of Occupancy.
143
Mr. Townsend pointed out that the traffic management plan previously
alluded to by Commissioner Williams with regard to the Civic Center was based
on known events in a situation where multiple events had already been
planned; as it relates to high school stadia, tickets are not sold in advance, and
a number of factors are different in terms of managing traffic in an anticipatory
way at a high school stadium compared to a civic center. ~e stated that if the
Planning Commission wishes to make proffers, or to ask the Council to include
a proffer in the petition, he would request that the proffer be as specific as
possible to assist with enforcement issues.
Commissioner Williams resubmitted the proffer as follows: A Certificate
of Occupancy for the stadium will be contingent upon completion and approval
by the City's Traffic Engineer of a traffic management plan to address event
traffic and parking.
Mr. Godek advised that Roanoke City Schools would be agreeable to the
above referenced proffer.
Mr. Townsend advised that the abovereferenced proffer would not be
inconsistent with Proffers 10, 11 and 12 in the Petition.
The Vice-Chair requested that Commissioner Williams summarize the two
additional proffers; whereupon, he submitted the following: A Certificate of
Occupancy for the stadium will not be issued until completion and approval by
the City's Traffic Engineer of a traffic management plan to address event traffic
and parking, such traffic management plan will be prepared subject to all
existing proffers.
Mr. Godek and the City Manager concurred in the abovereferenced
proffer.
Commissioner Williams offered the following additional proffer: Final
design of the stadium, including, but not limited to the façade, concessions,
press box, and restrooms, will be completed through a broad, community
oriented, visually based, design charette.
Mr. Townsend clarified that the above referenced proffer does not ensure
a decision on final design, but ensures a process.
Commissioner Williams stated that his purpose in submitting the
abovereferenced proffer is to ensure that there is an open, public, and visually
oriented process that allows interested persons to view the final product.
Mr. Rife advised that Roanoke City Schools has conducted approximately
15 public input meetings on the design for Patrick ~enry ~igh School to date,
therefore, the schools would have no objection to holding two or three more
public meetings devoted specifically to the stadium. ~e stated that he was
144
uncomfortable with the word "charette", because the definition could be
different in its interpretation, therefore, he would prefer the term "public input
meeting", or something along those lines.
Commissioner Williams agreed to refer to the meetings as "public input
meetings" and clarified that his intent is that the design will be visually based to
allow interested persons an opportunity to review proposed options in a
broadly participatory process.
Mr. Rife stated that two - three public input meetings will be held during
which visual options on exterior stadium design will be presented.
Mr. Godek advised that Roanoke City Public Schools will conduct a
minimum of two and potentially three - four public meetings to present the first
cut of the stadium design, especially the façade, and how the stadium will fit
into existing school design at Patrick ~enry ~igh School and the local
community. ~e stated that public comment will be invited at the first meeting
prior to presenting proposed designs.
Mr. Townsend reiterated that any design would be subject to and
consistent with other proffers in the petition.
The City Manager advised that the proffer would be acceptable to the City
of Roanoke.
At the request of the Vice-Chair, Mr. Townsend restated the following
proffer: The Roanoke City School Administration will conduct a minimum of
three public meetings with regard to design of the façade of the stadium, such
meetings will be held prior to issuance of a building permit for the stadium,
subject to all other proffers contained in the petition.
The Vice-Chair requested further clarification on lighting issues;
whereupon, Mr. Rife advised that the lighting system will be designed to
provide an average contained level of SO foot candles on the ground, located
uniformly across the playing surface of the stadium; and SO foot candles is a
standard design goal for high school stadiums as established by the
Illuminating Engineering Society. ~e explained that any football stadium, or
athletic stadium that is set up for television cameras, will provide about 1 SO
foot candles; therefore, the slide that was presented earlier in the meeting was
somewhat overly lit compared to what will actually occur; two supporting poles
will be placed in the center behind each of the concession areas, the top of
which will be 60 feet above the playing surface, one pole nets out at 43 feet
high between where it comes out of the ground and the top of the pole; the
pole behind the home stands is about 55 feet high between where it hits the
ground and the top of the pole, or 60 feet above the playing surface; four other
light poles will be located 55 feet from the top of the light pole to the playing
surface at approximately 40 feet from grade level to the top of the pole; lights
145
will have shields on top to minimize or basically eliminate any upward light for
a night sky's effect, lights will also be shielded to reduce glare; engineering
studies have been prepared on the lighting that show average foot candle levels
across the site and the rear property line of the houses that front on Brandon
Avenue; the lighting level from stadium lighting will not exceed one-half a foot
candle; and bright moonlight produces much more light than a one foot candle.
~e stated that these are all proffered conditions which can be substantiated
with engineering data and will be submitted to the Board of Zoning Appeals for
review and approval upon favorable action by the Council; and approval of the
proposed zoning map amendment does not automatically give permission to
install the lights, but simply authorizes the stadium.
Question was raised with regard to the availability of data on the
percentage of suburban Virginia high schools that have lighted football
stadiums on site; whereupon, Mr. Godek advised that approximately 80 to 85
percent of high schools have lighted stadiums on campus.
Commissioner Manetta inquired if the use of eminent domain would
figure into either the rezoning and/or construction of the stadium.
The City Attorney advised that all of the property shown in the rezoning
petition is owned by the City of Roanoke and he was not aware of any plans
that would require the acquisition of any other property by eminent domain or
otherwise.
Commissioner Manetta inquired as to why Patrick ~enry ~igh School was
. selected as the first of the two high schools to get an on site stadium.
Mr. Rife responded that Patrick ~enry ~igh School is being constructed in
phases because there is not enough vacant land to accommodate the entire
school; however, there is adequate acreage at William Fleming ~igh School to
build the entire school in one phase, move into the building and demolish the
old school. In summary, he stated that the stadium at William Fleming ~igh
School cannot be constructed immediately because a school building currently
exists onsite that needs to continue to operate until a replacement school can
be constructed.
Commissioner Manetta advised that a number of persons have stated that
the process was "hurried"; however, it should be noted that the issue of the
stadium and what to do about a stadium for the City of Roanoke has been
ongoing for more. than ten years. ~e stated that when he attended Cave Spring
~igh School, most of the territory around the school was pasture land; a
stadium was constructed which has a seating capacity for 4,000 persons; the
number of housing subdivisions in the Cave Spring area has increased and
more expensive houses are constructed every year, therefore, it would not
appear that the Cave Spring ~igh School stadium has caused a devaluation of
property.
146
Commissioner Prince advised that she previously purchased a house that
was located next door to a stadium that served both a high school and a middle
school; the high school had an enrollment of about 5,000 students and there
was significant noise on football nights which was not offensive, traffic lasted
for about 60 minutes, and she would not hesitate to purchase another house
next door to a high school athletic field. She spoke in support of constructing
stadia at the two high schools; and while she would not make the argument
that a stadium will raise student grade point average, a football stadium would
provide a good reason to keep kids in school. She advised that high school
stadia are a separate issue from Victory Stadium and the two issues should not
be confused.
Commissioner Williams advised that every neighborhood must be vigilant
to ensure that proffered conditions to zoning property are enforced according
to the spirit of the law. ~e stated that he suggested at the last meeting of the
City Planning Commission that the best way to ensure that a stadium on the
Patrick ~enry ~igh School campus is an asset to the neighborhood is for all
concerned citizens to become active participants in the Greater Raleigh Court
Civic League and regularly attend meetings because the Civic League is the
voice of the neighborhood. ~e added that he was not implying that citizens are
responsible for enforcing proffers; however, people who care about their
neighborhoods, regardless of where they live, are the only people who can do
the work of the neighborhood organization to ensure that neighborhoods
become a better place to live.
Commissioner Prince concurred in the remarks of Mr. Williams and
advised that she is a resident of Old Southwest; 25 years ago, Old Southwest
was falling into a state of deterioration, and through the activism of Old
Southwest, Inc., and Old Southwest neighbors, property values have tripled in
the last ten years.
There being no further discussion by the City Planning Commission,
Commissioner Manetta offered a motion to place the matter on the table for
consideration of the following additional proffers. The motion was seconded by
Commissioner Prince.
. A Certificate of Occupancy for the stadium will not be issued
until completion and approval by the City's Traffic Engineer of a
traffic management plan to address event traffic and parking,
such traffic management plan will be prepared subject to all
existing proffers.
. The Roanoke School Administration will conduct a minimum of
three public meetings with regard to design of the façade of the
stadium, such meetings will be held prior to issuance of a
building permit for the stadium, subject to all other proffers
contained in the petition.
147
The motion was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Butler, Chrisman, Manetta, Prince, Williams, and
Vi ce -C h ai r Sc h 0 I z n____nn______n____n___n_n_n___n___n_______n_____nnn_n____________n---------6.
NAYS: Non e ______nn_______nn___________n________nn___n_nn______n____nn_____nn-n--nO .
The Second Amended Petition to Amend Proffered Condition, as amended
with the above referenced proffers, was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners Butler, Chrisman, Manetta, Prince, Williams, and
Vi ce -C h ai r Sc h 0 I z ____n____ _____nm______nn_____________n_________________________m_____nn___mn6.
NAYS: Non e _______________n"____________n_n______n_n_____nn__nn__n____n__n___n_n-nnO.
The Vice-Chair advised that the motion passed and was submitted to the
Council in the form of a recommendation.
There being no further business, the Vice-Chair declared the meeting of
the City Planning Commission adjourned.
The Mayor declared a brief recess.
Following the recess, the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council
Chamber, with Mayor ~arris presiding and all members of the Council in
attendance.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37303-020606) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-100, Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke,
Virginia, dated December 5, 2005, as amended, by amending the condition
presently binding upon the development of Patrick ~enry ~igh School
previously conditionally zoned INPUD, Institutional Planned Unit Development
District, by deleting the proffered condition presently binding on the subject
property and applying new proffered conditions to the subject property; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 70, page 148.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37303-
020606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
The City Attorney advised that the ordinance presently before the Council
includes references to a "Second Amended Petition"; and in order to include the
two additional proffers approved by the City Planning Commission, a Third
Amended Petition would be required to be filed by the City. ~e stated that
148
whenever the language "Second Amended Petition" appears in the ordinance, it
should be amended to refer to a "Third Amended Petition"; and the ordinance
should be further amended to include another "W~EREAS" paragraph to explain
the Second and Third Amended Petitions.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Ordinance No. 37303-020606 be
amended to include the following additional proffers as recommended by the
City Planning Commission and an additional "W~EREAS" paragraph to explain
the Second and Third Amended Petitions.
. A Certificate of Occupancy for the stadium will not be issued
until completion and approval by the City's Traffic Engineer of a
traffic management plan to address event traffic and parking,
such traffic management plan will be prepared subject to all
existing proffers.
. The Roanoke City School Administration will conduct a minimum
of three public meetings with regard to design of the façade of
the stadium, such meetings will be held prior to issuance of a
building permit for the stadium, subject to all proffers contained
in the petition.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
~ arri s __________oo___________nn_____oo______n_n____n_ _n_____n_n___n_nn_nn_nn__ __nnn_______n___ 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff ___________________n___oonn______n____2.
The Mayor called for questions and/or comments by Council Members
with regard to Ordinance No. 37303-020606, as amende.d.
Council Member Wishneff advised that statements have been made that
at least two Members of the City Planning Commission have conflicts of
interest, and inquired if the City Attorney was asked to review the matter.
The City Attorney advised that in December 2005, it was determined that
one member of the City Planning Commission, Chair Richard A. Rife, had a
conflict of interest which is the reason he abstained from participating in the
public hearing. ~e stated that it was further determined, under the Virginia
Public Conflict of Interest Act, that no other member of the City Planning
Commission had a conflict of interest.
149
Council Member Wishneff called attention to a communication from Vice-
Chair ~enry Scholz's employer stating that he would have difficulty renting and
leasing the property in the area of the Riverside Biomedical Park if development
occurs along Reserve Avenue, therefore, the sites for high school stadia should
be pursued in lieu of Reserve Avenue. Mr. Wishneff inquired if the above
statement could be construed as a "financial interest".
The City Attorney reaffirmed that it was determined that there was no
conflict of interest under the Virginia Public Conflict of Interest Act.
Although the City of Roanoke owns the property, Council Member
Wishneff inqUired if only the Roanoke City School Board can determine how the
property will be used.
The City Attorney advised that School Trustees are responsible for the
operation and management of Roanoke's school system; under a conditional
rezoning, certain proffers are made, and pursuant to State law, only the
property owner can proffer conditions, therefore, the City of Roanoke submitted
the proffers.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if the Roanoke City School Board voted
in a properly called meeting to request construction of a stadium on the Patrick
~enry ~igh School site.
The City Attorney responded that the School Board reviewed and
concurred in the proffers that were originally submitted.
Council Member Wishneff questioned the legality of the notice with
regard to the December 19, 2005 School Board meeting; whereupon, the City
Attorney advised that the School Board held a properly called meeting on
December 19.
Council Member Wishneff stated that whenever there is a change in
meeting location, the Virginia Freedom of Information Act requires three
working days notice. ~e advised that the location for the December 19 School
Board meeting was changed from a local restaurant to the School
Administration Building without three days working notice.
The City Attorney responded that the meeting was called as a special
meeting and the Virginia Freedom of Information Act requires that a governing
body give reasonable notice under the circumstances; whereupon, Council
Member Wishneff questioned if Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and Monday would
constitute three working days notice.
150
Council Member Wishneff advised that he was concerned that the Council
could be placing itself in a losing position; and it is imperative for the School
Board, as Trustee of the property, to make a decision and in a legally called
meeting. Therefore, he offered a substitute motion that Council defer action on
the ordinance and refer the matter back to the Roanoke City School Board for a
vote in a legally called meeting with regard to constructing a stadium on the
Patrick ~enry ~igh School campus, to be followed by reconsideration of the
matter by the City Planning Commission and City Council. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Lea and lost by the follOWing vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea and Wishneff ___n_mmm_________nm_______________2.
NAYS: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ arri s ____n____n_nn__n_____________nn_n_noo_nnnn________n_nnnn_n______nn_______nn 5 .
Council Member Wishneff inquired about proffers with regard to the days
that football games would be played; whereupon, Mr. Townsend referred to
Proffer No.6 which provides that all football games between Patrick ~enry ~igh
School and William Fleming ~igh School and any other City of Roanoke high
school will be played during daylight hours only, and Proffer No.4 provides that
no less than 40 per cent and no more than 60 per cent of all home varsity
football games in a single season will be played during the daytime hours on
Saturday, as the exact number of home football games varies from year to year.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if attendance and school pride would
be greater at football games played on a Friday night off site, or on a Saturday
morning on site.
Mr. Godek responded that his personal opinion would be that attendance
may be lower on a Saturday morning than on a Friday night; and he could not
offer an opinion with regard to school spirit.
Council Member Wishneff advised that a vast majority of those persons
who spoke in support of constructing high school stadia referred to increased
school spirit, better school attendance, and more opportunities for fund raising
through the Boosters Clubs. Mr. Godek replied that he did not recall stating at
any of the community engagement meetings that school spirit would
dramatically increase if a sports facility was constructed at the high school;
however, the term in which it was mentioned was in looking at the top 100
school systems, whether they be urban or suburban, certain common
characteristics exist, one of which is having all of the facilities that students
need in order to have a well rounded educational experience located on the
school campus, and the provision of an athletic facility is one of the
characteristics of a great school system.
1 51
Council Member Wishneff referred to page 5 of the City Planning
Commission staff report which states that the petition is consistent with the
following goals and strategies of the Greater Raleigh Court Neighborhood Plan:
(1) minimize impact of increasing traffic, and (2) decreased traffic improves
safety in the residential areas, etc. ~e inquired if the statement implies that
introduction of the football stadium will minimize existing traffic and increase
residential safety.
Mr. Townsend responded that the proposed petition, with proffers,
address where traffic can enter and exit the site, and the additional proffers
proposed by the City Planning Commission this evening are consistent with
statements that are included in the 1999 Raleigh Court Neighborhood Plan.
Council Member Wishneff asked Mr. Townsend to explain Governor
Kaine's proposal to the General Assembly with regard to rezoning; whereupon,
Mr. Townsend advised that the Governor's transportation initiative advocates
the fact that all rezonings in the Commonwealth of Virginia would be required
to have a traffic impact study as part of the rezoning process, however, the
Governor's initiative is yet to be heard by the General Assembly. ~e stated that
numerous ideas are forwarded to the General Assembly each year with regard
to land use regulations that are not approved; in terms of communities, the
Proposal is a good idea, however, in terms of those communities that already
have infrastructure in place, the Commonwealth of Virginia does not allow cities
to accept cash proffers for new development; State law authorizes counties to
require numerous things in terms of controlling development that are not
available to cities; therefore, Governor Kaine's initiative, once it proceeds
through the legislative process, may become a State requirement that may
apply only to certain localities that have growth concerns, as opposed to core
cities where infrastructure is in place.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if a detailed landscaping plan will be
submitted; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that a detailed landscaping plan
will be submitted with the site plan, no noise study was conducted, and a
lighting study is subject to a special exception by the Board of Zoning Appeals.
Council Member Wishneff advised that the City of Roanoke required the
submittal of speCific landscaping plans for the Ivy Market rezoning, and
inquired if the City holds the private sector to a different standard than the City
applies to itself.
Mr. Townsend responded that the Ivy Market rezoning was submitted
under the old 1987 Zoning Ordinance and no landscaping provisions per se
were required; the new zoning ordinance adopted by Council on Monday,
December 5, 2005, includes a comprehensive landscaping requirement for the
site, thus, the City's standards have been raised with adoption of the new
zoning ordinance which will apply to the stadium development, as opposed to
properties that were considered under the old 1987 zoning ordinance.
1 52
Council Member Lea inquired if proffers were discussed with school
coaches and athletic directors; whereupon, Mr. Godek advised that proffers
were discussed with the Athletic Director at Patrick ~enry ~igh School who
spoke on behalf of the coaches, and with the Director of ~ealth and Physical
Education for Roanoke City Public Schools.
Council Member Lea inquired about the rationale that led to the decision
that Patrick ~enry/William Fleming ~igh School games will be played during the
day; whereupon, Mr. Godek advised that the decision was made based on
strong concerns expressed by numerous persons from the community around
Patrick ~enry ~igh School at community engagement meetings; and also taking
into consideration a recommendation of the Virginia ~igh School League that
schools begin to schedule more day games.
Council Member Lea expressed concern with regard to the inference
associated with scheduling only day football games between Patrick ~enry and
William Fleming ~igh Schools.
Upon question by Council Member Dowe regarding the removal of earth
to form an embankment similar to a berm around the stadium, Mr. Rife advised
that some students may prefer to sit on the embankment while watching
football games.
Mr. Rife advised that one of the amenities to be admired about the Salem
Avalanche Baseball Field is that the stadium is child friendly, which allows
children to sit up high in the stands, or run around the field, while offering the
opportunity for parental supervision, and he could foresee the Patrick ~enry
~igh School stadium operating in a similar fashion and being equally
child/family friendly.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick called for the question. The motion was seconded
by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel,' and
Mayo r ~ arri s nn__nn______________nnJ_:n_____nn___ _n____n_n__n__nnn__nn____nnnn__nn_nn 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff----------n------m-------n:n-----=-----2.
Ordinance No. 37303-020606, as amended, was adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, and
Mayo r ~ arri s ____n__oo___oo_n___nn___noon__________nn__oo_____n__________nnn_noo___n__nn_____oo 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff---------n---m----------nm--m-------2.
153
When responding to the roll call, Council Member Lea stated that a
renovated Victory Stadium is the best choice for the City of Roanoke, and
Council Member Wishneff stated that the majority of Council does not want to
hear what the citizens of Roanoke have to say.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Session just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
(2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which
any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: . Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and
Mayo r ~ arri s _nn___oo___nn__nn____n____n_n_____n_____nn__oo___oon_n_nnn_oo___-------00----00--6 .
NAYS: Non e___n_nnn____________oo_n__n_noo_n_nn_oo___nnnoon_nnn_____oonnu-00----0.
(Council Member Wishneff abstained from voting.)
At 10:58 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess until Tuesday,
February 14, 2006 at 12:00 p.m., at the Roanoke County Administration
Building, 5204 Bernard Avenue, S. W., 4th Floor Training Room, for a meeting of
the Roanoke City Council, the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority.
(The February 14, 2006 meeting of Council, the Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors and the Board of Directors of the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority was later cancelled.)
APPROVED
ATTEST: n
~~ I r~I."
~~UJ¿~~~
C. Nelson ~arris
Mayor
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
154
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
February 21 , 2006
I
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Tuesday,
February 21, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City
Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris presiding, pursuant
to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of
Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by the
Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea,
Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler and Mayor C. Nelson
~arris ----------------------------------------------------------_------------------------------------------------Ei.
ABSENT: Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.__nm___m__mnnnmmn_mmmm______m______m__1.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
I
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Ann ~. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; and
Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor ~arris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Cutler offered the following
resolution memorializing the late Evelyn Bruce Snead, mother of George C.
Snead, Jr., former Assistant City Manager for Operations:
(#37304-02210Ei) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Evelyn Bruce
Snead, mother of former Assistant City Manager Chip Snead.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 151.) .
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37304- I
022106. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
I
I
I
155
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ ani s __n_nn_n_nn_nnn____nn_n_nn_n_nn_nn___n____nn_nn_n_nn_nnn_n_n------------6.
N)\'(S: NClIlE!-------------c----------------------------------~--"----C--------------------------------------O.
(Council ME!mber Dowe was absent.)
The Mayor called for a momE!nt of silenCE! in memory <If Mrs. Snead and
presented a ceremonial copy of the aboverE!ferenCE!d resolution to her son,
George C. Snead, Jr.
Mr. Snead exprðsE!d apprE!ciation to City Council and to thE! City
Administration for all of the acts of kindness that were shown to his mother
during his tenure with the City of Roanoke; and advised that on behalf of himself
and his brother, he was honored to accept the resolution.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the CClnsent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enactE!d by one
motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was
desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. ~e called specific attention to a request for one Closed Session to
discuss disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in openmeeting
would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the
public body.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of CCluncil held 011 Tuesday,
January 3, 2006; tuesday, January 17, 2006; and the special meeting hE!ld on
Tuesday, January17,2006, were before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick movE!d that the reading ofthe minutE!s be dispensed
with and that the minutð bE! approvE!d as rE!corded. ThE! motion was sE!condE!d by
Council Member Cutler and adoptE!d by the following vote:
A'(ES: Council ME!mbers Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDanièl, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mél)lClr ~élrris--------------------------------------------------------------__________,--"--------c-------------------l).
NA'(S: NCllle---------------------------------------------------------------------------c---:---------------O.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP: A communication
from Célrol Jensen tendering her resignation as a member of the Roanoke
NE!ighborhood Advocates, was before Council.
"'
156
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the resignation be accepted and that the
communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council I
Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Co 1cJ ncil Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arri s nn_nn_n_nn_nn.n_nnnn_nn_____n_nnnnn_nnn"nnn___n_nn"nnnnn--m---n---6.
Nt\'(S): NClne---"----------------------------------------------------------"--------------------------------Cl.
(Cøuncil Member Dowe was absent.)
. OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-BLUE RIDGE BE~AVIORAL ~EALT~CARE: A
report of qualification of Robert Williams, Jr., as a member of the Blue Ridge
Behavioral Healthcare Board of DirectClrs, for a term ending December 31, 2ClCl8,
was before Council. . .
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ a rri s n'____n_____oo_oooooo_m_oooo_-c-moo-oon-oooooonn-noon-oon---_--------_____noooo____________6.
NA'(S: NCllle------"--------------------------------------------------"-------------------------------------Cl. I
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy ofthe public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711
(A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council convene in Closed Meeting as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arri s __n_oooo__'oo_noo___nn________nn_____oon_nnnnn____~oon_oooo___:----n-._~n__n_____________6.
NAYS: Non e ____n_m_oonn_oooon____n_________oooooo_nnnC____oo_C_oon_noo'n'_____---------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
I
PUBLIC ~EARINGs): NONE.
I
I
I
'., ~ . "1""
157
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-CLERK OF COURT-CIRCUIT COURT: A communication from the
Clerk of Circuit Court advising that the Clerk is responsible, by statute, for the
recordation of legal instruments which include Land Records, Marriage Licenses,
Financing Statements, Assumed Names, Wills and other Probate Records, and Law,
Chancery and Criminal Orders, was before Council.
It was further advised that records must be maintained and made available
to the public; the Compensation Board, through the Technology Trust Fund, has
made funds available to be allocated toward contractual obligations for offices
that have indicated that funds are needed; the City of Roanoke Circuit Court
Clerk's Office has been allocated funds, in the amount of $29,964.00, for
equipment upgrades and maintenance fees; and acceptance ofthe funds is vital to
meeting year-end budget obligations by the Clerk's Office.
The Clerk of the Circuit Court recommended that Council accept funding
from the Compensation Board Technology Trust Fund, in the amount of
$29,964.00, appropriate $29,964.00 and establish a revenue estimate in the same
amount in accounts in the Grant Fund to be established by the Director of Finance.
A communication from the City Manager concurring in the abovereferenced
recommendation, was also before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37305-022106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia through the Technology Trust Fund for the
improvement of operations in the Office of Circuit Court Clerk, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 70, Page 152.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37305-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mél\lor ~élrris-------------------------"------------------------------------------------------------------------------6.
Nt\'(S: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
158
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
I
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-~UMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the City of Roanoke is a grant recipient for
Workforce Investment Act (WIA) funding, thus, Council must appropriate funding
for all grants and other monies received in order for the Western Virginia
Workforce Development Board to administer WIA programs; and the Western
Virginia Workforce Development Board administers the Federally funded Workforce
Investment Act for Area 3, which encompasses the Counties of Alleghany,
Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke, and the Cities of Covington, Roanoke, and
Salem.
It was further advised that the Western Virginia Workforce Development
Board has received a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) from the Virginia
Employment Commission to allocate WIA funds from the Governor's Statewide
Discretionary Funds to be used for the following activities: .
.
Reassessment of the Workforce Board and one-stop operating
system structure, policies and procedures, with the intent to
improve Workforce Board efficiency, in collaboration with
. economic development and overall customer service; and add
business services.
I
. Activities identified as necessary to implement findings that
result from the abovementioned reassessment.
It was stated that the MOU received from the Virginia Employment
Commission allocates $12,100.00 for capacity building activities to the Western
Virginia Workforce Development Board for costs incurred from October 1, 2004
through June 30, 2006; and funds are available from the Virginia Employment
Commission, at no additional cost to the City.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the Western Virginia
Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act Capacity Building funds,
in the amount of $12,100.00, and adopt an ordinance establishing revenue
estimates and appropriating funds in accounts in the Grant Fund to be established
by the Director of Finance.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
I
I
I
I
,"
.,.
-,··t
159
(#37306-022106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia for the Workforce Investment Act Grant Capacity
Building Activity FY06, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-
2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title
of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 153.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7306-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
Council Member Lea inquired about the progress of the Workforce
Development Board; i.e.: whether the issue involving receipt of contracts by Total
Action Against Poverty (TAP) throughthe Workforce Board has been resolved, and
whether a TAP representative has been reinstated to theWorkforce Development
Board. The City Manager responded that the issue involving TAP contracts has
been resolved, and a TAP representative was not reinstated to the Workforce
Development Board. She added that the Workforce Development Board has
received high marks for productivity.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37306-022106 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arri s __oom___n__noooon_______oon_oon_oo_oon_oo___________n_oon_oonCoo_oo_oo_oo_noooo_____________6.
NAYS: Non e __noo_noo-m-------nn----oon-oo--_-noon--m-C-----------__oon__oo__------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
BUDGET-~UMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a'
communication advising that the Virginia Department of Social Services grants
funds to Virginia Commonwealth University (VCU) for operation of five Virginia
Institute for Social Service Training Activities (VISSTA) Area Training Centers
throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia; and the City of Roanoke Department of
Social Services has received an annual subaward for local supervision and
operation of the Piedmont Area Training Center since 1998, however, in the
current fiscal year, the subaward has been issued twice, once for the first half of
the fiscal year, and a modified version to cover the second half of the fiscal year.
It was further advised that Council previously authorized the City Manager to
execute the subaward agreement that included a budget of $258,505.00 for the
first six months ofthe 2006 fiscal year program; the City's adopted budget for the
entire fiscal year was $373,357.00; a new subaward for the second half of the
fiscal year has been issued in an additional amount of $258,505.00, for a total
subaward of $517,010.00, which is issued on acost reimbursable basis; current
revenue estimate is $402,000.00 and an increase in revenue estimate of
$115,010.00 is needed.
160
It was stated that the VISSTA program provides valuable training classes for
local Department of Social Services staff, including social workers, eligibility
workers, supervisors, administrative staff and training for local department of
social services approved or State licensed child care providers; and training events
enhance the knowledge and skills of staff and child care providers, such that
vulnerable children, adults and families are effectively assisted in obtaining an
appropriate level of safety and self-sufficiency.
I
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept a
$258,505.00 subaward from Virginia Commonwealth University and execute
Subaward Agreement Modification One, for the period of January 1, 2006 to
July 31 , 2006; that Council adopt an ordinance increasing the revenue estimate for
VISSTA, Account No. 001-11 0-1234-0671, in the amount of $115,010.00; and
authorize the Director of Finance to appropriate funds to the following accounts:
001-630-5318-1003
001-630-5318-1116
001-630-5318-1131
001-630-5318-2010
(Overtime Wages)
(ICMA Match)
(Disability Insurance)
(Fees for Professional
Services)
(Telephone)
(Administrative Supplies)
(Expendable Equipment)
(Program Activities)
(Other Rental)
(Fleet Parts/Sublet
Billings)
001-630-5318-2020
001-630-5318-2030
001-630-5318-2035
001-630-5318-2066
001-630-5318-3075
001-630-5318-7026
$ 2,000.00
500.00 .
50.00
10,000.00
2,500.00
6,500.00
10,000.00
43,160.00
40,000.00
300.00
I
$115.010.00
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37307-022106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia for the Virginia Institute for Social Service Training
Activities (VI SSTA) , amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006
General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of
this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 154.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37307-
022106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by
the following vote:
I
I
I
I
!: " '~'~';
';tJf.ì.'i
161
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
MéI\I()r ~é1rris------------------------------------'-------------------------------------------------------------------E>.
N)\'(S: N()IlE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------,-----------------------Cl.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
Vice-Mélyor Fitzpatrick offE!red the following rE!Solution:
(#37308-022106) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a subaward,
in the amount of $2s8,sCls.ClCl, from Virginia Commonwealth University and
authorizing thE! City Manager to execute a subaward agreement with Virginia
Commonwealth University for such funds for local supervision and operation of
the Virginia Institute for Social SE!rvice Training Activities ("VISSTA") Piedmont Area
Training Center, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 7Cl, Page 155.)
ViŒ-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37308-
0221 Cl6. The motion was seconded by Council Member Daniel and adoptE!d by the
following vote:
AYES: Council ME!mbers Fitzpatrick, LE!a, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arri s n_n_______nn_nn_nn______nn___mmmnnn_mnn_nn_n_m______________________---m--6.
N)\'(S: N()IlE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Cl.
(Council ME!mber Dowe was absE!nt.)
BUDGET-GRANTS- POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City ManagE!r submitted a
communication advising that the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice SE!rvices
(DCJS) provides grant funding for programs and activities which increase the
apprE!hE!nsion, prosecution é1nd é1djudication of pE!rsons committing violent crimes
against women; the Program, "Virginia SE!rvices, Training, Officers, ProsE!cution
Violence Agélinst Women" (V-STOP) has funded the establishment of a Domestic
. Violence Unit within thE! Police DepartmE!nt since 1999; the Domestic Violence Unit
collects and interprets relE!vant domestic violence offense data which allows
proactive case intervention and cultivation of the cooperative working
relationships with clients and service/adjudication agencies; and the program
produces more equitable victim-offender criminal justice dispositions rE!lated to
domestic violence offenses.
162
It was further advised that on December 16, 2004, DCJS awarded the Police
Department $32,967.00 to employ a full-time, non-sworn Domestic Violence
Specialist, thereby allowing continuation of the Domestic Violence Unit in calendar
year 2006; the required City in-kind match of $10,989.00 will be met through a
cash transfer, in the amount of $8,532.00, and an in-kind donation of$2,4s7.00;
a cash expenditure is necessary to continue to fully fund the salary and benefits
portion of the Domestic Violence Specialist position; and funding for the local
match is budgeted in Local Match Funding for Grants, Account No. 035-300-9700-
541 S.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the V-STOP grant and
authorize execution of the grant agreement and any related documents, in a form
to be approved by the City Attorney; and adopt a budget ordinance establishing
revenue estimates for State grant funds, in the amount of $32,967.00,
transferring funds in the amount of $8,532.00 from Account No. 035-300-9700-
5415 to provide local match funds, and appropriating a total of $41,499.00 to
accounts in the Grant Fund to be established by the Director of Finance.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
I
(#37309-022106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia for the Police Department Domestic Violence Program
Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund I
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 156.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37309-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
Council Member Lea advised that the City has established a Domestic
Violence Task Force, and inquired about the handling of funds that are provided
. for the Program through the Commonwealth of Virginia. The City Manager
advised that the Police Department Domestic Violence Program Grant will help
fund a full-time position· charged with the responsibility of collecting and
interpreting data with regard to domestic violence, and to investigate ways to
intervene in local domestic violence offenses, such as identifying organizations
that could provide assistance to victims of domestic violence in certain situations.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37309-022106 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arri s oon_oon___u_oo___n_oooon_n______uoooo_noooon_oon_u_n_-oo-mnnn-n---__oooon_________m6.
Nt\'(S: None-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
I
I
I
I
" --"I'
" i.:' ~ 1
.
,~'."
'~~:~\i#
163
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37310-022106) A RESOLUTION accepting the Virginia Services, Training,
Officers, Prosecution (V-STOP) Violence Against Women grant to the City from the
Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, and authorizing execution of any
required documentation on behalf of the City.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 157.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37310-
022106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ ani s ____n_n_nn_nn_nn_nnn_________________n_m__nn_n_nmnn_m__mnn____m___--------6.
NA'(S: NCll1e------------------------------------------------------------------------~----------------------o.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
CITY PROPERTY-PURC~ASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-Y.M.C.A.: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that on December 24, 2002, the City of
Roanoke entered into an Agreement with the YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc.
(YMCA), to provide support for development and construction of a new YMCA
facility in the West Church area of downtown Roanoke to accommodate an
expansion of YMCA programs, and to transfer the former YMCA building and land
located at the corner of Church Avenue and Fifth Street, S. W., to the City of
Roanoke; as specified in the Agreement, the YMCA was required to remove an
underground storage tank and all appurtenances and to remediate any soil
impacted by the presence of the underground storage tank before transferring the
property to the City;
It was further advised that the underground storage tank was removed from
the former YMCA site in December 2004, however, impacted soil and piping
associated with the storage tank were left in place by the contractor working for
the YMCA, along with a pedestrian walkway linking theJormer main YMCA building
with the YMCA's auxiliary gymnasium; the agreement dated December 24,2002,
contemplates the transfer of the main YMCA building from the YMCA to the City,
with the YMCA retaining title to the YMCA's auxiliary gymnasium; provisions for
removal of the pedestrian walkway 'inking the two structures need to be
established; and Amendment No.3 addresses other related issues, such as the
closing date and survival of certain terms beyond the closing date.
164
It was stated that the YMCA has approached the City to amend the
Agreement dated December 24, 2002, in order to allow the YMCA to transfer a
portion of the former YMCA facility to the City, with piping and impacted soil on
the property; Amendment No.3 will allow the YMCA to remove the piping and
impacted soil at its expense, if the City decides to demolish the former main
YMCA building; and if the City sells the property "as is", the YMCA is under no
obligation to remove the piping and impacted soil.
I
It was further stated that if the sale price for the property is diminished by
the presence of the piping and impacted soil, the YMCA and the City will agree on
a third party to establish the difference in value of the property, with the YMCA to
be responsible for the difference; and Amendment No.3 will allow the pedestrian
walkway between the former YMCA building and the YMCA auxiliary gymnasium to
be removed at the expense of the YMCA, pursuant to other terms and conditions
as agreed upon.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute
Amendment No.3 to the Agreement dated December 24,2002, between the City
of Roanoke and the YMCA of Roanoke Valley Inc., releasing the YMCA from the
initial obligation to remove all underground storage tank appurtenances, as well
as impacted soil from the former YMCA property located at the corner of Church
Avenue and Fifth Street, S. W., to the City of Roanoke prior to transferring the
former YMCA property to the City, including provisions for removal of the I
pedestrian bridge by the YMCA between the former YMCA building and the YMCA
auxiliary gymnasium, at the YMCA's expense, and other related documents,
subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37311-022106) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute
Amendment No.3 to the Agreement dated December 24,2002, between the City
of Roanoke and the YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc. (''YMCA''), to extend the date to
February 28, 2006, by which the YMCA must transfer to the City of Roanoke a
portion of the property on which the former YMCA faCility is located, to address
the future removal and disposal of piping and impacted soil from an underground
storage tank, to address the removal and disposal of a pedestrian walkway
between two buildings which constituted the former YMCA facility, to address
survival of such prOVisions and other provisions after closing, and to include other
terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 158.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37311-022106. I
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following
vote:
I
I
I
,.j ...« . ';-",., .~
..,
: '-; ~~
" . I
I;'
Jf,r,4
165
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Ma\l()r ~arris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------15.
Nt\'(Si: N()IlE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
(Council MembE!r DOWE! was absE!nt.)
TRAFFIC-STATE ~IG~WAYS: The City Manager submittE!d a communication
advising that the Virginia DE!partmE!nt ofTransportation (VDOT) rE!Œntly published
the Interstate 81 (1-81) Corridor Improvement Tier 1 Draft Environmental Impact
StatemE!nt (Tier 1 DEIS) and is currently seeking public comments; the streamlined
Tier 1 DEIS process, being conducted in accordance with the Federal ~ighway
Administration (FHWA) and National EnvironmE!ntal Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA)
guidelines, identifies neE!ds, develops solutions and evaluates potential impacts
associated with conceptual-level improvements along the entire 32s-mile
Interstate 81 (1-81) corridor in Virginia, as well as improvemE!nts to Norfolk
Southern Shenandoah and Piedmont rail lines in Virginia; potential impacts of
specific improvE!mE!nts will bE! analyzed in greater detail during TiE!r 2 if a "Build"
concept (or portion of a "Build" concept) is advanced; Tier 1 study documents
existing and future nE!eds along the corridor; and upon completion of the Tier 1
study, decisions will bE! basE!d upon the following:
·
improvement concepts for highway. and rail facilities;
advancing 1-81 as a toll pilot under Section 1216(b) of the
Transportation Equity Act for thE! 21" Century (TEA-21);
projects with independent utility and logical termini to be
studied in Tier 2;
types of Tier 2 NEPA document(s); .
location of the corridor for studying alignments in Tier 2; and
possible purchase of certain right-of-way parcels on a case-by-
caSE! basis.
·
·
·
·
·
The City Manager recommE!lldE!d that Council adopt a resolution in support
of multi-modal Interstate 81 corridor improvE!ments.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37312-()221 015) A RESOLUTION requesting the. Commonwealth
Transportation Board to make the multi-modal improvement of the Interstate 81
(1-81) corridor a high priority transportation project within the Commonwealth and
to proceed with the necessary work to implemE!nt these improvements in a timely
manner.
(F()r full tE!xt of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 7(), Page 159.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37312-
()22106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
166
Council Member Cutler read the following portion of Resolution No. 37312-
022106:
"T~EREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Roanoke
that the City hereby endorses and requests that the Commonwealth
Transportation Board continue the advancement of corridor
improvements appropriately balancing freight rail, public
transportation, and strategic interstate widening in a manner that will
maximize the utilization and efficiency of all transportation modes
along this corridor while minimizing impacts on the environment,
including scenic and cultural resources. Further, the City urges the
Commonwealth of Virginia to identify, and make available, the needed
resources to improve this vital corridor in a timely manner, and for
VDOT to recognize the 1-81 highway improvement segments in the
Roanoke and New River Valleys as high priorities to be more closely
studied and advanced in the 1-81 Corridor Improvement Tier 2
environmental documents."
I
For clarification purposes, Council Member Cutler reiterated that the
abovementioned portion of Resolution No. 37312-022106 requests the
Commonwealth Transportation Board to continue the advancement of corridor
improvements to balan.ce freight rail, public transportation, and strategic
interstate widening that will maximize utilization and efficiency of all
transportation modes along the 1-81 corridor while minimizing impacts on the
environment.
I
There being no further discussion, Resolution No. 37312-022106 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Ma)lor ~arris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6.
NAYS: NOlle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
CITY ATTORNEY:
STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising
that on October 18, 2001, Council adopted Ordinance No. 35619-101801
permanently vacating a portion of an unnamed and undeveloped alleyway between
10th Street and 11'h Street, S. E., upon certain conditions; one ofthe conditions was
that the petitioner, Sherman W. Chisom, record a copy of Ordinance No.3 56'19-
101801 in the Office of the Circuit Court Clerk for the City of Roanoke within a I
period of 12 months from the effective date of the ordinance; and if all of the
conditions were not met within the 12 month timeframe, the ordinance would
become null and void without further action by City Council.
I
I
I
~1' I '~'(
167
It was explained that Michael S. Ferguson, Attorney, representing the
petitioner, has advised that all conditions of the ordinance were timely completed,
except for the inadvertent failure to record a copy ofthe ordinance; therefore, Mr.
Ferguson has prepared and filed an application requesting that Ordinance No.
35619-101801 be amended and reordained to allow 60 months for recordation of
the ordinance and amendment to Ordinance No. 35619-101801; and the
Engineering Department and the Department of Planning Building and Economic
Development have no objection to the request.
The City Attorney recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to amend
and reordain Ordinance No.3 5619-101801, with the condition that the period of
time required for satisfaction of the condition be changed from 12 months to 60
months.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37313-022106) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Ordinance No.
35619-101801; and dispensing with the second reading by title ofthis ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 160.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37313-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arrisn-mn-nn-nnn-n._nnn_n_mn_n__m_______________________m---__n________________________6.
NAYS: Non e----------------------------------,------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
HOUSING/AUTHORITY-STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Attorney submitted a
written report advising that the City of Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing
Authority ("Authority") is in the process of taking over the development of the Fifth
Street Gateway project located in the 500 block of Loudon Avenue, N. W., from the
Northwest Neighborhood Environmental Organization ("NNEO"); at the request of
NNEO, C9uncil adopted Ordinance No. 36226-020303 closing two alleys in the
area of the project; Ordinance No. 36226-020303 required that, within one year
from the date of adoption of the ordinance, NNEO would have a subdivision plat
prepared and recorded combining the closed alleys with the adjoining lots; and
because the plat was never prepared and recorded, Ordinance No. 36226-020303,
by its terms, became void.
168
It was further advised that Ordinance No. 36226-020303 must be amended
to allow for the closure of the alleys and to grant the ~ousing Authority an I
additional 12 months to prepare and record an appropriate plat; and in
accordance with the Authority's request, Council adopted Ordinance No. 37152-
081505 amending and reordaining Ordinance No. 36226-020303 to allow a plat of
subdivision to be prepared and recorded within 36 months after February 3,2003,
the date of adoption of the original ordinance.
The City Attorney pointed out that by letter dated February 7, 2006, the
~ousing Authority advised that the required subdivision plat had not yet been
recorded; accordingly, the Housing Authority requested that an additional 12
months be granted to complete the process; and the Engineering Department and
the Department of Planning Building and Economic Development have no
objection to the request.
The City Attorney recommended that Council adopt an ordinance amending
and reordaining Ordinance No. 36226-020303 allowing a plat of subdivision to be
prepared and recorded within 48 months after February 3, 2003, the date of
adoption of the original ordinance.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37314-022106) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Ordinance No. I
36226-020303; and dispensing with the second reading by title ofthis ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No, 70, Page 161.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37314-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r H arri s _nn_nn_nn_oon_nn_nnn_nn_n_m_nnn_n_m____nn_______m_______n----------------00-6.
NAlfS: NOrle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
BONDS/BOND ISSUES-BUDGET-ClVIC CENTER-CITY INFORMATION SYSTEMS-
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM- ARTS MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA-
RIVERSIDE CENTRE-SC~OOLS: The Director of Finance submitted a written report
advising that the City's 2006A and 2006B General Obligation Public Improvement I
Bonds, in the amount of $35,055,000.00, were issued on February 8, 2006; the
I
I
I
, ,
",~:. ;
169
Series 2005 General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, in the amount of
$3,975,000.00, were issued on December 15, 2005; proceeds from the issuances
are available for appropriation; several projects have been established and funded
in advance of issuance of the bonds; and the following table details projects to be
funded by the bonds:
Project
Civic Facilities Fund
Civic Center Renovations-Phase II
Parkina Fund
Downtown West Parking Garage
Caoital Proiects Fund
Art Museum
Riverside Centre for Research
and Technology
Countryside Goif Course
Total Capital Projects Fund
Deoartment of Tech'noloav Fund
Financial Information Systems
Replacement
School Caoital Proiects Fund
Patrick Henry High School
Grand Total
Amount Remaining to
Issue Previously be .
Amount Appropriated Appropriated
$ 6,405,000.00 $ 6,405,000.00
$ 2,600,000.00 $ $ 2,600,000.00
$ 3,700,000.00 $ 2,500,000.00 $ 1,200,000.00
5,500,000.00 5,495,750.00 4,250.00
3 975 000.00 3 975 000.00
$13,175,000.00 $11,970.750.00 $ 1,204,250.00
$ 2,600,000.00
$ 2,600,000,00
$14,250,000,00
$
$14250000,00
$39l13.0 000 00
$1837575000
$2065475000
The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to
appropriate the remaining $20,654,250.00 in bond funds to the appropriate
project accounts.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37315-022106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding to be provided by
the Series 2005 and 2006A and B Bonds to various capital projects, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Civic Facilities, Parking, Capital
Projects, Department of Technology and School Capital Projects Funds
Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 163.)'
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 731 5-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following
vote:
170
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r ~ arri s _oooon_oooo_nn_u____nnn_oon_____oo___noo_oooo_noo_uoo____m_oon_noooon_oonn____________6.
I
NAYS: Non e _noon_nn__n_oooo_m_unn_oo_oooon_m____n_nnn_oon_noo_nnh___nm___---n---O.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-SC~OOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
appropriation of the following funds, was before Council:
. $544,576.00 from the Capital Maintenance and Equipment
Replacement Fund to fund faCility maintenance and food
services equipment, and school-based furniture.
. $4,100,000.00 from the Roanoke City Stadium/Amphitheater
project to provide funding for construction of a football
stadium to be located on the Patrick ~enry ~igh School
campus.
A report ofthe Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance for its first
reading:
I
(#37316) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the 2005-06 Capital
Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program and Patrick ~enry ~igh School
Stadium Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006
General, Capital Projects, School, School Capital Projects, and School Food Services
Fund Appropriations.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 174.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7316. The
motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
Mr. Alan Scanlan, 1631 Center ~ill Drive, S. W., advised that an informal
referendum was held over the weekend and although the referendum was not
attended by a large number of citizens, the overwhelming message was that the
citizens of Roanoke do not approve of actions taken by City Council. ~e stated
that he did not know that the school administration would show favoritism to
some schools due to the influence of certain parents whose children attend the I
schools, but he knows now; he did not know that while one school administrator
spoke in public about no meetings or discussions having been held to construct a
high school stadium on the Patrick Henry ~igh School campus as quickly as
possible to accommodate 4,000 or more participants, another school official
I
I
I
jÚ::r"
1 71
denied that the meeting occurred, but he knows now; he did not know that 48 per
cent or more of the City's population, 18 years of age or younger, are below the
poverty level, but he knows now; he did not know that economic issues of the City
serves as a magnet for the Roanoke City School system's problems and feeds the
growth of surrounding communities, but he knows now; he did not know that the
former School Administrator, under the watch of the current School Board, was
aware of the school system's false certifications of instructional compliance that
were forwarded to the State Department of Education, but he knows now; he did
not know that some of the forces in the City that have urged construction of high
school stadiums are likely responsible for the School Board's failure to address
instructional time needs because they would be disruptive to affluent life styles,
but he knows now; he did not know that 70 per cent of candidates campaigning
for City Council believe that too many public decisions are tainted before they
begin and that the City Manager has her own agenda, but he knows now. ~e
stated that he did not know that there are avenues of recourse open to citizens
and/or citizen organizations who are not willing to stand by while City Council
continues to do whatever it pleases, and although the cost may be significant,
citizens are prepared to take whatever action is necessary.
Ms.. Margaret Keyser, 2701 Guilford Avenue, S. W., advised that it is hoped
that the $4 million plus that will be allocated to Roanoke City Public Schools will
include the cost of a sunken stadium at Patrick ~enry~igh School, and additional
lighting in the school parking lot and the parking lot at the Raleigh Court Branch
Library to accommodate overflow parking. She further advised that approximately
two years ago, Council promised that there would be dialogue with the residents
of the area prior to making a decision concerning an on-campus stadium at Patrick
~enry ~igh School; although four meetings were held at Patrick ~enry ~igh School
with the architect and the School administration, the meetings did not address the
City's obligation to residents, and no Member of City Council attended any of the
meetings to address questions raised by residents. She expressedconcefn with
regard to parking and traffic issues in the neighborhood; usage ofthefield will be
greater than four to five football games per year as was previously stated, and will
most likely include Parks and Recreation, as well as community events, at any time
during the day. She also expressed concern with regard to a statemennhat was
made during a City Planning Commission meeting that parking plans for the high
school stadium should be revised to accommodate spillover into the
neighborhood due to narrow streets; therefore, residents of the area would like to
discuss the issue with the City's Traffic Engineer. She questioned how thé Council
could, in good conscience, provide the necessary funds to the school system to
construct the athletic field without addressing the concerns of residents. In
closing, she inquired if the school administration or the Department of Parks and
Recreation will contact residents prior to scheduled events. She urged that
Council give serious consideration to the construction of a stadium at Patrick
~enry ~igh School, and asked that City officials meet with residents ofthe area to
discuss their concerns.
172
Council Member Wishneff advised of his plans to vote against adoption of
the budget ordinance because in May 2005 Council unanimously voted to engage I
a consultant to study the stadium issue, which did not include stadia at the two
high schools; and Council was unanimous in itsdecìsion not to study high school
stadia due to the negative impact on the surrounding neighborhoods. ~e called
attention to an article in the Roanoke Times following receipt of the consultant's
report in which the news media used the word "surprised" to explain the reaction
of City Council because the consultant's report on Victory Stadium was positive.
~e added that what he did not know until the Citizens for a Sensible Stadium
group requested e-mails through the Virginia Freedom of Information Act was that
prior to release of the consultant's report, five Members of City Council had
discussed ways to overturn the results of the stadium study prior to release ofthe
report to the public.
Council Member Wishneff referred to an e-mail from a Member of Council to
the Chair of the School Board under date of October 25, 2005, which offered
suggestions with regard to the demolition of Victory Stadium and the construction
of a soccer field, and contributions by the City to encourage the School Board to
agree with construction of high school stadia. ~e also referred to an article in USA
Todav with regard to an increase in violence at high school football games
throughout the United States and in the Commonwealth of Virginia. ~e pointed
out that having lived in the neighborhood surrounding Patrick ~enry ~igh School
for the past 15 years, the image portrayed by the City regarding the lack of I
violence at high school football games is a "fairy tale"; and having witnessed the
traffic situation, he could attest to the negative impact of parking and traffic in
the area. He added that for many years, City Councils have rejected the idea of
constructing a high school stadium at Patrick ~enry ~igh School so as not to place
the neighborhood at risk, and alluded to existing problems of the City such as a
declining population and deterioration of neighborhoods, etc. ~e referred to
proposed action by the City of Norfolk in June 2003 to construct a stadium for
Granby ~igh School beside the Virginia Zoo in Lafayette Park, which action was
later rescinded and the City of Norfolk constructed a high school stadium at a site
near Old Dominion University which is farther away from Granby ~igh School in
Norfolk than Victory Stadium is to . Patrick ~enry ~igh School in Roanoke. ~e
stated that the City of Norfolk continues to prosper, the decline in population has
been reversed, economic development is flourishing, the downtown area is
. thriving, and the school system has turned itself around; however, in contrast to
the City of Roanoke where population has decreased to 92,000 citizens, with a
school system that is in trouble, a downtown that has lost approximately 5,000
people, and a reported reputation as the second most dangerous city in Virginia.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37315-022106 was
adopted by the following vote:
I
I
I
I
.".,-: .
,~'f::/!:
"'î!
173
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor ~arrisn----4.
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneffn---n------------------mn-------------nn---2.
(Gouncil Member Dowe was absent.)
UNFINIS~ED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BYT~E MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-NEWSPAPERS-CITY MARKET: Council Member
Cutler referred to an article in the January 2006 Virginia Town & City Magazine
with regard to the benefits of City squares that included the following sentence:
"Does your community host a still-vital town square created in years long past
such as Roanoke's Market Square?"
PARKS AND RECREATION-ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-NEWSPAPERS:
Council Member Cutler called attention to a column by Dan Smith in the February
13, 2006 edition of the Blue Ridge Business Journal that complimented Gary
Hegner, Parks Supervisor, Roanoke Parks and Recreation Department, for
encouraging student artist and skateboarder Hunter Dickenson to paint the City-
County Skateboard Park.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Council Member Cutler announced that Mike
Etienne, former Director of ~ousing and Neighborhood Services, recently received
his Doctorate of Philosophy Degree. He advised that he served on the Doctoral
Committee and attended the oral examination on Mr. Etienne's dissertation at
Virginia Commonwealth University on February 9, 2006.
~UMAN DEVELOPMENT-COUNCIL OF COMMUNITY SERVICES: Council
Member Cutler announced the availability of a 2-1-1 number for various
health/human service needs, which has been a long term goal of the Council of.
Community Services.
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: . .The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be .heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
174
CITY PROPERTY-EASEMENTS: Ms. Amanda Davis, 1998 Cahas Mountain
Road, Boones Mill, Virginia, advised that she serves as administrator of her I
father's estate as it relates to property that was purchased in 1938 near Bennett
Springs in Roanoke County. She further advised that a Bill of Complaint and
Demurrer was filed against adjoining property owners who purchased properties in
2003 and thereafter, when access rights to her father's property were revoked.
She added that efforts to work out access rights with three other property owners
failed, as well as a request for right-of-way easement across City property. She
stated that other property owners have access to their properties without crossing
City property; therefore, she requested that Council authorize a right-of-way
easement across City property to her property, with the understanding that any
request by the City to maintain the scenic quality of the land will be complied with.
Council Member Cutler advised that he visited Ms. Davis' property, as well as
certain property that was previously granted a right-of-way easement across City
property. ~e stated that the City erred in granting the right-of-way easement
across City-owned property to the previous owner because of timbering of the
land. ~e also expressed concern with regard to blight from the access road to the
Carvins Cove Natural Reserve, and recommended that the City not grant a right-of-
way easement as requested by Ms. Davis.
Ms. Davis responded that she has no plans to timber the land; however, if
the request for a right-of-way easement across City property is denied, her only
recourse will be to sell the property to the adjoining property owner.
I
There being no further discussion, Ms. Davis' request was referred to the
City Manager for study and report to Council.
CITY GOVERNMENT: Mr. John Kepley, 2909 Morrison Street, S. E., advised
that certain Members of Council do not hear what the citizens of Roanoke are
saying, and quoted a Bible passage which states that they have ears but they hear
not. ~e added that certain Members of Council are mentally alive, but spiritually
dead, and their conscience has become seared to the point of not hearing the
citizens of Roanoke. ~e added that every action taken by the Council is recorded,
and the Apostle Paul said that each of us shall give an account of himselfto God.
ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Winfred Noell, 2743 Northview Drive, S. W., read a
statement written by the Mayor with regard to Victory Stadium prior to the 2004
Councilmanic election entitled, "I Changed My Mind with Good Reason". Mr. Noell
questioned why the Mayor listened to and honored the will of citizens two years
ago, yet, with regard to construction of high school stadia, he discounted the will
of the Roanoke's citizens.
I
I
I
I
,"·r-
I·...
r;~*~ì
175
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
RVCVB: The City Manager called attention to an article in the February 21 ,
2006 edition of The Roanoke Times with regard to a pledge of $60,000.00 by the
Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, the Roanoke Valley Economic
Development Partnership, and several local governments to attract the second
annual U. S. Challenge to the Roanoke Valley. She advised that that event pairs
athletic and outdoor competition with tests of strategic thinking and teamwork.
At 3:15p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one
Closed Session.
At 3:45 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member Dowe,
Mayor ~arris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council
Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his.
or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2)
only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any
Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Ma)lor ~arris--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------6.
~j\'{S;: ~ol1e----------------------------------------,------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe was absent.)
At 3:55 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building.
At 7:00 p.m., on Tuesday, February 21, 2006, the Council meeting
reconvened in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Vice-Mayor
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian j.
Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert Cutler and Vice-Mayor Beverly T.
F itz pat ri ck, Jr. -mh__h_____m_mnn______nn_nnn_n___n_n_nn__n_m__mnn_n_____------------------ 5 .
ABSENT: Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson
~arris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------2.
176
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Ann ~. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; and I
Stephanie M. Moon, Deputy City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
PROCLAMATIONS: The Vice-Mayor presented a proclamation to David Mays,
an Advisor to the Roanoke Valley DeMolay Chapter, declaring the month of March
2006 as DeMolay Month.
The Vice-Mayorrecognized Bo Painter, Chris Ballard, Nick Dugan, Jonathan
Mays, Charlie Scruggs, Paul Brammer and Seth Sprinkle, members of the Roanoke
DeMolay Chapter, and expressed appreciation for their many contributions to the
community.
PUBLIC ~EARINGS:
~OUSING/AUT~ORITY-ROANOKE VISION, COMPRE~ENSIVE DEVELOPMENT I
PLAN-COMMUNITY PLANNING: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City
Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 21, 2006, at
7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposal of
the City of Roanoke to amend Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan,
to include the Strategic ~ousing Plan, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Timeson Monday, February 13, 2006, and Monday, February 17, 2006; and in the
Roanoke Tribune on Thursday, February 9, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that in
2003, K. W. Poore and Associates, Richmond, Virginia, was awarded the bid to lead
development of a Strategic ~ousing Plan; with assistance from City staff, a
steering committee of 19 citizens was appointed in the fall of 2003; and public
meetings, including focus groups, were held during the winter of 2004.
It was further advised that the overall goal of the ~ousing Plan is to reverse
negative trends experienced by the City over the past 20 years, which involves
increasing the amount of market rate housing, improving housing conditions,
halting the decline in population, and increasing income levels of City residents;
the Plan stresses that the City must realize its potential by capitalizing on urban I
assets, rather than competing in the realm of suburban housing; and the Plan also
recommends cooperation and partnerships with the private sector, and linking
housing initiatives with economic development activities.
I
I
I
177
It was noted that in order to achieve the abovereferenced goals, the Housing
Plan proposes the following: Neighborhood Strategies for each of the following
areas: downtown, northern edge of Old Southwest, Gainsboro, Southeast by
Design, West End/~urt Park, South Jefferson/Bio-Medical District, and City
suburban/Neo-traditional neighborhoods; Citywide Strategies to include
examination of all current ordinances and City programs, marketing the City,
addressing school issues, and attracting active seniors, young professionals and
empty nesters; and funding strategies are identified as solicitation of for-profit
and non-profit organizations for development, joint developers investing in a
single project to reduce risk, and additional City commitments.
The City Planning Commission recommended amendment of Vision 2001-
2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the Strategic ~ousing Plan, with
the following modifications:
·
Affordable Housing Must Be Maintained (p. 6). The Commission
recommends striking the phrase "inclusionary techniques" from
the last sentence in the third paragraph on page 6.
Substandard and Dilapidated Neighborhoods where
Rehabilitation is not Economically Feasible (p. J 7) - The
Commission recommends that this section be deleted from the
report.
Gainsboro - Geographic Focus (p. 30) - The Commission
recommends the following text be inserted: "Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RR~A) owns a number
of scattered site lots, as well as the Cherry Avenue site in
Gainsboro. These properties were acquired and made available
as part of the Redevelopment/Conservation Plan for the
neighborhood through various acquisition and clearance means
over an extended period of time."
·
·
Council Member Cutler offered the follOWing ordinance:
(#37317-022106) AN ORDINANCE approving the Strategic ~ousing Plan,
and amending Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the
Strategic Housing Plan; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance
by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 165.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37317-
022106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea.
The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
178
Council Member Cutler asked the following questions:
I
What are "loan pools" and how are they funded? .
R. Brian Townsend, Agent, City Planning Commission, advised that a
"loan pool" isa source of money that can be accessed and reused as
loans are paid off to facilitate rehabilitation or new construction of
housing, and could be self sufficient, once initiated. ~e identified
several funding sources such as CDBG funds, General Fund money
and grants, and an appropriate funding source would depend on the
target of the housing market.
Who administers the loan pool?
Mr. Townsend stated that the ~ousing Plan identifies either the
Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority or the City's
Neighborhood and ~ousing Services Department as the two entities
to administer the loan pool on behalf of the City of Roanoke.
If the plan is approved, what is the next step toward creating a loan
pool?
Mr. Townsend advised that the next step would be to identify a
source of funds and the target portion of the housing market that
addresses either rehabilitation or new construction, and whether the
City should look at buying down or lowering the interest rate for a
loan or down payment assistance. ~e called attention to a series of
potential programmatic responses that are included in the Plan that
identify ways to focus on the City's strategic housing mission.
I
Does the Cradle 2 Cradle (C2C) innovative housing program fit into
the Strategic ~ousing Plan?
Mr. Townsend stated that the C2C project was considered by the
committee even though the process began in 2003, prior to theC2C
project; the C2C project was geared toward exploring innovative
design as opposed to housing strategies and contained a different
focus by identifying new and better ways to design housing that is
sustainable in terms of design and materials used. ~e added that
although the C2C project was not included in this specific ~ousing
Plan, it is cited as an innovative way to provide housing within the
City of Roanoke.
Does the ~ousing Plan address the racially segregated nature of
Roanoke's housing?
I
I
I
I
! - ,P ¡,,;,:,.
"
.~,~
179
Mr. Townsend stated that a significant amount of time was spent
reviewing the City's housing market in comparison to the region,
both geographically and the City as a whole; the Plan identifies not
only social and economic divisions relative to the housing market in
terms value, but also studies clusters of still segregated housing in
terms of racial breakdown within some sections of Roanoke; and one
of the goals of the Plan is to provide a better range of housing within
the entire City and begin to address some of the discrepancies
identified geographically, socially and economically.
Is the power of eminent domain a useful tool to help accomplish the
Strategic ~ousing Plan, and will certain legislation before the General
Assembly act as a deterrent to the City?
Mr. Townsend stated that he could not speak to what the General
Assembly might be considering, however, certain bills are pending in
the General Assembly that will clarify rules as to when eminent
domain may be used by a locality in Virginia; even though the
Housing Plan does not recommend or advocate eminent domain, it
specifically focuses on redevelopment in the core areas of
neighborhoods that surround downtown Roanoke in all directions
which is a critical location that needs the most attention; and the Plan
looks at using other tools and means for new housing development in
the core areas, and the primary focus of the Plan is to provide a
better ratio of the City's housing market. ~e explained thatthere is a
disproportionate share of lower end ofthe scale housing value within
the City, and the Plan identifies areas where some insertion of new
investment could bring disproportionate housing back into balance in
order to have the City's housing profile reflect the entire region.
Council Member McDaniel inquired about implementation of new housing
initiatives; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that the City will provide a frame
work to respond to the private sector and private developers, both for profit and
non-profit organizations, and thereafter, discussions will be initiated by the City to
encourage investments in disadvantaged or key neighborhoods.
Council Member McDaniel noted that the ~ousing Plan provides for
strategies to promote the Rehabilitation Loan Fund Program and requested an
explanation of the Program; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that the City is
working with the Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority to broaden
criteria in order to provide loans in larger amounts so that more persons will
qualify; the Plan advocates expanding the loan fund for rehabilitation of existing
structures as a critical part of housing strategy, due to the City's existing housing
stock; and the City's goal is 2,400 new residents by the year 201 5 which is based
on new construction.
180
The City Manager explained that the rehab loan recommendation would
require an appropriation of General Fund money because Community Development I
Block Grant funds cannot be used for higher incomes.
Council Member Lea inquired if the ~ousing Plan addresses racially
segregated housing in the City of Roanoke; whereupon, Mr. Townsend responded
in the affirmative and advised that one of the issues is to identify a broader
economic balance of housing so that there will not be certain neighborhoods with
only low to moderate income housing minimums.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37317-022106 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Vice-Mayor
Fit z pat ri c k ___n___nn_nn_n_nn_n________nn_:_nnnn_n_m________n_n_nn_n_nn_nnn_______n____n 5 .
N)\,(Si: N()ne--------------------------------"--------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe and Mayor ~arris were absent.)
PARKS AND RECREATION-PLANNING-ROANOKE VISION, COMPRE~ENSIVE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pu'rsuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk
having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 21 , 2006, at 7:00 p.m., I
or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposal of the City of
Roanoke to amend Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include
the Mill Mountain Park Management Plan, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, February 13, 2006, and Friday, February 17, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that over
the years, there have been a variety of plans prepared regarding development or
preservation of Mill Mountain Park, however, none were based upon an in-depth
natural resource inventory; the City's Parks and Recreation Department and the
Mill Mountain Advisory Committee developed a Management Plan based upon a
detailed analysis of the natural, cultural and visual characteristics of Mill Mountain
Park; and the Plan was largely developed through assistance of the Virginia Tech
Landscape Architecture Department.
It was further advised that the purpose ofthe Management Plan is to guide
the future management, maintenance and development of Mill Mountain Park and
the Park's resources, to document current conditions, mission and history of the
Park, and to use the information to develop Resource Management Zones (RMZ's)
and a Trails Plan.
I
I
I
I
".1:;,'
1:;- :f;
1 81
It was explained that Resource Management Zones classify various areas of
the Park basedon shared characteristics and common management concerns; and
each Zone has a set of management recommendations that address such things as
appropriate land uses and a development review process to evaluate the
appropriateness of future development in each Zone.
It was further explained that the purpose of the Trails Plan component of
the Management Plan is to provide a sustainable network oftrails that will provide
residents and visitors with opportunities to enjoy the natural environment in ways
that will fulfill their physical, emotional, and spiritual needs, while protecting
mountain resources; and the Plan recommends the primary use, location, and
name of all existing and proposed future trails on Mill Mountain, and trail
management, including maintenance, volunteer programs, resource protection,
signage and education.
The City Planning Commission recommended approval of the following
amendments:
· Figure 34 and Page 19 of the trails plan - colors incorrect on Bigg
Sunny Trail;
· Page 47, add language to response on long-term conservation -
"imposition of a conservation easement be explored and a report
returned to the Planning Commission within a year ofthe adoption
of the report by the Mill Mountain Advisory Committee";
· Page SO; SeCtion E, add language - "maintain and expand back
planting along ridge lines";
· Page 52, Section A, second line, before word vegetation, add
words "low lying"; .
· Page 53, add No.6, "the department should explore opportunities
as they develop to acquire adjacent parcels of land to add to the
park if it supports the general precepts and mission of the plan";
and "Roanoke" is misspelled in Section One on the same page.
· Page 8 of Trails Plan, correct the location of Mill Mountain.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37318-022106) AN ORDINANCE approving the Mill Mountain Park
Management Plan, and amending Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive
Plan, to include the Mill Mountain Park Management Plan; and dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 166.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37318-
022106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea.
182
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37318-
022106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea. I
The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the matter; whereupon, the following persons addressed
the Council:
Mr. Tom R. Brock, 5434 Peregrine Crest Circle, S. W., former Chair of the
Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce, read an excerpt from the Chamber's
1997 Vision statement pertaining to Mill Mountain: "Make the region a
destination for people to want to come to". ~e advised that citizens want the
Roanoke Valley to be the kind of place where people want to visit and spend their
time and money; Roanoke does a good job to promote conventions and certain
events, but there is a need to advertise the region by linking various attractions
and events, such as incline transportation up Mill Mountain to a restaurant, shops,
or a museum on top of the mountain, or downtown Roanoke with some form of
historic or futuristic transportation that could be linked with the Virginia Museum
of Transportation, all of which could be ecologically compatible with the scenic
nature of Mill Mountain; and the Plan should build on the unique experience of
Explore Park. ~e stated that Mill Mountain is considered to be Roanoke's most
valuable asset and, by itself, has the ability to potentially change the future of
Roanoke if developed properly; and in order for development to become a reality,
public transportation would have to be provided, therefore, he urged that serious
consideration be given to any development on Mill Mountain.
I
Mr. Dale E. Wilkinson, 185 Park Drive, N. W., concurred in the remarks ofthe
previous speaker with regard to the importance of Mill Mountain in the Roanoke
Valley. ~e stated that he was not advocating any particular ideas for Mill Mountain
and urged that the Council proceed cautiously in its approach to Mill Mountain.
Ms. Elizabeth Belcher, 1206 Kessler Mill Road, Salem, Virginia, spoke on
behalf of the Trails Committee, a component of the Mill Mountain Management
Plan. She expressed appreciation to the Roanoke Parks and Recreation
Department for its leadership in recognizing the many opportunities on the
Mountain for conservation and development of the 20 acres atop Mill Mountain.
She congratulated the City of Roanoke, Roanoke County and the Roanoke Valley
Convention and Visitors Bureau for pledging $60,000.00 to attract the second
annual U. S. Challenge to the Roanoke Valley. She expressed appreciation for the
City's support of the Star Trail that was built in 1999 on Mill Mountain and the
Roanoke River Greenway project which will connect to Explore Park and the Mill
Mountain Greenway that was dedicated in September 2003 and will extend from
the Roanoke River to the top of Mill Mountain.
Mr. E. Duane ~oward, 1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., advised that Mill I
Mountain is one of the greatest assets and the most valuable piece of property in
the City of Roanoke. ~e stated that he relocated to Roanoke approximately nine
years ago, even though there was not a great deal of night life in the City after
11 :00 p.m., thus he took consolation that at any time during the night, he could
I
I
I
'··I··'J·
,."i>'..~
183
drive up to Mill Mountain to enjoy the spectacular view of the Roanoke Valley. ~e
urged Council to reconsider closing the gates to Mill Mountain Park at 11 :00 p.m.,
so that citizens and visitors may enjoy the benefit of Roanoke's greatest asset - an
aerial view of the Roanoke Valley from the Mill Mountain Star.
- There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
Council Member Cutler asked that Mr. ~oward's request regarding the
closing of Mill Mountain Park at 11 :00 p.m., be referred to the City Manager. .
Council Member Cutler expressed appreciation to the Mill Mountain Advisory
Committee for its persistence that the entire 568 acre park and not just the
summit, be inventoried. ~e agreed with the consultants that new construction on
Mill Mountain should be kept to a minimum, and advised that the summit of the
Mountain is not the right place for major new structures, such as a museum which
should be located in downtown Roanoke to add to the appeal created by the
presence of the Market Building, the Market Square, the Farmers' Market and
Center in the Square. ~e pointed out that it was approximately 100 years ago that
the nationally famous landscape architect and City planner, John Nolen,
recommended that Roanoke protect Mill Mountain and its river and stream
corridors from adverse development, and City Council is prepared to take action
to acknowledge the official sanction to Mr. Nolen's centUry-old and still-valid
recommendation. ~e added that with adoption of the Mill Mountain Plan, the
Council will officially acknowledge that the preservation of iconic views of Mill
Mountain from downtown and the surrounding Valley require limitation of future
development of the Mountain, just as Roanoke County is taking action to protect
the. summit of Read Mountain from adverse development. ~e stated that
together, the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County are protecting the natural
scenic heritage of the Roanoke Valley.
Council Member Cutler requested that specific management direction be
adopted for each of the resource management zones identified in the Mill
Mountain Park Plan, and that the City Code be amended to establish permitted
uses and prohibited uses similar to those adopted for the Carvins Cove Natural
Reserve several years ago. ~e spoke in support ofthe City Planning Commission's
recommendation to include a provision that a report will be required within one
year in response to the overlay of a conservation easement on portions of the
Park. ~e acknowledged Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick's interest in the revival of the
incline and spoke in support of the conservation easement portion of the Plan that
would reserve opportunities for construction of an incline and a mountaintop
restaurant. ~e requested that specific managemenUequirements for each of the
Mill Mountain Management Zones be submitted in the form of an ordinance for
adoption by Council.
Council Member McDaniel read the follOWing e-mail from Ms. Liza Field, a
supporter and user of Mill Mountain:
184
"I do not live in Roanoke, but grew up next to Mill Mountain. My
mother walks it almost every morning at the crack of dawn. She will
be at the Council meeting tonight, and since she does not "do" e-mail,
I just wanted to express my/our/many people's gratitude for those
who have slowed the various leaps to develop Mill Mountain. It is
completely unusual, progressive, a rare and priceless thing to have a
green, undeveloped mountain in the middle of a sprawling city. Its
value lies not only in its vital roles or providing songbird habitat,
wildlife range, an undisturbed watershed for the phenomenally
important Crystal Spring, oxygen for Roanoke's trying to improve air
quality, climate stabilizer and scenic beauty from below ~but also in
what does NOT exist there. People today (our tourists and residents
alike) are starved for the chance to experience quietness, clean air,
solitude and peace. I led a writing workshop on Mill Mountain in
September 2005 and we were all amazed to observe so many people
just sitting on a blanket, looking around, reading a book, walking
quietly together, drawing, reading their Sunday school lesson for the
next day's church service (both congregants and one preacher). I
have seen groups go there to hike, picnic, pray, take naps under the
oak trees, get their homework done, and just "to get away from
home" (one man told me early one Thanksgiving morning). If we
bring in restaurants, museums, more cars, parking, noise, exhausts,
busyness and human "activities", we lose yet another precious respite
from these things that cover every square inch of the land below.
Roanokers (and those of us who now visit) do not need another thing
to do, another commercial enterprise, another building full of
man made facts and figures and things to buy. We can do that
absolutely everywhere else. Let's move toward that conservation
easement, so that those who understand this vision, and how rare
and undeveloped the place will be in 15 years - so rare we would pay
millions of dollars to secure one -- can stop the wearisome task of
having to oppose every new bright idea for developing the mountain."
I
I
Council Member Wishneff inquired if adoption of the Mill Mountain Park
Management Plan would prohibit future decisions with regard to development on
Mill Mountain; whereupon, Mr. Townsend responded that any plan could be
amended by the Council.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37318-022106 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Vice-Mayor
F i tz pat ri c k ___n_nn_n_nn__nn_____________n_______n_nnn_m_______nn___nn_nn_n_nnn_______________ 5 .
NAYS: Non enn_n_nn_nn_nnn_nn_nnn_n____n_nn_n___________m_____nn____-------------000. I
(Council Member Dowe and Mayor ~arris were absent.)
I
I
I
,..,,-.;,,;.;
185
CITY CODE-FEE COMPENDIUM-ZONING: Pursuant to instructions by the
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday,
February 21, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on an amendment of the City's Fee Compendium to incorporate new zoning
districts and associated filing fees, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, February 13, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that with
Council's adoption of a new Zoning Ordinance and Official Zoning Map for the City
of Roanoke on December 5, 2005, allzoning district designations were changed;
and the existing Fee Compendium does not incorporate the new zoning districts
and associated filing fees.
It was further advised that the proposed fee schedule incorporates all
residential districts into one fee category and groups all overlay zones and special
purpose districts into separate categories; all fees, with the exception of those
fees associated with residential and overlay districts, are proposed to remain the
same; overlay district filing fees have been raised to incorporate the new zoning
overlay districts, however, the charge for acreage has been dropped; residential
fees have been adjusted to reflect a common fee for both single family and multi-
family filings; and fees are established in amounts to reflect generally the level of
staff time to process applications, undertake analysis and compile staff reports.
The City Planning .Commission recommended amendment of the Fee
Compendium to reflect changes in the following fees:
Rezoning to Residential Districts
RA,R-12,R-7,R-s, R-3, RM-1
RM-2, RMF
$600.00 + $25.00 per acre or
any portion thereof
Rezoning to Commercial Districts
CN, CG, CLS
$900.00 + $25.00 per acre or
any portion thereof
Rezoning to Industrial Districts
11,1-2
$900.00 + $25.00 per acre or
Any portion thereof
Rezoning to Special Purpose Districts
D, Downtown
MX, Mixed Use
IN, Institutional District
ROS, Recreation and Open Space
AD, Airport Development
$900.00 + $25.00 per acre or
any portion thereof
186
Rezoning to Planned Unit Development Districts I
MXPUD, Mixed PUD $1,000.00 + $25.00 per acre
INPUD, Institutional PUD or any portion thereof
IPUD, Industrial PUD
Rezoning to Overlay Districts
~-1 , Historic Downtown
~-2, Neighborhood ~istoric
ND, Neighborhood Design
RCC, River and Creek Corridor
CS, Comprehensive Sign
$250.00
Amendment to Proffered Conditions
$500.00
Council Member Lea offered the following ordinance:
(#37319-022106) AN ORDINANCE amending the Fee Compendium to reflect
new zoning designations and associated fees; providing for an effective date; and
dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 167.)
Council Member Lea moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7319-022106.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
I
The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the abovereferenced amendment to the Fee
Compendium. There being none, he declared the public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37319-022106 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Vice-Mayor
Fi tz pat ri c k _________________hh____________n____m__________h__h___________n____________'______n_____m_______ 5 .
Nt\'{S: None--_--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe and Mayor ~arris were absent.)
CITY MARKET-ClT,{ PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday,
February 21, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on a proposal to lease City-owned property located at 32 Market Square,
S. W., to Juan E. Garcia, d/b/a Paradiso Cuban Restaurant, to be used as a food I
service establishment, for a term of three years, commencing March 1, 2006, was
before the body.
I
I
I
187
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, February 13, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke owns the City Market Building located at 32 Market Square; and the City
of Roanoke began management of the Building on May 1,2005, after the former
management company, Advantis Real Estate, terminated the management contract
for the property. '
It was further advised that Juan E. Garcia, owner and operator of Paradiso
Cuban Restaurant, has requested a lease agreement for approximately 190 square
feet to operate a restaurant serving Cuban cuisine for a period of three years,
beginning March 1, 2006 through February 28, 2009, and the proposed
agreement establishes the following base rent:
Period Per Square Monthly Rent Annual Rent
Foot Amount Amount
3/1/06 - 8/31/06 $36.47 $577.44 $3,464.65
9/1/06 - 2/28/07 $28.00 $443.33 $ 2 ,660.00
3/1/07 - 2/29/08 $28.84 $456.63 $5479.60
3/1/08 - 2/28/09 $29.71 $470.33 $5,643.99
It was explained that the initial two six month periods of the proposed rent
provides a transition from the lease rate in Mr. Garcia's previously expired lease to
the new per square foot rent structure that has been identified in the Market
Building for food court tenants; the Common Area Maintenance fee is $300.00 per
month and will increase by three per cent upon each anniversary of the Lease;
Paradiso Cuban Restaurant has been a tenant of the Market Building since
November 1, 1995, and no renewal provision is included in the lease.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a lease
agreement with Juan E. Garcia, d/b/a Paradiso Cuban Restaurant, for
approximately 190 square feet of space in the City Market Building, for a period
of three years, beginning March 1, 2006 and ending on February 28, 2009, said
lease documents to þe subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37320-022106) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the lease of approximately
190 square feet of space located within City-owned property known as the City
Market Building, located at 32 Market Square, for a term of three (3) years
beginning March 1, 2006, through February 28,2009; authorizing the appropriate
City officials to execute a lease agreement therefor; and dispensing with the
second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 169.)
188
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37320-
022106. The motion was seconded Council Member Lea.
The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the lease agreement. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
I
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37320-022106 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Vice-Mayor
F i tz pat ri c k _nn_nn_nn_n_nnn_____n___nn_____nn_nnn_nn_nn_mm___n_n_____nnnn___________m 5 .
Nt\'(S: ~olle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe and Mayor ~arris were absent.)
YMCA-CITY PROPERTY-LEASES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the
City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Tuesday, February 21 , 2006, at
7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposal to
amend a lease agreement dated January 9, 2004, with the YMCA of Roanoke
Valley, Inc., to include certain property located at the corner of 5th Street and Luck
Avenue, S. W., the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, February 13, 2006.
I
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that on December
24, 2002, Council entered into an Agreement with the YMCA of Roanoke Valley,
Inc., to provide support for development and construction of a new ,(MCt\ facility
in the West Church area of downtown Roanoke to accommodate an expanding
number of YMCA programs and to replace the then current YMCA building located
at the corner of Church Avenue and Fifth Street, S. W.
It was further advised that on January 9, 2004, Council entered into a lease
with the '(MCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc., to lease certain City properties to the
YMCA; the lease provides that the City will lease to the YMCA Official Tax Nos.
1113408, 1113409, 1113410, 1113411, 1113412 and 1113413, lots located
immediately north of the new YMCA building and currently being used by patrons
of the YMCA; the lease provides that after the City receives from the YMCA three
additional lots on which the old YMCA is located and most of the adjOining
parking lot (Official Tax Nos. 1011206,1011209, and 1011210), the City will lease
the lots to the YMCA as well; and the lease speCifically provides, however, that the
lots will be leased to the YMCA only for the purpose of providing interim parking I
for patrons ofthe YMCA until a new structured parking facility can be constructed
and operational.
I
I
I
"1''''1
189
.~~
It was stated that since execution of the lease, the City has acquired the
properties necessary to build the new parking garage on the corner of 5th Street
and Luck Avenue, S. W.; the City is nearing acquisition of Official Tax Nos.
1011206, 1011209 and 1011210; the YMCA has approached the City to amend
the parking lease dated January 9,2004, so that instead of the City leasing Official
Tax Nos. 1011206, 1011209 and 1011210 to the YMCA, the City would lease
Official Tax Nos. 1113512, 1113513, 1113514; 1113514 and 1113516 to the
YMCA; and the alternative lots provide better access for patrons of the YMCA to
the entrance off Luck Avenue.
It was explained that the amendment will allow the City to market the
former YMCA site with sufficient surface parking adjacent to the structure to
enhànce the desirability of the site for development; annual revenue from the
amended lease will be $26,270.00 per year for both the City lots on 5th Street and
Luck Avenue and 5th Street and Church Avenue; the YMCA will assume complete
responsibility, liability and expenses related to operation of all leased lots; and
terms and conditions of the original lease are applicable to the additional property
contained in the amended lease.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute
Amendment No.1 to the lease agreement dated January 9,2004, between the City
of Roanoke and the YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc., to be approved as to form by
the City Attorney, for lease of the above referenced City properties for the purpose
of providing interim parking to patrons of the YMCA until a new public parking
structure is constructed and operational in the West Church Avenue corridor ofthe
City.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37321-022106) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute
Amendment No.1 to the lease agreement dated January 9, 2004, between the
YMCA of Roanoke Valley, Inc., and the Cityof Roanoke, for the lease of City-owned
property identified as Official Tax Nos. 1113404, 1113409, 1113410, 1113411,
1113412, 111 341 3, 111 3512. 11135 13, 1113514, 1113515 and 1113516, upon
certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of
th'is ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 170.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37321-
022106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea. .
The Vice-Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the lease agreement. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
190
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37321-022106 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Vice-Mayor
F i tz pat ri c k _nn_n_m_nn_n_nn_nn___nn_n_______n______n__n_n_nn_m_______nn_nnn_m____m_____ 5 .
NI\'(S: NCllle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
(Council Member Dowe and Mayor ~arris were absent.)
OTHER BUSINESS:
ARC~ITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD: A petition filed by Dawn S. Waters,
appealing a decision of the Architectural Review Board, which was rendered on
December 8,2005, that no Certificate of Appropriateness be issued with regard to
property located at 377 Albemarle, S. W., for the replacement of windows, was
before Council. .
Mr. Derrico advised that his client was a tenant at the residence for several
years prior to purchasing the property; she currently resides in the downstairs
portion of the home and leases the upstairs portion for additiollal income; and
due to deterioration, the original wooden windows of the house were replaced
with thermo-paned vinyl windows.
Mr. Derrico further advised that prior to replacing the windows, his client
was notified by the contractor that replacement willdows would require a
Certificate of Appropriateness by the City's Architectural ReviewBoard; because
his client was of the opinion that the appearance of the house would not be
altered, the windows were replaced; and on November 17, 2005, a "Stop Work"
notice was posted at the residence. ~e further advised that his client filed an
application for a Certificate of Appropriateness with the Architectural Review
Board on December 8, 2005, however, the application was denied because the
windows did not meet the City's ~istoric District-2 guidelines.
Mr. Derrico presented photographs of the windows prior to installation and
photographs of the work in progress, and noted that the replacement windows are
energy efficient and do not appear to take away from the aesthetics of the
community. ~e explained that the replacement windows represent 5.8 per cent of
the value of the home, and if replaced with identical wood reproductions of the
original windows, the cost would be between $6,000.00 to $12,000.00, or
approximately 11.6 per cent of the value of the home. ~e explained that the
reduction in size and window area is minimal and given the fact that the work is
80 to 90 per cellt complete, he requested that Council overrule the decision of the
Architectural Review Board and approve the use of thermo-paned vinyl windows.
I
I
I
I
I
I
! ,>;':
1 91
Council Member McDaniel asked the following questions:
While shopping for replacement windows, did the seller or
manufacturer offer any advice about obtaining a permit or contacting
City staff?
Ms. Waters responded in the affirmative, but reiterated that she did
not believe a permit was necessary.
Were you aware of previous cases in your neighborhood where
improvements were made without prior approval from the
Architectural ReView Board?
Ms. Waters responded in the affirmative, and stated that unlike her
neighbors who changed the entire appearance of their home, she was
replacing the windows only. .
Did you ever receive a mailing notifying you of the ~istoric District-2
guidelines for maintaining a home in a historic district?
Ms. Waters stated that she was aware of the requirements/guidelines
for the ~istoric District. '
On behalf of his client, Mr. Derrico stated that the issues before Council
should be whether the windows are compatible with the neighborhood, whether
the windows are so noticeably different that they take away from the value of
home and the architectural integrity of the neighborhood, and whether
replacement windows are in compliance with City Code requirements. ~e added
that the decision of the Architectural Review Board should have been based on
whether the windows are, or are not, compatible with the neighborhood and not
based on whether the appropriate procedure was followed. ~e urged that Council
reverse the decision of the Architectural Review Board.
Robert N. Richert, Vice-Chair, Architectural Review Board, advised that:
·
On November 17, 2005, a citizen advised staff that original wood
windows were being replaced at 377 Albemarle Avenue, S. W., which
is within the ~-2, Neighborhood Preservation District.
The Agent to the Architectural Review Board (ARB) had a legal notice
to "Stop Work" posted.
Staff advised Ms. Waters that replacement of the windows required a
Certificate of Appropriateness issued by the ARB. The manufacturer
also required Ms. Waters to sign an agreement to contact the City of
Roanoke to obtain the required permits.·
·
·
192
·
Ms. Waters filed an application for a Certificate of Appropriateness,
which was considered by the Architectural Review Board on
December 8, 2005, at which time staff recommended denial as the
request was not consistent with the ~-2 Guidelines because the
replacement windows reduced the amount of window space and did
not match the previous window size, shape and proportion.
ARB members expressed concern about the design of the windows
and stated that had the matter been brought to the Board before the
work was done, the Board could have provided guidance.
Ms. Waters thought the new windows would save money and that the
new windows appeared the same as the original windows.
During the ARB meeting, a representative of Old Southwest, Inc., the
neighborhood civic organization, further stated that the application
was not consistent with the guidelines and the window replacement
was inappropriate.
·
·
·
Mr. Richert further advised that consideration by the Architectural Review
Board included:
Section 36.2-33l(c) of the Zoning Ordinance provides:
"In the H-2 Overlay District, a Certificate of Appropriateness (see
Section 36.2-530) shall be required for the erection of any new
structure, the demolition, moving, reconstruction, alteration, or
restoration of any existing structure or historic landmark, including
the installation or replacement of siding, or the reduction in the floor
area of an existing building, including the enclosure or removal of a
porch. A Certificate of Appropriateness shall not be required for
ordinary maintenance, as defined in Section 36.2-s30(b)(4), or in-kind
replacement with the same materials, proportions and design. The
Zoning Administrator, in consultation with the Agent to the
Architectural Review Board, shalf determine whether an activity
requires a Certificate of Appropriateness." (emphasis added).
· The ~-2 Architectural Design Guidelines adopted by the ARB and
endorsed by City Council state that windows are especially
important in rehabilitations. Their size, shape, pattern, and
architectural style not only provide architectural character, but
also give a building much of its scale, rhythm, and detail.
· The Guidelines provide the following considerations for windows
on historic buildings:
o Identify and keep the original materials and features of
windows, such as size, shape, glazing, muntins and
moldings.
o Consider new replacement windows only when old
replacements are unavailable. New replacements should be
compatible in size and shape, design, and proportion.
I
I
I
I
I
I
. "'<1 .:¡.
193
o Use storm windows to improve thermal efficiency of existing
windows.
. Staff reviewed similar window replacement cases since January
2003, and found eight applications were approved where
replacement windows had the same dimensions as the originals;
during the same period, three applications were denied because
the replacement windows did not maintain the correct
proportions; one denied application was appealed to City Council
on May 20, 2004, whereby City Council upheld the ARB's decision
to deny the application.
Mr. Richert advised that the Architectural Review Board recommends that
Council affirm its decision to deny the issuance of a Certificate of Appropriateness
for replacement of wooden windows with thermal-paned vinyl windows at 377
Albemarle Avenue, S. W.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if the issue is wood versus vinyl
replacement windows; whereupon, Mr. Richert responded that the ARB considers
the glass area in the completed window to be the same as, or similar to, the
original window, geometry of the window is more important than materials since
certain materials may no longer be available for an original window replacement,
many buildings in Old Southwest have storm windows covering original windows to
protect the original portion of the structure; and ARB staff has the expertise to
assist property owners upon request.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if measures could be taken to bring the
windows into compliance with historic guidelines; whereupon, Mr. Richert stated
that the issue pertains to the thickness of various parts of the window, mainly
replacement of the upper and lower sash that provides more detail in separation
of the facade of the window.
Based upon evidence, testimony and documents, Council Member Cutler
moved that Council affirm the decision of the City of Roanoke Architectural Review
Board, which was rendered on December 8, 2005, that no Certificate of
Appropriateness be. issued for the installation of replacement windows at 377
Albemarle Avenue, S. W., as set forth in the Petition of Appeal, on the grounds
that the replacement windows are not consistent with the ~-2 Guidelines, will
reduce the amount of window space, are not the appropriate proportion or design,
and are not architecturally compatible with structures in the ~-2 ~istoric District.
The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the
following vote:
194
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and Vice-Mayor
F itz pat ri c k _n_nnn_m_____m_nn_nn_nn_m______n_nnnn____nn__n_____n___nn_nn_________nm____ 5 .
NJ\'(S: Notle--------------------------------------------------------------------------"--------------------Cl.
I
(Council Member Dowe and Mayor Harris were absent.)
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Vice-Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
CITY PROPERTY-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE:
Valerie Garner, Chair, Countryside Neighborhood Alliance, advised that residents
living on and around Coutltryside Golf Course have been blessed to witness some
of God's most natural creations and precious gifts n sunsets that take one's
breath away, while giving one a perspective on life that no man's creation can
match. She stated that it is true that this sunset provides no "tax base" for the
City of Roanoke, but neither do the blue birds splashing in her bird bath and
feeding their young in the adjacent house Iinitlg the fairway, or the downy
woodpeckers living in the huge oak trees who trust her enough not to flyaway
when she approaches.
She further advised that at night, the area provides a haven away from City I
lights and allows residents to see the moon and stars; and Countryside is not just
a golf course to residents living in the Peters Creek North area, but the only open
space that provides residents with the "quality of life" and recreational space that
is lacking in the Peters Creek North community. She added that The ~otel
Roanoke lists Countryside Golf Course as a Roanoke City amenity and shuttles
visitors to the Roanoke Valley to the area to play golf, as do the Clarion,
Wyndham, and other hotels near the Airport; and First Tee youth also use facilities
at Countryside.
Ms. Garner stated that the City of Roanoke has expressed dismay over the
minimal lease dollars that it receives from Meadowbrook to manage the golf
course; however, Countryside residents paid $39,3Cl4.ClO in real estate taxes and
$15,543.00 in personal property, business license, meals and sales taxes, for a
total of $54,847.00 for fiscal year 2ClOs; and the City will receive only $3 s,ClClCl.ClO
for leasing the property to Meadowbrook for the 2006 golf season; the City will
pay the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission $4,731.ClCl, annually, for leasing the
Airport owned property; atld the City borrowed $3,97s,ClOO.ClO at 6.25 per cent
interest to purchase the property.
I
I
I
I
\.;
'~p.,;;.
195
Ms. Garner raised questions with regard to the extension of time that was
provided to Toll Brothers to submit plans for Countryside, pursuant to a Request
for Proposal. She highlighted certain existing conditions from the 2002 Airport
Study, and after it was discovered that the Airport "noise contour" study would
alter available building possibilities, in July 2003, the Airport Study was modified
per the Department of ~ousing and Neighborhood Services.
Ms. Garner advised that according to the Lawrence Group study, the Virginia
Department of Aviation, and the Federal Aviation Administration, a golf course is
identified as one of the "compatible" land use options for property surrounding
and at the end of an airport runway; and local government is the vehicle by which
recommendations are supposed to be implemented using proper planning to
protect the airport and citizens from improper land use, however, the City does
not appear to care about the safety of citizens, or the traveling public.
She called attention to a January 2003 letter to the City Manager from the
Executive Director of the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission in which she
referred to a conversation with FAA officials that the lease with the golf club,
which expires in 2008, was approved because it was determined to be compatible
with primary use of the land as an airport clear zone. She stated that an airport
such as Roanoke's, which is comprised of fewer than 900 acres when the current
desirable standard is closer to 2,000 acres, might be viewed as irresponsible ifthe
airport released any of the acres that it owns, especially land dedicated to meeting
safety needs of the traveling public.
Ms. Garner explained that residents were told that failure to renew the lease
was based on safety issues and non-compliance by golf course owners to maintain
the leased property; however there is no document to substantiate that a non-
compliance complaint was made to golf course owners; and the reason for non-
renewal of the lease was that no lease could be located, therefore, owners of the
golf course did not have a golf course, and the City's representatives on the
Airport Commission should not enter into any negotiations to extend the lease
beyond November 2008, which could jeopardize the City's potential to purchase
the property for a higher and better use.
Ms. Garner stated that on January 3, 2003, the City Manager advised the
Executive Director of the Roanoke Regional Airport that the City of Roanoke was
interested in obtaining the property, and requested that the Airport Commission
not extend lease options in order to make the property available to the City. She
stated that the Countryside Neighborhood Alliance extended an invitation to Efren
Gonzales, Deputy Executive Director of Roanoke Regional Airport, and City staffto
attend a meeting on January 10, 2006, the purpose of which was to discuss the
Airport clear zone and to address protection of existing residences at the end of
Runway 6, as well as those purchasing property in the future; and the already
"agreed to" land swap between the City of Roanoke and the Airport Commission
was not mentioned by any speaker during the meeting.
196
Ms.. Garner referred to a letter addressed to the City Manager from the
Airport Executive Director dated August 2, 2003, as well as the response from the
City Manager dated September 1 , 2003, advising that the arrangement was sealed,
and the request was discussed with Council who was amenable to the transfer; and
response to the Request for Proposal by Toll Brothers clearly indicates that the
land swap was a "done deal."
I
In conclusion, Ms. Garner inquired as to why the Countryside property could
not be left as a Municipal golf course for the enjoyment of all citizens of Roanoke.
She advised that improvements to the golf course would enhance the quality of
life of the surrounding community, the golf course is an attraction for residents
living in the area, and to take away the golf course to construct as many homes as
possible to increase the City's "tax base" will completely destroy the reason that
residents chose to live in the area. She further advised that it is not too late for
the City to do the right thing by the citizens of Roanoke, and especially citizens
reSiding in the northwest community.
In closing, Ms. Garner stated that the existence of the Countryside
Neighborhood Alliance is based on: 'Taking pride in a diverse community
dedicated to maintaining our quality of life and the natural beauty of our
surroundings". She questioned what will happen to the quality of life of residents
of the Countryside area and the natural beauty of their surroundings.
With objection by Council, the Vice-Mayor requested that Ms. Garner forward I
a copy of her questions to the City Clerk for transmittal to the City Manager.
ARMORY/STADIUM-SC~OOLS: Mr. Phillip P. Wright, 1646 Center ~ill Drive,
S. W., expressed concern with regard to comments made by a Member of Council
that the City of Roanoke should honor the recommendation of the Stadium Study
Committee and demolish Victory Stadium. ~e read the following excerpt from the
May 2,2005, Council meeting in which a Member of Council stated that, "his vote
would be based on his respect for the work of the Stadium Study Committee which
was composed of a group of intelligent individuals who spent nine months on
their assignment; Council must respect their recommendations and the City's
Stadium Study Committee voted unanimously in support of a new stadium to be
bounded by Franklin Road, Jefferson Street, Reserve Avenue and the Roanoke
River."
Mr. Wright pointed out that while Recommendation No. A 1 submitted by the
Stadium Study Committee provided for the demolition of Victory Stadium,
Recommendation A3 recommended construction of a new multi-purpose stadium
with at least 15,000 seats and construction of day stadia at William Fleming and
Patrick ~enry ~igh Schools, with no more than a 500 to 1,000 person seating
capacity. ~e also referred to comments made by another Member of Council that I
the Council should respect the recommendations of the Stadium Study Committee
I
I
I
-\,'
.~~~"~¥
197
whose members had invested nine months of their time to· the study, and
although the Committee did not unanimously agree upon an athletic facility to be
located along the Reserve Avenue corridor, the Committee reviewed construction
of football stadia at each of the two high schools, which recommendation was
voted down by a vote of five - two of the Council.
SC~OOLS-ARMORY /STADIUM: Ms. Alice P. ~incker, 4024 South Lake Drive,
S. W., advised that Virginia's Freedom of Information Act is based on the
presumption that all government meetings are open and available to the public;
Roanoke City School Board members have routinely conducted public business
through the exchange of e-mails for the purpose of establishing dialogue,
reaching consensus, or furthering discussion, which is a violation of the Freedom
of Information Act; and e-mails circulated among School Board Members with
regard to high school stadia constitute an improper electronic meeting. She read
excerpts of certain comments made by some members of the School Board and
legal staff via e-mail which constitute a violation of the Virginia Freedom of
Information Act.
The following persons also read portions of e-mails from School Board
members and staff with regard to stadia at Patrick ~enry andWilliam Fleming ~igh.
Schools:
Ms. Margaret Keyser, 2701 Guilford Avenue, S. W.
Mr. Alan Scanlan, 1631 Center ~ill Drive, S. W.
Mr. Winfred Noell, 2743 Northview Drive, S. W.
Mr. Flen Fleenor, 1738 Blair Road, S. W.
CITY GOVERNMENT-COMPLAINTS: Ms. Suzanne Osborne, 1702 Blair Road,
S. W., stated that it is apparent after reading the above referenced e-mailsthatthe
School Board is not "on board" with the process leading to the construction of
high school stadia. She stated that any citizen whocondones the actions of the
current City Council and City administration should vote for those candidates who
are endorsed by the Mayor and the Vice-Mayor, and if citizens do not support the
current City Council, they should vote for. another slate of Council candidates.
COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE: Ms. Susan ~all, 2237 Ranch Road, N. W., a
resident of Countryside Estates, spoke to the advantages of living close to
Countryside Golf Course, such as green space and the wonders of nature; however,
the City's purchase of Countryside Golf Course for the purpose of constructing
homes and businesses will cause certain critical choices to be made. She advised
that the first priority should be maintain Countryside as an 18-holegolf course, or
as a municipal golf course, and the second priority should be a nine hole golf
course using the back nine of the present golf course, while retaining green space
where homes are currently located. Prior to taking any further action, she urged
that Council call for a traffic study and also take into consideration the wishes of
property owners who enjoy living in the area.
198
CITY GOVERNMENT: Mr. John C. Kepley, 2909 Morrison Street, S. E.,
inquired about the current City Council's legacy to the citizens of Roanoke and I
how Members of Council will be remembered following their respective terms of
office. He commented that some Members of Council will be remembered for
their backroom politics which led to deception and hypocrisy, and advised that
never in ~he history of the City of Roanoke has there been so much bitterness,
anger, and wrath. ~e stated that Council does not listen to, nor care about the
concerns, emotions and overall welfare of the citizens who elected them to office.
COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE: Ms. Virginia B. Stuart, 3774 Laurel Ridge
Road, N. W., advised that she has resided in Countryside Estates for approximately
23 years and is an active member of the newly formed Countryside Neighborhood
Alliance. She stated that the Countryside Golf Course has been purchased by the
City of Roanoke for construction of upscale housing; residents of Countryside have
constructed attractive new homes, while others have upgraded existing homes in
order to increase the value of their property; therefore, it is hoped that the City of
Roanoke will value the input of residents with regard to any future development.
As a long time resident of the Laurel Ridge Road area, she called attention to
changes in the neighborhood, such as newly constructed homes on Laurel Ridge
Road, an increase in traffic by vehicles traveling through the community to reach
other destinations, and an increase in the number of children residing on Laurel
Ridge Road who enjoy sleigh riding, bicycling, etc. She emphasized that the
Countryside Neighborhood Alliance looks forward to providing input with regard I
to decisions pertaining to their community.
CITY PROPERTY-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. John Graybill, 2443 Tillett Road,
S. W., advised that Victory Stadium was dedicated to the memory of Roanoke
Valley veterans of World War II, however, because of negligence by the City, the
Stadium has been allowed to deteriorate to its current state of disrepair. ~e
further advised that some Members of Council have expressed concern with
regard to Roanoke's students having to play football at other athletic venues,
which could have been avoided if Victory Stadium had been properly maintained by
the City.
ARMORY /STADIUM-SC~OOLS-COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE: Mr. Chris Craft,
1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., expressed concern with regard to action by Council
to construct an athletic field at Patrick ~enry ~igh School, and acquisition by the
City of Countryside Golf Course to construct upscale housing. ~e stated that the
City of Roanoke is inconsiderate of patrons attending events at the Roanoke Civic
Center inasmuch as there is a lack of parking spaces due to ongoing construction
at the Civic Center. ~e expressed concern with regard to an increase in traffic at
Valley View Mall due to incompletion of the off-ramp at 1-581 leading to Valley
View Boulevard.
I
I
I
I
:·,c·
':"·f(;}i
199
COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Michael ~iggins, 2267
Countryside Road, N. W., advised that his family moved to the Countryside area
because of its natural beauty, and expressed concern with regard to the proposed
construction by the City of upscale housing in the area. ~e stated that Victory
Stadium should be renovated for the enjoyment of all citizens of Roanoke.
COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE: Ms. Sarah ~iggins, 2267 Countryside Road,
N. W., spoke to the beauty of the Countryside area, and called attention to other
available open space in the northwest section of Roanoke that could be developed
for housing by the City. She stated that Countryside should continue to be used
as a municipal golf course, indefinitely, and suggested that residents of the area
be included in future planning by the City.
COMPLAINTS: Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., expressed
concern with regard to the overall condition of the City of Roanoke, the
construction of a $4.5 million Art Museum in downtown Roanoke, deteriorating
vacant buildings for lease in the downtown area, Valley Metro buses that block
traffic at Campbell Court during rush hour traffic, construction of upscale housing
in the inner-city that the average citizen cannot afford to purchase, and the high
cost of health and dental benefits for City employees. ~e called for a Federal
investigation of actions taken by the Roanoke City Council and the City
administration, the Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority, and the
Roanoke City School Board.
COUNTRYSIDE GOLF COURSE: Mr. Daniel M. ~ale,Jr., 4425 Oleva Street,
N. W" President, Miller Court, expressed appreciation for actions taken by the City
to provide better living conditions for Roanoke's senior citizens. ~e stated that
the Countryside area adjoins Miller Court, and advised that Miller Court and the
Countryside Neighborhood Alliance encourage the City to continue to operate
Countryside as a municipal golf course. ~e stated that all major cities throughout
the Commonwealth of Virginia and the United States have municipal golf courses.
At 9:40 p.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the meeting in recess to be
reconvened on Friday, March 3, 2006, at 8:30 a. m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., for the Council's Annual Financial
Planning Session.
The Tuesday, February 21, 2006, meeting of the Roanoke City Council
reconvened on Friday, March 3, 2006, at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, for the
Council's annual Financial Planning Session, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J.
Wishneff, M, Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson ~arris---n6.
ABSENT: Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.---n---n-------n---------n_mn___1 .
200
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; Mary F. Parker, City I
Clerk; Ann ~. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance; Sherman L. Stovall, Director,
Office of Management and Budget; and Susan S. Lower, Director, Real Estate
Valuation.
The Mayor advised that prior to engaging in the City's fiscal year budget
study, the Council holds a Financial Planning Session each year which allows City
staff to review basic information and financial projections; whereupon, he called
on the City Manager and the Director of Finance for opening remarks.
. The City Manager expressed appreciation to the Members of Council for
taking time out of their busy schedules to conduct the annual Financial Planning
Session. She stated that City staff devotes considerable time and effort to prepare
the presentation; however, while staff sets the stage and provides the perimeters
within which the City operates in terms of revenues and certain fixed expenses,
the meeting is an important time for staff to hear comments by Council, as the
City's elected officials, as to priorities that should be emphasized in the upcoming
budget. She added that over the last two years, improvements have been made in
the community that will, over time, help the City to continue to grow revenues;
and the General Assembly is in the midst of the final week of a process that will
"tweak" some of the revenues that will be discussed today. She called attention to
positive signs with regard to the City's revenues for the future: for example, the
number of downtown living units that are currently under design and/or
construction, the City Market study which will soon be submitted in its final
version that suggests a number of improvements, and other new housing
construction currently taking place in the City. She advised that much of the City's
local revenue, such as sales tax, meals tax, and hotel lodging taxes have
increased, all of which are a part of the plan that has been in place for several
years. She stated that there is no more significant activity for an elected body
than the adoption of a budget, which is the blueprint for how the City will operate
over the next year and in some instances over the next several years; therefore,
she encouraged the Council to ask questions throughout the meeting because the
process is a critical building block to the ultimate culmination in a budget tha.t will
be presented to the Council on April 17, 2006, for adoption in mid May.
The Director of Finance advised that most of the decisions made by Council
have a certain element of financial impact; therefore, he stressed the importance
of understanding the City's financial picture and future planning processes.
I
I
I
I
I
.¡
> ;¡". 'j~l,
201
Agenda
· FY 2006-07 Bud2et Development
· Revenue-Outlook and Trends
· Revenue Specific Foeus
~ Real Estate Tax
~ Personal Propert)' ·Tax Relief.
-- Machinery and Tools
- Telecommunications Tax
· Expenditures - Priority Expenditure List
· Expenditures - Specific Focus
__ Employee Compensation and Benefits
__ Other Post Employment Benefits
.
2
.
I
Agenda
· Review Capital Proiects
Look to the Future
- 1~lanned Bond Issmuu,:e
- Existing Projects Requil-ing Additional Funding
~' Po.tential Ne'w Pro,jeets
· Review Debt for Capital Proiects
· Current and Futnre Debt Service
· Review Debt Capacity
· FY 2005-06 Budget Balancing Status
· Current Gap
· Options for Closing Gap
3
Sherman M. Stovall, Director, Office of Management and Budget, reviewed
the above referenced agenda.
Ann ~. Shawver, Deputy Director of Finance, advised that the budget
process begins with the City's revenue estimates; and discussion would include
overall revenues, growth revenues for fiscal year 2007, and real estate and the real
estate process.
202
Fiscal Year 2005
I
General Fund Revenues
ChargesbServi:es
"
RealEsIall'
16~
CommOllweahh
25'
Per>onalPrq:oerly
1~
El Real Estate
fliIUtiJilY
II Commonweallh
. Personal Property
II BPOL
G Charges for Services
. Sale~
. Food/Beverage
. . Other
She advised that the City's real estate tax makes up approximately one
quarter of total General Fund revenues, as do revenues from the Commonwealth
of Virginia, which are at about 25 per cent; and key local taxes for the City of
Roanoke are depicted on the above referenced chart.
Projected Revenue Growth - FY 2007 Revenue Estimates
I
Category $ Growth 0/0 Growth
Real Estate Tax $6,014,000 9.3%
Personal Property Tax 2,175.000 9.3%
Sales Tax 1,325,000 6.9%
Business License Tax 695.000 6.0%
Prepared Food Tax 428,000 4.2%
Transient Lodging Tax 277.000 12.30/0
Other Local Taxes (467,000) (1.7%)
Intergovernmental 5.683,000 11.4%
Charges for Services (327,000) (2:9%)·
Other Revenues 54 000 1.5%
Total $15,857,000 7.1%
Growth in FY 2007 Recommended Revenue estimate as compared LO
FY 2006 Adopted Estimate.
6
The above information depicts current expected revenue growth based on
the City's current estimate for fiscal year 2007; a total of approximately $15.9
million represents the dollars of growth between the fiscal year 2006 adopted
budget and the fiscal year 2007 revenue estimates as currently charted. The City's
total growth is at 7.1 per cent; total revenue estimate at this point for fiscal year
2007 is approximately $240 million; the key to the overall growth at 7.1 per cent I
can be seen in the real estate category; real estate is expected to grow
approximately nine per cent next year, which includes the current year, as well as
delinquent collections in the districts for downtown and the Williamson Road area.
Six million dollars will be shared on roughly a one-third and two-thirds basis
I
I
I
'~:Ù'~
f.''''r.r~
203
between Roanoke City Public Schools and the City of Roanoke. Personal Property
Tax is expected to generate additional revenues based on today's estimate of
about $2.2 million going into fiscal year 2007, or 9.3 per cent. Personal property
tax is due on May 31 ", personal property is the City's most difficult tax in terms of
where the City is now in the fiscal year, because the City begins with a revenue
estimate as early as December, and monitors performance of the tax by working
with the Commissioner of the Revenue's Office through the May process to refine
the estimate. The current estimate for personal property tax is predicated on
performance that was actually achieved in fiscal year 2005, which was a strong
performing year, with about ten per cent growth over the prior year, and it has
been assumed that the tax will grow based on long term performance over a five-
ten year tax period; growth would provide the City with a typical growth of about
two per cent every year, thus the $2.2 million, or 9.3 per cent growth. In working
with the Commissioner of the Revenue's Office, certain peer localities around the
state use National Automobile Dealers Association (NADA) values; it appears that
the personal property tax will most likely have to be adjusted downward; and there·
is a two to two and one half per cent decline in the vehicular side of the tax, which
is a significant portion of the tax. Based on discussions with officials of Roanoke
County, the County is experiencing similar circumstances, and staff works
diligently to obtain additional information to perform analytical. reviews as
appropriate, and sometimes it is necessary to modify those types of estimates. .
Approximately 36 per cent goes to Roanoke City Public Schools based on
the current funding formula. Sales tax is a significant revenue to the City of
Roanoke; the current year is performing well in light of the estimate, growth is
moving along at 31/2 to 4 per cent compared to the prior year; and growth
projections for next year expect continued growth at about three per centwhich
will bring an additional $1.3· million to the City's revenue estimates.
Intergovernmental will provide about $5.7 million in new revenues next year, or·
11.4 per cent, which is a significant percentage growth. There has been a
recalculation of the formula for fiscal year 2007 for ~ouse Bill 599, Local Law
Enforcement funding, and currently the City of Roanoke stands to significantly
benefit with additional revenue of about $1.6 million in 2007, however, the
formula takes into consideration certain crime statistics and welfare-type statistics
that are not the type of indicators that the City would like; approximately one half
million dollars in additional s.treet maintenance funds are anticipated for next
year; the social services category is projected to grow significantly, or about $3.7
million, however, there is a local match on the expenditure side toward costs that
continue to grow. The City has seen good growth on current year revenues, the
prepared food tax has seen a revenue growth of four to five per cent over the last
several years; and the business license tax performed well last year with a growth
of about four per cent.
The City Manager advised that an important point to recap with regard to
Intergovernmental is that out of the $5.6 million, approximately $4.3 million is
termed non-discretionary, or represents money that the City is required to spend
on street maintenance or social service programs, or funds that are already
204
committed. Therefore, she stated that when talking about discretionary versus
non-discretionary activity, the figure looks good initially, but when one realizes I
that the funds are already obligated to certain programs, some of the euphoria
disappears.
Council Member Dowe inquired as to how the 36 per cent funding formula
between the City and the School system was derived.
The City Manager advised that the funding formula was developed many
years ago based on local revenue growth, excluding any growth in non-
discretionary items. She stated thatcertain other localities have funding formulas
that were drafted specifically for their locality; the genesisofthe City's 36 per cent
funding formula is not known, however, it is believed that it is time to reevaluate
the funding formula, particularly in light of the fact that it does not take into
account the City's obligations and commitments on debt service, but is based
strictly on the operating side of the budget; and as the City has funded some very
significant school improvements and will continue to do so over the next six years,
City staff believes that debt commitment should be taken into consideration,
however, staff is not prepared at this point to propose a new funding formula.
She called attention to preliminary discussions with school counterparts who have
been receptive in acknowledging that the City has made a significant investment,
not only on the operating side of the budget, but with regard to debt service.
Council Member Lea inquired about reasons for the decline in personal
property revenues.
I
The Director of Finance advised that beginning eight or nine years ago,
personal property taxes started to decline each year, and business personal
property is also included in the personal property tax base along with the
machinery and tools tax. ~e stated that the National Automotive Dealers
Association (NADA) provides a service to localities in the way of an automated
assessment on car values which is used by Commissioner of the Revenue; with the
trend in recent years of heavy discounts on new automobiles, the value of used
cars went down and approximately three years ago NADA adjusted new car values;
and the adjustment downward in used car values had a negative impact on
personal property tax. ~e stated that working with the Commissioner of the
Revenue, the City emphasized the importance of matching up the City's
assessment of vehicles on file with Division of Motor Vehicles files on a regular
basis, which yielded a ten per cent growth in the City's personal property tax in
fiscal year 2005; figures for personal property tax for fiscal year 2006 have not
been received, revenue estimates are being developed, and. staff is basing its
judgment on fiscal year 2005 trends and is now at the point in the fiscal year
where details are available in the database to begin to make an analysis based on
facts, ratherthan judgment from previous years growth; and there appears to be
another decline.
I
I
I
I
I'" '
\';;%..1'('
205
The City Manager advised that currently the General Assembly is looking at
the definition of machinery and tools and trying to make adjustments for what is
referred to as idle machinery. She explained that currently localities receive a
certain value on machinery and tools, whether or not the equipment is in use, and
it is possible that the City could be impacted even further in the personal property
category if the General Assembly changes the defi,nition..
Council Member Cutler inquired if Federal funds are received under the
Intergovernmental category; whereupon, Ms. Shawver advised that approximately
$40,000.00 represents Federal funds.
Council Member Cutler advised that almost all Federal money comes
through the State; therefore, why do Other Local Taxes and Charges for Services
show that a percentage of the dollar growth is in decline?
Ms. Shawver. explained that the Other Local Tax category includes such
items as the admissions tax, the bank stock tax and a variety of small or local
taxes, but the majority of the decrease is in the public service corporation
category which is imposed on public utilities through the State Corporation
Commission, and the City's trends basically represent a decline from fiscal year
2006 to 2007. She stated that the category seems to fluxuate upward and
downward from year to year; it can fluxuate downward based on the valuation of
real property and personal property; real property tends to continue moving
upward, personal property can sometimes fluxuate downward based on the
valuation and the age of items that are held by those types of businesses; it can
also be impacted from year to year by the timing of assessments in the spring for
personal property and corrections that might result in the following year;
therefore, it is a revenue where erratic growth and decline can be seen in the
categories that are declining, the largest of which is in the social services area,
and relates to a decline in what the City receives from the citizen payor private
pay component. She added that a decline is expected in public safety and
recreational programs for the fiscal year 2007 budget compared to the fiscal year
2006 budget.
Council Member Dowe inquired about funding for future recommendations
of the City's Domestic Violence Task Force.'
The City Manager advised that there are certain significant challenges to the
City of Roanoke, notthe least of which is the disadvantaged population; and when
comparing Roanoke to the other 15 member localities of Virginia First Cities,
which are in the category of older and oftentimes distressed communities,
Roanoke generally ranks about fifth in population in expenditures in the various
categories, with the exception of the Comprehensive Services Act for Children
which puts the City of Roanoke in third place. She stated that Roanoke has
extraordinary expenses when it comes to dealing with the special needs
population of young people, and many of those young people in the past have
been warehoused, or sent outside the region, or outside the State, to expensive
treatment facilities that have not always benefited the child and the family, and
206
there are other concerns if problems in the family to which the child must
eventually return are not addressed. Additionally, she stated that there are a large I
number of children who are turned over to the City by their parents on a voluntary
basis, and the courts willingly offer the custody of the children to social services;
there is a need to have different programs in the community to keep these
children in their home community that could, over time, be less expensive;
currently, the City is spending unbelievable amounts of money on a very large
foster care population, and the City is responsible for those young people once
they are placed into custody until they reach the age of 18, unless the City is able
to return the child to the family. She advised that study groups have been
appointed in recent months to address the issue, there are specific examples in
recent months where people have tried to bring or to keep children in the home
community that often times involve the school system which sometimes initiates
the need for a child to be placed outside of the community due to the special
education needs, and the City is working with the school system to identify the
responsibility of the schools for the financial component. She explained that this
is an area that will cost more money in the future until the right programs are in
place, and over time there should be a reduction in expenditures, with more
children remaining in their own homes. She stated that this is one area that is in
great need of some additional resources, and at the March 20 meeting, Council
will be requested to appropriate additional State money for the Comprehensive
Services Act.
$70.0
$6$.0
-;- $60.0
.g $SS.O
S!! $500
'" .
Ii $4S.0
f $40.0
a:: $35.0
$30.0
$2!i.O
I
Real Estate Tax
The City's largcsl source of_revenue
n'Oll FYOl FYO:Z .~13 I"'rfN f-'Yœ'ó F~
1''Y07
1.-¡...,..IV....r
Avc::ru.gcgTQwth: 2yr_7.6%.5yr_6.0%.IOyr_5.0%
SQ~.;_
FYOO 0_ FY05 - C,()rnprcllen_~jvc Annual Financinl R~"I')OJ"1
FY06 _ FYO? - AdoptedlRcconuncndcd EstÎnUllc .
7
Ms. Shaw\.ter advised that the real estate tax is the largest revenue source for
the City of Roanoke, and is a tax that has seen a fair amount of growth in recent
years. The abovereferenced chart is a graph of real estate tax actual revenue
through fiscal year 2005, the current revenue estimate in fiscal year 2006 and the
estimate that will be submitted to Council for adoption based on the current tax I
rate and the assessment that the Director of Real Estate Valuation has prepared
I
I
I
207
for fiscal year 2007. There is a nine per cent growth in the current fiscal year; last
year the City's financial records were closed with about 8 y" per cent growth; and
there is an upward trend in recent years with the tax. According to a recent
newspaper article, home prices in the fourth quarter of calendar year 2005 are
about 1 3 per cent higher than in the fourth quarter of 2004.
Trends in Real Estate Assessments
....
B'"
7...
..5
Percentage .5.5
GrlnVl.h 4.5
3-S
2.~
..s
0.5
FV94 FY96
~1
1,'''98 FYOO "'V02
FY04 "~V06
Ie RellMC!'l8.nent .. New Construçtlo.. f
Ave growth: 2 y.- _ 8.6%. Syr-'7.5%. 10 yr - 6.0%
Source: Real Estate'Valuation
.
The above chart breaks down assessment activity between reassessments
and new construction, and reassessment is where a change has been seen in a ten
year history of assessment activity in recent years; the City'sreassessments have
been in the six, seven and eight per cent range, whereas in years past,
reassessment was more like two or two and one-half per cent, and the strong
increase in value during the last couple of years contributes to the higher growth
that has been seen in the last few years. The real variability tends to be in new
assessment, with regard to slides 7 and 8, the average growth will look somewhat
different because reassessment data uses averages through 2007, whereas on the
real estate slide, averages are through fiscal year 2005 which is the most recently
completed year.
-
Real Estate Growth
· Value of 1 cent real estate in FY07 - $567,000
- City's share: $360.500
- Schools' share: $206.500
· New revenue in'FY07 based on 9% increase in
assessments - $5.6 million
· New revenue which- would be achieved from
typical increases:
- Based onl 0 year average growth (50/0) - $3.1 million
- Based on 5 year average growth (6%) - $3.8nliIlion
.
208
Ms. Shawver advised that Council has requested the City administration to
examine a budget for fiscal year 2007 that would consider a reduction in real
estate taxes; in today's assessed market, one penny of real estate tax equals
$567,000.00, or approximately $361,000.00 for the City and approximately
$207,000.00 for the schools based on the funding formula previously discussed.
New revenue to fiscal year 2007 based on the expected increase is $5.6 million,
and new revenue on a ten year average growth, which averages about five per cent,
is $3.1 million, and six per cent would average $3.8 million, so there is roughly a
$2-2 Y, million impact in actual revenue on new revenue to the City and the School
budget based on the current type of growth versus that which is more
representative of what should be expected over the long term.
I
Real Estate Assessments
· Code of'Virginia
- Requires that all 'real property be assessed tor tuxation at 100% or
naarke. v,plue.
· City Code
Roanoke a-c¡,sesses real property on an annut.\! basis.
- Roanoke notifies prope,rty o",^,oers each January of assessed valuc$.
This nOl.ificution establishes asseSSlnents for the tax payments due
October 51h of t.hat yc:¡u· and April 51h of the next year.
· IVIarket Value
- Market value is defined as the ømount a typical, 'Nell-informed
pUTchasel" vvoUld be ""'illing to pay for a property.
'"
I
Susan S. Lower, Director, Real Estate Valuation, advised that a general
reassessment of property is authorized by State Code; the Director of Real Estate
Valuation is required to appraise all property in the City at 100 per cent of market
value; annual assessments are performed in the City of Roanoke, citizens are
notified each January, and bills are due on October 5th and AprilS'" of each year.
Market value is defined as the amount of money that a well-informed purchaser
would be willing to pay for a piece of property; and approximately 4,000 sales
took place in the City of Roanoke this year.
The Assessment Process
· Assessment. notices ~ailed .January3rd
· Deadline for appeals February 1"
_. In 2006. 1,862 contacts were made by citizens (.:alling or visiting Real
E...."'tate Vnluallon
_ 331. of these nled formal appeals: the remaining were resolved-through
discussions with staff
__ In 2005, 1,542 contacts were Inadc Þy citizens Hnd 419 appeals were.filed
· Board oC Equalization
- Board nlcmbersaTe appointed by the Circuit Court
- Meetings convene in Spring 10 anal)'zc property values
I
"
I
I
I
:flli:~,
209
Ms. Lower advised that in January of each year, citizens of Roanoke receive
their annual real property assessment; during the month of January, staff responds
to inquires by citizens with regard to their annual assessment; in 2006, 1,862
persons contacted the Office of Real Estate Valuation either by telephone, walk-in,
on-line, e-mail, etc, and of the 1,800 people, only 331 persons filed a formal
appeal with the Board of Equalization prior to the April 5th deadline.
Roanoke Board of Equalization Results
· In 2005~ the Board of
Equalization heard 99 appeals:
- -63 assessments """ere upheld
- 34 assessments were decreased
-2 asseSSlnents were increased
· The HOE-changes reduced the
value of the properties included
within their reviev.r by Jess than
2%.
ê...-~'~";;~;':;'¡-¡:!;__._:¡J
"
Ms. Lower advised that in 2005, the Board of Equalization received 99
appeals, 63 of which were upheld and the key point is that with 99 appeals,
decisions of the Board of Equalization changed less than two per cent.
Sales Ratio
· Tbe ratio of an appraisal or assessed value
to the sale price or adjusted sale price of a
property.
» ASse;Ssrnent= $1.40,000
»Baie Price = $150,000
» Sales Ratio = ~39ó ($140,0001 $150.000 =-.93)
"
Ms. Lower advised that sales ratio is defined by the assessment value
divided by the sale price; and the sales ratio is an indicator of the percentage of
market value for which the property is actually assessed.
210
Roanoke's Sales Ratio
as Measured
by the Department of Taxation
I
--
--
~.~
-~
æ.~
66.~
_.~
e2.~
60.00<l<>
78.000>'>-
1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
~led Sale~ Tax ~
Sourèe: V¡rgil1¡" Depanmen. of Ta><nhon. 14
. Ms. Lower advised that the above chart shows a history of Roanoke for the
past ten years and in stable times, the City's ratios tend to be stable as well.
The Director of Finance advised that every locality is required to submit
specific data and the State Department of Taxation computes the locality's sales.
Ms. Lower advised that the sales ratio is tied to the school funding
distribution formula and all properties of public service corporations are appraised
by the State Corporation Commission which is tied to the sales ratio as well.
Mr. ~all clarified that public service companies include railroad, except
railroad property, electric, gas and telecommunications companies that are
assessed by the State Corporation Commission, and the Department of Taxation
assesses railroad properties; and once the City receives the assessed value, the
City must apply its sales ratios to the assessed value to deterrninetaxation value;
therefore, the sales ratio is extremely important to the school funding formula as
to how much money the City will receive from the State in. school funds.
I
Department of Taxation
2004 Assessment to Sales Ratio Results
Roanoke County Assesl<:rnenl lo-Sules Ratio-was 88%
Snleln ,As!>es.l'\ment to Sale.<¡ Ratio 'Was 78<;f¡.
"
I
I
I
I
.. . , '~' '. ;,\~; ~ i:. ,,'
,"
. >;: \..~ I
·í#:l¡...·~
211
Ms. Lower advised that the above chart gives a picture of how Roanoke
compares with other localities around the Commonwealth of Virginia; and
Tidewater localities are experiencing low sales due to an active market.
Reassessment Increases In Virginia
Locõltit)' RC¡IS~'SSlncnt, <if C)'(:k Ene...· ivC' Dmc
R(l.m<lkc· X.U~A AnnU~11 Jul)' L 2oot> tProjc\:"tc(, )
HanlphlO 20.6f¡f Annual July 1.2005
LYl11,:hhurg 5.M·;f· Bicnnhll July I " 2{K)5
;"¡cwJlon NC'ws 14.23';; AnnuOll July I. 2005
Nurf";lk 20.0<ìf AnnUll1 Juty 1.20()6 U,...ojc...·ICO)
PClnSlll(luth ClAW,," Annual July'. 2( ()5
Ril.:hnllttlÚ 13.50·ìf Annual Jut)" I. 2fXl5
.. L)'nchÞurJ;tca""...""..." Þícnniull,r. Ih..·....·rc.n.. nnllounl is udJu"h.-c.1 IU I\:O..."1unmlalì;;<:..-..J has¡....,
NUlle:' Rcmnuk..:C"uunt)' prujo."1,;I!>o an,¡lIlnual ¡."...reaM: ul"lU)I';I, crf..~lin:' July 1_ 2006.
S.dclllim:rcaM..u h)' ~L7'k as ul' Jul)' 1.20llS. Their lca"""''''Mll1..''fl1 "')"1.: ¡.. hk'1m;",!.
lh
Ms. Lower advised that Roanoke's reassessment percentage is at 8.11;
Roanoke is a growing community and is no different than any other city
throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia with increases in reassessment, which
is a good indication that the City's neighborhoods and businesses are strong and
growing.
The City Manager advised that the price of the average home in the
Tidewater area, according to a recent newspaper article, is $290,000.00; the
average assessment in Roanoke is approximately $110,000.00 which is up over
the last several years; and the average price of a home in the Roanoke region is
between $165,000.00 and $170,000.00
In summary, the Director of Finance advised that Council Members receive
numerous comments with regard to the amount of increase in property
reassessments, and the purpose of the discussion was to point out that there are
guidelines that dictate how reassessments are conducted in the City and the
process for independent review.
With regard to the School funding formula, Council Member Wishneff
requested that the City Manager provide information on the percentage offunding
if debt service is included.
The City Manager advised that a later slide will show the amount of funds
that the City provides toward school debt, as well as the amount of funds that the
School system allocates toward debt service; and to this point a percentage has
not been applied, but could be calculated by City staff.
212
Council Member Wishneff requested a breakdown by neighborhood or by
census tract of real estate reassessment increases.
I
Real Estate Tax - After Reassessment
Bascchm current lln~r3gca~..t.'1ised ,:'nJue of Sl~W~%9 nnd Ütlueof
$IJR.8S1 àftt!:rr(:'as~srncntror8 shlgle nmúJy home.
Tax' Tax
(Reassessed Value) (Current Válue) Change
Current Tax Rate $1,439 $1,331 . $108
Reduction,of$.Ol, $1,426 $1,331 $95
Change $13
"
.
The Director of Finance advised that as the City Manager previously stated,
the average value of a single family home in Roanoke is about $110,000.00; when
calculating the increase in the real estate tax created by the reassessment
increase, or the 8.11 per cent reassessment increase that will be effective next
year, a $110,000.00 homeowner will pay an additional $108.00 due to their
property reassessment increase; and if the real estate tax is reduced by one
penny, that same homeowner would pay an additional $95.00 in taxes, or a
difference of $13.00.
I
Value of Tax Relief
Value. of Relief
Program Value-of Relief- Per:Property
Elderly Tax Fre~ze $526,410 $329
Disabled Tax "~reeze 120,168 $279
Agricultural Tax "~reezc 52,797 $3,771
Rehabilitation Tax Ji'reeze 578,318 $2,360
Total Relief $1,277,693
'8
I
I
I
I
.r.-¡~,,¡'.
213
Elderly and Disabled Tax Relief Program
Income Net Worth
I':'imit 'Limit
State Code $50.000 ' $200,000
.Roanoke $30,000 $lOO~OOO
'Hampton $30,000 $]00;000
Lynchburg $30,000 $60~OOO
Newport News $S()~OC)() $200,000
Norfolk $50,000 $200,000
Portsmouth $19,000 $64,200
Richmond $40,000' $100,000
City of Roanoke Median House.hold Income - $3l.45]
..
The Director of Finance adVised that the City has initiated a number of tax
relief programs for Roanoke's citizens, one of which is the Elderly and Disabled
Tax Relief Program; the elderly tax freeze is at about $526,000.00 and relief per
property is about $330.00. Another program is the agricultural tax freeze and the
list of properties has declined over the yèars due to development in the City; and
the Rehab Tax Freeze Program which involves a tax abatement on the value of
property improvements.
Council Member Cutler inquired if tax relief is provided for programs such
as Cradle to Cradle houses or energy conservation/environment projects.
The City Manager advised that Senator John S. Edwards was successful, for
the second year in a row, with regard to passage of a Constitutional amendment
that will be included on the November ballot to allow communities like Roanoke to
offer, at their choice, tax relief for new construction. She further advised that the
request of Council to look at energy effiCiency as an issue was taken to the
General Assembly, but was not submitted in the form of a bill, and has now been
forwarded to the Department of Housing and Community Development for review
of the types of options the State should offer in the future; and if the
Constitutional amendment is passed, it is possible if the City were to locate a
piece of property on which it wanted to construct a Cradle to Cradle home, taxes
could be abated. She called attention to Miller Court which is under renovation by
the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority in the 400 block of Day
Avenue, S. W., where a combination of the City's tax abatement program, tax
credits, and low interest mortgage rates were used to break down a significant
portion of the mortgage in order to make the home more affordable to a certain
category of persons or income level.
214
Mr. ~all advised that it has been three - four years since income limits were I
adjusted for persons who qualify under the Elderly and Disabled Tax Freeze
Program; the median household income for Roanoke is about $31 ,500.00 and the
matter has been referred to fiscal year 2007 budget study for review and
recommendation. ~e stated that Roanoke is below the State average and the
national average.
Council Member Wishneff inquired as to the number of elderly citizens who
have a larger household income than $30,000.00 and a net worth greater than
$100,000.00.
The City Manager stated that the numbers could be obtained from the
Commissioner of the Revenue. ~owever, she pointed out that there are many
people who are actively working, who have families, who may have more expenses
than some retirees and are living on $31,000.00 per year or less, therefore, it is a
challenge to determine what should be the income limit for a person who is retired
or disabled, versus the income of an active person in the work environment. In
terms of household net worth, she stated that there are no available statistics
from the Weldon Cooper Institute on household net worths, and the issue could be
addressed by the Commissioner of the Revenue in terms of the number of people
who have been denied the benefit because their net worth exceeded $100,000.00.
Council Member Wishneff requested information on the impact to the fiscal I
year 2007 budget if the income limit is increased to $ 50,000.00 and net worth is
increased to $200,000.00; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the
information could be provided if certain assumptions are allowed to be made by
staff.
Personal Property Tax
The Cily's,secoòd largesl lax
'i"a.oo
R~
!i
~ 1..00
;f!.l".oo
2:14.00
,~
..-
,....
¡rilloC.I~"'.!'
¡.....__I'""_.)'T....I
Averagegrowth: 2yr-3~8%,5yr- 1.5%, 10 )T-3.7%
~
FYOO- FYOS . Comprehensive AnnualFinancÎal Repon
FY06- FY07 - AdoptedlRccommen<k..-d Estimale
20
I
I
I
I
~ , . \.' ¡
~,\ifi'}1
215
Ms. Shawver discussed the personal property tax which is the City's second
largest tax, and sales tax as well as certain legislative initiatives that are currently
under consideration by the General Assembly. Personal property is a tax where
there has been either a flat growth or some declines in prior years; in 2002, the
tax dropped about one per cent, it dropped another one per cent in 2003, it
dropped two and one-half per cent in 2004, and in 2005, the. tax dropped by
almost ten per cent. The fiscal year 2006 adopted estimate was actually lower
than the revenue the City achieved in 2005; there should not be any problem in
meeting the 2006 estimate and now that newer data is available, the fiscal year
2007 estimate will be revised downward to almost the same level as fiscal year
2005.
Revisions to the Personal Property
Tax Relief Act (PPTRA)
.
· Caps PPTRAreimbursCJIlcnt at$950M for tax years 2006
and beyond (proposal.to increase to $IB)
· Localities were informed this week of their share of this
lolal- Roanoke's share - $8.076.000.
· Council adopted an ordinance to allocate relief to Roanoke
taxpayers· using the Specific (percentage) ReHef MedJod
- similar to.luethod currently 'in use
-Vehicles valued aland under $1 .(){X) continuelo be fully exempt
· Responsibility shifts' to localities to ensure percentagc'is
correctly computed to ensure revenue neutrality upon ,cap
of State funding
- Smffcun-ently working on growth trends wdetermincappropriare
percentage to use an 2006 tax bills
· Reduction In cash flow during summer months based On
changes in l'einlburseInent schedule
- Impact~to Roanoke is I()s~ of interesLim;::ome of $45,000
20
Ms, Shawver advised that the Personal Property Tax Relief Act (PPTRA) was
originally enacted in the late 1990's, with the intent of the General Assembly to
fully phase out the tax for individuals owning vehicles valued at $20,000.00 or
less, that did not happen and the most recent changes in the Act will be reviewed;
Council adopted an ordinance last year with regard to how the City of Roanoke will
handle PPTRA, and within approximately the next six weeks citizens will receive
their tax bills. Legislation that was adopted by the Commonwealth of Virginia
related to the Personal Property Tax Relief Act provides that rather than the State
contributing 70 per cent of relief each year to localities in Virginia based on
qualifying vehicles, the State will cap the amount at $950 million across the entire
Commonwealth of Virginia. Localities have submitted data regarding their 2004
tax year, and data was provided so that the State could inform localities as to their
share of the $950 million, using the calendar year 2004 as a basis for the
determination. The City of Roanoke's share is approximately $8,076,000.00
which, unless changed, will be the flat amount that is provided by the
Commonwealth of Virginia in tax years 2006 and thereafter. There were choices in
Council's adopted ordinance as to how the most recent changes would be
implemented; Council adopted an ordinance that calls for a percentage allocation
concept, so that the $8,076,000.00 will be distributed among Roanoke's citizens
216
and the tax bill will show an amount of relief to citizens in terms of a percentage
that is considered relief and a percentage that the citizen will actually pay. In the
past, citizens with vehicles of $20,000.00 or less received 70 per cent relief, that
per cent of relief will change and could go up in a year where assessments go
down. The ordinance adopted by Council provides that all vehicles valued at and
under $1 ,000.00 will be exempted from the tax. Staff of the Finance Department
have reviewed the data to determine the appropriate percentage to be listed on
tax bills that will be mailed in April; the impact to the City of Roanoke is a cash
flow type issue; the State will slow down reimbursements and shift to more of a
periodic scheduled reimbursement, whereas, in the past, reimbursements were
made from the Commonwealth to Roanoke based on when the City Treasurer
submitted data to the State advising that taxpayers had paid their portion of the
tax; and based on the current interest rate environment, there will be a negative
impact to the City of Roanoke in terms of interest income of about $45,000.00.
21:..00
20.60
I ~:::
~ 1P.00
.....; 1..60
-= 1..00
f- 17,60
j '17.00
,.~
,.-
,....
Sales Tax
'The City'S thjrd.largcst ta",
- - -
FYUO
FYO~
t"YO?
FY(Jof>
FYOJ
FY02 f'VtJ3 FYU4
.·..cnl Y.,.ar
I.S"'~T_ '·
...._...Il#gr<>wth: 2yr-6.2'%. 5yr _2.3%. 10 yr- 3.1%
SU~
FYOO - FYO~ - Co......-e..."rL..lve Annual Financial R..pon
,:"YQ6·-·FY07 _ Adnpl",.lIlkconuncnded F....linuuc
'2
I
I
Ms. Shawver advised that Sales Tax, the City's third largest tax, showed a
strong growth in fiscal year 2005 of 2.3 per cent, which was not expected because
2004 growth included certain one time corrections for some items; 2004 growth
was ten per cent, which was out of the norm compared to prior years where
growth was either flat or somewhat in decline; those years were negatively
impacted by the terrorist attacks in September 2001, the war in Iraq, and a
general slow down ofthe economy; 2005 continued to do well, and the Cityended
2005 with better growth than was expected; the adopted budget for fiscal year
2006 is about a half million dollars less than fiscal year 2005 actual, or about 2.7
per cent below that level; and based on the City's current year growth, which is
about 3 )1,-4 per cent, it is expected that revenue will exceed the estimate by about
$2 million. Fiscal year 2005 provides the best ability to date to project fiscal year
2007; staff approached fiscal year 2007 expecting continued growth at around
three per cent over the next few years. The importance of sales tax revenue is I
emphasized because it is a barometer of the health of the local economy and the
City's third largest revenue at approximately $21 million.
I
I
I
"".'.'
, ,
"
"
"
t,J!~,1'~'!'
217
Council Member Cutler requested a break down on sales tax generated by
retail establishments at Valley View Mall; whereupon, the Director of Finance
advised that the information could be compiled by reviewing sales taxes remitted
by individual stores.
Proposed Legislation
MachineI')' and Tools Tax
· ,Various bills have been introduced ,in the General Assembly to
revise the Machinery and Tools T::lX. a component ofthepersonaJ
property tax; '.
- Changing the 'assessment process to require that equipment values be
determined based :on Federal depreciation schedules
- Changing the classification of certain machinery and tools to
intangibJerather thanlangiÞlc pCJ'somILproperty(thus avoiding the
taxnh.ogclher)
. - Altering the definition,of'''idle' machinery and tools
· The goal is to create a.more consistent and uniform tnethod to
assess the value of.nachinery and tools.
· The City received approximately $2.7 million fI'oln the Machinery
and Tools Tax for.fiscal year 2005.
23
.
Ms. Shawver advised that the above information addresses legislative
activities with regard to the Machinery and Tools tax, which is a component of the
Personal Property Tax. The City of Roanoke receives about $2.7 million in
Personal Property Tax revenue from this category; and several bills have been
introduced in the General Assembly this year with regard to changes in the tax.
The City Manager previously alluded to a bill that would change the taxation on
machinery owned by a business that is not actively used in a particular process.
Other proposed changes could alter the depreciation schedule (during the first
year, the City of Roanoke taxes at 60 per cent of value, the next year at SO per
cent of value, then 40 per cent of value, and the tax drops at ten per cent
increments 'until it reaches 20 per cent, and is taxed at 20 pér cent thereafter.)
The current proposal would enable companies to remit taxes using the same
depreciation schedule that they use on their Federal income tax return which
could give the City greater taXation in the early years, but would stop the City's
ability to tax any out years where the value is kept at 20 per cent using the Federal
depreciation schedule, and the tax would eventually go down to a zero value. It is
difficult to determine the impact on revenue, however, the Commissioner of the
Revenue advises that items in the 20 per cent category represent about $1.2
million. Taking into consideration the gain from the early years from this type of
change, with declines in the latter years, coupled with potential legislation from
the idle Machinery· and Tools tax, it is estimated that there could be a
$500,000.00 to $1 million impact to the City. Legislatively, the idea would be to
have more consistency and uniformity in the assessment of machinery and tools.
The Machinery and Tools tax goes hand in hand with the Business License Tax and
legislation has been discussed in recent years regarding changes in the Business
License Tax which is one of the City's larger local taxes.
218
Proposed Legislation
5°ló Telecommunications Tax
I
· 'l"clcconununications tax legislation appears to be; well on
its way through the General Assenlbly.
· 'This will replace utiJity:taxes on landline and cellular
phone. cable tv franchIse tax. e-.911 lax and, the gross
receipts tax -on telecornmunications cOlnpanics.
· A neM! 5% tax effective 1/1/07 imposed and collected by
the Conunonwealth and remitte-d to local govcrnlnents.
· These cbangesare projected to be revenue-neutral. and
over time will likely prove to be positive to local
governnlcntsin that it will pave the way for taxation on
rnediurns not -curren.tly'taxed.
· 'bnpact on rccolnmended revenue estimatewiH be a shift
from :toeal taxes' to grants-in-aid conunonweaJth. The
telecommunications taxis revenue neutnll 10 PYO?
24
Ms. Shawver advised that the Telecommunications Tax, which is intended to
· provide for better uniformity and consistency, appears to be well on its way
though the General Assembly this year. The Telecommunications Tax would
replace utility taxes on a typical telephone in the home, or the land line, as well as
the cellular phone, cable television franchise tax, theE911 tax, and the gross
receipts tax on telecommunications companies. When legislation was initiated,
the idea was to make it revenue neutral to localities; and all of the above I
referenced items were pulled in to be replaced with the new five per cent tax that
would be effective on January 1, 2007, to be imposed and collected by the
Commonwealth of Virginia and then remitted monthly to localities.
Council Member Cutler inquired as to "how much of the tax will get lost in
Richmond."
Ms. Shawver responded that it is a concern to local governments and the
City's Department of Billings and Collections works diligently to ensure that cell
phone companies remit any taxes that are owed to the City.
The Director of Finance advised that since cell phones came into vogue, it
· has been difficult to collect taxes; the City's Department of Billings and
· Collectionshas collected $80,000.00 and up to several hundred thousand dollars
of taxes that would not otherwise have been remitted to the City had the Billings
and Collections Department not spent many hours auditing cell phone companies
and engaging the City Attorney's Office on occasion to help convince providers to
pay outside taxes. ~e further advised that the State does not have the resources
to maintain collection which isa component that will be lost; the
Telecommunications Tax needs to be Simplified and should be imposed in order
to tax some services that are not currently taxed such as satellite, and some
current telecommunication services continue to move to the internet, which I
cannot be taxed.
I
I
I
"';:
.'.;.;.,
'¿~.f
219
The City Manager advised that another concern relates to timing of the
receipt of funds when a revenue goes to the State to be redirected to a locality.
She called attention to occasions when the State has experienced a budget crunch
and as a result, delayed a monthly payment to the City by as much as 30-45 days,
which created a cash flow problem for the City; and if the tax is billed locally, the
City would receive the funds on a more regular basis.
Council Member Lea inquired about the status of the five per cent franchise
fee on cable television and the impact on the City of Roanoke.
The City Attorney advised that it is likely that the City of Roanoke will lose
revenue because the definition adopted by the State is not as broad as the
definition that was negotiated between the City and the City's cable provider, Cox
Communications.
FY 2006
Expenditure Budget by Category
Public Safety
Scbools
Health & Welfare
Public Works
Debt Service
General' Gov.
Parks. Rec. & Cult.
Judicial Admin.
Community:Dev.
Capital Projects.
AIIOtbcr
TOTAL
$55.IM
$54.5M
$30.6M
$23.3M
$17.7M
$12.IM
$ 9.6M
$ 6.8M
$ 5AM
$ 304M
$ 5.3M
$223.8M
_...,....e.&
c::ult....-'
-
PuCJlk:s.l.ly
...
Cloftl",unA'¥'
~"II;I""""nt
'"
26
Mr. Stovall advised that staff's presentation would now transition to the
expenditure side of the budget by looking at budgeted expenditures by major
categories. Approximately 74 per cent of the Citis budget is dedicated to public
safety, schools, health and welfare, and publicworks;approximately 24 per cent is
dedicated to local support of the School division, and when debt paid by the City
on behalf of the School division is added in, the figure grows to approximately 26
per cent, which is a significant contribution.
220
The City Manager pointed out that if one were to take a similar chart for
other communities in the region, or for other cities,public safety and schools I
would be somewhere in the order of first and second, and there starts to be a lot
of variance in categories three, four and five. She stated that oftentimes it is said
that the City of Salem spends a considerable sum of money on parks and
recreation; parks, recreation and culture will be higher on the Salem chart becal:lse
the City of Salem does not have the same challenges as Roanoke with regard to
health and welfare; and it is more typical for a jurisdiction to show public works,
general government, and parks and recreation in categories three, four and five
than it is to see health and welfare categorized as the third highest expenditure in
their budget. She advised that she was proud to be the City Manager of a City
where housing and other services are offered to low income individuals, but it
must also be recognized that in so doing, less money is available for parks,
recreation and culture and certain other activities. She added that it is also a
known fact that many times neighboring jurisdictions encourage persons with
health and welfare needs to move to the City of Roanoke.
Budget Challenges
· Support of Roanoke City Publi~ Schools
· Employee compensation and benefits
I
· Continue to build debt capacity for planned capital
projects
· Continue progress Îli budgeting for equipment
replacement, capital building maintenance, street
paving and. tecbnoiog)'
21
Mr. Stovall advised that developing a balanced budget is a challenge which
includes support by the local school system, competitive employee compensation
and benefits, continuing the City's progress in building debt capacity for planned
capital projects, and budgeting for equipment replacement, capital building
maintenance, street paving and technology.
I
I
I
I
<io~'{~;f
221
Budget Challenges
. Increases in the cost to provide st,rvices atthe same .level
· Tipping ,Fees (Tonnage) - $.lM
· Utilities - $.3M
· Motor Fuels - $.3M
· GRTClValley Metro - $.2M
· Vehidë Maintenance ...·$.lM
. Desire to expand :selected program services
· Polke (lOpositions) - $.4M
· Library Master Plan - $.6M
· Code, Enforcement Commonwealth Attorney ... $~07M
· Bridge Maintenance $.SM
· Storm Drain Maintenance -$.2M
28
Mr. Stovall advised that as the City begins the budget process, it is also
faced with the challenge of increases in the cost to provide services at the same
level; this year those challenges include an increase in tipping fees as a result of
higher tonnage, an increase in the cost of utilities and motor fuels, an increase in
the City's contribution to GRTC/Valley Metro, and vehicle maintenance. There is a
desire to expand selected program services; i.e.: a request by the Police
Department for ten additional positions, a desire to begin building recurring
operating funding in the budget, Code Enforcement which includes a request by
the Commonwealth's Attorney for an additional position, bridge maintenance and
storm drainage maintenance.
Council Member Cutler inquired if funds are budgeted for planning at
Carvins Cove; whereupon, Mr. Stovall advised that Council appropriated
$90,000.00 in the current budget for development of a Carvins Cove Master Plan,
and the funds will be obligated this year even though the study may extend into
next year.
Mr. Stovall emphasized that even though there is a revenue growth of $15.8
million, once dedicated revenues, social service revenues, the sharing of revenue
with the school system, and other miscellaneous dedicated revenue sources are
adjusted, only $6.9 million will remain for discretionary use.
222
Priority Expenditures
I
.. Support of Roanoke CityPuhlie Schools - $3,736,871
· Based on fundingfonntiln of 36.42% 'of local tax revenue
-Local suppórt of $58.'J minion and $4.2 million for debt service
. Employee Compensation and Ucnef1ts - $5,890,358
· Increase in contribution rate (12.61 % to 15.11 %)forthe Employee
Retirement System -$1.y461,407
· Increase in 'the'cost of employee heaJth" ,dental, and life insurance -
$894.7Z3
· Remaining six months, or full year cost or additional 4 % salary
increase provided to Deputy Sheriffs and"~ire·EMS - $392,874 (Total
costor$77S~667)
· Competitive enlployec compensation (T¡;¡rget of 4 %of'salary) .
$3,141,354
- Salary surve~' indicalessolaries arcapproximatcl}' 9% below "'irst Cities
jurisdictions
29
Mr. Stovall advised that the list of priority expenditures include additional
funding in the amount of $3.7 million for the school system based on the funding
formula previously discussed, local support for fiscal year 2007 would total $58.1
million, with another $4.2 million for debt service, which is the City's share of
school capital projects.
I
The City Manager called attention to a recent newspaper article which stated
that the School system is contemplating the submission of a fiscal year budget of
$7 million over and above the $3.7 million, and, in effect could request a
$10.7 million increase in a single year, absent what is known to be the growth that
the State will provide in aid to education.
Mr. Stovall advised that the projected increase from the State for school
funding is $6.6 million. ~e pointed out that the $4.2 million that the City will
provide in fiscal year 2007 for debt service grows to approximately $6 million in
fiscal year 2009, after the City issues its share of the debt for the William Fleming
. ~igh School project.
Council Member Wishneff requested comparative data from other
jurisdictions with regard to the level of school debt service and operating funds;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that most of the communities that Roanoke
would compare itself with are not in a school construction mode in the same way
that Roanoke is, therefore, significant differences will emerge on the debt service.
With reference to the above information on Priority Expenditures, Mr. Stovall
advised that employee compensation is at $5.9 million, which includes an increase
in the contribution rate for the Employee Retirement System, an increase in the I
cost of employee health, dental and life insurance; and in fiscal year 2007, the City
will pick up the remaining six months, or the full year cost of the additional four
per cent salary increase provided to Deputy Sheriffs and Fire/EMS employees.
I
I
I
't:.:
-:~}}t
223
The Mayor referred to the increase in contribution rates for the Employee
Retirement System, and inquired if over the next few years the contribution rate
will begin to come down; whereupon, the Director of Finance advised that rates
should come down based on projections made by the City's actuary, assuming that
the stock market performs at a level that the City will achieve an expected return
of seven and three quarters on the City's investment.
Mr. Stovall advised that the City strives to provide competitive employee
compensation and at this point, four per cent of current salary is targeted for
fiscal year 2007; and the annual salary survey compiled by the City's Department
of ~uman Resources indicates that the City of Roanoke is approximately nine per
cent below Virginia's First Cities jurisdictions.
Council Member Wishneff inquired as to how a four per cent salary increase
compares with actions to be taken by Roanoke County and the City of Salem for
their employees.
The City Manager advised that Salem and Roanoke County are considering
the same percentage of increase. She stated that if the City of Roanoke were to
come into a significant increase in revenues, as City Manager, she would
recommend a greater percentage increase because over the last six to seven years,
more has been demanded of Roanoke's employees, they have produced the
desired results, and City employees have been held accountable in a way that
should be pleasing to both the Council and to Roanòke's citizens. She added that
as the City of Roanoke falls further and further behind in its pay scale, it will be
less able to keep valuable employees, therefore, she would set four per cent as a
target and if there is a considerable amount of extra money, she would
recommend a minimum of five per cent in order to cut throug~ some of the
disparity with other localities. .
Pay Raise vs_ Change in CPI
Fiscal Year Pay Raise CPI
2006*· 3.14% of salary (avg.) 3.2%
2005 3.08% of salary (avg.) 3_0%·
2004 2.83% of salary (avg.) 2,1%
2003 3_0% of salary 1.5%
2002 3_5 % of salary 2.7%
Results from salary survey indicates average salaries ure
approximately 9% below the.Flrst'Citlesjurisdictions
·Sh~riffand Fire·EMS rec.-eived an,additionaI4% of
salary"efTective January 06
30
224
Mr. Stovall advised that the above information demonstrates the pay raises
provided by the City over the past five years, which have kept pace with inflation, I
but Roanoke falls behind other First Cities peer jurisdictions.
Employee Compensation
Percent of
Amount Budget
Salari~'S $62.563.997 28%
Overtime and 3~020, 1.44 1%
Temporary Wages
Retirement 9,212,173 4%
Insurance 6,661,356 3%
Other 6,858,447 3%
Total $88,316,117 39%
Total Genernl Fund Rudget - $223.799,000
.11
Mr. Stovall advised that the above information shows the percentage of
employee compensation in the total budget; i.e.: salaries, overtime, temporary I
wages, retirement, insurance, FICA, worker's compensation related expenses; and
employee compensation amounts to 39 per cent of the City's total budget.
.
OPEB
. A new GASB (Governmental Accounting
Standards Board) statement will require
local governments to quantify, disclose and
ultimately record liabilities for benefits
other than pensions which are provided to
retirees
. Roanoke provides retirees access to the
medical and dental plans
State Code requires this for retirees with fifteen or more
years of service
n
I
I
I
I
,~'ifl(~: .
\~j¡i¡~b.
"" .
225
Ms. Shawver discussed retiree benefits, or Other Post Employment Benefits
(OPEB). OPEB is an accounting for those things besides pensions that the City
provides to its employees upon retirement. Beginning in fiscal year 2008, the
Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) will impose changes with regard
to how localities address Other Post Employment Benefits in terms of non-pension
retiree benefits that include access to medical and dental plans, and is a
requirement by State Code for all localities with retirees who have 15 or more
years of service. .
OPEB
· Roanoke's exposure to OPEB liabilities is
through an implicit subsidy to retirees for
medical insurance
- Retirees with fifteen years öf service are permitted to
participate in our medical plan from retirement to age
65 at rates blellded with those of our active employees
. An OPEB liability results from the difference ill the blended
rates available to retirees and the rates which would apply to
retirees rated alone.
. Typical blended rate is about 50% lower than the rate a retiree
would receive Wílhoulthe benefit of blending
· Retirees pay for dental insurance at retiree
rates, thus there is no liability related to
dental
3-'
MS, Shawver advised that the benefits provided to retirees go hand in hand
with the fact that the City allows its retirees to participate in a health insurance
rate that is blended as a part of the overall group health plan with active City
employees, and provides a better rate for retirees who are blended with younger
active employees; however, the Governmental Accounting Standard Board will
require the City to quantify, account for and disclose the benefit infuture years in
the City's financial statements. Currently, the benefit is handled on a pay as you
go basis; the City provides a little more in terms of local government costs than it
otherwise would if there were a separation of the rates instead of a blended rate;
the typical blended rate is about SO per cent lower than the rate that a retiree
would pay as a lone subscriber and retirees pay for dental insurance at a retiree-
type rate. Accounting regulations are predicated on current, past and recent
practice and even though the City has not promised to provide blended rates
forever, the dollars are based on the fact that the City currently provides the
blended rates; and 2 SO retirees have chosen to enroll in the City's health
insurance plan and may continue to participate until Medicare eligibility at age 65.
226
OPEB
I
. An initial actuarial review of OPEB
liabilities was conducted in Pall 2005.
- Study performed by same third party actuary which
handles our Pension study and health care consulting.
- Resulting liability approximates $30 million and
includes valuation for active employees as well as
retirees based upo~ actuarial assumptions.
- GASB requirements would entail expense of
approximately $4 million each year over a périod of
years until liability fully recognized in our financials.
34
Ms. Shawver advised that the same actuarial firm that prepares the City's
Pension Plan study and health care consulting work was engaged to prepare a
preliminary actuarial review of health insurance liability; the actuarial firm used
data with regard to the enrollment of retirees, the retirement plans they
participate in, the age of retirees, assumptions with regard to active employees
such as age and likelihood to participate, etc., and arrived at a liability amount for I
the City based on provision of the benefit at approximately $30 million. The
largest portion of the $30 million is not for retirees, but for active employees,
because actuarial assumptions and methodology examine not only retirees that
currently benefit from the blended rate, but also takes into consideration active
City employees, the extent to which they have either achieved 15 years of service
and may retire, or are likely to achieve 15 years of service and retire.
OPEB
- Financial reporting requirement effective in FY08;
planning begins now
- Localities will balance costs of funding liabilities
with impacts of cÞanges in policy regarding
benefits provided to retirees
- Phased approach may be appropriate in
implementing any policy changes
-Study team to be established to examine employee
benefits including post retirement benefits and
make recommendations to City Council
35
I
I
I
I
"-.<
;I;':~~""
227
Ms. Shawver advised that the City will be required to deal with accounting
issues in the fiscal year ending June 30, 2008; however, in order to approach the
matter from a prudent fiscal and policy making perspective, now is the time to
consider whether the City can fund these types of liabilities, or whether it would
be appropriate to enact policy changes. Localities throughout the nation and in
the Commonwealth of Virginia are impacted by the State's requirement to provide
access to medical care for retirees with 15 or more years of service, and a
recommendation will be submitted to Council in conjunction with the City's fiscal
year 2008 budget.
The City Manager advised that because ofthe City's pension policies, more
and more people are eligible to retire; with the rule of 70 for public safety
employees, which is defined as a combination of age and service totaling 70 years,
and the rule of 80 for general employees, the number of City employees who are
retiring is increasing and future options need to be reviewed prior to submitting a
recommendation to the Council.
The City Manager stated that an important feature of planning for
retirement for City employees is the Deferred Compensation Plan in which the City
contributes up to $25.00 per pay period on a matching basis with the employee;
too many people over the years have wrongly made the assumption that a Single
retirement program will be able to sustain them in their retirement; therefore, the
City has promoted the idea that employees should look for other avenues of
support in their retirement, and the Deferred Compensation Plan is one of those
vptions.
The Director of Finance noted that approximately 80 per cent of City
employees currently participate in the Deferred Compensation Plan.
.
Priority Expenditures
Libnn-)' "!\1astcr l)ofan ~ $613.700
· Begin funding the recurring operating expense components such as stafT
additions. collection enhancement. program activity chhancemenl. and
h.-chnology
. SU1>port of CulturÚl/Human Sc-'"vkc. Agencies. $208,"104
· Increase in funding based on growth in discretionary revenue
· Funding to cultural agencies in FY 06'lotol5 $986.288.
· Funding to humun service agencies in FY 06 tolals $2,520.134
... Sodal Sen'ÎCc l'rógrams . $2.623.693
· Increase in f'unding for programs such as foster care, special needs
adoptio~. daycare ser\·Îces. special needs adoption, and general relier
· State reimburses 50% to 100% or the cost depending upon the program
nebt Capacity (01" Capital Projects ~ $570,000
· Coittinueto build debt capacity for planned capital pn)jects.
. ,Replllcemcnt of lost \VittcrISe,,'crFuitd re\'~nue fronl:creation of the
'Vcstern Virginia 'Vater Authorit~,,~ $400,000
· Year two ora three year effort
36
.
228
Mr. Stovall advised that additional priority expenditures include the Library I
Master Plan, and based on Council's direction, the City began funding the
recurring operating expense component such as staff additions, enhancing
collection materials, program activity enhancements, and technology
enhancements.
Council Member Cutler advised that a comparable plan, the Public Arts Plan,
will be considered by the City Planning Commission later today which has the
potential for recommending additional spending related to public art for either an
individual from outside the City, or a staff person to be added to the City's payroll
to address artresponsibilities. ~e inquired if the component has been considered
in conjunction with the City's budget development.
The City Manager responded that the dollar amount will be addressed at a
later time after Council provides direction to staff.
Mr. Stovall· advised that funding was increased based on growth in
discretionary revenue; in the current fiscal year, funding provided to cultural
agencies will total approximately $1 million and funding to human service
agencies in the current fiscal year will total approximately $2.5 million, including
those funds that the City is required to provide to the local ~ealth Department.
There will be an increase in Social Service revenue of approximately $2.6 million,
which includes funding for programs such as foster care, special needs adoption,
day care services, and general relief, and the State reimburses the City between
50-100 per cent of the cost, depending upon the actual program. The City has
carved out $570,000.00 from revenue growth for debt capacity for planned capital
projects for the past four to five years and will continue to do so through fiscal
2010, and this is year two of a three year effort to replace revenue that the City
lost when water and sewer funds were dissolved and the Western Virginia Water
Authority was created.
I
With regard to cultural and human service organizations, Council Member
Dowe inquired as to how active the City is from a philosophical standpoint in
identifying partnering opportunities, or is it up to cultural and human service
organizations to recognize partnering opportunities, more specifically with non-
profit organizations.
The City Manager called attention to discussion by Council at a recent City
Council retreat in which the Council was of the opinion that it was important for
cultural and arts organizations to co-promote, co-market and engage in certain co-
ticketing of events so that each entity would not have a separate function, or
administrative activity; and Mill Mountain Theatre submitted a proposal to Carilion
~ealth System and the City of Roanoke to co-pilot, co-market, and co-ticket with
cultural and arts organizations. She advised that funds that are referenced on the I
above chart are monies that are allocated by the Roanoke Arts Commission and
the ~uman Services Committee based on an application process, and five
organizations did not meet the deadline for submitting applications for funding in
fiscal year 2007.
I
I
I
., '!'.L;,
ÿ;.7Jr..~'
229
Council Member Lea requested the names ofthe organizations that did not
meet the deadline for funding.
. ..
Priority Expenditures
. Continue progress in budgeting ·recurring fUlldin.gì!l tbe
operntillg budget for (-"quipnlcnt rel)laceme1Jt~ huJldulg
nlaintenance.. paving:- and technology. Elinlinatereliance Oil
~'ear end funds for on-going operating expenses
· EouiDnlcnt RCDhtcement
· Additional funding of $183,404
· FY 2007 total or $2,246,116
· Initial target of$2.5·ntillion will be reached in FY 2008.
· Need to rC"ìse larget to $3 million.
· Cuoital Mnintenancc of BuildinS!s
· Additional funding of $130,000
· FY 2007 total of $750,000 to reach initial target
· Need to revise target to $1 million
· Street Pln'ine
· Additional funding of $217,159
-«"V 2007 total of $2..646..111 to reach target of 57 lane miles
37
Mr. Stovall advised that at the direction of Council, for the past four to five
years, progress has been made to budget recurring funds in the operating budget
for equipment replacement, building maintenance, paving, and technology, in
order to eliminate the City's reliance on year end funding for on-going operating
expenses. The City will meet its target of $750,000.00 in fiscal year 2007 for the
Capital Maintenance of Buildings, and Street Paving at a funding level of $2.6
million to reach a target of 57 lane miles. With respect to equipment replacement,
the City will reach the initial $2.5 million target in fiscal year 2008, but as
equipment replacement needs are assessed, it will be necessary to revise the
target to $3 million; and in the category of Capital Maintenance of Buildings,
based on capital building needs in excess of $10 million, it will be necessary to
revise the target to approximately $1 million; and it is recommended that revenue
continue to be dedicated to these categories in the out years.
Priority Expenditures
. (~:outintje pTogrt.~s in budgeting re<:.urrÎng funding in tlH:~
oper.ating budg,et '"or e<,u;J>menl rcpJa(.~t.~ment,. building
rnaintenanc::c.. paving" ¡and le.(~hnolog)-'~ ,1~;I¡'ni"ate reliafu~e on
)-'t.~ar endful1ds for on-going operating c'xpenscs
. Technolol!v
- Additiona.l f'undjng 01" $'58,.753
- FY 2007 total of $] ",000",000 to reach initial target.
- Continue to pro'\.'idc ineremenlal funding over the next five
years to reach $1.5 million to $2 million.
>8
230
Mr. Stovall advised that in the category of Technology, the City will meet the
initial target of $1 million in fiscal year 2007, but based on technology needs, it is
anticipated that the target will need to grow to $1.5 - $2 million over the next five
years.
I
Council Member Cutler inquired ifthe above statement is related to the new
financial control software; whereupon, Mr. Stovall advised that financial control
software has been funded; however, there are issues with respect to replacement
of micro computers, disaster recovery, and additional phases of the City's work
order system, etc.
.
Priority Expenditures
. Maintaining ex¡sHng'Sel~vjce l'evels a.nd, enhancing selected
I:>rogranl services - $2,,757..921
. Increase in the cost of'maintainingcxisting scnrice I~vels-
$2,112,424
- MOlOt: Fuels
- Utilities
_GRTClVaJlcyMetro Contribution
_ Solid Waste Tipping Fees (Tonnage. Increase)
_ Velñcle.'MainteJUlnce
. Enhancing,selected program,ser'\'iccs -$645~497
_ :CodeEnforcement
- 'BridgelSlorm Drain Maintenance
- Greenway Maintenance
-,River Keepers Program
I
39
Mr. Stovall advised that after reviewing requests from City departments,
approximately $2.1 million is proposed to be dedicated for an increase in the cost
of maintaining existing service levels; approximately $645,000.00 will be directed
toward enhancing selected program services; and supplemental budget requests
submitted by various City departments are in the $5-6 million range.
The City Manager called attention to the inclusion of an additional position
for the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney for the purpose of prosecuting
violations with regard to City Code enforcement. Question was raised as to the
rationale for placing the position in the Commonwealth Attorney's Office, as
opposed to the City Attorney's Office; whereupon, the City Attorney advised that
the City Charter requires the Commonwealth's Attorney to prosecute Code
violations.
Question was also raised as to what assurances have been made that the
additional position will be used for Code enforcement purposes by the I
Commonwealth's Attorney.
I
I
I
'1'
Ù~'~~J\
231
The City Manager advised that the Commonwealth's Attorney has made a
commitment that the additional position will be used exclusively for Code
enforcement, and only if the City cannot provide sufficient work for the additional
position to address Code enforcement issues could the position be used for other
purposes by the Commonwealth's Attorney. She stated that a considerable
amount of staff time has been expended to study ways in which the City could be
more aggressive in the Code enforcement area, and an aggressive program will be
initiated on July 1, 2006, the City Attorney is reviewing portions of the City Code
to determine if more restrictive measures can be adopted by Council; and the
additional position in the Commonwealth Attorney's Office will be critical insofar
as prosecuting Code enforcement cases through the City's Court system.
Mr. Stovall advised that the above information represents a list of priority
expenditures proposed by City staff at this point, and staff would like Council's
input with regard to those items that the Council would like to add to the priority
list.
Council Member Cutler suggested that the operations side of the Public Arts
Plan be included on the priority list. Council Member Wishneff spoke in support of
the request of the Police Department for ten additional positions.
Planned Future Bond Issues (City)
FY08 FY 10
Fire-EMS Facilities $3_81M .......---
Roanoke River Flood Red $4.52M ------
William Fleming High School $20.00M ..................
Downtown West Parking Garage $2.60M ..............
Multi-Purpose Recreation Center ------ $6.71M
'rotal $30.9_'M $6.71M
41
Transitioning to the Capital Improvement Program, with respect to the
. planned issuance of bonds on the City's side in fiscal 2008, Mr. Stovall advised
that the City plans an issuance of $30.9 million for the Fire-EMS Facilities project,
Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project, the City's share of the William Fleming
~igh School project, the second parking garage in the Downtown West area; and in
fiscal year 2010, the City plans $6.7 million for the Multi-Purpose Recreation
Center.
232
Planned Future Bond Issues/Debt
(Schools)
I
FY07 FY08 FY09
Patrick Henry
(Literary Lc>anIVPSA) $7.S0M ------ ------
Fallon Park/Westside .
(Literary Loan/VPSA) $S.OIM ------ ------
MontereylRaJeigb Ct.
(Literary LoanIVPSA -----... $2_0M ------
William Fleming .
(Literary Loan) ---....... $16_SM $7.SM
Total $12.51M $18.SM $7,SM
42
Mr. Stovall advised that in 2007, the Schools· plan an issuance of
approximately $12.5 million for Patrick ~enry ~igh School and Fallon Park and
Westside Elementary Schools improvements, which will be done through either a
Literary Loan Fund or a VPSA loan or bond.
The City Manager clarified that when the Schools use a source such as the
Literary Loan Fund, or VPSA loan or bond, they are still using the City's debt I
capacity.
Mr. Stovall advised that in fiscal year 2008, the Schools plan approximately
$18.5 million for improvements to Monterey and Raleigh Court Elementary
Schools; $16.5 million for their share of the William Fleming ~igh School
renovation project; and another $7.5 million in fiscal year 2009 for the William
Fleming ~igh School project.
. Existing Capital ProiecL<; RC<luiring Additional
Funding:
· Bridge Renovation Program- $7.5M
- $1.5 million aonuall}' for five years
_ Increase operating funding for maintenance from $150,(ÞOO to
$500,000
· Roanoke Center for Industry and Technology- $1.2M
- Complete the extensjon of Blue Hills Drive
_ Fund from Economic and Community Development Reserve
· Riverside Center for Research and Technology -·$1.5M
_ Strectscapc improvements required in performance agreement as
center is developed
· Curb, Gutter, and Sidewalk Program - $8.9M
_ Current program has reduced the backlog
- Additional funding needed in FY 2007-08.
I
.,
I
I
I
",L t.
.j":,""..
"'., "
.;.~
y~~
233
Mr. Stovall advised that as the City looks to the future, existing capital
projects that require additional funding include the Bridge Renovation Program at
$7.5 million, and it is anticipated that $1.5 million will be needed annually over a
five year period; there is also a request to increase operating funds for
maintenance of City bridges from $150,000.00 to $500,000.00 annually; a request
for $1.2 million to complete extension of Blue ~i s Drive at the Roanoke Centre
for Industry and Technology, and at this point, it is believed thatthe City will be
able to fund the extension from the Economic and Community Development
Reserve; a request for $1.5 million for streetscape improvements that are required
in the performance agreement with build out at the Riverside Center for Research
and Technology; a request for $8.9 million for the Curb, Gutter and Sidewalk
Program, and current program and funding that was provided through the
issuance of bonds several years ago has reduced the backlog, but when looking at
the remaining amount of available funds, additional funds will be needed in fiscal
year 2007-2008. '
Council Member Dowe inquired about funding for the Colonial
Avenue/Wonju Street project; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the
project is funded through the Virginia Department of Transportation's Six Year
Plan (VDOT), which should move forward in the current calendar year since VDOT
has completed the public comment period.
. Existing CapitalProiects Heuuiring Additional Funding:
· Gateway Ilnd Streetscape Improvements ~ $lAM
- Not formally induded in the CIP
_ Recent projects include Jamis()nlBullitt~ Williamson Road, HufT Lane
_ Additional projects include Crystal Springs other projects to be
prioritized based on neighborhood plans .
· Downtown and ViJlage Center Streetscape Improvements - $6.5M
- Not formally includ(..-d in the CIP
_ Rt'Cent project - Grandin Road
_ Additional p':rojecls indudeßalem A venue, Kirk A venue, Norfolk
Avenue, \Vdliamson Road (lOCh Strt.>eO.Mefrose Avenue, Memorial
A vcnue
· Storm Drains - $57.2M"
- Bused on identified projects
- Storm water µlili(v ft."C potential (unding S(lurce
· Public Works- Service Center Improvements - $4.2M
- First two phases have been completed
_ Additional phases include renovation of space oecupied b,)' Facilities
. !\1anagement. renovation of locker roo~ BV AC replacement. and
expanding the building to meetidentilied. need$.·
44
Mr. Stovall advised that other projects requiring additional funds include
$1.4 million for gateway and streetscape improvements, which is not formally
included in the City's CIP, recent projects include activities in the Jamison/Bullitt
area, Williamson Road area, and ~uff Lane, and additional projects include Crystal
Springs and other projects that will be prioritized based on neighborhood plans;
$6.5 million for downtown and village center streetscape improvements, which is
not formally included in the ClP, and improvements in the Grandin Road area
234
represent an example of a recent projects, and additional projects include Salem I
Avenue, Kirk Avenue, Norfolk Avenue, Williamson Road (lOt" Street), Melrose
Avenue, and Memorial Avenue; $57.2 million for storm drain projects which is
based on projects that have been identified at this point, and a storm water utility
fee has been discussed as a potential funding source; and $4.2 million for
improvements at the Public Works Service Center.
Council Member Dowe requested that City staff address the storm water
utility fee as it relates to new commercial type businesses, as opposed to existing
businesses, and the offering of incentives to attract new businesses to the area.
The City Manager explained that a new business would be required to pay
the same fee based upon the amount of impervious surface to be generated,
unless the business chose to submit a specific plan that would contain storm
water on site; an existing business could submit specific plans for approval by the
City that would mitigate storm water and the business would not be required to
pay the storm water utility fee. Overall, she stated that the storm water utility fee
would be applied to every existing business, as well as any new business, and to
every existing and future residential unit.
. New capital projects requiring funding:
I
· Library Master Plan Phase I ~ $13M
- Recurring Operating -$2.4M
· Radio System Upgrade - $1O.6M
- Upgrade to digital tt-ochnology with Roanoke County
_ FY 2008 - $4.4M. FY 2009 - $2.9M. FY 2610 - $3.0M. FY2011 - $.3M
· Courthouse RenovationlExpansion - Cost To Be Dctennined
_ Com_'t!'pt study underwa:y and schedult.>d to be completed in spring
2006
· Housing Strategies - $1.5M
. Includes Market Rate Purchase/Rehabilitation Program. M~rket Rate
Mortgage Assistance Program and Property A(~quisition
45
Mr. Stovall advised that the above information transitions to new capital
projects that require funding; i.e.: Phase I of the Library Master Plan at
approximately $1 3 million, of which $9 million is for architectural and engineering
services and bricks and mortar related expenses, with the remaining portion to be
used for furniture, fixtures and equipment; the $13 million applies to the super I
regional branch library and for renovation and expansion of possibly two existing
library branches; $10.6 million for a radio system upgrade from analogue to
digital technology in conjunction with Roanoke County, and funding needs over
multiple fiscal years beginning in fiscal year 2008 through fiscal year 2011;
I
I
I
. w,
WkJ$'
235
Courthouse renovation and expansion, the cost of which is to be determined
following the concept study that is scheduled for completion in the spring of
2006; and $1.5 million for housing strategies, which include a Market Rate
Purchase/Rehabilitation Program, a Market Rate Mortgage Assistance Program and
Property Acquisition.
Capital Projects
. Nc'\V capit:al J>roiccts .-cuuÍl-in2f"undin2:
- Police Academy - -$S..5M
- Based on preliminary estimate
- MarketI>istrjct 110Iun - $4.RM
_ Based on preliminary es'lillUlte
- Market BuildJng Iml"rovern..~nts -
__ Murket Squure nnd Farrner"'s,Market Improve"n~nls -
- StrcetsclIpc
. Gainsboro ):Joarking Garage Expansion - $3..8M-
. ..Jail HV AC and Secu...ity - $2.5M
~
Mr. Stovall advised that additional projects include anew Police Academy at
$5·.5 million; and a preliminary figure of $4.8 million for the Market District Plan
which includes improvements to the. City Market Building, the Market Square and
the Farmer's Market, as well as streetscape improvements in the Market district
area.
Council Member Cutler inquired as to the level of partnering that could be
anticipated from the private sector.
The City Manager advised that it is believed that this particular aspect of the
Market Plan would be done with City funds and the private sector would be
engaged in other aspects, such as modification of the parking garage for
condominiums, or Market Building improvements through a long term lease, or
purchase arrangement.
Mr. Stovall advised that $3.8 million is included to expand the Gainsboro
Parking Garage to facilitate the potential location of the Social Security
Administration Building.
The City Manager clarified that parking will be provided for the Social
Security Administration Building through existing parking; however, the Gainsboro
Parking Garage will then be at full capacity, therefore, if additional parking is
needed in the Gainsboro community, the $3.8 million will provide for expansion of
two additional floors that were initially considered in the structural design of the
Gainsboro Parking Garage.
236
Council Member Wishneff inquired if Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) has been
approached with regard to providing a pedestrian grade crossing at the railroad I
tracks; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the issue was discussed with
railroad officials some time ago without success. She stated that NS is attempting
to reduce the number of crossings of rail tracks, whether they be pedestrian or
vehicular, due to liability issues.
Mr. Stovall advised that the last item on the list of new capital projects is
replacement oftheJail HVAC and security systems, at approximately $2.5 million.
~e then called for input by Council with regard to other items that should be
included on the capital projects list.
Question was raised with regard to how the City monitors the availability of
Federal and State funds and grant opportunities; whereupon, the City Manager
advised that for the past several years, the City has contracted with the Randall
Corporation to monitor available grants and, in the initial years of the contract,
the City was guaranteed a certain volume of grants through the Federal and State
governments; and the contract with the Randall Corporation was renewed, but has
not been as successful in its most recent extension; therefore, the City plans to
advertise a request for Proposals for similar services in the future. She stated that
Senator George Allen's Office has been helpful by forwarding information with
regard to various grant opportunities for the City's review.
Council Member Cutler inquired if a Carvins Cove Master Plan will be I
prepared for future consideration; and following the Mill Mountain and Carvins
Cove Master Plans, he suggested the preparation of a Roanoke River parkyvay
Master Plan that would take into account the work of the U. S. Army Corps of
Engineers with regard to bench cuts, and the greenway trail, etc., as to how the
park could be extended from one end of the Cityto the other along the Roanoke
River (Bennington Street). ~e stated that it would be hoped that at a not too
distant future date, the City would dedicate the entire Roanoke River through the
City of Roanoke as a Roanoke River Park.
Future General Fund Debt Service Requirements and
Projected Funding Available for Debt Service
=~
..~
~.~
,.~
10.000
~~
_ o.bI s_. RoI>qu............. ....".,... 15.074 18._ 20.208 19.838 22.398 21.7<112
......ne.
__p«>ieC1"'I"UndlingA_labl.._ '..883 20.&44 21.8'. Zil.6&o$ 23.2S4 23.2~ 23.2&4
~~.
E><ce.""Ca~it)' tShun,,&,el _0.1<)) l.~H."l I.f"oOfi 2.1Wfl IJA7f1; n.~6 1.512
I
48
I
I
I
r':;':~" r.'" '.. ,. ""! ¡
. ~:::'! <
,.... r
, ","
237
Ms. Shawver advised that the above chart provides an update on funding for
debt and debt service, based on projects that have been funded through various
bond issues. Moving toward fiscal year 2007 and in other years, $570,000.00 has
been carved out in additional debt service, as well as setting aside other new
revenues each year toward future debt service. At last year's Financial Planning
Session, Council was advised of the need to identify a new source of revenue to
provide for debt service, therefore, the meals tax was increased one per cent,
which provided about $2,060,000.00 in additional revenue, one-half of which was
devoted to debt service.
,.
~ ;'
~,i , '
The Director of Finance stated that EMS fees were based on a five year
phased in approach that has contributed a total of about $750,000.00 over several
years.
i!w:\i~l'
Ms. Shawver advised that the Capital Improvement Program, as a whole, is
about ten per cent cash funded, which is a plus when the City talks with bond
rating agencies.
Future City and School Debt Service
20.000
e 15.000
~
., 10.000
"S
..
"
,g 5.000
!i
0_000
ICIC1l)'_I:>yOly 15.1. ,.... 16.187 15,GSl
.Sc_f'\lolQI:>yOf'o' ".. ~:l17 ".17~ ..212 .~
_Scl'oOolfWtl ,,- 6.00017 .... ,."" 9,SolI7 ~
I [J City Paid by City 'm School Paid by City _School Paid by School ¡
49
Ms. Shawver stated that the above chart depicts debt service, i.e.: debt
service paid by the City on non-school items, such as economic development
projects, Roanoke River Flood Reduction, storm drains, etc.; another bar depicts
debt service amounts that the City of Roanoke pays on behalf of the Schools for
projects such as RAMS, Patrick ~enry and William Fleming ~igh Schools, and
various school construction projects; and another bar depicts the debt service that
the School system funds.
238
Council Member Dowe suggested that a list of future projects (a "wish list")
be prepared that the City could place on its radar screen; whereupon, the City
Manager advised that an inventory of needed improvements to all municipal
buildings has been prepared. She stated that City staff is attempting to build an
annual amount of funds that will be needed to address maintenance of the City's
buildings because not every building will need to be repaired in the same year. To
the extent possible, she advised that the City would be far better off to include
funds in the operating budget on an annual basis for recurring items and give
consideration to the replacement cycle for different kinds of buildings.
I
Legal Debt Margin and
Balance of Outstanding Debt as of Marcb 1, 2006
S:'í 934 o::!o 400
593.402.1t40
Ass.:~o;ed VlIlue of Real EM3IC. 2:0(}ô
I_egal neb' Limit. 10% or $5.934,020..wo
City Gc~ral ObliglllÍon Bonds
Enterprise Fund O¢~t;
- CJCflCnll Obligation BOllds:
. Civic Center Fund .
. Parking FUlltf
Total Elllerpt"Îse Fund Debt
Capital LC3...;cS
School C.eneral Obli~lll¡ )n Hunds 6O.92~.3(,5
Qualitìcd Zone A\'ademy Uomls ¡QZAB) I J·)74.3(>R
VIr/,!iuia l"uÞlk SdltKlJ .-\ulhorily IVPS.4) BUII<h JO.699.67fJ
Literary Fund 1..0.111);, .:i:..Œ&QQQ
TOfal Schools
Se.::tion 108 loan
Gcocrul ()blí~¡lliQIl Dt:bl II'SUNI for ULÍlitil,lio .1.
Total Orbl a5 of March 1,2006
Less: Parkiug FUIlII Debt Considered Self Supponing
Lc~; ScctìOll108 Loan
Lt'Slí: General ObliJ!alioll Debt 10 he "aid by WVWA 'l.
Outstanding Tax Suppor1rd Debt
1.ess: AVllÎlnble in Delli Service Fund
Lt'gal O~bt
Lt'gal Oebt Margin
$111.815.091
15.'190.000
to 094 474
16.084.474
246.935
91L50J .403
J.220.00()
1l..1QQ.CX-~
$282,027,903
(IO'<)C)4.474)
\ 3.220.000)
IH bOOOOj
$237.553.429
Œ.illhIlli
236.644.678
53.56,757,362
I
'I' ('"""".al OhIÍjl.~'¡"n a.,,,,¡. i>.MI<tl hy IlK- Çil~ rri<..-Io J...... 31.>. 2'.1ò4 "n;.,,,,,,;U I>., ...,,,u~lly "'p"i<l hy lh~ WVWA 50
Debt Policies
· Tax-supported general obligation debt service will not
exceed 10% of General Fund expenditures.
· Net bonded debt wiJI Ilotexceed 5 % of the assessed
value of real. estate.
Net Bonded Debt is general obligation debt for. the City
and School Board. exclusive of Par.king Enterprise
Fund debt and the amount available in theDebtServi=
Fund.
· Tax-supported debt wiJIbe structured such that not
less tban 50% of aggregate outstanding debt. will be
tetiredwithin ten years.
Note: Ratios that follow include allt"1x-supported.debt - GO bonds~
VPSA~ l:jterary'Loans. QZÄB. and Capital Leascs.
51
I
~;'.!"'" " )~~'::.¡~. .,\,.\~
q, î,1
I
. Ratio of Debt Service to General
and School Fund Expenditures (10%)
· FY 2003
· FY 2004
· FY 2005
· FY 2006
FY 2007
· FY 2008
· FY 2009
· FY2010
· FY 2011
· FY 2012
City
Proiects
5.6%
4.6%
4.5%
5.2%
5.3%
5.0%
5.0%
4.8%
4.4%
4.1%
School
Proiects
2.9%
2.5%
2.6%
3.4%
3.6%
3.7%
4.5%
4.6%
4.3%
4.1%
Overall
8.5%
7.1%
7.1%
8.6%
8.9%
8.7%
9.5%
9.4%
8.8%
8.1%
Note: As.r.;umes annual expenditure growth of 4%.
"
I
Debt Capacity After Future Planned
Debt Issuances
(in millions)
70
00
50
'"
30
20
10
o
."""
Debt capacity í~ based on debt service payments not exceeding 10% of General Fund expenûítUfCS. 53
I
239
240
Ratio of Net Bonded Debt to
Assessed Value of Real Estate (5%)
City School
Proiects ProÎects Overall
· FY 2003 2.5% 1.5% 4.()%
· FY 2004 2.2% 1.5% 3.7%
· FY 2005 2.6% 1.8% 4.4%
· FY 2006 2.5% 1.8% 4.4%
FY 2007 2.2% 1.7% 3.9%
· FY 2008 2.0% 2.2% 4.2%
· FY 2009 1.8% 2.1% 3.8%
· ¡.-y 2010 1.6% 1.8% 3.5%
· FY2011 1.4% 1.6% 3.0%
· FY 2012 1.2% 1.4% 2.6%
Note; Assumes growth of8.5% in FY07. 5% in FY08, 4% thereafter in
assessed value of real estate.
54
Reduction of Aggregate Debt Within
Ten Years (50%)
(Reflects Issuance of Planned Future Debt)
City Schools Overall
FY 2005 72% 66% 69%
FY 2006 69% 66% 68%
FY 2007 71% 68% 70%
FY 2008 72% 65% 68%
FY 2009 75% 67% 71%
FY 201 0 76% 70% 73%
FY 2011 78% 73% 76%
FY 2012 81% 76% 78%
55
The Director of Finance advised that the above charts/information address
debt policies and capacity.
I
I
I
I
I
I
Debt Statistics of Urban: Cities
Source: 6/30/05 CAFRs
iNl..'(Bt1níJciI:OCht
GcO\.......lJ [k-i'!t S,::TI,'if."c'· To 'Assessed N~I,BtJndcd,
OhIÎ~<lti(ln i Tt1 G\.'1lcral Value: lXht Pl."
:LnC'alîlY Bnnd'~aÎjn~ FUIJd.Exfl\=nditun:. Rc.aI'Estal\! .capita'
Rualloke AN."':t.~ 7:19% ;J~:l6~,~~ $2311
Ri..'hlJlt.lnd AAI.l\a~:¡ In,J2tJ; J.67~.f: S.:d77
Hoinlpton ANAa2 '7.5()fJ) 2;SQ',( 51:422
l~ynl,..hh"Tg: ANAa~ K.46'A; ':U))_fl~ "1;557
Newport Ncw~ .4.:NAa:2 8.7'1".. 4:Mi'1 $2;176
Norfulk AI'VAal n.~($;; -,'\,99'",( 5. 1 ,gU7
:Pnnsmumh AA:IAI b.6J',i -5..68';4; S2.301
RuanÜk'::("o.. AN Aä2 h.fÍ:Vj, -2.121J $IA38
'"
241
Council Member Dowe inquired if the Cities of Norfolk and Richmond have
engaged in the types of projects that could generate revenue for their localities.
The City Manager advised that several years ago, the City of Richmond
deliberately exceeded its debt policy and downgraded for a period oftime and the
locality specificallydirected some activity toward economic development projects.
She stated that the City of Norfolk exceeded its debt policy and City officials went
to bond rating agencies in advance of the issuance of bonds to explain the City's
plans.
Capital·Project Recap
Bridge Renovation Prognun $7.5M
Roanoke Cenler for Indusuy and Teçhnology $1.2M
Riverside Center for Research and Technology $1.5M
Curb. GUlLeT. and Sidewalk . $8.9M
Gateway and Slrcelscape Ilnprovcmenls $IAM
Downtown and Village Center Streetscapc Improvements $6.5M
Library Mus-ter Plan $13.0M
Radio System Upgrade $IO.6M
Courthouse RenovationÆxpansion THD
Housing Strategies $1.5M
Market District.Plan $4.8M
Gaìnsboro Parking Garage Expansion $3.8M
Jail HV AC and Security $2.5M
Storm Drains $57.2M
Public Works Service Center $4.2M 5
8
242
Mr. Stovall transitioned to prioritizing and balancing of the budget, and I
advised that at some point, either today or at a later time, staff would like input by
Council with regard to Council's priorities for capital projects that were previously
identified which will allow staff to develop a plan for later consideration by
Council.
The Mayor advised that the Library Master Plan deserves prioritization and
there is an element of excitement around the City Market District Plan.
Council Member Wishneff suggested that housing be ranked as the next
priority.
Council Member Dowe suggested the installation of sidewalk on the other
side of Cove Road, N. W.; whereupon, the City Manager advised that sidewalks
were envisioned for only one side of Cove Road. She stated that the commitment
was to complete one side of Cove Road, given the volume of sidewalk needs
throughout the City of Roanoke.
Council Member Dowe inquired if any portion ofthe youth component to the
City's Comprehensive Plan will be implemented in the next budget cycle.
The City Manager advised that it may be necessary to wait another year due
to timing issues, recommendations of the Youth Commission will be phYSical in I
terms of facilities and some will include operational issues that may be
accommodated depending on when the youth component is completed. She
added that it is doubtful that recommendations will be processed through the City
Planning Commission and the City Council to the point that certain needs could be
considered in the 2007 fiscal year budget.
Priority Expend ¡tures
Support of Roanoke City Schools $3.7M
Employee ,Compensation and Benefits $S.9M
Library'Master,Plan $.6M
Support of CultumllHuman Service Agencies $.2M
Debt ,Capacity for Capital Projects $.6M
Replacenlcnt of 'lost 'WaterlSewer Fund Revenue $.4M
Equipment Replace,ment $.2M
Capital Maintenance of Buildings $.IM
Street Paving $.2M
Technology $.2M
Maintaining Existing ScrviceLevclslEnhancingSelected $2.9M
Programs
>"
I
Mr. Stovall advised that none of the items on the above list are considered
to be luxury items, but address critical needs of the City.
I
I
I
243
Status of Budget Balancing
Pre I iminary.Pro jeclion .Revenue $15.85:7,000
Growth
Priority Expenditures $17 .489,963
Balance ($1,632,963)
""
.
Mr. Stovall advised that based on the preliminary estimate with respect to
revenue growth and the total list of priority expenditures, the City's budget is
approximately $1.6 million out of balance, which could change over the next few
weeks as City staff works with the recommended budget.
Council Member Wishneff advised that his number one priority would be the
addition of ten new police officer positions for fiscal year 2007.
The City Manager advised that Council was not being requested to balance
the budget today, but it is important to understand that certain choices will have
to be made; City staff will initially make the choices in order to present a balanced
budget to the Council, and Council will decide whether staff has been wise in its
selection, or whether the Council wishes to modify certain staff recommendations.
Council Member Wishneff advised that his priorities are: the addition often
new police officer positions, a pay increase for City employees, and a revision of
the income limit and net worth of persons applying for the Elderly and Disabled
Real Estate Tax Freeze.
The Mayor concurred in the remarks of Council Member Wishneff with
regard to the ten new police officer positions and a pay increase for City
employees; however, he suggested a review of the net worth, as opposed to the
net income limit of persons qualifying for the Elderly and Disabled Real Estate Tax
Freeze.
It was suggested that City staff confer with the City Treasurer and the·
Commissioner of the Revenue to determine the number of persons who have not
. qualified under currently established net worth and income levels.
244
Comparison of Local Tax Rates
for Peer Localities - FY 2005
I
Real ESla'e $1.21/$1.03 $1.27/$1.12 $0.98/S0.89 $1.121$0.99
Personal Property $3.451S2.66 $4.06IS3.23 $3.74/$2.87 $3.501$2.70
Utility Consumer 12% 19% 17% 12%
Motor Vehicle
License 520 $25 S22 $20
Prepared Food 4.0% 6.1% 4.9% 4.0%
Transient
Occupaney 7.0% 7.4% 5.9% 5.0%
Cigareue (25 pack) 50.2700 50.5813 $0.3957 50.??oo
Admissions 5.5%19% 8.6% 8.4% 5%
Note: Split rates for Real Estate and Personal Property Taxes dcnòle differences in nominal
and effective tax rat~ based onassessmentlsales ratio and assessment basîs.n:speclively.
Current Prepared Food Tax is 5%
.,
Mr. Stovall advised that $1.27 per $100.00 of assessed value is the First
Cities average on the real estate tax rate, and is slightly higher than the real estate
tax in the City of Roanoke which is $1.21 per $1 00.00 of assessed value; however, I
he stated that Roanoke is lower on the Personal Property Tax, Utility Consumer
Tax, Motor Vehicle License Tax, Prepared Food Tax, and in the ball park on the
Cigarette Tax, as compared to other First Cities localities.
Closing The Gap
Potential Options
· Reduce pay raise amount
. . 1 % = $785,389
· Reduce planned increases in equipment replacement,
capital building majntenance~ and technology
· Reduce planned supplemental funding to enhance selected
programs
· Examine budget reductions
. Department Djrec,tors and Division Managers asked to submit
option for 3 % reductions
.,
I
. '
245
I Cost of Services
. Police Of'tice,- - $39,327
. Includes salary~ supplie.<j~ and equipment (excludes vehicle)
I
I
Fircl1ghœr - $40,755
. Includes salary~ supplies. and equipment
Leaf Collection - $400,000
Solid \Vaste Tipping Fees - $2,490,407
Snow Removal - $253,869
.,
. Question was raised with regard to how any excess funds in the snow
removal account will be handled; whereupon, it was advised that excess funds are
deposited in the year end fund balance.
The City Manager pointed out that the City is currently in year five of a five
year program to provide take home vehicles to police officers, the program is
working well, a significant number of police officers have made the decision to live
in the City of Roanoke, and the Officer Next Door Program is another example of
how the City encourages its public safety employees to live in the City, and the
program should continue to be promoted.
Prior Year Budget Adjustments
,
$.5 Mfilion in FY 2005..06
'" $.IM in staff ødju.'lôtments
· 6 ne~ unfunded positions M $136,638
<0 Continuation of6 unfunded positions. $143,083 ({';~nend ,,'uDd)
· 9 previOU!'Ilyunfundt.>d posiUnD eliminated M $240.433 (Generøl ""uDd)
$AM in operating adjustments
<0 AdjustmentsincJudoo human TI$OUn-e Itrograms, JuvenUe Court Services
residenUol detention, Tel."reation programs, o'\Trtlme Dnd other department
adjustments
$2.2 Million in FY 2004-05
$.1.SM in staff adjustments
27 positions eliminatrd In the Cit:nerøl Fund M $964.808. 12 of the positions
a.."l.."w.duted with the Water Authority
.. 16 unfunded positions - $48.5,406 (General Fund)
· 9 pn:oviousJy unfunded position eliminated - $240,,433 {(;encnd Fund)
. $.7M in operating adjustments
Adjulo'tments Included summer intern program: park malntenuncc ucthitle<õ,
recreation prograDUl, utility cut repain. and otner department adjustments
64
246
Mr. Stovall advised that the above information provides an overview of some
of the budget adjustments that were made over the last two years, which includes I
$500,000.00 in the current year, approximately $143,000.00 in staff adjustments
that involved six new unfunded positions, and nine previously unfunded positions
were eliminated, for a savings of $240,000.00; $400,000.00 in operating
adjustments were made across department boundaries, including human resource
programs, Juvenile Court Services residential detention, recreation programs,
overtime and other department adjustments; in fiscal year 2004-2005, budget
adjustments totaled $2.2 million and included $1.5 million in staff adjustments;
27 positions were eliminated, at a savings of approximately $1 million, 12 of
which were positions associated with transition to the Western Virginia Water
Authority, 16 unfunded positions, fora savings of approximately $500,000.00,
and nine previously unfunded positions were eliminated, for a savings of
$240,000.00; and approximately $ 700,000.00 in operating adjustments across
department boundaries included the summer intern program, park maintenance
activities, recreation programs, utility cut repairs, and other department
adjustments. '
The Mayor requested that Council Members provide any additional
suggestions to the City Manager.
The City Manager advised that Council will be provided with a budget status
update, particularly with regard to the State budget, in terms of any changes that I
could significantly impact the numbers that were reviewed with the Council today.
She stated that the City's Fiscal Year 2007 budget will be submitted to the
Council on Monday, April 17, 2006; two weeks prior to April 17, City staff will
meet with Council Members for budget briefings; and the public hearing on the
fiscal year 2007 budget will be held on Thursday, April 27, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in
the City Council Chamber, with budget study sessions to be held on MayA and 5,
2006, at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the status of a storm water utility fee;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that the consensus of Council was that this
is not the year to enact the fee, and a storm water utility fee could be tied in with
an appropriate reduction in the real estate tax rate in a future fiscal year.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 1 :25 p.m.
APPROVED
ATTEST: /1'
~~,.j-- ,;;~:~
Mary F~. Parker
City Clerk
\(·~~o~~ I
Mayor
I
I
I
247
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSIONm-ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
March 6, 2006
9:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
March 6, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 1 S9, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building,
215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris
presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council,
Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule I, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505
adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea (arrived late), Brenda L.
McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and
Mayor C. Nelson Harrismm_.h..mmmmmmnnmnmm__..hnmmmmnmnnuh_m6.
ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishneffnmmm-mmnmn---nmmnmnl .
Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson
Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies
on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees· appointed by
Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(l), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
was before the body.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor
H a rri s - _nn_ - - --. - - - 00 nn - __ _ _ __ __ - - - - Un n -. __ _ __00 _ _ _ _ _ 000__. 0 __ __0000 _ _ 00000000_ __0000 00 00 00000. 00 00 __00 - - - - 5 .
NAYS: Non e ___nn___n_n______nn_____n_h__n_nnn___nOn___n_nn____.nnn__000000___000.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Member Lea arrived late.)
248
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
I
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor
H a rri s _nnnnnnn - - 0000-0000 - - 00 00000000 00 - - 00-00 - - 0000 - - - - - - - - 00 00 nn 00 - - 00 - -00000000 - - - 00 -00000000000000- -: 5 .
NA YS: Non e n_nnnn______nnn__nnn_nnnnnn____nnn______nnmnn_________---0000-0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Member Lea arrived late.)
TOPICS FOR DIS"
NONE.
.;--..¡ BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
ITEMS LISTED C""i :it, 2:00 P. M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING
DISCUSSION/CLARIFICl:. ;:,ND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P. M., I
AGENDA: NONE.
ITEMS FOR DISCU~·c;:¡;'-l AT A JOINT MEETING OF COUNCIL AND THE
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPME.N ¡ AUTHORITY ON MONDAY, APRIL 3, 2006 AT
12:00 P.M.: The Mayor suggested that agenda items be submitted to the City
Clerk.
BRIEFINGS:
CELEBRATIONS: Mayor Harris advised that the year 2007 will mark the
125'" anniversary of the founding of the City of Roanoke, and just as the City's
50"', 75t", and 1 00'" anniversaries were honored, Roanoke will celebrate its 125'"
anniversary. He stated that Clifton B. "Chip" Woodrum, III, and Wendell H. Butler
have agreed to Co-chair the Anniversary Committee, which will consist of
approximately 12 - 14 persons; and the proposed calendar of events will
include three major components: (1) a Roanoke Arts Festival, (2) small
weekend celebratory events to highlight important historical landmarks,
businesses, and accomplishments, and (3) activities commemorating the 400'"
birthday celebration of Jamestown and honoring its historical impact on the City
Roanoke. He explained that the Arts Festival will invite, utilize and
showcase various arts and cultural organizations in the City and the region, and I
I
I
I
.,", ~ ~ >:,,\;;." .:....:~;~ :' :,'. ~ ~}..':" ~¡;: ;::;':;":":
. .,oJ.:";:
:'~G::;;:¡
249
coordinate various performances and events of certain organizations into an
extended weekend or week of events, which may continue as a regional annual
event similar to the Virginia Arts Festival which is held in the Tidewater area.
He stated that it would be advantageous to retain the services of an individual
with expertise in special events and fund raising to coordinate activities. He
requested input by Council in order to provide direction to the City Manager.
The City Manager stated that three elements of celebrations are under
consideration for 2007, and most communities have been responsive to the
Jamestown 2007 celebration. She advised that efforts are underway to host a
conference for railroad enthusiasts,.a kickoff including an Annual Arts Festival
is anticipated to be held in the fall to offset the Arts Festival which is held in the
Tidewater area in the spring; and first year activities will include a three and
one-half to four day event, beginning with a major gala reception on a Thursday
evening, to be followed by performances of local arts and cultural organizations
at a higher level than a normal Friday, Saturday or Sunday performance. She
stated that in addition to the Arts Festival and Jamestown 2007 celebrations,
there could be a number of mini-celebrations throughout the 2007 calendar
year to celebrate the City's 125'h anniversary that would require the services of
an executive director to focus on coordination of events.
As examples, the City Manager advised that the City would like to:
· showcase all businesses in the community that have operated in
the City of Roanoke for 125 years;
· celebrate churches that have been in existence in the City of
Roanoke for the last 125 years;
· showcase various attractions that reflect Roanoke's history, such
as the antique road show;
· showcase a major author who is associated with the
Commonwealth of Virginia and the City of Roanoke for a
presentation with regard to family genealogy;
· showcase various fashion eras over the past 125 years, using
dolls or mannequins that could be dressed in period clothing;
· showcase a play at Mill Mountain Theatre in honor of the City's
125'h anniversary
The City Manager stated that small events will take place throughout the
year, culminating in an Arts Festival as the major event to celebrate 125 years
of the City's history in the fall. She further stated that a sufficient amount of
brainstorming has gone into the concept and the process has reached the point
where the service of an event planner is needed, seed funds should be included
in the 2007 fiscal year budget, and the Art Festival, which will be a major
expense, will be held in fiscal year 2008. She advised that it is anticipated that
several fund raising events will be held to help fund the Arts Festival which are
generally funded through municipal governments, private sector donations, and
ticket revenues. She explained that the City should begin to put in place certain
250
fund raising activities so that responsibility for funding does not fall exclusively
to the City of Roanoke, and with the Council's concurrence, a request will be
included on a future Council agenda for approval to engage the services of an
events coordinator by June 30, 2006, and to include seed funds in the fiscal
year 2007 budget, with the understanding that 2006 will be the year for
planning and fundraising and fiscal year 2007 will be the year for major
expenses associated with the Arts Festival.
Mayor Harris called for suggestions by Council Members.
Council Member Cutler called attention to a Monacan Indian group in
Amherst County whose representatives' work as interpreters at Virginia's
Explore Park, and archeological sites such as the Buzzard Rock location along
the Roanoke River that are known to be Native American habitations which
could provide another dimension to Roanoke's celebration.
Council Member Dowe suggested a small celebration in honor of Oliver
White Hill.
Council Member McDaniel stated that the celebration would provide an
opportunity to showcase Roanoke's neighborhoods; the Raleigh Court Land
Company was formed in 1907 and the Raleigh Court neighborhood plans to
celebrate its 100th Anniversary in conjunction with the City's 125th anniversary.
She suggested that other neighborhoods be invited to celebrate their
milestones, and that families and neighborhoods be encouraged to research
their history.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that neighborhoods could be invited to·
sponsor floats in a parade recognizing the City's 12 5th anniversary.
Council Member Lea entered the meeting.
Council Member Cutler suggested the use of historical markers that could
be placed strategically throughout the City of Roanoke indicating the location of
various historic buildings and landmarks.
Council Member Dowe stated that Asheville, North Carolina, has
enhanced the region by advertising the assets of the community on a national
basis.
Mayor Harris expressed appreciation for the suggestions offered by
Council Members and advised that Council will receive periodic updates with
regard to proposed activities.
Mayor Harris left the meeting and the Vice·Mayor took the Chair.
I
I
I
I
I
I
",. I '." :,"
I ,.' ~. : :"
"",
."".", /:"
'f~:'):;~'
251
HOUSING/AUTHORITY: On Monday, February 6, 2006, Total Action
Against Poverty requested the City's assistance, through appropriation of funds
and a letter of support to the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development, to renovate the Terrace Apartments, and the request having been
referred to the City Manager for study and report to Council, the matter was
again before the body.
The City Manager advised that it was unusual for such an application to
come directly to the Council, and numerous requests have been received in past
years for letters of support for tax credit applications, and with the exception of
those projects planned by the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority,
the City of Roanoke has forwarded letters of opposition. She stated that letters
of opposition have caused no points to be awarded to a specific project, but
because TAP has not only requested a letter of support, but a request for
Community Development Block Grant funds, the City engaged in a rigorous
evaluation of the Terrace Apartments renovation application, which involved
discussions with TAP representatives. She added that the City has until
March 25, 2006, to make a decision on any action to be taken, however, TAP
has requested that Council make a decision today in order to provide sufficient
time to complete the application to HUD. She called attention to two pending
letters of support by other organizations, and advised that unless there are
objections by the Council, the City administration would handle the requests in
the same manner as past· requests have been addressed through an
administrative review and reach a decision based upon previously established
City Council policy.
The City Manager called upon Ford Weber, Director, Department of
Housing and Neighborhood Services, for the follOWing presentation:
Council's HUD Policv (Adopted 2001)
Purpose of which is to promote home ownership, eradicate
substandard housing, and make a stronger, more visible impact on
neighborhood revitalization going beyond the initial project.
· Council's Targeted Reinvestment Strategy was first implemented
in southeast Roanoke and is currently being implemented in
Gainsboro, with Hurt Park, Loudon-Melrose, Gilmer, Old
Southwest, and Washington Park to follow.
Strateqic Housinq Plan (Adopted by City Council in January 2006)
· Goal 1 - Arrest the decline in housing conditions
· Goal 2 - Stop population loss
· Goal 3 . Increase income levels in the City
252
Demoqraphic Trends in Citv
I
.Decrease in the number of housing units
.Aging housing stock
.Lower ownership/high renter percentage:
56% home ownership in the City, wherein the region as a whole
is near 80%
44% rental in City of Roanoke, 23% in Roanoke County
.Declining population (5%) despite regional gains (7%) from 1980-
2000
City no longer has enough neighborhoods of choice competing
effectively with suburbs, meaning people with economic choice
tend to move out of the community
.Income Gap between City and Suburbs:
Area MFI Povertv
City of Roanoke $27,492 15.95%
Roanoke County . $47,838 4.46%
Nearly one out of every six City residents live in poverty,
whereas one out of every 22 residents in the region as a whole
live in poverty
Overview of Terrace Apartments Proposal
I
Current Status:
· 22 S Units; 95% occupied
· Natural gas, forced air heating system
· Tenants do not pay for utilities
· Aging kitchen appliances and cabinets
· Not an eyesore, not substandard, but a tired development
· Acquired April 2005 for $3.55 Million
Terrace Apartments Rent/Utilitv Structure
..... -....- ...... _, u._u.__·
# Units Type Current Proposed Utility Total Rental
Rent Cost Cost
. ..
8 1 BR $350 5360 $75 $435
----- -...
8 1 BR $350 $410 $75 $485
-. ... .. _n_ --.
37 2 BR $395 $455 $90 $545
18 2 BR $395 $495 $90 . $585
-- __ ___n.. _ "__ .__.. ....-.
8 3 BR $425 $545 $107 $652
..-
I
.... ".:"
',.'.
:.;;'¡.t¡f:"t·
253
I
Three different redevelopment or reinvestment scenarios proposed
for the complex, which may be adjusted or modified to become
more competitive, and become a catalyst for the community:
I
..- -----.--.' ..... --.." ..-----
Item Scenario Scenario Scenario
One Two Three
.---.
N~w heating system X X X
-..-
New appliances X X X
---- ..-
New cabinets X X X
..... ------
Gutters/downspouts X X X
.. -.. .....
Ste ps re pai red X X X
.--..--.
Air conditioning X
- .-. -
Windows repaired X
..------ ---
Windows replaced X X
".-----
Sidewalks repaired X X
--
Playground & B-Ball Co~.!.~_. X
--
New laundry rooms X
--.-- --
Accessible units 8 8
._---.
Density - 1 5 - 1 5
------
Market rate units 8
Cost to City 0 0 $250,000.00
- - - ...
HUD Funds 2006-2007
HUD funds were recently cut for the coming fiscal year (2006 -
2007):
CDBG was cut by 10% ($201 ,000.00)
HOME was cut by 6% ($43,000.00)
Additional cuts are anticipated for the 2007 - 2008 fiscal year.
The City has $771,758.00 in CDBG and HOME funds available for
Community Development requests during the 2006 - 2007 fiscal
year.
Requests for grants totaled $2,178,350.00.
I
254
CDBG/HOME Fundinq:
I
CDBG/HOME Community Development Applicants
Total CDBG/HOME fu
- ._".
# Applications Total applied for:
.. ....-
evelopment Corp. 2 $ 721,754.00
---. ...- .-
nt Living Center 1 $ 65,833.00
---. - ----
anoke Valley 1 $ 30,000.00
.---._-
rhood Services, Dept. of 5 $ 430,900.00
.---...-.. ..
Health & Wellness Center 1 $ 83,750.00
n__ -.
1 $ 72,973.00
Roanoke ..--.
1 $ 25,000.00
---.--. ..
1 $ 200,000.00
.__".___n
4 $ 418,140.00
--... ____.n on .
IIey 2 $ 130,000.00
.-- ....
Total Requests 19 $2,178,350.00
.. -... ----
nds available for requests $ 771,758.00
---.-. .." .------ ...- .
Applicant
Blue Ridge Housing D
__..on __
Blue Ridge Independe
Family Services of Ro
.___. __d.._._
Housing and Neighbo
Kuumbä-Community
Police Department
-- ...---
Rebuilding Together
TBI Family Services
TAP
YWCA of Roanoke Va
Real Propertv Taxes
· Real Estate Valuation staff estimates the value of the property
under scenarios two and three to increase by approximately 37%
($20,230.00/yr) due to HUD/L1HTC limitations on rental income.
· Revenue would increase by even less if the project receives
rehabilitation tax abatement.
I
Citv's L1HTC OPtions
· Oppose the Application
· Neutral Position
· Support the Application
o Points
25 Points
50 Points
Recommendation:
The Administration recommends a neutral position without any City
funding.
· A neutral pOSitIOn is better than the City's current policy of
opposing L1HTC projects.
· The entire complex can be upgraded under Scenario One
without any City funds.
· The City has prior commitments to other community
development projects based on adopted policy. This project is
not located within any of the six targeted neighborhoods
identified for redevelopment activities.
I
I
I
I
. '::::\!~
255
. There is no guarantee tinder Scenarios 2 or 3 that the entire
complex will eventually be upgraded.
Council Member Cutler requested clarification on the statement that
"There is no guarantee under Scenarios 2 or 3 that the entire complex will
eventually be upgraded".· Mr. Weber stated that Scenarios 2 and 3 would·
address 93 units out of 225, and address the balance of units at a future date,
which is contingent upon other funding mechanisms and other development
plans, therefore, there is no guarantee that they would be carried out.
The City Manager advised that TAP would have to make application for
tax credits in a subsequent year; the number of applications cannot be
predicted or the competitiveness of applications in a subsequent year;
therefore, the only guarantee, assuming TAP receives the tax credits, is that 93
units will be completed.
Council Member Cutler inquired as to the funding source for the
$500,000.00 previously requested by TAP; whereupon, the City Manager
advised that because Scenario NO.3 divides the project, the assumption is that
only a portion of the $500,000.00 will be necessary this year, with the
remainder of funds to be requested in a subsequent year. She explained that
the City has more applications for CDBG funding than the City has the capability
to address, and TAP was included on the list of outstanding requests, however,
the total amount of funds a'pplied for did not include the Terrace Apartments
renovation.
Council Member Lea: asked for a clarification with regard to the staff
recommendation; whereupon, the City Manager advised that the City could
forward a letter of support, without funding, however, TAP previously requested
a letter of support and $500,000.00 over a certain period of time.
Theodore J. Edlich, III, President, TAP, spoke in support of separating the
request for funds from the letter of support, and advised that although TAP
would like to have financial assistance from the City of Roanoke, a letter of
support would be more important to the project. Therefore, he requested that
Council entertain a letter of support; without financial assistance, which would
increase the chances of receiving maximum funding for the project from HUD.
He stated that TAP will continue to look for other funding sources to replace the
money that was requested from the City.
Council Member Dowe referred to a statement made by staff that the
project could have a catalytic affect on the neighborhood, and inquired as to
who would be responsible for monitoring the outcome.
256·
As an example, the City Manager referred to the Southeast By Design I
project which ensured an increase in the assessed value of properties in
southeast Roanoke, and, due in part to the City's investment in the community,
more business owners are willing to make improvements to the facades of their
buildings and some new businesses have moved into the southeast area.
However, she stated that there is not enough HUD money for the City to
improve a total neighborhood, therefore, the City has tried to measure the
dollar investment, which is a catalyst for private investment, whether by banks
or individuals. In summary, she advised that one of the measures is to look at
property assessments and whether assessments are growing in a community
where they might have been lagging behind.
Council Member Dowe asked for a definition of the term "tired
development"; whereupon, Mr. Weber stated that the term was derived from
information provided by TAP which stated that the apartment complex needs
renewal and is an aging structure that is over 50 years old.
The City Manager advised that City staff reviews all of the needs as a
community and the first priority is to eliminate the City's substandard housing;
funds are included in the upcoming CDBG budget known as "derelict structure
money" to be used for the specific purpose of acquiring properties that are
substandard for rehabilitation, and if certain structures cannot be rehabilitated I
they should be demolished. She advised that when considering substandard
versus standard or tired housing, the Terrace Apartments project could use
some help, but they are not included in the substandard category.
Mr. Edlich reiterated his previous request to remove a request for CDBG
funds from consideration, and that the City issue a letter of support of TAP's
application for tax credits to HUD.
Council Member Dowe inquired as to the role of the City when competing
with other agencies· for funds; whereupon, the City Manager advised that
funding recommendations are submitted to a committee composed of
individuals that are both part of the City organization and outside of the City
organization which evaluates all applications based upon City policy. She
explained that the City has attempted to address issues relating to low income
tax credit requests by de·concentrating poverty within the City; as an urban
community, the City of Roanoke should be the place of choice and need by
many people, but the concentration of poverty has worked against the City, and
to some extent, the concentration of poverty also addresses segregation in
Roanoke.
Council Member Lea moved that the City Manager be authorized to issue I
a letter of support of tax credits to HUD for renovation of the Terrace
Apartments, as requested by Total Action Against Poverty without CDBG
funding. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
I
I
I
_." '1";
'J(~I,:';
257
Council Member Cutler inquired if the City's support of the application
for tax credits will reduce the opportunity for other projects to compete for
funds; whereupon, Susheela Shanta, President, Development Initiatives, Inc.,
stated that the letter of support is a form letter which states that the City of .
. Roanoke supports the application, with no commitment of funds. She
emphasized the significance of the City's support of the Terrace Apartments·
project, and advised that no financial support by the City will still ensure a
pOSition in the ranking, although it does not mean that the project will be
funded, but could leverage approximately $8 . $10 million· of funding from
various private and public sources from outside the region. She stated that
there would be no competition for any other City funds by supporting the
project.
Council Member McDaniel spoke in support of the City's policy with
regard to no additional low·income housing in the neighborhoods; however, in
reality, the Terrace Apartments currently exist and are owned by TAP, and TAP's
proposal, which has the support of the Wasena and Raleigh Court Civic
Leagues, is an opportunity to improve the apartments. She stated that
although she did not believe that the project will have a catalytic affect. on the
surrounding neighborhood, some homeowners will be appreciative of the fact
that the Terrace Apartments will be properly maintained and more aesthetically
pleaSing. Therefore, she advised that she would vote in favor of a letter of
support.
The motion was adopted by the following·vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe and Vice-Mayor
F itz pat ri c k nn 00.0000 00 000000..00 nun .00.00·....00 nun 00.. noon 00 0000.....000000 00 000000'_ 000000..000000.. 5 .
NAYS: No n e_n____nu...uuu..._uuu.....nuun.uu.____nn___nn_____n_n00..000000...000.
(Mayor Harris was not present when the vote was recorded}. (Council Member
Wishneff was absent.)
CELEBRATIONS-SPORTS ACTIVITIES: R. Brian Townsend, Director,
Planning, Building and Economic Development, reviewed a video presentation
regarding the "U. S. Challenge" presented by FORTUNE magazine, which will be
held in the Roanoke Valley.on October 20 - 21, 2006. The "U. S. Challenge" is
described as follows:
The Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau Sports Marketing
Committee has a stellar record of competing' and winning bids· to
bring major sports events and millions of dollars to the Roanoke
Valley. Today, the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau
and regional partners announced that the 2006 U. S. Challenge,
organized by Challenger World, will take place in the heart of the
Blue Ridge Mountains on October 20 . 21, 2006.
258
U. S; Challenge, 'a national event presented by FORTUNE magazine,
is part of the world's fastest growing teambuilding concepts,
designed to create great teams for business. Up to 70 companies
will develop teams, consisting of five individuals, to compete in the
event, which is intended to inspire staff, energize business and
increase productivity through teambuilding. Over two action
packed days and nights, athletes might be kayaking through fast
flowing. rivers, scaling the Blue Ridge Mountains, navigating
through forests at night, cracking codes or engineering tasks using
the simplest to the most complex equipment. Challenger World
uses a specialized formula called Intelligent Sports™ to challenge
competing teams. To succeed, teams must show intelligence,
strong communication skills, teamwork and the ability to
strategize. In 2005, over 300 teams.. from FORTUNE 500
businesses, including Accenture, Cisco Systems, Dell, Microsoft,
First National Bank and Volvo competed in challenges around the
world.
I
The U. S. Challenge will be regional in scope. Partners include the
County of Roanoke, City of Roanoke, City of Salem, Town of Vinton,
County of Botetourt, County of Franklin, Roanoke Regional
Chamber of Commerce, Roanoke Valley Economic Development
Partnership and the Roanoke Valley Convention & Visitors Bureau.
With the use of facilities in multiple jurisdictions and the impact it.
has on businesses, this event will benefit the entire Roanoke Valley.
I
The U. S. Challenge will provide incredible exposure for the
Roanoke Valley. With over $750,000.00 in pre-event promotions,
Challenger World will place full-page, color advertisements in
publications such as FORTUNE and Delta Sky magazines.
Additionally, a 30 minute television spot will be produced to air
after the event, providing even more coverage and promotion for
the Roanoke Valley on both a national and international level.
The U. S. Challenge will provide the opportunity to showcase the
. Valley's outstanding outdoor amenities, as well as its lifestyle and
business attributes.
Mr. Townsend stated that "U. S. Challenge" representatives considered
approximately ten different locations within the region to stage events, they
plan to return to the Roanoke Valley in April to select actual venues, and an
interest has been expressed in Carvins Cove for water related activities. He
added that representatives of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitor's I
Bureau will have an opportunity to meet with organizers, and it is anticipated
that some of the major employers in the· Roanoke Valley will be invited
to attend an activity on April 25 in which local businesses will be invited to
either participate with a team and/or sponsor the participation of athletes;
I
I
I
. ......
.
'J;..:~
. : .,,~
259
Delta Airlines has included information on the event in Sky magazine which has
provided a considerable amount of exposure to the region; and Fortune
magazine will provide approximately $.5 million worth of exposure and
advertisement for the event between now and October, 2006; and with a
$10,000.00 commitment by the City of Roanoke ($5,000.00 this fiscal year and
$5,000.00 next fiscal year) to help sponsor the event, as well as support by
Roanoke County, the Roanoke Valley Regional Chamber of Commerce, and the
Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, the event will receive a
considerable amount of free publicity. He stated that the Department of Parks
and Recreation will work with organizers of the event with regard to venue
locations and other types of activities, it is anticipated that at least 70 teams,
consisting of five members each will participate, and· representatives of
participating businesses will visit the Roanoke Valley for the award ceremony
which will be held on Saturday evening following completion of events.
Mr. Townsend advised that the entry or participation fee, which includes
lodging, etc., will range from $7,000.00 to $9,000.00, depending on the
number of teams that are enrolled by a speCific business.
Council Member Dowe called attention to another opportunity to
showcase the Roanoke Valley through the Emerging Leaders Workshop, which
includes top African American students in mathematics and science, who visit
the Roanoke Valley in conjunction with Virginia Tech.
The City Manager pointed out that numerous company Presidents and
Chief Executive Officers will attend the closing activities on Saturday evening
which could be an opportunity to showcase the quality of life in the Roanoke
Valley.
Council Member McDaniel inquired about the availability of the new DVD;
whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that the DVD, which contains a list of
sponsors from last year's event that was held in Asheville, North Carolina, is
available on the website, and will also be included with information regarding
the event. Ms. McDaniel suggested that the Roanoke Valley region be listed on
the DVD, especially if the information will be used for recruiting purposes this
year.
Depending on the success of the event in 2006, Mr. Townsend advised
that the issue of rotating sponsorship between regions could be discussed, the
first location to host the event in the United States was Asheville, North
Carolina, and the City of Roanoke was in competition with Charlottesville,
Virginia, and a locality in the State of Kentucky to host the second United States
event.
260
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that colleges and universities in the
Roanoke Valley, especially Virginia Tech, be invited to serve as major sponsors. I
He stated that on Saturday, October 21, a special welcome to Roanoke
activities/amenities should be provided at the Roanoke Regional Airport upon
arrival of Chief Executive Officers representing the various' businesses to
showcase the quality of life in the Roanoke Valley. He congratulated all persons
who have participated in the process and advised that the U. S. Challenge will
be a great opportunity for the Roanoke Valley as a region. .
PARKS AND RECREATION-GREENWAYS: Louis "Donnie" Underwood, Parks
and Greenways Planner, presented an overview of the following information
with regard to pathways to healthier neighborhoods, arid an active living
approach to neighborhood planning (greenways):
Backqround
Chronic diseases· such as heart disease, cancer, and diabetes are
the leading causes of death and disability in the Uniteq States.
These diseases account for seven of every ten deaths .and affect the
quality of life of 90 million Americans. As the average American's
lifestyle grows less active and more isolated, the results of a public-
health check-up are not encouraging. The biggest indicator of an
overall slowdown in physical activity is the obesity rate, surging
nationwide, most alarmingly among children, 30% of whom are
overweight. Obesity, along with heart disease and diabetes, is
exacerbated by a sedentary lifestyle. All of these diseases also
dramatically affect the aging population, among whom over 60%
are inactive; this age group also suffers overwhelmingly from.
depression and mental illness, which can be heightened or
prolonged by social isolation.
I
Although chronic diseases are among the most common and .costly
health problems, they are also among the most preventable. The
prevalence of overweight among children aged six to 11 has more
than doubled in the past 20 years, going from seven per cent in
1980 to 16% in 2002. The rate among adolescents, aged 12 to 19,
more than tripled, increasing from five per cent to 16%. Overweight
is the result of caloric imbalance (too few calories expended for the
amount of calories consumed) and is mediated by gerietics and
health. An estimated 61 % of overweight young people have at least
one additional risk factor for heart disease, such as high
cholesterol or high blood pressure. Additionally, children who are
overweight are at greater risk for bone and joint problëms, sleep
apnea, and social and psychological problems such as
stigmatization and poor self-esteem.
I
-. .::.:,:::
;J::;:..~/~;'
261
I
Originally, the field of Parks and Recreation was created to heal a
society, to bring literally new life into the urban, industrial
landscape by bringing greenspace into the toxic urban fabric of the
19'" century and to give hope and anticipation back to citizens by
implementing fun and enjoyable programming for the tired and
depressed American workforce. Over the decades, the profeSSion
somewhat lost its roots and original value system, replacing it
instead with years of justifications through· a public relations
drought resulting in society associating Parks and Recreation as.
simply "fun and games".
I
It was not until late in the 20th century, that the profession began to
sense that a shift was necessary; a repositioning that brought us
"back to the future" in a sense where we slowly began to quantify
the benefits provided to the user-base. It is no longer about how
many people are enrolled for programs, rather it is about the.
empirical evidence that Parks and Recreation produces. The
mission is to produce tangible results that quantify such .attributes
as a reduction in the chronic disease mortality rate in
neighborhoods, the ability to increase property values through
sales data and tax assessment via properly planned and managed·
greenspace, improvements to landscapes by the creation and
protection of parks and conservation areas through land use policy
which will enhance water and air resources, and successes in
creating opportunities for obesity rates of children to falter due·to
safer routes to school.
When given the above evidence, it becomes logical to determine
that the harvest or yield or the worth of Parks and Recreation far
exceeds the boundaries of the polygons within our communities
that are called parks, for the benefits of leisure services seep into
and saturate every nitch of society, from urban land use planning,
to economic development, tourism, public health, education and
learning, livability, design, character, and comfort. It is no wonder
that so many communities now label themselves as 'City's Within A
Park.'
Current Data and Research
I
A high quality environment is essential for both children and adults
to achieve optimal health and development. Building and land-use
policies, including the quality and design of a child's physical
environment, can help to cause or prevent illness, disability and
injury, and degrade or preserve natural resources. As children
grow and mature, the scope of their environment predictably
expands per their built environment as a central factor in this
progression. With proper planning and management through
262
urban' park systems via green infrastructure administration, the
, City's built environment and land-us'e policies have the opportunity
to promote safety, health and optimal development, while
simultaneously preserving future natural resources through
neighborhood greenway and trail systems.
I
Quality land-use planning and urban design protects human health
and quality of life and preserves essential natural resources via
greenways, open space, forests and clean water supplies. A
healthy community is not just one with excellent medical care, it is
one with an environment that encourages physical activity and
social contact and provides healthy air and landscapes. In many
communities and urban centers, urban sprawl has crept into forests
and open spaces with ever widening roadways, but with little
thought to alternate forms of transportation that could be created
within the given landscape.
The CDC (Center for Disease Control) states that even a moderate
amount of regular phYSical activity and social interaction could
have a dramatic effect on these statistics. However, there are a
number of disincentives to Americans getting out and about more
often, and recent studies from both the planning and public-health
professions locate many of them in the places where we live and
work; more times than not, the way in which public spaces look·
and the ways in which they function do not create the need, the
desire, nor the opportunity for people to walk, jog, hike, or bicycle-
let alone get more active types of exercise.
I
Our society seems to devote a majority of its time to relatively
isolated, private activities; for instance, studies show that larger
numbers of hours spent watching television, playing video games
and surfing the Internet have eaten into What was formerly social
and active time for both children and adults, and these activities
could therefore be tied to depression and other diseases related to
inactivity and isolation.
Moreover, we need to ask ourselves what happens when people do
venture outside. The lack of connected trails, unavailable sidewalk
development, non-existent safe routes to schools, and the lack of
interesting landscapes discourage physical activity.
In their cost-benefit analysis of PhYSical Activity of Using Trails,
Dr.'s Wang, Macera, Schmid, and Buchner of the Center for Disease
Control (CDC) found that for every $1 invested in trails, a $2.94
direct medical benefit was yielded to the community. The CDC
found that because of the health and economic burden of physical
inactivity, promoting physical activity has become a public health·
I
". :"::'
,~. . '<:~"
~~)"Úi\
263
I
priority. Studies have shown that' lifestyle interventions are as
effective as structured interventions in increasing physical activity.
For actfvities s~ch as walking and cycling, availability of greenway
trails, sidewalks and bicycle routes is an important element needed
to incorporate physical activity into everyday life. Indeed, lack of
accessible facilities has been identified as a deterrent to a
phYSically active lifestyle.
I
A rapidly emerging field of research focused on active living is
uncovering how various factors influence phYSical activity, with the
goal of developing guidelines and policies for design, planning,
and management. The National Recreation & Park Association has
published significant leisure research regarding Active Living over
the years; and one such examination was regarding the renaissance
of Chicago's urban landscape. In concert with Chicago's urban
parks, bicycle and pedestrian trail systems have been identified as
important outdoor settings for active . living for a number of
reasons: they cater to phYSical activities that can be adopted and
adhered to by a broad spectrum of the public, their typical off-
street and natural location in parks, former alleys, and greenways
provide safe and attractive environments that further encourage
use, and their length and. the modes of movement (walking,
jogging, bicycling, cross country skiing,. and in-line skating) for
which they are designed facilitate .use for both leisure and
utilitarian purposes.· Although' .theoriginal focus. of the
investigations was on the recreational dimensions 'of trail use,
characteristics of the data collected lent themselves to
reinterpretation from an active living perspective.
One other sample group comes from Greensboro, North Carolina,
where the Parks and Recreation Departments Division of Greenways
and Trails partnered successfully with Moses Cone/Wesley Long
Health Foundation and obtained $294K in private planning funding
to develop Greensboro's Greenway Trails Plan that targets and
prioritizes greenway trail needs.
The Challenae
I
The task in Roanoke is to create active neighborhood linkages
through a micro-scale greenway and trails planning tool that
connects both greens paces and great places that can in turn
provide the rationale for a range of solutions to foster health and
livability.· Making neighborhoods and Village Centers more
navigable for strollers, walkers and bikers may promote phYSical
and social activity - but it may not be a fruitful activity unless this
accessibility is linked to great places and has a direct impact on the
community's chronic health related issues.
264
A "healthy" Roanoke, is made up of places that are valued by and
accessible to everyone in their neighborhood: parks for recreation,
play, and relaxation; streetscapes and sidewalks where neighbors
meet and people can shop, jog and stroll; and downtown or
community markets with fresh produce, food, festivals, theatre and
other goods. Such places are also the "front porches" of public
institutions: city halls, libraries, schools, and post offices. These
places must be situated so that people can conveniently reach them
on foot or by transit. Psychologically, .thriving public spaces give
residents a strong sense of community, and promote the kinds of
familiarity and social bonds that make neighborhoods safer and
healthier. They are critical to livable. cities and healthy
communities!
I
Four distinctive traits make a "healthy" place:
A) Access and Linkages - According to the Department of
Transportation, 25 percent of all trips are less than a mile, but 75
percent of those trips are made by car. That 75 percent could be
reduced if the design of neighborhoods facilitated other forms of
active transport. Instead, communities have been typically based
upon streets too wide to cross comfortably, traffic that moves too
quickly, and an absence of neighborhood design that addressed.
greenway trails, sidewalks, crosswalks, and bike lanes. Access
means a truly public space, one that is available and easy to reach
for people of all incomes and backgrounds.
I
B) Uses and Activities - Intriguing and beautifully designed space
is not very valuable if people do not use it. A community-based
planning process lets all the stakeholders - including residents, City
staff, local leaders and merchants - define what goes on in a place.
When ideas come from the ground up, not the top down, the
events, programs, recreation, and play areas in a public space are
truly connected to the communiti.es that use them. In addition,
partnerships among local organizations, merchants associations,
and government agencies act as new sources of ideas for activities
and help a public space become a true "community place." Planning
for uses and activities in this way promotes sustainability and use,
and therefore activity.
C) Comfort and Image· - Rather than being satisfied with
neighborhood design where vehicles tend to dominate, there is a
stigma that suggests Simply walking down the street is the limit to
. our opportunity. Great places that are designed to be appealing,
enjoyable, and convenient provide an incentive to getting people
out and about - they become attractions and destinations within
themselves, like a greenway trail that meanders through a managed
I
I
I
I
:,',,'," " ',"
..:~ .;.. .:. ; :,:-., :.'
:' " ~,
';;i'!"
. ".õ"
.'. ~~;.
~'~':'~;'.:'
265
landscaped corridor that once was an unsightly alley, or a shady
retail streetscape with wide sidewalks, outdoor dining, benches, or
a park that supports a range of active and passive uses where ADA
access is the norm rather than the exception. Shade trees,
comfortable places to sit, water fountains, waste receptacles, good
views, places that encourage children, and adequate (but not
overbearing) lighting, all of these amenities make people feel good
about being in a public space.
D) Sociability - Like physical activity, research has· shown that
sociability can play a role in alleviating depression, which is
strongly linked to isolation and disconnectedness.. It can draw
people out of the house and into community life - and it is the
. critical identifier· of every great public space. Sociability is
measured by public displays of affection, diversity, volunteerism,
even people taking pictures and pointing out neighborhood
monuments and special features.
Conclusion
Per the endorsement of Roanoke's Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board, Parks and Recreation shall champion the effort for bringing
active opportunities into neighborhoods via· Roanoke's own
greenway and trails master planning process. Thus. far in bringing
together Roanoke's division heads in Public Works, Transportation,
Engineering, and Planning/Economic Development, a position has
been identified that a detailed planning tool needs to be created
that provides clear direction and prioritization of the City's
greenways and trails system. By bringing Roanoke's leadership to
the table with the likes of Carilion, the Roanoke City School System, .
the Health Department, and Virginia Tech, the goal is to create the
scope of work necessary to produce an award-winning proposal for
both the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation's Active Living Research,
as well as Carilion's Health Foundation in an effort to obtain the·
necessary planning funds that would lead to the development of a
n~jqhborhood based qreenwav and trails plan; Pathways to
Healthier . Neighborhoods; An· Active Living Approach to
Neighborhood Planning, which, in-turn, would become part of
Roanoke's Comprehensive Plan.
In closing, and on behalf of the Parks and Greenways Planning and
Development sector of Roanoke Parks and Recreation, Mr. Underwood
expressed appreciation for the support of Council to move forward and to make
the City of Roanoke a national destination for relocation, retirement, outdoor
recreation, and livability.
266·
Council Member Cutler inquired if there is an agreement with the
Departments of Economic Development and Engineering to include the concept I
in future neighborhood plans; whereupon, Mr. Underwood stated that staff of
the Parks and Recreation and Economic Development Departments are working
together, and there is a long-term process for developing plans for businesses
and a short-term process for developing neighborhood plans.
Dr. Cutler inquired if the concept would fit in with CDBG funds for
Gainsboro, or fall in line with the Southeast by Design project; whereupon, the
City Manager advised that it is not in the Gainsboro plan at this point, but could
be included if there is an interest by the neighborhood becaUse development of
greenways could be seen as an infrastructure element and could be financed.
She stated that this type of approach is different from previous greenway
planning as major connections, and the concept presented by Mr. Underwood
looks at the positioning of greenways and trails in a way that promotes walking
by citizens to transact business, as opposed to using greenway trails for
recreational purposes only.
Council Member Cutler stated that the City should determine the
locations where people would like to live and then decide on the logical
corridors for transportation.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick spoke in support of the concept and the I
involvement by Carilion. In addition, he suggested involvement by HCA
. because the City reaches into HCA's general service area. He asked that
Council be advised of continuing progress.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the construction schedule for the
Lick Run Greenway Project; whereupon, Mr. Underwood advised that· a
preconstruction meeting is scheduled in the near future with the contractor.
Dr. Cutler further inquired if the Lick Run Project provides connectors to
Addison Middle School and Lincoln Terrace Elementary School; whereupon, Mr.
Underwood stated that City staff could look into the possibility.·
At 10:55 a.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the meeting in recess, to be
reconvened at 11 :30 a.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Rom 451, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, for one closed session.
The Council meeting reconvened at 12:00 p.m., on Monday, March 6,
2006, in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue,
S. W., City of Roanoke, for a joint meeting of the Roanoke City Council, the
Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and the Western Virginia Water Authority,
with Mayor C. Nelson Harris, Chair Michael A. Wray, and Chair M. Rupert Cutler I
presiding.
I
I
I
.".. '" .'"
¡.. :."' : ~":';';;'. .;.~'-;; .
. .,' ~ .:';i .
:!;
'.:."õ.", .,
. .,.
,\".;":...
267
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and
Mayor C. Nelson Harris-mnm_mmnm__mn___mm.-nmmnnnm"_mnmhn_____mnm6.
ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishneff-mmmm-----mnm-nnmmmm 1.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
ROANOKE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PRESENT: Michael W. Altizer,
Joseph B. Church, Richard C. Flora, Joseph P. McNamara, and Michael A. Wray,
C h ai roo 0000 - - - 000- - - -0000- 000000__00 00_0000 _ _ _ 00000000_ _ _000000.-000000_._ _ 00_00 _ _.- _ _ _ __0000 - - 0000 00 0000__ 00 noon - - 5 .
A BS E NT: Non e - -00- 00 __000000 -- noon - - - - 0000 00- 00__00.____ _000000_ _ _ _0000_ - - - _00_ - - _00_0000 -00-'- 00 O.
WESTERN VIRGINIA WATER AUTHORITY COMMISSIONERS PRESENT:
Michael W. Altizer, Elmer C. Hodge, H. Odell "Fuzzie"· Minnix, Darlene L..
Burcham, Robert C. Lawson, Jr., John B.Williamson, III, and M. Rupert Cutler,
<:l1élir-------------------------------------------------,-----------------------------------------------------------ï'.
A BS E NT: Non e - 0000 00 00 0000-- 00 __ noon - - - - 00_00 00 - - 00--00 ---00-00__ __ 0000 - - - 00 0000 - - _00_0000 ___00_ O.
STAFF PRESENT:
Representing the City of Roanoke: Darlene L. Burcham; City Manager;
William M. Ha"ckworth, City Attorney; Jesse A.. Hall, Director of Finance; and
Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
Representing Roanoke County: Elmer C. Hodge, County Administrator;
Paul M. Mahoney, County Attorney; and Mary Brandt, Office Support Specialist.
Representing the Western Virginia Water Authority: Gary Robertson,
Executive Director, Water Operation; Michélel T. McEvciy, Executive Director,
Wastewater; Harwell M. Darby, Legal Counsel; Robert Benninger, Director of
Operations; Mary Sweeney, Assistant Clerk; Bruce M. Grant, Director of Finance
and Administrative Services; and Roger Blankenship, Engineer.
WATER RESOURCES: On behalf of the City of Roanoke, the host locality,
Mayor Harris welcomed the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors and staff and
the Western Virginia Water Authority and staff to the meeting.
Chair Cutler submitted the first Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
of the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA) for the year ended June 30,
2005. He then turned the meeting over to the two Co-Directors for a .
presentation.
268
Messrs. McEvoy and Robertson jointly presented the following overview of I
the Water Authority's history and current programs:
Inteqration of Cultures and Operations:
· Integrated former City and County utility department employees to
create a new Western Virginia Water Authority
· Integrated City and County billing systems into a single billing
system
· Integrated City and County billing staffs to provide a single
billing/customer service staff
· Integrated Carvins Cove and Spring Hollow water quality
laboratories to provide a single lab at Spring Hollow
Western Virqinia Water Authoritv Admini~trative Offices:
.. Acquired and occupied Coulter Office Building- Spring of 2005
· Consolidated administrative, finance, billing and engineering
staffs under one roof
· Convenient location for customers and created an identity for
the Authority
· Receive 175 visitors a day to conduct business
Meter Readinq Initiatives:
I
· Commitment to move from quarterly to bi-monthly reading of
residential meters
· Pilot project with contract meter readers
· Improved route efficiencies
· Goal is to provide monthly meter reading for all accounts
· Aggressive replacement of large (2" - 10") meters
· Continue implementation of automatic meter reading for all
accounts
Larqe Meter Replacement Proqram:
· 100 year old meters are gradually being replaced with much
smaller and more efficient meters
Water Pollution Control Plant:
· $50 million is 65% complete
· Increases peak capacity to handle wet weather events
· Fully operational by July 2007
I
:.>;,.':"
269
I
Inflow & Infiltration (1&1):
· Public Education Effort - tThe More you Know the Better the
Flow' started last Fall
· Aimed at getting homeowners to disconnect downspouts and
sump pumps
· Completed consent order negotiations with the Commonwealth
of Virginia
· Finalizing collection system plan due January 2007 as required
by Consent Order
· Replacing Mudlick Creek interceptor in southwest City and
County (known as the Garst Mill Project which is a $12 million
interceptor upgrade)
Capital Improvement Proqram:
I
· WVWA has increased capital spending for infrastructure
improvements from $2 million prior to FY-2005 to over $5
million projected for FY-2007
· Infrastructure improvements will ultimately result in more
effective service to customers by:
- Minimizing service interruptions due to water line breaks
- Improving water pressure and flow delivery
Reducing property damage from sewer backups
Reducing frequency of overflows from Water Pollution
Control Plant
Technoloqv:
I
· Installed treal time' flow measurement devices in sewer system,
which will help identify problems and areas for improvements
· Installed 'real time' security monitoring and operation óf remote
facilities, sends alarm back to Carvins Cove or Spring Hollow
· Developed computer models of water and sewer systems which
will assist in identifying areas needing upgrades and new
interconnections
· Website - 300 pages and 6,000 hits monthly
· Integrated City and County GIS Systems into one platform with
map overlays
· Partnered with City on work order system which integrates into
the GIS system .
· In next fiscal year, provide online viewing of. accounts and
online payment
270
Communitv:
I
· Recognized two consecutive years by United Way for effective
campaigns
· 'Letter' Sponsor for American Cancer Society's 2005 Relay for
Life
· Reached 2,500 area students with conservation programs
· Fielded teams for Valleywide clean up events
· Sponsored award for Regional Science Fair
Rate Equalization Plan:
· Year two of six-year rate equalization plan has been
implemented
· WVWA is on schedule to fully implement plan in 2010
· Converted to meter-based· billing structure (meter needs to be
sized properly)
· Initiated monthly billing for all customers
Water & Wastewater Bills:
· City Customers - had a rate increase
· County Customers - had a small rate decrease
· Statewide Average - lower average than statewide average;
sewer rate will increase slightly iri the future
I
2005 Annual Water and Wastewater Report:
· Average City of Roanoke residential water and wastewater rate·
was $29.55
· Average County of Roanoke residential water and wastewater
rate was $38.75
· Average combined water and wastewater rate for Virginia was
$41.53
Water Main Replacement Hollins Road:
· Approximately 40 miles of 12" cast iron pipe were installed in
the City of Roanoke from 1945 to 1960
· Expected service life for cast iron pipe should be 100+ years
· Due to poor manufacturing processes after WW II, break history
is greater than expected, and a 12" pipe breakage is very visible
· Sections of 12" pipe have been replaced along Orange and
Brambleton Avenues through Capital Improvement Projects
· Next project is Hollins Road
I
,.'.
~,;
..~ .:: fl
...,. ,
271
I
· Phase I ~ 4,000 lineal feet of 12" water line between Liberty
Road and Plantation Road at an estimated cost of $500,000.00
(FY-2007 ClP); paving scheduled for that area will help keep cost
down; 13 main breaks occurred in last five years
· Phase II - 5,900 lineal feet of 12" water line between Liberty
Road and Orange Avenue; five main breaks have occurred in the
last five years
· Traffic count is 7,500 vehicles per day
· Evaluating construction operations - conventional vs. trench less
. technology
Hollins Road Distribution System:
I
It was explained that the water system along Hollins Road consists
primarily ofa 24" transmission line, installed in the early 1990's
and a 12" distribution line, installed in the late 1940's/early
1950's; there are a number of smaller diameter .lines that branch
off the 12" line;·the transmission line is one of the major carriers of
water to the southeast portion of the City and County from Carvins
Cove, and serVes businesses and neighborhoods abutting Hollins
Road; the length.of the main segments is approximately two miles
from Plantation Road to Orange Avenue; the 1 2-inch distribution
main has had· a number of breaks over the past few years;. the
Water. Authority's FY-2007 Water Capital Improvement Plan has
$500,000.00 budgeted for main replacement along Hollins Road,
which is not enough to replace all of the 12" main that could cost
in excess of $2M; and a number of alternatives are being reviewed
in lieu of main replacement, including trenchless replacement
methods, but no decision has been made.
Water Supplv Plan:
· Commonwealth of Virginia passed legislation. effective
November, 2005 which requires localities to develop a water
supply plan
· Plans must be submitted within three to six years depending on
the size of the locality and whether the plan is local or regional
in nature; City Council has recommended the regional plan
· Anticipated that Roanoke Valley localities will participate in a
regional plan and the Roanoke Valley Allegheny Regional
Commission (RVARC) has agreed to coordinate development of a
water supply plan
I
272
. Modify and expand the 2002 Long Range Water Supply Plan
prepared by Black and Veatch as the basis for a regional water
supply plan (involved Roanoke City, Roanoke County, City of
Salem, the Counties of Bedford, Botetourt and Franklin, and may
involve the Towns of Rocky Mount, Boones Mill and the City of
Bedford)
I
Mr. Robertson was requested to discuss meetings with representatives of
American Electric Power with regard to re-Iicensing of the Smith Mountain Lake
Project, and efforts to ensure that development re-Iicensing provides for the use
of water upstream from Smith Mountain Lake.
Mr. Robertson stated that the 2002 Long Range Water Supply Plan
basically provides that at some point in the future, Smith Mountain Lake could
be the next locatiop when a new water supply is needed, and in approximately
2050 or 2060, there is a potential that approximately 12 million gallons of
water per day may be needed. He stated that Smith Mountain Lake will
celebrate its 40th anniversary in March, 2006, and licensing through the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) is effective for 40 years, therefore, a re-
licensing for Smith Mountain Lake will be required this year. He called attention
to instream flow monitoring downstream at Leesville, to the Kerr Reservoir and
a Roanoke Log Perch study that is currently underway; and Bedford County is
currently taking water out of Smith Mountain Lake as a public water supply, and I
the goal is to look at what will be happening in the next 40 years, with the hope
that all future studies will take into consideration a 12 million gallon per day
withdrawal. He noted that an environmental assessment with regard to the
affect on the landscape would most likely be necessary at the immediate point
of withdrawal, and it is hoped that it will not be necessary to go downstream of
Smith Mountain Lake which would save a considerable amount of time.
Chair Cutler inquired if water withdrawal in the Roanoke Valley will be
taken into consideration with regard to the re-Iicensing of Smith Mountain Lake;
whereupon, Mr. Robertson responded in the affirmative and advised that it is
important for both Bedford and Franklin Counties and the Water Authority to be
included in the study because it makes sense for the affected localities to work
together, . approximately 80 per cent of the water supply study· has been
completed, and certain items in the 2002 study are not as detailed as current
State requirements and need to be updated.
With r~spect to the Smith Mountain Lake re-licensing study, Chair Cutler
stated that it is fortunate that members of the Smith Mountain Lake Association
have recognized that emergency withdrawals for the Roanoke Valley, upstream
of Smith Mountain Lake Dam and Leesville Dam, are relatively small compared I
to the requirements on American Electric Power to maintain downstream
instream flow level on behalf of the Roanoke Log Perch and recreational
I
I
I
" <" " ~ i ."'
"!..í"¿
273
activities on the river. He added that the Smith Mountain Lake Association is
not as concerned about the need to withdraw for occasional domestic water
upstream as it is about instream flow requirements downstream from the dams,
and the Association is even more concerned about what the dams must pass
. through in order to maintain the endangered Roanoke Log Perch and the
protection of recreational activities downstream.
Reqionallnitiatives:
· Initiated quarterly meetings with the City of Salem, Town of
Vinton, and Botetourt County to discuss water and wastewater
issues; in planning stages of a joint sewer replacement project·
with the City of Salem
· Initiated meetings to discuss mutual aid for water and
wastewater· utilities during emergencies; 2004 flooding has
prompted consideration for· establishment of a state-wide
network for utilities; partnership has been set up with DEQ, the
Health Department, the Department of Emergency Management,
and various agencies that represent water and wastewater plants
in the state. It is hoped in the Summer to premiere a page on
the Department of Emergency Management's website that will
be open for utilities, speCifying examples of contracts already in
place, and contact information in the industry
· Hosted water supply planning seminars
· Hosted wastewater collection conferences around the state·
· Hosted City of Wilmington, North Carolina, and New. Hanover
County, North Carolina, to discuss creation of a regional
authority in their area
Council Member Dowe inquired if other jurisdictions have used ductile
iron water pipe long enough to determine the durability of the material;
whereupon, Mr. Robertson stated that ductile iron water pipe was used
beginning in the mid 1960's, ductile means that the pipe flexes, and the
primary problem with cast iron pipe relates to freezing and thawing and when
the earth moves, the pipe splits; and C-900 PVC pipe (thick plastic pipe) has
been used as smaller pipe over the past 25 years. He stated that more ductile
iron water pipe has been used over the past 40+ years, and the 12" pipe that
was used from the 1890's to the 1940's have had fewer problems, even at 1 00
years old, and the water pipes that have experienced the most problems due to
manufacturing issues were installed between the end of WW II and
approximately 1960.
274
Summarv:
I
· Successful integration of systems and staffs
· Improved meter reading and billing technology
· Increased funding levels for capital projects
· Adopted a business model for operations
· Open to partnerships with institutional customers and private
utilities
· Improved relations with regulatory agencies
· Developed partnerships with Smith Mountain Lake Association
· Positioning WVWA for leadership role in water and wastewater
industry; receiving calls for assistance in development of
agencies by other jurisdictions; active in the Virginia
Government Finance Officers Association
Chair Cutler called upon Bruce M. Grant, Chair, Audit Committee, to
summarize results of the first audit of the WVWA; whereupon, he stated that it
was "a clean" first audit, and the most striking fact about the Annual Financial
Report is the evaluation of capital assets which showed a gross total of over
$637 million. .
Mr. McEvoy stated that the City of Roanoke provides information I
technology infrastructure, including telephone service,· computer technology, .
internet access, radios, and serves as host for the website of the Water
Authority. He further stated that Roanoke County provides fleet service at the
County's garage, payroll and general ledger services through the Finance
Department and also acts as fiscal agent for the Authority. He called attention
to certain outsourcing to private organizations, such as check processing for
payments which is relatively inexpensive, and street paving.
Supervisor Church stated that citizens of the Roanoke Valley want to
know that they will receive consistent service at a fair price, they want the
assurance that commitments will be honored, they want to know that they will
have sufficient water to meet their needs and that water-related issues will be
addressed in a timely manner. He commended the Western Virginia Water
Authority which appears to be on the right track in· meeting the
above referenced needs.
Chair Wray stated that the long term goal of the WVWA is to provide
monthly meter reading, and 90 per cent of billing issues will be eliminated with
accurate and regular electronic meter reading.
Supervisor Altizer stated he was involved with the merger of the I
City/County water systems from the beginning, the merger was an astronomical
process that has come full scale, and is a credit to all employees of the Western
Virginia Water Authority and the leadership provided by the Water Authority's
Co-Directors.
I
I
I
,}..:,'.
,
275
Council Member McDaniel ·stated that from the point of view of the
citizens, the Water Authority has provided a much needed service and from a
regional standpoint, the entity bodes well for the entire Roanoke Valley.
Mr. Robertson and Mr. McEvoy expressed. appreciation for the support of
. Roanoke City Council and the Roanoke County Board of Supervisors.
On behalf of the City of Roanoke, Mayor Harris expressed appreciation
for the opportunity to meet with the Board of Supervisors and the Board of
Directors of the Western Virginia Water Authority.
At 1 :25 p.m., the Mayor declared the City Council meeting in recess until
1 :30 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
The Chair stated that the meeting of the Roanoke County Board of
Supervisors would be adjourned until Wednesday, March 8, 2006, at 5:15 p.m.,
fora joint meeting with the Roanoke County School Board; at the School Board
Administration Office Building, located at 5937 Cove Road, N. W., Roanoke,
Virginia.
Chair Cutler declared the meeting of the Western Virginia Water Authority
adjourned until March 15, 2006, for a Special Meeting.
At 1 :35 p.m., the Council reconvened in the City Council Chamber, will all
Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member Wishneff, Mayor
Harris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed. Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public. business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
(2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion bywhich
any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: . Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and
Mayo r H a r ri s 0000 - - on - - - 00 n___0000_ - - - - noon - - - --__ _ _ 0000 - - - - noon _ _ ____00 _ _ _ 00 00__0000 __ __ 00 0000 - - - - 00'00-6. .
NAYS: N on e-__n__._____nn______nnn__n______n_nnnnnnn____nnn_nnn_____000000____000.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
276
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-LEAGUE OF OLDER AMERICANS: The
Mayor advised that the term of office of Vickie F. Briggs as a City representative I
to the League of Older Americans Advisory Committee expired on February 28,
2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Vickie F. Briggs.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Briggs was reappointed as a City
representative to the League of Older Americans Advisory Committee, for a
term ending February 28,2007, by the follOWing vote:
FOR MS. BRIGGS: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, and Mayor Harrismnmm_mnnnnnmmnnm_mnmm_____mmmm_mn6.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: The Mayor
advised that the three year terms of office of Carl H. Kopitzke; Mary F. Monk and
James Settle as members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board will expire
on March 31, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the
vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Carl H. I
Kopitzke and James Settle.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Kopitzke and Mr. Settle were
reappointed as members of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for terms
ending March 31, 2009, by the following vote: .
FOR MR. KOPITZKE AND MR. SETTLE: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harrismmmnnm____mnmmmnmnn___m_m6.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
AIRPORT-OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the
four year term of office of Claude N. Smith as a City representative to the
Roanoke Regional Airport Commission expired March 9, 2006; whereupon, he
opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of John E. Dooley.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Dooley was appointed as a City
representative to the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, for a term ending I
March 9, 2010, by the following vote:
I
I
I
277
FOR MR. DOOLEY: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris____nu___mc_uuommcnnmunmm_mmnm_mmm_nom6.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the City residency requirement be
waived in this instance. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe
and adopted.
At 1:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, March 6, 2006, the CoUncil meeting
reconvened in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor
C. Nelson Harris presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel,
M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Mayor
C. N e Iso n H arri s _n --noon 00 -00--- -- -00-00-- - - - 0000 0000 - - noon 00 _0000__ - - - - 00 no - 00 noon - - noon - - - - 0000 - 6.
ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishrieffm-mmm-mmmm-mnmnmm 1.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: NONE.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by
one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if
discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately.
278
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-AMERICAN ELECTRIC POWER: A
communication from the City Manager recommending that Council schedule a I
public hearing for Monday, March 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter
as the matter may be heard, with regard to conveyance of certain property
rights to Appalachian Power Company, described as Official Tax Nos. 4150101 R
and 4150501 R, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and
Mayo r H arri s nn _00_000000 00 _000000_00_0000_ - - 0000_ - - 0000000000 - - 00 00000000 - - - - - 00000000 - - _0000_00000000 00 -00-6 .
NAYS: No n ennnn_n___nnnnnnnn____n_n_______n_n_n__nn_nn_nn_nnnn_n00-00000.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT: A communication from the City
Manager recommending that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday,
March 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, to consider a budget adjustment for motor fuel expenses and certain
Social Service program expenditures, was before the body:
I
It was advised that pursuant to requirements of Section 15.2-2507, Code
of Virginia (1950) as amended, localities are required to hold a public hearing
on budget adjustments which will exceed one per cent of the adopted budget,
or $500,000.00, whichever is less; and budget adjustments will be required for
motor fuel expenses and certain Social Service program expenditures.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: . Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and
Mayo r H a rri s - 00_00 -0000--- 00 00 000000000000 - - - - - 0000 - - _00___00__ 00 00 00000000 - - - _n~nnn _0000__000000__ - - - -00 -6.
NAYS: N 0 ne_nn_______n_nnnn___n____nn_nnnn___nnn_nnnnn_~---~-nn00000000___000.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE.
I
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
I
·1
1
279
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-EMERGENCY SERVICES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Four-For-Life program is funded through the
Office of Emergency Medical Services in Richmond, Virginia; each year, Roanoke
Fire-EMS receives funds from the program to purchase items needed by the
department; the Four-For-Life program, as amended in 2000, stipulates that
four additional dollars be charged and collected at the time of registration of
each passenger vehicle, pickup and panel truck; funds collected, pursuant to
Section 46.2-694, Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended, shall be used only for
emergency medical services; the law further states that the Department of
Health shall return 26 per cent of the registration fees collected to the locality
wherein such vehicle is registered, to provide funding for training of volunteer
()r salaried emergency medical service personnel of licensed, nonprofit
emergency medical service agencies, or for the purchase of necessary
equipment and supplies for EMS.
It was further advised that Roanoke Fire-EMS expected to receive
assistance from the fund in the amount of $40,000.00; Four-For-Life provided
Roanoke Fire-EMS with a total of $63,889.00; .and action by Council is needed
. to appropriate additional Four-For-Life .funds in the amount of $23,889.00, in
accordance with provisions of the program.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
increasing the revenue estimate for the Four-For-Life Program, Account No.
001-110-1234-0657. in the amount of $23,889.00, and appropriate funds in
the same amount to Four-For-Life Program, Account No. 001-520-3521-2245;
and authorize the City Manager to execute any required agreements or
documents, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
{#37322-030606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth for the Office of Emergency Medical Services Four for Life
Program, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General
Fund Appropriations, and dispensing. with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 171.)
280
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37~22-
030606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by 1
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and
Mayo r H a rr i s 00_ - noon - - _00000000_ -- - - - - _nnn~_ __0000 - - - - 00 _000000_ - - - - - - n~ 0000 00 _00_000000 __00 00 00 - - 00 -00-6 .
NAYS: Non e 000000'_ 00 - - - - - - - - 00 00 _00_ _ 00_00 _00 _h_hnnnn - - _00_0000 00 _00000000 00 - - - - - - - - 00 000000-0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
HOUSING/AUTHORITY-VALLEY VIEW MALL: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the City's Fair Housing Board plans to sponsor a
Fair Housing Fair at Valley View Mall on April 29, 2006; owners of the Mall,
CBL & Associates Management, Inc., have requested that the City execute an
agreement in order to use the Mall; the agreement contains a provision that
requires the City to agree to indemnify and hold harmless CBL and to defend
CBL in the event of personal injury and/or property damage during the City's
use of the premises; CBL has refused to delete the provision; and Council has
previously waived sovereign immunity for the event at Valley View Mall.
It was further advised that the City's Service Excellence at Work
Committee will sponsor the City's Citizen Appreciation Day at Valley View Mall
on May 6, 2006; owners of the Mall, CBL & Associates, Inc., require that the City
execute an agreement in order to use the Mall; the agreement contains
provisions that require the City to agree to indemnify and hold harmless CBL
and to defend CBL, in the event of personal injury and/or property damage
during the City's use of the premises; only Council can waive the City's
sovereign immunity and agree to such provision; and CBL has refused to delete
the provision.
1
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution
authorizing waiver of the City's sovereign immunity, and further authorizing the
City Manager to execute both agreements, to be approved as to form by the
City Attorney.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution: .
(#37323-030606) A RESOLUTION authorizing the waiver of the City's
sovereign immunity in connection with the City's use of Valley View Mall for the
Fair Housing Board's Fair Housing Fair, and autho¡'¡zing execution of an
agreement with Valley View Mall, LLC, through its agent, CBL Associates
Management, Inc., in connection with such use of Valley View Mall.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 172.)
1
1
I
1
.. I.·
I ~ . , :
281
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37323-
030606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and
Mayo r H a rri s _00_ 00 noon __noon 00 00 - - __ _u 00 _ _ _ _ 00 00 0000_ _ 00 _ _ 00 00 0000 00_0000 00 - - 000000;_ 00-0000- 00 - - - - -00_006.
NAYS: Non e 0000 - - -- _.____0000 00 - - un 00_00_ - un 0000 00 ____0000 - _ noon __ ___00_00_ - - - _00000000 - - 0000_ O.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37324-030606) A RESOLUTION authorizing the waiver of the City's
sovereign immunity in connection with the City's use of Valley View Mall for
Citizen Appreciation Day, and authorizing execution of an agreement with
Valley View Mall, LLC, through its agent, CBL Associates Management, Inc., in
connection with such use of Valley View Mall.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 173.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37324-
030606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and
Mayo r H a rri s __00 _0000_ - - 00 _00_ _00 _ __ __0000_00_ - 0000 - - 0000 00 _ - ____0000 _0000_ 00 _ _ _ _000000_ ____0000 00 - - 00__ 00 00006 .
NAYS: Non e____unnnn___nnnn_____nun______Cunn__n_u___nnn_nn_nnu___-00-00-000.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the
Financial Report for the month of January 2006.
(For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Director. of Finance advised that the January Financial Report,
summarizes the City's budget for the first seven months of the fiscal year;
General Fund revenues are up about 7.1 per cent and represents a slightly
positive variance from the adopted budget; State revenues make up about one
quarter of the City's budget and are up about 6 per cent, and the majority of
State revenues are dedicated to speCific or mandated programs. He stated that
the expenditure side of the budget is on track with the adopted budget.
282
Council Member Cutler stated that the Civic Facilities Fund appears to be
down when comparing fiscal year 2006 to fiscal year 2005, and inquired if the
difference can be attributed to a specific reason.
1
The Director of Finance advised that Civic Center revenues are off
approximately $400,000.00 on a year to date basis, and at this time in fiscal
year 2005, the Civic Center account had just over $1,600,000.00 in revenue,
compared to about $1,200,000.00 in fiscal year 2006. He explained that the
Civic Center administers financial reporting follOWing each event; once the
event has been closed, funds flow through the City's accounting system; the
Civic Center has been running behind all year in comparison to the previous
fiscal year, due to a smaller number of actual events and less attendance;
However, he added that in recent months, there has been a high level of activity
at the Civic Center with two major concerts and after the books are closed and
funds are channeled through the City's accounting system, the numbers will
improve.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the status of the new Exhibit Hall
presently under construction at the Roanoke Civic Center.
The City Manager advised that the project is ahead of schedule and
should be completed in February 2007. She stated that construction involves a
45,000 square foot addition of Exhibit Hall space, as well as a new kitchen area
that will serve not only the additional Exhibit Hall space, but other events that
will bring additional revenue to the City; and the City is currently booking
events in the year 2008.
I
There being no further questions or discussion, and without objection by
Council, the Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of January
2006 would be received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: Ordinance No. 37316 appropriating funds for facility
maintenance, school based furniture, and construction of a football stadium to
be located on the'Patrick Henry High School Football campus, having previously
been before the Council for its first reading on Tuesday, February 21 , 2006,
read and adopted on its first reading and laid over, was again before the body,
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offering the following for its second reading and final I
adoption:
I
1
I
283
(#37316-030606) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the 2005-
06 Capital Maintenance and Equipment Replacement Program and Patrick Henry
High School Stadium Project, amending and reordaining certain sections of the
2005-2006 General, Capital Projects, School, School Capital Projects, and School
Food Services Funds Appropriations.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 174.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37316-
030606. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor
H arri s --- _nn_ ~- 00 00 - - n_nn_n_ _ _ _000000_'_ 00_0000 _ _ 00 _00___00 noon 00 n_n~__ _ 00 ___00_ _ _ noon _ _ 00_0000_ - - 0000 5 .
NAYS: Council Member Leaonmnnmn__mnmmnnn______monnnonn__mm_n 1.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE. MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
PARKING FACILITIES: Council Member Cutler complimented the City
Manager and City staff on the renaming of City parking facilities, as more ·fully
described in a communication from the City Manager under date of March 2,
2006.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: The Mayor read the
following House of Delegates and concurred in by the Senate, Joint Resolution
No. 90 which was adopted on January 11, 2006, recognizing the outstanding
service of Council Member M. Rupert Cutler to the citizens of the City of
Roanoke.
WHEREAS, Dr. M. Rupert Cutler, respected citizen and city council
member since 2002, is recognized for his outstanding service to
the City of Roanoke; and
WHEREAS, a native of Detroit, Michigan, Rupert Cutler earned an
undergraduate degree in wildlife management from the University
of Michigan and master's and doctoral degrees from the
Department of Resource Development of Michigan State University;
and
284
WHEREAS, Rupert Cutler was an editor for Virginia Wildlife and
National Wildlife and for the magazines of the Virginia Game
Department and served as the assistant director of The Wilderness
Society, director of the Population-Environment Balance, vice
president of the National Audubon Society and president of
Defenders of Wildlife; and
I
WHEREAS, because of his vast knowledge of natural resources and
environmental issues, Rupert Cutler was appointed by President
Jimmy Carter to serve as the assistant secretary of agriculture for
conservation, research, and education in 1977 and he served as a
policy director for the United States Forest Service, Soil
Conservation Service, and various agencies of the Department of
Agriculture until 1980; and
WHEREAS, Rupert Cutler has generously given of his time and
talents on numerous civic organizations and advisory boards,
including the director of Virginia's Explore Park and founding
. director of the Western Virginia Land Trust, chairman of the board
of the Western Virginia Water Authority, trustee of the Virginia
Outdoors Foundation, president of the Kiwanis Club of Roanoke,
and as a member of the board of Opera Roanoke; and
WHEREAS, Rupert Cutler has been a valuable member of the
Roanoke City Council from 2002 to 2006; and has contributed
immensely to enhancing the environment and the quality of life for
all of the residents of Roanoke; now, therefore, be it
I
RESOLVED by the House of Delegates, the Senate concurring, that
the General Assembly commend Dr. M. Rupert Cutler on his many
achievements; and, be it
RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Clerk of the House of Delegates
prepare a copy of this resolution for presentation to Dr. M. Rupert
Cutler as an expression of the General Assembly's gratitude for his
outstanding service and commitment to the citizens of the City of
Roanoke.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
I
I
1
1
285
POLICE DEPARTMENT: Mr. Shaheed Omar, 1215 Loudon Avenue, N. W.,
expressed concern with regard to alleged police brutality and excessive force
by the Police Department. He called attention to a recent incident in the City of
Roanoke· involving a veteran police officer who allegedly shot a citizen in the
line of duty, and stated that the police officer in question has a reputation of
using excessive force while carrying out his law enforcement responsibilities.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
COUNCIL: The City Manager expressed appreciation for the Council's
participation in the Friday, March 3, 2006, annual Financial Planning Session.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting
adjourned at 2:25 p.m.
APPROVED
A7\ '-'õ I ¡J ~
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
CJ1td~
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor
286
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
March 20, 2006
2:00 p.m.
I
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
March 20, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City
Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to
Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of
Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, and pursuant to Resolution No.3 7109-070505 adopted by the Council
on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel, BrianJ, Wishneff, M. Rupert
Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, and Mayor
C. N e I son H arri s _n_nn_n_mnnnm______m_m_nnmnn_______nnmn______nnn_nmn__n_-m_n7 .
ABSENT: None_u_n_ooonn____n_nnnnnnnm___u_nnnnnm_n____nnooonn_nnn__-ooomO.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. 1
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Harris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
DECEASED PERSONS: Council Member Cutler offered the following
resolution memorializing the late Harold F. "Harry" Burnup, husband of Linda F.
Wyatt, former Council Member, who passed away on Sunday, February 26, 2006:
(#37325-032006) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Harold Franklin
Burnup, Jr., husband of former City Council Member Linda F. Wyatt.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 176.)
1
1
1
I
.":."
..'
.".,.
.' .
':.~~' ".
,
287
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37325-
032006. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
an d Mayo r Harri S______m_m____n__u__mmm__m.n.___mmm___m_m_____________mm____m__un7 .
NAYS: Non e 00---00- 000 - __00____00_ un 000 - 000 --000000------ 00000__00 ___nmm__m_n_mmmmmO.
The Mayor called for a moment of silence in memory of Mr. Burnup and
presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced resolution to his wife, Ms.
Wyatt.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one
motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was
desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. He called specific attention to three requests for Closed Session to
discuss vacancies on certain Council appointed boards and commissions; and two
matters with regard to disposition of publicly-owned property, where discussion in
open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or negotiating
strategy of the public body. .
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday,
February 6, 2006, were before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading ofthe minutes be dispensed
with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by
Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
an d Mayo r Harri sm_mm____nmooon____u___mm_____m__m__m____mmnmn__m_ nm____m_____7 .
NAYS: Non e__m__m__mm___________n_____u.n _mmm__m__ooo______n_________mmmmm__O.
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting
that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on certain
authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council, pursuant
to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(I), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
288
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the Mayor's request as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted
by the following vote:
I
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harrisnm_mnu___mnn_mmmnh_nn__mnnmn_"m___nmnnmn_mn_hnn_mn 7.
NtI'(Si: NClr1E!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, wherE! discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-
3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City
Manager as abovE!described. The mCltion was seconded by Council Member Dowe
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harri smn_m_mmn__n_.__m_:mmmm_mm_m_____m_nmmnnmm___nm_n_____7 .
NtI'(Si: NClr1E!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------(). 11II
AUDIT COMMITTEE: Minutes of a meeting of the Audit Committee which
was held on Monday, December 19, 2005, were before Council.
The following items were considered by the Audit Committee:
· FINANCIAL KPMG AUDIT REPORTS - JUNE 30, 2005:
. Report to the Audit Committee of City Council
· Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and Auditors' Opinion
· Management Letter - Management Response
. Management Response
· Pension Plan Report to the Board of Trustees
· Pension Plan - Comprehensive Annual Financial Report
1
1
I
I
. ., '. d. .' . .!" ," \ '.~. '.'!"
. : .1
. ',' "
¡.
289
." .;.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the minutes be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harrisum__n_muumnmumuum_u_mmmmu___mmmuu___mnuuu__n_nmn 7.
Nt\'(S): NCllle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining
position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to Section 2.2-
3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the City
Manager as abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harri smm____mmuuum____n_____m_mumm______nu_mmm_uu____mm_u__mm 7 .
NAYS: None_mu_______umm_mmmn_____nu_mmm_u_m_u_n_nmmm____mmmm000.
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BONDS/BOND ISSUES-ARMORY /STADIUM-L1BRARIES: A communication from
Mayor C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council schedule a public hearing for
Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard to appropriate certain remaining bond funds into a capital account for the
purpose of renovating or constructing new library facilities in the City, was before
the body.
290
The Mayor advised that with the decision of Council to construct stadia at I
the City's two high schools ($4.1 million has been appropriated for the stadium at
Patrick Henry High School and $4.1 million is reserved for a stadium at William
Fleming High School), $5,590,000.00 in bond funds remain in the
stadium/amphitheater account which can be reallocated to a capital account for
renovation or construction of new library facilities; and the Code of Virginia
requires a public hearing whenever excess funds are reallocated. The Mayor asked
that Council act favorably on the request to schedule a public hearing.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor and that a publiC hearing be held on Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m.,
or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard. The motion was seconded by
Council Member McDaniel.
Joyce Waugh, Vice President, Public Policy, Roanoke Regional Chamber of
Commerce, advised that the 1,400 members of the Chamber of Commerce
support the recommendation outlined in the Roanoke Library Comprehensive
Study and encourage action on the first phase of the library study.
She advised that the Library Study makes several points:
·
Transactions, program attendance, and collection turnover rates
are declining.
I
· Attention must be made to correct striking deficiencies, including
customer service (retail model) and creating a welcoming
atmosphere.
· Libraries are an integral part of their communities.
· To have top tier libraries, investments are needed.
· Quality of life issues continue to weigh more heavily in the decision-
making process of employers and employees.
Ms. Waugh stated that the Roanoke Valley Regional Chamber of Commerce
supports a regional library system, and although it does not appear that this will
happen in the near future, investments in the Roanoke City Library system will
enhance the entire valley-wide system; therefore, the Chamber of Commerce
supports these investments.
I
1
I
I
", ".:"
,., .
~. ,.;. ~
.,::,."
291
The above referenced motion was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, and Mayor
Hélrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------5.
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff nnnnnn_mmm__nnm_umnmmm_2.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Phillip F. Sparks, Executive Director, Roanoke
Valley Economic Development Partnership, presented the 2005 Annual Budget.
Mr. Sparks advised that the Partnership's industrial park brochure was
updated to feature industrial parks throughout the nine jurisdictions served by the
Economic Development Partnership, by showing signs leading into the entrance of
the park, or buildings and/or properties within the park, which created a better
brochure for clients served by the Partnership; and City propertieswere posted on
the Partnership's website, the Commonwealth of Virginia's website, élnd Area
Development Magazine's website, resulting in 189 hits alone on eight different
properties located in the City of Roanoke on the Area Development Magazine
website. He added that Carilion Biomedical Institute and City of Roanoke
biomedical efforts were featured in Expansion Magazine articles, and media writers
were invited to tour the greater region in the hopes that articles will be included in
néltional publications with regard to the Roanoke Valley; and numerous prospects
have visited the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology where the City
created level sites at the end of the industrial park with utilities and a roadway to
help promote the site. He advised that in 2004-2005, the Economic Development
Partnership worked on $77.2 million in new announced investments, WélS
instrumental in establishing 322 new jobs, participélted in three local business
expansions and one new business; and since inception ofthe Partnership in 1983,
$1 billion in new investments has been announced, including direct investments in
equipment élnd bUildings.
In other news, Mr. Sparks stated that Alleghélny County and the Town of
Covington have joined the Partnership as voting members; initiéllly, the Partnership
stélrted out with five governments, two were added in 1991-92, followed by an
additional two localities; the Partnership, along with the City of Roanoke and
Roanoke County and their respective Economic Development Departments were
recognized élS one of the first 30 Partnerships to be certified by the International -
Economic Development Council; approximately 18,000 economic development
organizations in the United States currently compete for approximately 1,000
projects; and the Roanoke Valley is ranked near the top in Expansion magazine
cities. He called attention to the Partnership's strong' marketing program, with
approximately $80,000.00 annuéllly invested in advertising, the primary purpose of
which is to direct persons to the Partnership's website; staff of the. Economic
Development Partnership continues to participate in trade shows and in marketing
missions with potential businesses; and a Targeted Industry Sector Campaign was
implemented this year in which Partnership staff looks at companies that have
292
made capital investments, or engaged in land acquIsitIOns, or hired a new
President, etc., and arranges telephone conference calls with those companies to I
determine their level of interest in the Roanoke Valley. He stated that a
measurable goal in 2006 with regard to public relations included 34 published
articles, three articles concerning the greater Roanoke region were published in
national publications, 36 advertisements were included in various· publications,
56,000 website hits involving over 100,000 website pages, eight trade shows were
worked, seven marketing missions were conducted, 12 conference calls were
placed, 31 editorial placements, and 31 prospect files were opened. He advised
that proposals have been submitted to ten prospective businesses on behalf of
various governments throughout the Roanoke Valley region, with potential jobs
ranging from 964 to 1,284 and a potential investment of from $102 million to
$167 million, and 13 businesses are actively considering the greater Roanoke
Valley region, which could generate 1,154 to 1,409 jobs, or a potential investment
of $146 to $160 million.
When talking with potential businesses, Council Member Dowe inquired as
to what they perceive to be Roanoke's major challenges; whereupon, Mr. Sparks
advised that the major challenges are a trainable work force and the lack of
available land.
Mr. Sparks was asked to define "trainable workforce"; whereupon, he advised
that "trainable workforce" includes the basic skills of reading, writing, I
mathematics, personal hygiene, communications, etc.
Question was raised with regard to what Roanoke's school system and the
Western Virginia Workforce Development Board is doing to improve basic skills to
achieve a trainable workforce.
The City Manager advised that one of the specific reasons that County
Administrators and City Managers of the various Roanoke Valley jurisdictions were
asked to serve in the Chief Local Elected Officials (CLEO) role on the Workforce
Development Board was to bring more work force related issues to bear on
economic development and regional initiatives, and meetings of CLEO are
scheduled in conjunction with Regional Economic Development Partnership
meetings. She called attention to concerns that many of the basics of education
are not taught as a part of the school curriculum, therefore, the City attempts to
determine training needs in advance of an intended expansion of a business, by
identifying potential employees in advance of hiring and training those persons in
the basic skills so that by the time jobs are actually posted, employees are
prepared to enter the workforce. She added that the Roanoke Valley's
unemployment rate is somewhat of a draw back because those persons who are
employable are already in the work force, and there is an ongoing effort to include
community colleges.
1
I
1
I
. ":, ".' ", ~
:~1. ,~".:
~,~:W~
293
Council Member Cutler inquired about the Regional Industrial Park in
Pulaski, County; whereupon, Mr. Sparks advised that a group of 1 5 governments
throughout Southwestern Virginia came together to form Virginia's First Industrial
Facility Authority, in order to incur debt and to receive the benefits of potential
businesses.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that Commerce Park in Pulaski County is the
only industrial park in the Commonwealth of Virginia where governments share
revenues by contract; and the industrial park allows counties to have other
localities provide funds to create infrastructure that some counties could not
otherwise afford, and then allows the individual communities to draw funds based
on their investment in the industrial park.
Secondly, he stated that there is an unfavorable work force development
situation in the entire Commonwealth of Virginia, with various organizations
engaging in work force development at a cost of $8.5 million, the organizations
rarely work together and some teach skills that are no longer applicable to jobs
that are being performed in the region, therefore, it is an issue that needs to be
addressed if the Regional Partnership is to succeed. He stated that available land
and work force skills are considered to be two of the most important factors when
potential businesses look at an area as a place to locate and the greater Roanoke
region is not as prepared as it needs to be. He added that the Roanoke Valley's
. low unemployment rate prevents many potential businesses from looking at the
region because there is a perception that there is no available work force. He
stated that there should be one Metropolitan Statistical Area instead of three,
which would provide a better opportunity for the Regional Economic Development
Partnership to sell the greater region.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation for the work of the Roanoke
Valley Economic Development Partnership arid adVised that an annual budget of
$870,000.00 is not sufficient to market the greater Roanoke region and to
adequately address the creation of more jobs.
Council Member Wishneff spoke in· support of upgrading the Regional
Partnership's website, which is a tool that is widely used by site location
consultants throughout the country; whereupon, Mr. Sparks advised that funds for·
a website upgrade will be included in the 2007 fiscal year budget.
Mr. Sparks expressed appreciation to the City Manager for her support of
the Roanoke Valley Economic Development Partnership.
294
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
I
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the plight of homeless individuals and families has
been at the forefront of the community's attention for more than a decade; the
number of homeless persons relying on local services has increased; and the 2005
winter survey conducted by the Roanoke Valley Task Force on Homelessness
indicated that the nightly average of homeless persons during the survey period
was 397.
It was further advised that based on Roanoke's 2005 Continuum of Care
application, the Roanoke Homeless Assistance Team (UHAT") Renewal was awarded
a supportive services only grant totaling $137,669.00 for a one year period
beginning February 1 , 2006; and a local cash match of $34,417.00 is required, for
a total program budget of $172,086.00. .
It was explained that the HAT office is located at 310 Campbell Avenue,
S. W., and provides for convenient access to the program; HAT staff maintains
office hours from 8:00 a.m. until 12 noon, after which time street outreach is
conducted to shelters and other places not designed for human habitation; and
staff provides limited case management, including agency referrals, security
deposits, food, transportation and prescription assistance.
I
It was stated that a local cash match of $34,417.00 is required for
acceptance of the grant; and funds are available from Local Cash Match Funding
for Grants, Account No. 035-300-9700-5415.
The City Manager recommended that Council take the following actions:
. Authorize the City Manager to accept the Roanoke Homeless
Assistance Team Renewal Grant Award, in the amount of
$137,669.00, from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development and execute the required grant documents on behalf of
the City;
1
I
I
1
'."
. l'\'i
.':-." <
295
.
Authorize the City Manager to execute documents associated with
implementation of grant renewal;
. Adopt a budget ordinance to establish a revenue estimate in the
amount of $137,669.00, transfer funds in the amount of $34,417.00
from 'Local Cašh Match Funding for Grants, Account No. 035-300-
9700-5415, and appropriate funds totaling $172,086.00 to
expenditure accounts to be established by the Director of Finance in
the Grant fund.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37327-032006) ,AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Homeless
Assistance Team Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 200S-
2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title
of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 177.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37326-
032006. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harrismmnnmmn__nm___nmmm_"mmm__m_______u_mnnnmn_mnnmn_----7.
NtI,(5i: NCll1e-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37327-032006) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of the Roanoke
Homeless Assistance Team Renewal Grant . Award from the United States
Department of Housing and Urban Development to provide outreach and limited
case management services to the homeless; and authorizing the execution of the
necessarý documents.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 178.)
296
Vice-Mayor Fiztpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37327-
032006. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
I
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayo r H arri s_n_nnn__m_n__n_____nnnnnn_nn_n___nnnnnnnn__h_nn_nnn__mnnm 7 .
. . NAYS: None_nuuh__n_n_nnnnn_n_____nn_nn_unu__nn___m_nm_mmnh___nnnnnO
BUDGET-HOUSING/ AUTHORITY-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) and the City of Roanoke entered into the Shelter Plus Care
(SPC) agreement in 1995 for a five year grant period; and in December 2000, the
agreement was extended for an additional five year period.
. It was further advised that permanent supportive housing continues to be
identified as a top priority for the Blue Ridge Continuum of Care and the Roanoke
Regional Task Force on Homelessness; the program provides rental assistance and
supportive services to 21 disabled, homeless individuals and their families;
disabilities are defined as serious mental illness, chronic substance abuse, AIDS or
related diseases and physical disabilities; and the City of Roanoke and the·
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority worked cooperatively with eight I
local community agencies to develop and submit a proposal for funding. .
It was explained that a Shelter Plus Care grant allocation of $136,716.00
was awarded to the City of Roanoke for a one year period; and a local in-kind
match of supportive services is required and has been committed to by the
following agencies: Salem Department of Veterans Affairs Medical Center, City of
Roanoke Department of Social Services, Total Action Against Poverty, Blue Ridge
Independent Living Center, Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, City of Roanoke
Health Department, East-Hornback Services (EHS) and the Roanoke Aids Project.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept the
Shelter Plus Care Renewal Grant Award, in the amount of $1 36,716.00, from the
U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and to execute the required
grant documents on behalf of the City; and that Council adopt a budget ordinance
to establish a revenue estimate, in the amount of $1 36,716.00, and appropriate
funding in the same amount to an account to be established by the Director of
Finance in the Grant Fund.
I
I
1
I
. '..1
~~,~i..:".
297
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37328-032006) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the United
States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the Shelter Plus Care
Grant, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 179.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37328-
032006. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harrism_____uuu_mmm_m_____nmmm_mnuum_____unmmmumuu_nn_u__m 7.
NAYS: Nonemum__nm_n_unmmmn_mu_____m'u_uunmmumm_________mm_m_---0.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37329-032006) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of the Shelter Plus
Care Grant Award from the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
in the amount of $1 36,716.00 fora. one-year period, to provide rental assistance
and supportive services to disabled homeless individuals; and authorizing the
execution of the necessary documents.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 180.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37329-
032006. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harrisunm-~m--__nn----m-nummmm-u-mmm-n-uunmm-------nmnmmoon 7.
N)\,(Si: NOlle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
298
BUDGET-GRANTS-YOUTH-JUVENILE CORRECTIONAL FACILITIES: The City 1
Manager submitted a communication advising that the Department of Criminal
Justice Services notified the City of Roanoke and Roanoke County of an allocation
of funds under the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program UABG); an
allocation of $40,581.00 in Federal funds was awarded jointly to the two
jurisdictions; and ajoint local match of $4,509.00 is required.
It was further advised that the allocation formula provides for $28,339.00
Federal and $3,149.00 cash match from the City of Roanoke and $12,242.00
Federal and $1,360.00 cash match from Roanoke County; .staff from both
jurisdictions have met and developed program proposals for use of the funding;
Roanoke County will provide a substance abuse intervention education program
through the schools; the City of Roanoke, in collaboration with the Boys and Girls
Club and Total Action Against Poverty, will provide services to students
suspended, or otherwise absent from school during the day; TAP-Project Recovery
will help adjudicated youth avoid the negative risks and unproductive lifestyles
that often correlate with dropping out of school; funding for the City's match of
$3,149.00 is available in Account No. 001-630-1270-2010, Human Services
Support; and the City of Roanoke will serve as fiscal agent for the funds.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to accept the
$40,581.00 JABG grant allocated to the City of Roanoke for $28,339.00 and to 1
Roanoke County for $12,242.00 and execute an agreement with the Department
of Criminal Justice Services for said funds; that Council adopt a budget ordinance
establishing revenue estimates totaling $45,090.00; and appropriate funds in the
same amount to an expenditure account to be established by the Director of
Finance in the Grant Fund and transfer $3,149.00 from Human Services Support,
Account No. 001-630-1270-2010, to the Grant Fund account.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37330-032006) AN ORDINANCE. to appropriate local match funding and
funding from the Commonwealth of Virginia Department of Criminal Justice
Services for the Juvenile Accountability Block Grant Program, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General and Grant Funds
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page .181.)
1
I
1
1
"~" .: ; "'. -: :.' ....~;....; j. ~
. . .."~;
~(: ,';",(
~':': :~: \: '.
299
· Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37330-032006.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
Council Member Wishneff inquired if school age children who are observed
off campus during· school hours are questioned by the Police Department;
whereupon, the City Manager advised that she would respond to the question later
during the meeting. (See page 303 for the City Manager's response.)
Ordinance No. 37328-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
. AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayor Harrisu__mm_:_n_m_n__n__umm_mmm_____m_mmmm·_nn__m_n_nnnnmnm 7..
NAYS: No nem_mmmmnmn____mmmmnn_n___n_nn_mm__mmnmooo_______m_mnO. .
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37331-032006) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of a Juvenile
Accountability Block Grant from the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice
Services on behalf of the City, and authorizing execution of any and all necessary
documents to comply with the terms and conditions of the grant and applicable
laws, regulations, and requirements pertaining thereto.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 182.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37331-
032006. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayo r Harri s__nun_nm__nnnnnmm_nmnn_m_____m_mmmmnmnmmm__nn_n_____7 .
NAYS: Non en_mooo_n_nn_ooo_mm__mn_m mmnmm_____;__ooo_______'n__ooom__mmnmO.
300
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
I
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
appropriation of $41,278.00 for the Learn and Serve K-12 Virginia program, to
provide hands-on education and career development for students at William
Fleming High School and Taylor Learning Academy, said continuing program to be
100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds, was before Council.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37332-032006) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Federal
Government for the Learn and Serve K-12 Virginia program, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 School Fund Appropriations and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 183.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37332- I
032006. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
an d Mayo r Harri S__mm_nnmnnmmm_mn_nm___n_nn__mnmnm_moo___n_mnn:_nmn_n 7 .
NAYS: Non e _____m_nnn_mnoon 000 mn_h_nnn____oooooonnn mmnm__n_._____ooon_____oooooO.
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting appropriation of $3,370.00 from the School Food Services
Unappropriated Fund Balance to fund school-based furniture, and the remaining
$100,000.00 balance of the School Food Services Unappropriated Fund Balance
should be transferred to reserves for Workers' Compensation in the School
Operating Fund ($50,000.00) and the School Food Services Fund ($50,000.00), was
before Council.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
I
1
I
I
.,
.'
;.-,:,..:
301
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37333-032006) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the School
Food Services Fund. Unappropriated Fund Balance, amending and reordaining
certain sections of the 2005-2006 School and School Food Services Funds
Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 184.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37333-
032006. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler;
Council Member Cutler spoke in support of joint purchasing by the Roanoke
City School System and the City of Roanoke, in order to take advantage of
economies of scale associated with joint purchasing.
Ordinance No. 37333-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea
and Mayo r H arri s ______m____mm_ _'.n____nn_nn_m_m_________.m_n__m__m_______ m-.----n----------7 .
NAYS: Non e m______ 00 --- mmno -0000----------- mm_________________nnm__mm______________:___O.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CELEBRATIONS: Council Member Cutler
congratulated organizers of the St. Patrick's Day Parade, which was held on
Saturday, March 18, 2006.
302
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT: Council Member Cutler complimented
Greene Memorial United Methodist Church on the SINFONIA, Music of Johann
Sebastian Bach, featuring Dr. Joan Lippincott, organist with The New York Bach
Ensemble, which was held on Sunday, March 19, 2006.
1
SPORTS ACTIVITIES: Council Member Dowe advised that over the next two
weeks, the National Basketball Association (NBA) will make certain decisions with
regard to the Roanoke Valley and the future of the Roanoke Dazzle basketball
team; therefore, he asked that the citizens of .Roanoke support the Roanoke
Dazzle through the purchase and renewal of season tickets. He stated that if the
Roanoke area does not support existing sports teams and programs it will be
difficult to attract other potential sporting activities to the area. He advised that
Roanoke was selected by the NBA for a basketball franchise largely due to the
existing quality of life in the Roanoke Valley, and other localities throughout the
Commonwealth of Virginia who are interested in a franchise are anxiously waiting
the decision of the NBA with regard to the future of the Roanoke franchise. He
urged citizens of the Roanoke Valley to support the Roanoke Dazzle basketball
team.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-CITY EMPLOYEES: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick
commended City employees who participated in the City's Second Annual Talent
Show, which was held on Friday, March 17, 2006, in the Performing Arts Theatre at 1
the Roanoke Civic Center.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Mayor Harris commended
Council Member and Mrs. M. Rupert Cutler on the occasion of their 50th wedding
anniversary on Thursday, March 23, 2006.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
ARMORY/STADIUM-COUNClL-COMPLAINTS: Mr. John E. Kepley, 2909
Morrison Street, S. E., urged the citizens of Roanoke to read various e-mails that
were obtained through the Virginia Freedom of Information Act, which were
written by certain City Council Members and School Board Members with regard to
high school stadia, Victory Stadium, and other City related issues.
I
I
I
I
. (.....
.~':;y:.
303
He compared four specific Members of the Council to a story in the Bible
regarding two brothers, Jacob and Esau, and advised that he prays that each·
Member of the Roanoke City Council will have an encounter with the living God so
that the citizens of Roanoke will know the truth behind the individual decisions of
City Council Members.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
SCHOOLS-COUNCIL: The City Manager responded to a question raised by
Council Member Wishneff earlier in the meeting with regard to whether police
officers stop school age children who are observed on the streets during school
hours. She stated that a police officer will stop the child to ask the appropriate
questions and follow up with the School Resource Officer (SRO) at the child's
school, the SRO will return the student to school if he or she does not have
permission to leave the school campus, and if the student's explanation as to why
they are off the school campus appears to be legitimate, the police officer will not
detain the student.
CITY MARKET: The City Manager advised that March 19, 2006, marked the
first occasion that· the City Market was open· for business on a Sunday, and
encouraged citizens of Roanoke to support future Sunday shopping/activities on
the City Market.
At 3:10p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for three
Closed Sessions.
At 4:05 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding.
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOTEL ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER:
The Mayor advised that the four year term of office of Darlene L. Burcham as a
Commissioner of The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission, will expire
on April 12, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the
vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Darlene L.
Burcham.
304
There being no further nominations, Ms. Burcham was reappointed as a
Commissioner of The Hotel Roanoke Conference Center Commission, for a term
ending April 12,2010, by the following vote:
FOR MS. BURCHAM: Council Members McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris_____m_mmu_hnm_::_m:u:mum°:u_mumm____mm_7.
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor advised
that the four year term of office ofTuan Reynolds as a member ofthe Fair Housing
Board will expire on March 31, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for
nominations to fill the vacancy. . .
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Juan Reynolds.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Reynolds was reappointed as a
member of the Fair Housing Board, for a term ending March 31, 2009, by the
following vote:
FOR MR. REYNOLDS: Council Members McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harrisn____mmmn_mm_m:_mmmmmunummm_m_mm7.
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: . The Mayor
advised that the four year term of office of Mary F. Monkas a member of the Parks
and Recreation Advisory Board will expire on March 31, 2006; whereupon, he
opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Mary F. Monk.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Monk was reappointed as a
member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending March 31,
2009, by the following vote:
FOR MS. MONK: Council Members McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler,. Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris_mmmnmu___nunnmn:_mumum_~__mmmmn_n_m7.
1
I
I
1
1
I
;.....
305
OATHS OF OFFICE-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised
that there is a vacancy on the Human Services Advisory Board, for a term ending
November 30, 2008, due to the passing of Corinne B. Gott; whereupon, he opened
the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Quentin J. White.
There being no further nominations, Mr. White was appointed as a member
of the Human Services Advisory Board to fill the unexpired term of Corinne B.
Gott, deceased, ending November 30, 2008, by the following vote:
FOR MR. WHITE: Council Members. McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris---nmnmmm____m__oom_m______oo__moommmoo_oon_n7..
At 4: 10 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building.
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, March 20, 2006, the Council meeting reconvened
in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris
presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Brenda L. McDaniel; Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert.
Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea and Mayor
C. N e Iso n Harri sooun____ oonoonnnooooooooooo__mn_mooooooooooooon__c__uo___ncoooooooooo_m___mm 7.
A BS E NT: -00 m - oooooonooo_ooo______n____mnooooooooooooooo____oooo____mnn moo mm___nnn______O.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag ofthe United States of America was led
by Cub Scout Pack #2, Raleigh Court Presbyterian Church.
306
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: NONE.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, March 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the request of Carilion Medical Center, CHS, Inc., and B & B
Holdings, LLC, to establish a Comprehensive Sign Overlay District to properties in
or near the Reserve Avenue, S. W. area, more specifically identified as Official Tax
Nos. 1032203, 1032209, 1032208, 1032207, 1032106, 1032005, 1032002,
1032001,1031902,1032201,1032105,1032104, 1032103, 1032102, 1032101
and 1032006, such District to include regulations pertaining to size, location,
height, materials, landscaping, text, color, calculation of sign area, and
illumination of certain proposed signs on the subject property, the matter was
before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Wednesday March 8, 2006, and Wednesday, March 15, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that at its
meeting on December 20, 2004, Council rezoned the subject properties from HM, 1
Heavy Manufacturing District, and C-l, Office District, to INPUD, Institutional
Planned Unit Development District; and the petitioner now requests that the City
establish a Comprehensive Sign Overlay District.
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the
request, and advised that the Planning Commission finds that the proposed
Riverside Center Comprehensive Sign Overlay District is consistent with design
guidelines of the Redevelopment Plan of the South Jefferson Redevelopment Area,
is compatible with Vision 2001-2020, and fulfills Comprehensive Sign Overlay
District Standards.
Council Member Dowe offered the follOWing ordinance:
(#37334-032006) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-1 00, Code ofthe City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke,
Virginia, dated December 5,2005, as amended, to establish a comprehensive sign
overlay district within the City of Roanoke to be known as the Riverside Center
Comprehensive Sign Overlay District; and dispensing with the second reading by
title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 186.)
I
I
1
I
.,¡,; ....
. ,
.'
: ....
,';;ï':I1-
307
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37334-
032006. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
Robert P. Mannetta, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the
request of his clients.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the request. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37334-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
and Mayo r Harri s __________nm________umnm__________n_____:m__m______.__n_c__mm___nnmn_m_7 .
Nt\'{S: NCltlE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Cl.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, March 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the request of Crawford Development Company, LLC, to repeal and
replace' proffered conditions on property located at 3806 Thirlane Road, N. W.,
Official Tax No. 6520105, such new proffers relating to the design and materials
of structures proposed to be built on the subject property, proposed possible uses
to be placed on the property, and proposed vegetative buffer for the subject
property, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published itl The Roanoke
Times on Wednesday, March 8, 2006, and Wednesday, March 15, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that at its
meeting on October 2, 2000, pursuant to Ordinance No.3 5071-100200, Council
rezoned the subject property from RA, Residential-Agricultural District, to LM,
Light Manufacturing District, with certain proffered conditions; pursuant to
Ordinance No. 37025-041805 adopted by the Council on April 18, 2005, Council
amended proffered conditions to extend the timeframe in which the petitioner was
required to obtain permanent Certificates of Occupancy; and on December 5,
2005, Council rezoned the property fromLM, Light Manufacturing District, to I-L,
Light Industrial District, as part of a comprehensive rezoning of the City; however,
existing proffered conditions remained in force.
308
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the 1
Second Amended Petition to Amend Proffered Conditions, which is consistent with
the Comprehensive Plan and uses permitted in the 1-1, Light Industrial District.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37335-032006) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-1 00, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke,
Virginia, dated December 5, 2005, as amended, by amending the conditions'
presently binding upon certain property conditionally zoned 1-1, Light Industrial
District; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 188.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7335-032006.
The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
George I. Vogel, III, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the
request of his client.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the request. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
1
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37335-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r Harri s_mnmnnmnnm_h_nnnn_n_nnnnnn______mnnmn_____nh______________n___ 7 .
NAYS: Non e_m__oon_____ _n___oooo________mmn._ mm______oo_m__m________oo__________mm____O.
FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL-CITY PROPERTY-APPALACHIAN POWER
COMPANY-: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, March 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the proposal of the City of Roanoke to
convey a 40-foot by 41 O-foot wide easement to Appalachian Power Company
across City-owned property located adjacent to Riverview Boulevard and Arbor
Avenue, S. E., for the purpose of relocating and installing new facilities, in
connection with the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project, the matter was before
the body.
1
I
I
I
309
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 10, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Appalachian
Power Company has requested a variable width easement approximately 40' x
410' across City-owned property, identified as Official Tax Nos. 4150101 Rand
4150501 R, which is located along the Roanoke River near the intersection of
Willow Street and Riverview Boulevard; the easement is needed to relocate an
existing overhead power line and related facilities; and facilities are being
relocated in connection with the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the
appropriate documents granting an above-ground utility easement as
abovedescribed to Appalachian Power Company, subject to approval as to form by
the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37336-032006) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the conveyance of an
easement of an approximate width of 40 feet and an approximate length of 41 0 .
feet across City-owned property identified by Official Tax Map Nos. 4150101 Rand
4150501 R, located adjacent to Riverview Boulevard, S. E., and Arbor Avenue, S. E.,
. to Appalachian Power Company, to relocate and install new facilities, in connection
with the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project, upon certain terms and
conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 190.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37336-032006.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the matter. There being none, he declared .the public hearing
closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37336-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
and Mayor Harrismumnmnnmn_nnmmmmm____n_________nmmmm_mnmnmnmmm, 7.
N)\'(S: NCllle-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
310
BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-FLEET MANAGEMENT FUND: Pursuant to
instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, March 20, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the proposal of the City of Roanoke to adjust the aggregate amount of
the City's Fiscal Year 2005-2006 General Fund budget, in connection with
appropriation of additional funds for Social Service/Human Service programs, not
to exceed $3,100,000.00; and a proposal to adjust the aggregate amount ofthe
City's Fiscal Year 2005-2006 Fleet Management Fund budget, in connection with
appropriation of additional funds for Motor Fuels and Vehicle Parts/Supplies, not
to exceed $500,000.00, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Saturday, March 11, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Department
of Social Services has experienced an increase in demand for the following services
over the past year: Fuel Assistance, Emergency Assistance for Needy Families,
Auxiliary Grant, General Relief, Refugee Resettlement, Foster Care, Special Needs
Adoption, Adoption Incentive, Respite Services, Subsidized Adoption, Daycare
Services, and Purchased Services; some of the programs are mandated by the
State; and Fuel Assistance, Auxiliary Grant, General Relief, and Daycare Services
programs require local funds.
It was further advised that the Comprehensive Services Act (CSA), which was
established in 1993, provides out-of-home services to troubled and at-risk youth
and their families through a collaborative system of State and local agencies,
parents, and private sector providers; services include mandated foster care,
certain special education services, and foster care prevention; and CSA also
provides services to certain targeted non-mandated populations.
It was explained that Department of Social Services expenditures are
projected at $10,045,059.00 for the following programs: Fuel Assistance,
Emergency Assistance, Auxiliary Grant, General Relief, Refugee Resettlement,
Foster Care, Special Needs Adoption,· Adoption Incentive, Respite Services,
Subsidized Adoption, Daycare Services, and Purchased Services; based on the
projection, expenditures will exceed the fiscal year 2006 appropriation of
$8,152,848.00 by $1,892,211.00; within the category of Social Services
expenditures, Fuel Assistance, Auxiliary Grant, General Relief, and Daycare
programs are expected to total $875,000.00 and will require a local match of
$117,275.00; funding anticipated from the Commonwealth of Virginia for the
programs is $1,774,936.00; and the number of citizens requiring assistance and
the cost of providing services continues to increase.
1
1
I
I
I
I
".; ,,'.;,:- .'.
". ',;;~ .
311
.,' I
It was further explained that CSA expenditures are projected at
$10,650,000.00 for fiscal year 2006; based on the projection, expenditures will
exceed the CSA fiscal year 2006 appropriation of $9, 152,256.00 by $1,497,744.00
and require additional local funds in the amount of $460,107.00; additional local
funding will come from an increase in CSA service billings to the school division in
the amount of $295,192.00 for the schools' share of the cost, with the remaining
$164,915.00 from General Fund Salary Lapse; funding anticipated from the
Commonwealth of Virginia for CSA is $1,037,637.00; additional funds are to be
allocated to mandated services for at-risk youth; and CSA has experienced an
increase in the number of youths requiring higher cost services.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance to
increase General Fund revenue estimates by $1 ,774,936.00 for Social Services and
$1,332,829.00 for the Comprehensive Services Act, to transfer $282,190.00 from
General Fund Salary Lapse, and to appropriate $1,892,211.00 for Social Services,
and $1,497,744.00 for the ComprehenSive Services Act.
Council Member Cutler offered the follOWing budget ordinance:
(#37337-032006) AN ORDINANCEto appropriate additional funding from
the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Department of Social Services and
Comprehensive Services Act (CSA), amending and reordaining certain sections of
the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 191.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37337-
032006. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37337-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
and Mayo r Harri S_nnmm_m._m_n_nn_mn_n_n_nn.nm_mmmnmnnmm______n_u_u___m7 .
NAYS: Non e - 0000 nn m - _n_ nn nn m mm'___n_n_nmnm·nnnnnmnmnnn_______ -----mO.
312
The City Manager submitted an additional communication advising that as a I
result of an increase in the cost of motor fuels, expenditures will exceed budget in
the amount of $296,800.00; and General Fund motor fuel expenditures will total
$283,600.00 of this amount; the remaining $13,200.00 will be billed to the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority, the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority, the Roanoke Valley Detention Commission, the Civic Center Fund and
the Department of Technology Fund; and it is anticipated that expenses for parts
required for vehicle repairs will exceed budget, in the amount of $169,500.00, due
to higher than anticipated costs for repair of Solid Waste and Fire-EMS vehicles and
an increase in the cost of specialized tires for Police vehicles.
It was further advised that Fleet Management Fund revenue and expense
budgets will need to be adjusted, and funding will need to be allocated in the
General Fund to cover its share of billings; and expenditures for the remaining
$13,200.00 must be absorbed by the respective agencies or Funds.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance
increasing the revenue estimate for Fleet Management Billings for Motor Fuels,
Account No. 017-110-1234-1279, by $296,800.00 and Billings to General Fund,
Account No. 017-110-1234-0952, for vehicle repairs/parts by $169,500.00;
appropriating $296,800.00 to Fleet Management Motor Fuels, Account No. 017-
440-2641-3013, and $169,500.00 to Project Supplies, Account No. 017-440-2641- 1
3005; transferring $168,611.00 from Motor Fuels Contingency, Account No. 001- .
300-9410-3012, and $284,489.00 from Unallocated Life Insurance Premium
Savings, Account No. 001-250-9110-1130, to General Fund department motor
fuels accounts and parts accounts.
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37338-032006) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the General
Fund Motor Fuel Contingency and Life Insurance Premium accounts to various
department motor fuel and parts accounts and to increase the motor fuel and
parts revenue and expenditure budgets in the Fleet Management Fund, amending
and reordaining certain sections ofthe 2005-2006 General and Fleet Management
Funds Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance. .
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 192.)
I
1
1
1
313
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37338-
032006. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the matter, to which no person asked to be heard.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37338-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
and Mayor Harri s _n_n____nn_nmnm___mnnnm_nn__mmmnnmn______mmnmmnn__mn7 .
NAYS: No nennm_mm__mm_________nn,nm·n---nn-n-"-mnmm-----mmm----------m-O.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will· be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
CITY PROPERTY-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-COMPLAINTS-(COUNTRYSIDE):
The following persons spoke with regard to Countryside Golf Course:
Ms. Valerie Garner, 2264 Maitaponi Drive, N. W., advised that she made a
detailed presentation before Council on Tuesday, February 21 , 2006, with regard
to Countryside Golf Course; however, it appears that portions of her presentation
were irrelevant due to withdrawal by the proposed developer. She stated that the
letter of withdrawal from Toll Brothers,developer, was dated February 16, 2006,
therefore, the City had ample time to advise her of the withdrawal prior to
February 21 so that her presentation to Council could be modified accordingly.
She speculated that withdrawal of the proposal by the developer could have been
due to the appointment of a new project manager whose evaluation of the
Countryside property was different from his predecessor; or because a residential
building in an Airport approach area is not a viable option, or because total
acreage is not 140 acres, but less than 100 acres if the runway protection zone is
eliminated, or because the area which is included in the 65 decimal noise contour
is discouraged by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for use as residential
housing or for use with a high concentration of people. She added that the FAA
and the Virginia Department of Aviation have speCifically stated that a golf course
is a good use of the property. She advised that a suggestion offered by Council
Member Cutler to maintain the runway protection zone portion of the property as
a bird sanctuary sounds like a good idea, however, it would not be acceptable to
the FAA due to potential conflict with aircraft. She asked that the Countryside
property continue to be used as a golf course.
314
Mr. Rick Ferguson, 2261 Maitaponi Drive, N. W., spoke on behalf of the 1
Countryside Neighborhood Alliance, and requested that Countryside Golf Course
continue to be used as a golf course. He stated that not enough consideration
has been given to the advantages of maintaining a golf course; a plus is
Interstate 81 which extends both north and south, and as business people,
vacationers, and others pass through Roanoke, they see hotels, a golf course, and
an airport for air travelers. He further stated that Countryside is the only golf
course in the northwest City area that is semi private, which means that anyone
can play on the course and pay a nominal cost for green fees. He added that the
City's high schools could sponsor golf teams, or churches and non-profit
organizations could hold golf tournaments as fund raising events; and with proper
management, the golf course could be beneficial to northwest Roanoke, including
possibilities for other recreational amenities such as swimming, tennis, and youth
training in various sports, etc. He stated that he purchased his patio home
without any thought that the golf course would be destroyed, nothing could be
constructed at Countryside that would ever be equal in value to a golf course, and
without the golf course, there is nothing to attract people to the area due to noise
from the Airport and added congestion created by additional homes, traffic and
chaos. He advised that if the golf course is no longer available, property values
will decline: therefore, property owners expect to be compensated by the City for
the loss of value of their homes due to the proposed development.
Ms. Lee Savigny, 2409 Lincoln Avenue, S. W., spoke with regard to 1
maintenance and the phYSical condition of Countryside Tennis Court which was
leased to a private operator by the City. She stated that in the event the property
is sold, it is requested that it be sold to the individual who is currently operating
the tennis court which will allow the Countryside Tennis Club to make the
necessary improvements.
Mr. A. Byron Smith, 2710 Cheraw Lake Road, N. W., spoke with regard to the
need for improvements to narrow City streets leading into the area of the
Countryside Golf Course, as well as traffic congestion. He stated that the golf
course is a plus to the City of Roanoke and to those persons who reside in the
area.
Ms. Sarah Higgins, 2267 Countryside Road, N. W., advised that northwest
Roanoke is growing, and Countryside should continue to be maintained as an 18
hole golf course, while continuing to offer adult recreation for the citizens of the
northwest City and the City of Roanoke as a whole at a reasonable price. She
stated that the swimming pools should be drained, repaired and reopened, the
indoor tennis courts, which are operating as a separate business from the golf
course, should also be kept open and properly maintained; and Countryside
should be preserved as a recreational area for the citizens of Roanoke.
I
I
I
I
315
COMPLAINTS: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that the
Countryside Neighborhood Alliance is rightfully. concerned about their
neighborhood, as well as residents of Raleigh Court due to the proposed athletic
field at Patrick Henry High School. She stated that residents of northeast and
northwest Roanoke are concerned about policies of the current City
administration, and referred to turmoil, stress, unrest, distrust and anger among
most City employees and some citizens, all of whom reside in a City that is slowly
burning and loosing its very soul. She called attention to numerous out of state
appointments to high level administrative positions under the three year
administration of the current City Manager, and advised that Roanoke has lost
some of its best home grown, knowledgeable, and qualified employees under the
current City Manager's administration in which many dedicated City employees
have voluntarily resigned, or were forced to retire.
She called attention to the leadership of the late Mayor Noel C. Taylor who
treated citizens with respect and was beloved by citizens throughout the Roanoke
Valley; and expressed concern with regard to the Council's unwillingness to
appoint Wendy Jones, who received the next highest number of votes cast in the
May 2004 Councilmanic election, to fill the unexpired term of Council Member
C. Nelson Harris upon his election as Mayor. She stressed the importance of
citizens of Roanoke who must become watchful and active to ensUre that the City
of Roanoke will remain a good place to live, work and play, and asked that the
Members of Council display characteristics of leadership, respect, fairness and
trust.
Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., expressed concern with
regard to the Mayor's proposal to appropriate remaining bond funds from Victory
Stadium renovations to renovation or construction of new library facilities; the
removal of grass in the median between 13th Street and the Roanoke County line;
and blocking of streets in downtown Roanoke on Saturday, March 18, 2006, for
the St. Patrick's Day Parade. He referred to the leadership of the late Mayor Noel
C. Taylor who treated all citizens with respect and advised that Mayor Taylor would
not support any action to demolish Victory Stadium. He suggested that the
present Council be replaced with Council Members who will live up to Mayor
Taylor's vision for the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., advised that the City of
Roanoke's biggest commodity is its work force, and if the City's work force
continues to be downgraded, the City will lose its biggest shareholder. He stated
that Roanoke's pay scale for City employees is inadequate, with some employees
who live below the poverty level; there is a lack of diversity in the City's work
force; the City's infrastructure is not properly maintained; Roanoke is not a safe
place to live; the City is spending money that it does not have by shifting funds
from one account to another; and downtown Roanoke does not offer enough
activities to attract visitors to the area.
316
At 7:50 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for a 1
continuation of the Closed Session.
At 8:05 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
with all Members of the Council in attendance, Mayor Harris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council
Member Dowe moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open
meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only
such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed
Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The
motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
an d Mayo r Harri snnn_nnn__._mmnnm_m_nn___nnnn__mnmu____mmm_mm_n___mnm 7 .
NtI,(5i: N()r1E!----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
at 8:07 p.m.
APPROVED
1
A"'o J ~
Mary F. Parker
City C1~rk
~~
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor
1
1
'1
1
317
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION-h-ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 3, 2006
9:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
April 3, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building,
215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris
presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council,
Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reqular Meetinqs, Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505
adopted by the Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff (arrived late), M. Rupert
Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., (arrived late), Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P.
Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris mmmnmmmmmmm_mn7.
ABSENT: No nen-n ______00 ________00_________000000___ 00___0000_____00_00___000000______0000_00000.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson
Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies
on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by
Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(l), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
was before the body.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea McDaniel and Mayor
H a r ri s - 00 - - - - _00_ - - - - 0000 - - - 00 00____ _ _ 00 0000 _ _ _ _ 00 _ 00 00 _ _ _ _ _ _ 0000 00 - _ 00__00 _ _ _ _ 00 - - - - - - - -00- 00 - - - - -00-_____ _ _ _ 00 - - 5 .
NAYS: No n e 00_0000______00__________00____00___00____0000____000000___00________--00 00______000000_0.
(Council Members Dowe and Wishneff were not present when the vote was
recorded.)
Council Members Dowe and Wishneff entered the meeting.
318
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
1
ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P. M. COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING
DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P. M.
AGENDA:
BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE: Council Member Cutler inquired
about an e-mail from a citizen expressing certain concerns with regard to a
communication from the City Manager recommending that Blue Ridge
Behavioral Healthcare act as its own fiscal agent.
The City Manager responded that the e-mail from Christene Montgomery,
Chair, Mayor's Committee for People with Disabilities, referenced certain
concerns with regard to practices of Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare and did
not relate to the fiscal agent issue.
ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION AT A JOINT MEETING OF COUNCIL AND THE
ROANOKE CITY SCHOOL BOARD ON MONDAY, MAY 1, 2006 AT 9:00 A.M.:
COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: With the concurrence of Council, the City Manager
advised that the meeting will consist primarily of discussion with regard to the 1
fiscal year 2006-2007 Roanoke City School budget.
The Mayor requested that Members of Council submit agenda items to
the City Clerk.
BRIEFINGS:
CODE ENFORCEMENT UPDATE:
HOUSING/NEIGHBORHOOD CODE ENFORCEMENT: The City Manager advised
that code enforcement has been an area of concern for the City for a number of years;
and Lieutenant Bryan 'Todd" Clingenpeel - Police Department, Ford Weber - Director,
Housing and Neighborhood Services, in conjunction with Rolanda B. Russell -
Assistant City Manager for Community Development, and the Commonwealth
Attorney's Office worked as a team to study code enforcement initiatives that will
involve major revisions to the Roanoke City Code. She called on Lieutenant
Clingenpeel and Mr. Weber for an indepth briefing on proposed initiatives.
1
1
1
1
.".",
319
Lieutenant Clingenpeel advised that Code enforcement efforts will involve staff
from Neighborhood Services, Code Enforcement, Solid Waste Management, Police
Department, Environmental and Emergency Management, and the Fire Marshal's
Office.
Crime Prevention throuqh Code Enforcement:
It is the responsibility of citizens and caretakers of the City of Roanoke to
keep the City safe and beautiful.
City of Roanoke Philosophy - To promote decent, safe and sanitary living
conditions and increase property values throughout the City of Roanoke
by striving to eliminate illegal dumping, litter, dilapidated and abandoned
buildings, inoperable motor vehicles, and other blighting influences in
the neighborhoods.
Grime Equals Crime - 'Fight the Blight':
·
Accumulated Trash and Unclean Areas
Trash and Clutter
Inoperable Motor Vehicles
Vacant Structures
'Broken Window Theory' - Broken windows, accumulated trash, and
deteriorated building exteriors can indicate that no one is taking
care of the neighborhood and can lead to more deterioration in the
neighborhood and an increase in crime.
·
·
·
·
Past Code Enforcement Activities:
· Weeds and Trash ordinance adopted on May 14, 1979
· Eyesore Alert Program - 1983
· Inoperable Motor Vehicles adopted on January 1, 1996
· Rental Inspection Program adopted on July 1, 1996
· Inter-Agency Code Enforcement (ICE) Team - 1998
· Drug Blight Ordinance adopted on February 7, 2000
· Graffiti Abatement ordinance adopted on March 5, 2001
320
Current Efforts:
1
· A Guide to the City of Roanoke's Nuisance Ordinances (April 16,
2004)
· ICE Team Enhanced (September, 2004)
· Bawdy Places Ordinance adopted on November 21, 2005
Reasons for New Efforts Toward Code Enforcement:
· Continued citizen complaints regarding crime, blight and code
violations
· Bulk items left on the streets for extended periods of time
· Abandoned vehicles, abandoned properties and absentee landlords
· Influx in vacant structure fires
· Level of citizen satisfaction in the areas of weed abatement,
collection of bulk items, etc.
Exploring 'Best Practices':
· Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates and the Commonwealth
Attorney's Office sponsored a presentation by the City of Norfolk
on September 29, 2005 1
· City of Roanoke personnel and citizens were exposed to an
aggressive, cooperative and effective code enforcement program
· A follow-up trip was made to Norfolk by City staff on January 30,
2006
Identifying Top Code Enforcement Complaints:
· Inoperable Motor Vehicles
· Weeds and Trash
· Outdoor Storage
· Property in need of maintenance
· Illegal signs
· Illegal set-outs
· Illegal fences
· Commercial vehicles in residential zones
· Right-of-way visibility
· Illegal business
· Abandoned and open structures
1
321
1
Identifying a Systematic Approach to Code Enforcement:
1) Reorganize
2) Strengthen partnerships
3) Adopt additional ordinances, fees and penalties
4) Educate/evaluate
Reorqanizinq
Staff Assignments:
· Deployment of code enforcement, fire, solid waste personnel, and
police as a special team
· More involvement of Police Officers, Fire Inspectors and Solid Waste
employees in the citing of code violations
· 'Co-extensive Authority' to issue violations
Process:
I
· Creation of a 'Uniform Notice of Violation' containing code section,
penalty and method of abatement of problem
· Change in Notifications to Violators, UNOV posting on the door and
hand-delivery, placards to be issued by Fire, Inspectors, and Health
Department for unsafe structures
· Investigate possible notification changes for property managers when
dealing with evictions and 'move outs' in order to take immediate
action to clean up items left on property for disposal
· Establishment of a Commonwealth Attorney (special prosecutor)
component to prosecute code violations cases, which will develop a
relationship with the court and help identify repeat offenders
Tracking System:
· Enhancement of the database available on the City's website
· Enhancement of citizen capability to track problem locations and to
view actions taken
· Use of a mapping system to identify problem property owners to
increase accountability
I
322
Strenqtheninq Partnerships
I
· Five C's - Citizens, City Departments, Commonwealth Attorney, the
Court, and Community (Businesses and Neighborhoods)
· Continue to work with citizens to problem solve and seek solutions to
blight in their owner neighborhoods
· Continue to work with the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates and
neighborhood groups to seek input
Ord i nances/Fees/Pe nalties
Code revisions, new code sections, adoption of ordinances by June
2006
Change penalties to maximum allowed by State law by June 2006
Introduction of new legislation by January 2007
Educate/Evaluate
· Cross-train Department personnel - City staff will have knowledge to
identify potential problems and take action
· Educate citizens on code issues - Presentations in neighborhoods to 1
inform citizens of problems and action that can be taken
· Develop a Reference Guide for City Employees and Citizens - City
employees will have a step-by-step procedure to address particular
problems, contact person for any registration or licensing issue
Conclusion:
It is the responsibility of citizens and caretakers to work together to keep
the City of Roanoke safe and beautiful.
'Fight the Blight' can be addressed with:
· A team approach
· Expansion of code enforcement responsibilities across departmental
lines
· Cooperation and buy-in from all citizens and involved departments at
all levels of leadership
1
1
1
I
323
Program Implementation Target Date: July 1, 2006
The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke needs to raise
community standards with regard to what is allowed in Roanoke's
neighborhoods; for too long there has not been a clear understanding of
community standards, the system to support the activity has also been unclear,
and the City should adopt a "zero" tolerance relative to those property owners
who do not abide by community standards. She suggested involvement by the
news media to raise the awareness of property owners/citizens that the City of
Roanoke will not tolerate those property owners who do not take care of their
property.
Council Membet Dowe asked how often the tracking system will be updated;
whereupon, Mr. Weber stated that the tracking system could be updated almost
immediately, and City staff will be responsible for updating information on a daily
basis during the work week.
Council Member Dowe inquired as to how accountability for weed control will
be integrated into property that is owned by the City of Roanoke.
The City Manager advised that it will be necessary for the City to abide by the
same standard that is applied to the community as a whole and as the City becomes
more efficient with clearing public rights-of-way, citizens will begin to clean up their
property. She stated that due to budget constraints, it was necessary to increase the
period of time between cuttings on City properties, and additional resources may be
required to accomplish more frequent cuttings, especially in park areas.
Council Member Wishneff stated that New York City took this type of approach
with great success, and suggested that the City Manager schedule a news event to
launch new code enforcement initiatives.
Council Member Wishneff inquired as to who will be authorized to issue notices
of violations; whereupon, the City Manager stated that employees of Solid Waste
Management, Streets and Traffic, Public Safety and Code Enforcement Departments
will have the ability to issue citations and all information gathered by employees will
be entered into a database that will be utilized in court proceedings.
324
The CityÄttorney stated that ultimate authority will depend on the specific type 1
of code enforcement, and various enabling statutes will need to be followed
accordingly; and there are numerous ways to deal with issues, such as criminal or
injunctive relief and other self-help measures or statutes that allow localities in some
cases to actually seize property. .
The City Manager advised that it must be proven to the court that an illegal
activity has occurred and a 30-day notice must be given to the property owner. She
stated that a suggestion has been made that the City should seek additional
legislative authority for instances of multiple occurrences on the same property over a
certain period of time; and the City will pursue the legislative route, however, the
Dillion Rule requires permission for some of the measures that involve private
property rights. She stated that photographs will be taken of properties that involve
code enforcement issues that will be used in court proceedings in order to
demonstrate the severity of the problem.
Council Member Wishneff inquired with regard to the time frame to address
properties that are used for illegal drug activities; whereupon, it was advised that a
minimum of 45 days is required.
Council Member Lea inquired if the judiciary will be briefed on the proposed
code initiatives; whereupon, the City Manager stated that in the past, the City 1
administration has been advised that it should not make these types overtures to the
judiciary, and due to the level of interest in the neighborhoods, citizens may be ·in the
best position to make a request for judiciary support. Mr. Web'er stated that a new
position in the Commonwealth Attorney's Office has been requested for the purpose
of addressing code violations and an ordinance increasing penalties, fines and
incarceration will be proposed. The City Manager stated that certain internal actions
will need to occur such as staff training and preparing staff to be better witnesses in
court cases.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that there be follow up with the City's
Legislative Committee with regard to any changes that need to be addressed at the
2007 Session of the Virginia General Assembly.
Council Member Cutler stated that interdepartmental cooperation will be
necessary, and the City should improve on its oversight of various contracts to ensure
that City facilities are properly maintained. He congratulated the Clean Valley Council
for hosting Clean Valley Day, and complimented the City Manager's initiative to
maintain the banks of the Roanoke River through the City's Parks and Recreation
Department.
1
1
1
I
r'"
325
Council Member Cutler inquired if photography will be used to document
certain code violations as a part of court proceedings; whereupon, Mr. Weber stated
that the City has established a plan to utilize digital and video cameras to document
violations.
Council Member Cutler inquired if the record keeping process will be
comparable to the process currently used to identify repeat offenders under the City's
new parking violation program.
Lieutenant Clingenpeel explained that the tracking system will allow the City to
provide information regarding the date, penalty and sentencing for each violation,
and the prosecutor will have the appropriate information in a report format on each
case before the court;' and if approved by the City's Legislative Committee, a proposal
will be included in the City of Roanoke's 2007 Legislative Program to authorize an
increased fine for repeat violations and, in many cases, the fine could escalate.
Council Member McDaniel suggested that a uniform telephone number be
published so that citizens will know where to report code violations.
The City Manager expressed appreciation for the positive comments and input
by Council, and advised that the issues represent common problems that impact the
workload of all City departments. She stated that timing and buy-in will be important,
and over the years, neighborhood organizations have become stronger and more
. committed to raising and to being held to a higher community standard. She added
that it may be necessary to request additional resources in the future, and by sharing
the workload, more work can be accomplished by City staff.
POLICE INITIATIVES:
The City Manager called upon Joe Gaskins, Chief of Police, to present a briefing
on police initiatives relating to crime and ongoing police activities.
Chief Gaskins advised that:
Recent published reports concerning the crime rate in Roanoke are not
indicative of the daily efforts of police officers. The Police Department
realizes that crime reduction is an integral component of its over all
efforts. In response to published reports, as well as Police Department
findings, he reviewed the following programs and accomplishments:
326
O-Tolerance for Patrol Officers and Other Uniform Personnel
1
Using the Broken Windows Theory of crime reduction, officers have
begun to make arrests on many violations. Selective traffic enforcement
generally leads to arrests of a more serious nature.
An example would be on Friday or Saturday night, people will leave a
night club around 1 :30 - 2:00 a.m., caravan in about 40-50 vehicles to
local stop-in's, once they reach their destination, they congregate on the
lots, play loud music, and dance which leads to fighting, which
sometimes leads to shooting. (Police want to take a practical approach,
and work with business owners with regard to those persons who
trespass on the property and arrest those persons at the onset who act in
the 'disorder' mode before they move to more violent crime.)
Orange Avenue, N. E., 157 summonses were issued· in order to reduce
traffic accidents.
Grant funded aggressive driver enforcement - 472 summonses were
issued over a period of six months.
Two Williamson Road traffic check points produced .117 arrests for 1
criminal and traffic-related violations.
More drugs are confiscated during traffic· arrests than during drug
investigations.
Warrant Service
Persons wanted for violations of crime usually commit more crime.
Arresting these individuals sooner will reduce the number of incidents.
To do this, the Police Department is:
having more warrant service days;
concentrating on individuals with multiple warrants and lengthy
criminal histories;
1
327
I
promoting efforts like OPERATION INKED (March 29 - 30, multi-
agency effort to arrest wanted people after placing 3,100 names in
the newspaper, results were 474 persons arrested and 512
warrants served, two complaints were filed because their names
were published in the newspaper.)
additional arrests are expected after completion of the
investigation of approximately 200 leads.
Reduce Sex Crimes and Violence Aqainst Women
The Police Department has surveyed warrants to identify past sex crime
offenders and prioritized those individuals for arrest on outstanding
warrants.
The Police Department has reviewed the sexual predator registry to
identify past sex offenders not registered; and two were located, one of
. which has been arrested.
Re-Focus Street Crimes Unit
1
Concentrate on those areas (not specific crimes) that provide the greatest
amount of violent crime statistics.
Focus on crime hotspots and crime trends, not the crime of the day.
Narcotic reversal operations in the hot spot areas netted 30 arrests for
drug related crimes.
Violent Crimes/Orqanized Crime Task Force (VCTF)
Created to reduce drug-related violent crime; one drug related murder
has occurred since January 2004.
Originally identified eight narcotic organizations and 75 persons as
targets. In two years, the unit has removed seven of the eight
organizations from the community by arresting over 80 persons
associated with the groups.
1
328
Seized $800,000.00 in money and vehicles, $480,000.00 in cocaine and I
marijuana, and 98 firearms over a period of 27 months.
The Police Department would like to implement new technology known as
'gunshot detector' through the use of grant funding. The equipment will
detect a weapon that is being discharged in a neighborhood by cameras
triangulating on the sound and taking a photograph of a particular area.
Crime Prevention Throuqh Environmental Desiqn (CPTED)
New initiative to reduce crime in apartment communities.
Police Officers will complete crime prevention assessment surveys for
property owners signed up with the program.
Property owners will make suggested improvements.
A portion of improvement costs will be refunded to property owners
through the Community Development Block Grant program.
Retention and Recruitment
1
The January 2005 pay increase resulted in increased recruitment and
retention.
1 8 months ago, the Police Department experienced its worst officer
shortage in history, with approximately 36 positions, or 14% of allocated
positions vacant.
Currently, five police officer positions are vacant, three of which are due
to retirement.
The Police Department now selects from a larger number of qualified
applicants.
Cops in the Neiqhborhood
The Take Home Car Program has increased the number of police officers
living in the City from 21 to 63 over a five-year period, which is a 200%
increase.
I
1
1
I
329
Two officers live in lower income neighborhoods in houses that were
renovated by the City. Future expansion of the program is expected.
Clearance Rates Above National Averaqe
A crime is cleared when the suspect is arrested, or when a suspect is
identified and the prosecution of the suspect is declined.
A glitch in the system has been detected, i.e., the Police Department will
report 300 aggressive assaults to the State, however, when the number
arrives at the State, it may be 400-450.
Aggravated Assault
Homicide
Rape
Robbery
Burglary
Larceny
Motor Vehicle Theft
Arson
Roanoke
78%
69%
71%
33%
25%
28%
47%
66%
National
56%
63%
42%
26%
13%
18%
13%
17%
Chief Gaskins stated that there has been an upturn in violent crimes in the City
of Roanoke, and the Police Department has taken steps to address the issue through
such initiatives as the Violent Crimes Task Force, Street Crime personnel, "gunshot
detector" equipment, and serving more warrants in order to take more people off of
the streets who are committing crimes.
Council Member McDaniel requested that Chief Gaskins address the issue
of gang activity in Roanoke; whereupon, he stated that there are individuals in
the City of Roanoke who refer to themselves as a gang; however, the Police
Department has refused to recognize them as gangs, but prefer to call them
criminals because they break the law, they are arrested and placed in jail, and
glorifying these individuals with a special name does not add anything to what
the Police Department is attempting to accomplish. He stated that a task force
was established in 1998-99 to track those persons who are involved in various
groups that consider themselves to be part of a gang, and the task force
continues to meet and to arrest persons who are associated with the various
groups.
330
Council Member Cutler congratulated Chief Gaskins and the Police Department 1
on crime prevention efforts, and specifically cited community policing initiatives and
Operation Ink.
Council Member Cutler requested that Chief Gaskins provide an example of
crime prevention through environmental design; whereupon, Chief Gaskins advised
that numerous actions could be taken to affect the behavior of individuals; i.e.,
apartments that have dark and unlit areas could be improved by adding lights, the
planting of shrubbery that would discourage personal contact, and closing
breezeways by directing persons elsewhere. He stated that upon requests police
officers conduct safety assessment surveys (known as target hardening) to determine
measures that could be taken to help prevent crime before it reoccurs, or before
crime initially occurs.
Council Member Dowe commended Chief Gaskins on crime prevention efforts
by the City's Police Department. He stated that the City of Roanoke is considered to
be one of the more pro-active communities in the nation with respect to law
enforcement efforts and responsibilities.
Council Member Lea commended the Police Department and the various
departmental initiatives, and asked that law enforcement move aggressively on the 1
issue of domestic violence.
Council Member Lea inquired if there is gang activity in the City of Roanoke, or
does the Police Department refuse to call certain persons or groups gangs, even
though they engage in the same activities as gangs.
Chief Gaskins responded that there is the basic "want to be a gang" group
composed of home-grown people who come together and commit crimes when there
is an opportunity, and there is no chain of command within the group. He stated that
the basic gang, such as the "Bloods" and "Cripts", are formulated with people in
charge, .and engage in a specific crime that is used for profit; and Roanoke has the
home-grown group, who, for example, might walk by a car and if the window was
open, they would take a cell phone from the car seat, that might be on the seat, or
deal dope in the neighborhood. He stated that these are the types of people that the
Police Department refuse to glorify by referring to them as gangs because they are
criminals who should be put in jail whenever there is an opportunity; and the City is
taking the necessary action in terms of enforcement.
I
1
1
1
331
The City Manager advised that often times, pro-active cities such as the City of
Roanoke are left out of Federal funding, and because the City took the initiative after
September 11, 2001, to train employees in Homeland Security, Roanoke has become
a trainer for other localities in the nation on Homeland Security. She stated that the
Police Department has employed a detective who serves on a National Board dealing
with gangs and travels around the Commonwealth of Virginia to train other police
officers with regard to identification and investigation of gangs, and the Police
Department is aware of any problems and maintains a data base containing
information captured during investigations.
Council Member Wishneff requested a clarification of the term, "and the
prosecution of the suspect is declined", as previously referenced by Chief Gaskins.
Chief Gaskins responded that the term refers to a sexual assault case where the
suspect is known, but the victim refuses to prosecute, or for some reason the
Commonwealth Attorney's Office declines to prosecute the crime, and there are
instances when the Police Department does not have as much impact in certain
circumstances because the responsibility of prosecution falls under another entity of
the criminal justice system. The City Manager called attention to issues in connection
with domestic violence where certain circumstances might encourage people, either
consciously or unconsciously, to sometimes decline prosecution. She stated that the
City is investigating ways to enforce prosecution after multiple actions have been
reported, because there are instances when police officers respond to a domestic
violence call on repeated occasions, and when the case goes to court the affected
parties have temporarily reconciled which is often not a permanent resolution. She
added that prosecution of a case is the call of the Commonwealth's Attorney and the
City is attempting to educate and train staff on how to better present a case in order
to have more cases prosecuted through the court system.
The City Manager stated that with the Council's endorsement, an additional
attorney for the Commonwealth Attorney's Office will be funded 100 per cent through
local funds in the 2007 fiscal year budget to prosecute code enforcement cases
exclusively; and the present Council and succeeding Councils will be called upon to
consider the provision of more resources to the Commonwealth Attorney's Office in
order for the City to aggressively prosecute code enforcement cases.
332
Mayor Harris referred to a recent article in The Roanoke Times that quoted 1
certain disturbing crime statistics with regard to the City of Roanoke that were
portrayed as being a reflection of reality when, in fact, it is widely known that crime
statistics, while helpful to some degree, are reported in different ways by different
communities, with different levels of under-reporting. He stated that the use of crime
statistics as a portrayal of the reality of a community is extremely unfortunate,
because it is a well known fact that statistics are flawed in a number of areas. He
noted that within two - three days after the article was published, he received a
detailed letter of apology from the author who made statements regarding the
Roanoke community that had no basis academically and went well beyond what any
legitimate academic research would have concluded, to say that Roanoker's were
mean and that Roanoke was not a safe place for women and children based on a very
cursory review of certain statistics. He further stated he was given permission to
share the letter, and did so with the City Manager and the Chief of Police, but he
decided against sharing the contents of the letter with the news media because there
was no benefit in continuing the dialogue, and he offered to make the letter available
to any member of Council who wished to receive a copy. He further stated that ten
additional police officers will be recommended by the City Manager in the 2007 fiscal
year budget, and based upon initial responses, the Members of Council are supportive
of the recommendation.
13th STREET/HOLLINS ROAD TRANSPORTATION PROIECT UPDATE:
1
of
Robert K. Bengtson, Traffic Engineer, and Kenneth H. King, Jr., Manager
Transportation, presented the following update:
Hollins Road/13th Street Extension
VDOT Project No. UOOO-l 28-11 3
Tvpical Section
·
Four-lane typical from Orange Avenue to Wise Avenue - 35 mph
design speed
Surrounding properties are industrial/commercial
Four-lane bridge
Two-lane typical from Wise Avenue to Dale Avenue - 25 mph
design speed
Surrounding properties are more residential
Minimizes impact on neighborhood both visually and from right-of-
way acquisition need
Bike lanes included throughout
Crossing overhead utilities only placed underground
Wide medians and sidewalks set back from the curb line to
increase landscaping opportunities
1
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
1
1
I
h."., '",
......;
':!:¡:i
333
Rqundabouts vs. Siqnalized Intersections
· 13th and Tazewell - existing signal proposed to be removed
· 13th and Wise - currently not signalized, projected traffic volumes
would meet warrants for a signal
· Signals would require additional lanes and associated larger
foot p ri nt
· Roundabouts meet traffic needs, provide gateway and aesthetic
opportunities, and can better control travel speeds
Left turns will be restricted at certain streets - Campbell Avenue, Kirk
Avenue, Church Avenue, Stewart Avenue
· turn restrictions ensure efficient traffic flow and minimize the
number of lanes, especially turn lanes
· these streets extend only a few blocks in either direction
· main arteries into Downtown are maintained
Schedule
·
Citizen Information Meeting - Wednesday, May 17, 2006
Fallon Park Elementary School
5:00 - 7:00 p.m.
· Public Hearing - Spring 2007
· Right-of-Way acquisition begins - 2007
· Construction advertisement - 2010
Mr. King called attention to discussions spanning a number of years with regard
to the 13'" Street improvement project, which would basically continue north to
Orange Avenue, the key improvement being the grade separation at the railroad
tracks which would enhance mobility and movement of traffic; the 1 3'h Street project
was the only project that was removed from the Six Year Transportation Plan for a
brief period of time and was reinstated in a subsequent fiscal year; the project is now
in the phase of finalizing the conceptual plan, followed by the preliminary plan, and
VDOT citizen participation meetings will begin in May to address design issues. He
explained that the task is to connect southern and northern communities and to
afford better mobility, while remaining supportive of neighborhood environments and
goals; two distinct components to the project are: the southern end has more of a
neighborhood characteristic and the northern end has an industrial characteristic, and
includes the Solid Waste Transfer facility, which has an attractive and presentable
appearance and will influence the general theme in that portion of the project. He
explained that landscaping is very important and VDOT has assigned staff from the
Richmond office to work on that particular component of the project. He stated that
"roundabouts" are an option, as well as more traditional signalized intersections; the
334
key is travel speed, as well as character; since "roundabouts" collect the travel path of
vehicles, speed will have to be reduced in order to comfortably navigate turns; and 1
with "roundabouts", left turns are made by continuing counter-clockwise around the
circle, negating the need for a left turn lane, leaving space that affords an opportunity
for landscaping and making a gateway into the community. He added that the
Comprehensive Plan for the area estimates traffic volume in the northern section to
be about 21,400 vehicles per day, and the southern section through neighborhoods
to be about 14,400 vehicles per day; therefore, the northern portion will need to be a
four-lane road throughout, the southern portion can be a two-lane road, with
landscaping and a mature tree canopy along the curb through the neighborhood and
a restriction of left turn lanes in order to enhance roadway safety. He stated that
. another key component of the project is the bridge over the railroad tracks, which
must be aligned more to the east in order to span the tracks without a center support
and to keep the width more manageable; several buildings located in the area will be
affected and VDOT will fine tune the impact and precise design.
The City Manager called attention to future plans to widen Orange Avenue from
13'" Street to Gus Nicks Boulevard to six lanes in the next Six-Year Transportation Plan
Update, which has a bearing on increasing the northern portion of 1 3th Street to four
lanes.
Council Member Cutler inquired if the roundabouts at Wise Avenue and 13'"
Street will be designed to accommodate large trucks; whereupon, Mr. King stated that I
the roundabouts will be designed to accommodate full tractor trailer type trucks.
Mr. King advised that Orange Avenue is not the end of the 13th Street project,
and upgrades will be needed at the intersection of Orange Avenue, possibly with dual
lanes coming off of Orange Avenue onto 13'" Street; at the southern end, near Dale
Avenue, which is one block away from the tie-in with Jamison and Bullitt Avenues,
there may be a desire to continue the landscaping island up to the signalized
intersection, rather than ending the landscape island in advance of a wide asphalt
area; and the City is working with VDOT officials to install the majority of utilities
underground where they cross the roadway, however, a major transmission line is not
capable of being placed underground.
Council Member Dowe inquired if roundabouts are an option, or an element of
a conceptual plan; whereupon, Mr. King advised that VDOT and City staff recommend
roundabouts with the knowledge that there are currently no roundabouts in any
community in the City of Roanoke, and the standard signalized intersection has also
been included for discussion.
1
1
I
1
,.
.": -. .~.
335
Council Member Dowe advised that with roundabouts, emergency vehicles
could be challenged because travel time could be decreased by ten seconds to make a
left turn in a counter-clockwise lane, therefore, he suggested that the City obtain
input by VDOT. Mr. King responded that there will be more information at the public
hearing with regard to roundabouts in general as well as information on the
experience of VDOT with regard to roundabouts in other parts of the state. He noted
that roundabouts can be confused with traffic circles with stop signs at various places
within and yield signs will be installed for traffic that isalready in the circle; specific
design and functional aspects are associated with roundabouts, and years of
European experience and knowledge regarding roundabouts will be helpful in
designing roads and addressing issues such as road grade.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that the roundabout concept would help
neighborhoods and provide a good use of pavement and beautification. He stated
that traffic volume on Wise and Tazewell Avenues would not cause any major
problems, and roundabouts would be a favorable concept to complete the last major
artery project into the City.
Council Member Cutler inquired as to the diameter of the island in the
right-of-way; whereupon, Mr. King stated that typically, there are two islands in
the roundabout, a landscaped island in the center and some type of raised
apron constructed of brick or concrete on the outside area, with the overall
diameter of the inside circle being approximately 110 - 150 feet across, which
would afford sufficient space for landscaping or public art.
On behalf of the Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation for an
informative briefing.
Dr. Martin Luther Kinq Ir. Memorial Bridqe Proiect Update.
Scott Hodges, representing Hayes, Seay, Mattern and Mattern, presented
the following:
Backqround
· Council reviewed four concepts for the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.,
Memorial Bridge in September 2004; Alternate B - restore the existing
bridge for unrestricted pedestrian use was chosen as the desired
alternate; eliminated vehicular use
· Estimated 2004 bridge design cost was $200,000.00
· Estimated 2004 bridge project cost was $2.2 million
· Estimated 2004 MLK enhancement features project cost was
approximately $500,000.00, which includes the statue, platforms,
columns, etc.
336
Proiect Status
· Total Estimated 2004 Project Cost was $2.9 million 1
· Project advertised in February 2006
· Bids received in March 2006
· Two bidders on the project:
. Allegheny Construction - $2,779,528.00
. DLB,lnc. - $2,819,572.00
· Total estimated project cost in 2006 - $3.9 million, which includes all
project elements and features such as statue and MLK memorial items
Cost Differential (2004:2006)
· Total estimated 2004 project cost - $2.9 million
· Total estimated 2006 project cost - $3.9 million
· Cost differential (2004-2006) - $1 million
Factors Impactinq Constructi.º_n Costs
· Virginia Department of Historic Resources (VDHR) requires use of
stone masonry
· VDHR requires replication of the existing railing
· Structural steel price increases in a volatile market
· Cement price increases
· Diesel fuel and gasoline price increases 1
· Hurricane Katrina, August 2005
Quantifiable Construction Cost Increases
· Stonemasonry - $50,000.00
· Replication of the existing railing - $150,000.00
· Average Project Inflation September 2004 to September 2006, '-0% -
12% = $300,000.00
· Total Quantified Increases - $ 500,000.00
Non-Quantifiable Construction Cost Increases
· Federal money requires the use of Federal wage rates
· Federal money eliminates pre-award negotiations
· Federal money requires DBE participation of 7%
· Federal money requires VDOT participation
I
I
1
1
337
The City Engineer reviewed the following funding options:
· Re-Bid the project with removal of some enhancements
· Re-Bid the project without Federal requirements
· Move with VDOT consent excess funding from the Wonju Street
Project to cover the difference
· Award the project and value engineer the project for savings
(50% contractor/50% City Benefit); City covers the difference to
award the project
· Award the project; City covers the difference to award the
project.
Due to recent changes in Wonju Street/Colonial Avenue enhancements,
the City Manager advised that the City has $5 million in excess funds in the Six-
Year Plan, for the Wonju Street project. She called attention to the uniqueness
of the situation which allows the City to reallocate Federal funds to a locally
funded project.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick requested assurance that the transfer of excess
funds will not affect the new plan for Wonju Street/Colonial Avenue
enhancements.
The City Manager explained that originally, several million dollars were
allocated to the Wonju Street/Colonial Avenue project; however, a solution for
the Wonju area was identified that would not require the same magnitude of
funds; therefore, she proposed that any excess monies be transferred to cover
the balance of funds needed for the Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., Memorial
Bridge, although the City could request more than the $1 million difference to
replenish City funds that have been allocated to the MLK project. She stated
that given the cost of projects today, having the option to use excess funds
would allow the City a level of flexibility; however, it will be necessary to
discuss the matter with VDOT officials to determine if there is support for the
use of funds beyond $1 million, and to ensure that the MLK project will move
forward in a timely manner.
It was the consensus of Council to concur in the City Manager's proposal.
338
Century Square Update
1
Steve Buschor, Director, Parks and Recreation, advised that Century Plaza
is a non-traditional park located across the street from Fire Station No.1; the
City has partnered with Local Colors to create a venue for cultural
entertainment during the summer months, and events will be tentatively
scheduled on a monthly basis, depending upon resources, availability of
entertainment, vendors, etc.
Gary Hegner, Park Superintendent, advised that City staff received
approval from the Architectural Review Board in January 2006 to install awnings
in Century Plaza; $8,800.00 was included in Phase I for the purchase of
additional furniture, including one 6' curved bench with back, two 6' straight
benches with back, two individual chairs with back and arms, three 40" tables
with base, a table with two arm chairs, and two additional individual chairs with
arms per table, in order to comply with ADA requirements; and installation is
anticipated toward the latter part of April, with additional chairs, tables, planter
boxes, landscaping, etc., to be forthcoming.
Council Member Cutler inquired if the furniture will be secured to the
deck;. whereupon, Mr. Buschor advised that only the longer benches will be
secured because of the need to move free standing furniture within the area. 1
He further advised that a small portable wooden stage will be constructed for
various types of performances.
Council Member Cutler asked about vendor participation: whereupon, the
City Manager advised that two locations have been identified for vendor
participation, and food vendors in the City Market area are reluctant to
participate.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed concern that the free standing furniture
could become a target by vandals, or a sleeping place for homeless persons.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE-TAXES: The Director of Finance presented a
briefing on the Personal Property Tax Relief Act (PPTRA). He advised that:
Prior Tax Relief Program:
·
Provided 70 per cent relief from personal property taxes on the
first $20,000.00 of value for qualifying vehicles
Owners of vehicles assessed at $1,000.00, or less, received 100
per cent tax relief
Qualifying vehicles are owned by an individual and must be for
personal use only
I
·
·
I
I
1
339
Tax Relief Program 2006 and Beyond:
· Caps reimbursement for PPTRA at $950 million statewide for tax
years 2006 and beyond
· Prorated to localities based on tax year 2004
· City of Roanoke to receive $8,075,992.00 annually
· Spring billers, like Roanoke, will receive the majority of tax
year/fiscal year 2006 reimbursement in July 2006
· Current reimbursement program for tax years 2005 and prior
ends September 1, 2006, or when current budgeted funds are
exhausted
· Localities were given options for implementing PPTRA changes
· City CounCil adopted Ordinance No.3 7221 in October 2005
· "Specific Relief' method adopted for computing tax relief
· Äpplies tax relief to individual vehicles on a per cent basi
· Both dollar and per cent relief will be shown on tax bill
·
Allocation of relief at a single percentage to the first $20,000.00 of
personal vehicle value·
Full relief provided for vehicles valued at $1,000.00 and less
Localities may "balance bill" delinquencies at September 1, 2006, or
when State funding is depleted
Percentage of relief to be adopted annually by City Council
Setting PPTRA relief rates or percentages is a matter of forecasting
and estimation
·
·
·
·
· PPTRA allocation model developed by a group of Treasurers,
Commissioners of the Revenue and Finance Directors
· Analysis of 2006 assessment data
· No requirement for "settling up"
· Roanoke relief for tax year 2006 is 66.19 per cent.
The Mayor advised that Council will be requested to take formal action on
the matter at its 2:00 p.m. session.
At 12:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
immediately reconvened for a joint meeting of Council and the Industrial
Development Authority.
340
At 12:00 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in Room 159, Noel C. I
Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia,
for a joint meeting of Council and the Industrial Development Authority, with
Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Chair Dennis R. Cronk presiding.
CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS PRESENT: Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler,
Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea Brenda L. McDaniel
and Mayor C. Nelson Harris (arrived late) nnnnuhmmmm_nmm_mmnnn'_nmn7.
A BS ENT: No nenmnnnnn_n___nn _nnnn___nn nnnnn m_nn_n_nnnnn__hnnn_O.
The Vice-Mayor declared the existence of a Council quorum.
INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY DIRECTORS PRESENT: Linda D.
Frith, F. Gordon Hancock, Charles E. Hunter, III, Stuart H. Revercomb, Allen D.
Williams, and Dennis R. Cronk_m_nm_hnnnnnmnmmmm__mnmnmmnmmmm6.
ABSENT: Director S. Deborah Oyler_nm_nnmmnhnnn_mmmmm_n_mnn_l .
OFFICERS PRESENT: Representing the City of Roanoke: Darlene L.
Burcham, City Manager: William M. Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall,
Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, City Clerk. Representing the Industrial 1
Development Authority: Harwell (Sam) M. Darby, Jr., Counsel; Glenna O.
Ratcliffe, Secretary; Industrial Development Authority; and R. Brian Townsend,
Director, Planning, Building and Economic Development.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Sherman P. Lea.
ANNUAL REPORTS-INDUSTRIES:
On behalf of the Members of Council, the Vice-Mayor welcomed Directors
and staff of the Industrial Development Authority.
Chair Cronk presented an update on activities of the Industrial
Development Authority.
(See Annual Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
1
1
I
I
341
Chair Cronk advised that the Industrial Development Authority of the City
of Roanoke (IDA) was established in 1968 for the purpose of aiding and
assisting the City in economic development efforts and to facilitate the issuance
of industrial revenue bonds; the IDA, by Charter, is provided with the authority
to acquire and own property, etc., so long as the property is used for industrial
development and economic development purposes on behalf of the City; the
IDA consists of seven members who serve three year terms of office; and
meetings were previously held at the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce,
with staff support provided by the Chamber of Commerce. He stated that in
2002, the IDA accepted the City Manager's offer to provide staff support
through the City's Economic Development Office, and meetings are currently
held at the Economic Development Office at Franklin Plaza on the second
Wednesday of each month. He added that the IDA currently manages
approximately $320,000,000 in outstanding industrial revenue bonds, of which
$308,000,000 are directly related to Carilion Health Systems; and over the past
eight months, the IDA and its counsel has worked closely with Carilion to
prepare for the issuance of a multiple bond issue in the total amount of
$308,465,000 to refinance certain debt. He stated that an administrative fee,
which is based on a portion of bonds issued during the life of the bonds, was
initiated and will generate $75,000.00 of income to the IDA in June 2006 and
$139,000.00 annually thereafter so long as the bonds are outstanding, to be
used as a pool of funds to be directed toward economic development efforts in
the City of Roanoke.
Chairman Cronk advised that the IDA held six meetings during the year
2005, with an average attendance of five Directors per meeting; $55,000.00 of
façade grants were awarded, and 32 performance agreements were considered,
including $9 million for the new Ukrops Store; for the period July 1, 2005 -
March 30, 2006, eight meetings were held with an average attendance of five
Directors per meeting and the IDA approved $200,000.00 in façade grant
applications and one performance agreement for the Home Depot project on
Route 220. He explained that the façade grant program has been administered
by the IDA for approximately two years and was established to improve the
outside appearance of buildings.
Chair Cronk stated that currently, the maximum amount that can be
awarded for a façade grant is $25,000.00; and it is requested that the
maximum amount be increased to $100,000.00; and the interpretation of
"façade" should be modified since some buildings have front corners; or two
fronts, which is sometimes debatable.
342
In closing, Chairman Cronk advised that the Industrial Development I
Authority looks forward to working with the City on future economic
development issues.
Director Hancock spoke in support of the IDA serving as an active
committee of the City and working with the City staff on economic development
issues. He requested that the Members of Council provide input with regard to
the role of the IDA, and asked for suggestions by Council on the use of future
administrative fees to be collected by the IDA.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick commended the positive partnership between the
City of Roanoke and the Industrial Development Authority. He suggested that
there be further dialogue with regard to the use of administrative fees for the
Façade Grant Program and for marketing purposes. He stated that currently the
City is looking at entrepreneurial kinds of projects that create jobs, many of
which are technically oriented, therefore, the IDA could provide direction on
whether administrative fees could be used to enhance the business· incubator
program, or in conjunction with programs sponsored by Virginia Tech.
Council Member Wishneff suggested that Roanoke's IDA look at what
other Industrial Development Authorities throughout the Commonwealth of
Virginia are doing that create revenues for their respective localities. He stated 1
that a potential role for the IDA could involve an audit of economic
development; Le.: what is the function of each layer of economic development
and is each layer appropriately staffed. He called attention to the flexibility that
is afforded to the IDA in its capacity as an independent body.
Chair Cronk advised that a survey was conducted. of Industrial
Development Authorities throughout the Commonwealth of Virginia which
revealed that they all perform different functions and a key component to the
success of each entity is strong staff support.
Director Hancock pointed out that the survey also revealed that the City
of Roanoke's administrative fee is approximately one-half of the fee charged by
other Virginia localities, the 50 per cent rate was selected to assist Carilion
Health System and can be changed at any time.
With regard to economic development, Council Member Dowe advised
that in excess of 1,500 jobs have been created in the City of Roanoke over the
past four years, and somewhere in the range of $260 million has been collected
in revenue. He asked if the IDA has any concerns with regard to enterprise
zones and technology zones.
I
1
1
1
343
Mr. Townsend advised that the Enterprise Zone was established by
Council with approval of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and the City of
Roanoke maxed out last year in the acreage requirement that can be devoted to
enterprise zone boundaries. He pointed out that every 12 months, the State
allows localities to amend program guidelines for Enterprise Zone designation;
and there is a need to amend the administration of façade grants with regard to
the amount of funds that can be allocated toward a specific project, which will
require action by the Council and the Commonwealth of Virginia. He pointed
out that the IDA conducts an annual audit which tracks all funds that are
transferred to or from the IDA, in addition. to audits that are performed by the
City's Municipal Auditor.
Mayor Harris commended the work of the Industrial Development
Authority which is important to the economic development vitality of the
Roanoke community. In response to a question raised by the IDA with regard
to the type of services that the IDA could provide to the City, he stated that he
would seek input by the City Manager and report to the Industrial Development
Authority accordingly.
Council Member Cutler referred to the City Market study in which the
consultant submitted recommendations on how to improve the appearance and
vitality of the overall Market area, and inquired if the IDA could be of assistance
in that regard. The Chair responded that the IDA can be of assistance to the
City in numerous ways if it is in the form of economic development.
The City Manager advised that the City administration will begin to
address ways in which the IDA can be involved that have not heretofore been
discussed. She stated that at a future meeting, she would be interested in
discussing what proportion of funds devoted to façade grants should be
allocated to small façade grants versus large façade grants. She advised that
Council will be provided with a copy of the final report of the City Market
consultant and it will be necessary to prioritize items, as well as those items
that will involve the private sector, and as the process moves forward, today's
discussion raised the visibility of the role of the Industrial Development
Authority.
In a discussion of the role of the IDA, the City Manager advised that the
IDA can purchase hold, and develop property in much the same way that the
City has used the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority in the past.
She stated that a challenge is the need for staff support since the IDA is a
citizen based group.
344
In summary, the Vice-Mayor suggested that City staff provide information 1
to the Council with regard to the powers and duties of the IDA, a review of
options whereby the City and the IDA could partner in different ways, and a
scope of issues that currently face the City of Roanoke and the role of the IDA
with reference to those issues that could be somewhat different than the past
role of the IDA.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that there is a lack of developable sites in
the City of Roanoke, and it will take a lot of work to create development that
generates income. Therefore, he stated that the relationship with the IDA will
be a much more important partnership in the future.
It was noted that eligibility for the Façade Grant Program is based on first
come, first serve criteria, and modification of the program should be
considered by Council.
At 12: 54 p.m., the Chair declared . the meeting of the Industrial
Development Authority adjourned.
At 12:55 p.m., the Vice-Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess, to
be immediately reconvened for continuation of the 9:00 a.m. Council briefings.
MARKETING CITY PROPERTY
1
The City Manager advised that the City of Roanoke wishes to market
certain City-owned property and requests input by Council with regard to
paying a realtor's commission fee. She explained advised that heretofore, the
City has resisted paying a realtor's commission on the purchase of City
property since the value of land is used as a part of negotiations to attract
prospective businesses to the community. She stated that the City has
considerable flexibility in discounting the value of land; however, because the
City now has ownership of the former YMCA facility, the possibility of
constructing an office building on the surface lot adjacent to the proposed City
garage is under consideration.
R. Brian Townsend, Director, Planning Community and Economic
Development, advised that three parties have expressed an interest in
submitting development proposals to the City with regard to the former YMCA
facility; whereupon, he called attention to the Council's previous direction to
dispose of the property based on the best development proposal, without the
assistance of a realtor. He explained that other localities such as Norfolk,
Richmond and Charlottesville follow the same policy as the City of Roanoke,
which is to issue a notice advising of the availability of property for 1
development, the most qualified developer is selected, and if a realtor is
1
1
1
345
involved in the process, the commission is paid by the developer. He added
that the City of Newport News has adopted a specific policy regarding
commissions which is based on the selling price of the property, the City of
Williamsburg enacted a policy establishing a set fee, and remaining localities
operate on a case by case basis, or require the buyer to pay the realtor's
commission fee.
Mr. Townsend stated that due to the type of properties that are marketed
by the City of Roanoke and since a sale price is rarely assigned, it is difficult to
involve a realtor due to potentially complicated negotiations with potential
developers. He added that an inventory of all City-owned property was
completed which revealed several small parcels of City owned land, and
approval by Council may be necessary to engage the services of a realtor to
represent the City's interests in the disposal of certain parcels of land that are
too small or isolate for development.
The City Manager stated that the City of Roanoke has been comfortable
with the policy of not paying realtor commission fees; however, because there
are several visible pieces of City owned property,criticism has been expressed
by the real estate community with regard to the City's position.
Council Member Cutler advised that one exception to the policy is land
owned by the City of Roanoke outside of the City's boundaries, such as Coyner
Springs; whereupon, Mr. Townsend stated that Coyner Springs is the largest
assemblage of publicly-owned property outside the City limits, with a portion
that is leased to the adjacent Jeter Farm, several parcels of land that are used by
the Juvenile Detention Center, and other parcels of land that are open green
space. The City Manager added that some of the parcels of land were
transferred to the Western Virginia Water Authority..
Council Member Cutler called attention to a proposal of the Bush
Administration to sell isolated tracts of national forest land to the highest
bidder. He stated that consideration should be given to identifying some of the
land that was included in the recent inventory of City-owned property for park
purposes.
Mr. Townsend advised that the inventory of City-owned property has been
forwarded to all City operating departments and to the Western Virginia Water
Authority for review with regard to retention and/or disposal of properties.
3.46
Council Member Cutler also suggested land exchanges as an option.
There being no further discussion, it was the consensus of Council that
the City of Roanoke will continue to market City-owned property.
1
The Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be immediately
reconvened in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, for one Closed Session.
The Council meeting reconvened at 1 :50 p.m., in the City Council
Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue,
S. W., City of Roanoke, with all Members of the Council in attendance, except
Council Member McDaniel, Mayor Harris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Council
Member Cutler moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of
his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted
from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information
Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion
by which any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or
. considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member
Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s - _000000__ - - - - 0000 00 - - 00 noon _- - - - 00 00 00 0000 0000 __ - - 00 0000 - - - - - - - - - 0000 __ - - 00 _.00_0000 - - 00 00 __n 006 .
1
NAYS: No n e_nn_n____nnn____nnnn_____________n_n_____nn______nnh_000000__________00_0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: The Mayor
advised that there is a vacancy on the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board
created by the resignation of James C. Hale, for a term ending March 31, 2009;
whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Evelyn W.
Manetta.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Manetta was appointed as a
member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory Board, for a term ending
March 31, 2009, by the follOWing vote:
FOR MS. MANETTA: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick,
Lea and Mayor Harrismnmmmuo__nmmmnmn_mmmu_mm___nnm______n__m_nn6. I
1
1
I
:r·'·l.;
347
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The Mayor advised that there is a vacancy on the
Fair Housing Board created by the resignation of Rich G. McGimsey, for a term
ending March 31, 2007; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Krista Blakeney.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Blakeney was appointed as a
member of the Fair Housing Board to fill the unexpired term of Rich G.
McGimsey for a term ending March 31, 2007, by the following vote:
FOR MS. BLAKENEY: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor Harris-mmmmumn_mm_mmmmm_m__mmmmmm6.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that on June 30, 2006, there
will be three vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board for terms commencing
July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2009; and pursuant to advertisements in The
Roanoke Times, applications were submitted by: James P. Beatty, Caren D.
Boisseau, Jason E. Bingham, Chris H. Craft, Jay Foster, Alice P. Hincker, E. Duane'
Howard, Mae G. Huff, Randy L. Leftwich, Mark S. Lucas, Charles W. McClure and
Todd A. Putney.
It was the consensus of Council that the following persons will be
interviewed for the upcoming vacancies on Monday, April 17, 2006, at
11 :45 a.m., and on Monday, May 1, 2006 (hour tentative); and the Council will
hold a public hearing on Monday, May 1, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the City Council Chamber, to receive
the views of citizens.
James P. Beatty
Caren D. Boisseau
Mae G. Huff
Mark S. Lucas
Jason E. Bingham
Jay Foster
Randy L. Leftwich
Todd Putney
At 1: 5 5 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
348
At 2 :00 p.m., on Monday, April 3, 2006, the Council meeting reconvened
in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris
presiding.
1
PRESENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea and Mayor C. Nelson
rlélrris-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------{).
ABSENT: Council Member Brenda L. McDaniel-mmnm--oooooo-m-h--mn-m-l.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
I
CITY EMPLOYEES-DECEASED PERSONS: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the
following resolution memorializing the late Margaret "Fran" Cox Fulford,a
former employee of the City Attorney's Office:
(#37339-040306) A RESOLUTION memorializing the late Margaret "Fran"
Cox Fulford, an employee of the City for thirty-seven years.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 195.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37339-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri S_oooo____oo_oooo______n__nh__oo__oo______oooooo_________noooo_nn____0000_00______________00_6.
NAYS: No n e _____oooooonnnnn_mnooU_U_n_nn _nn___oo_moooooonnn_n_nnU_nn 0000-0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
I
I
1
I
349
The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure
to Tamara C. Greene, daughter, and James E. Cox, III, son, and called for a
moment of silence in memory of Ms. Fulford.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-SCHOOLS: Council Member Dowe offered
the following resolution congratulating the Roanoke Catholic High School Boys
Basketball Team, winners of the Virginia Independent School Division II State
Basketball Championship:
(#37340-040306) A RESOLUTION paying tribute to the Roanoke Catholic
Celtics Basketball Team for its victory in the Virginia Independent School
Division" State Basketball Championship Tournament at Richard Bland College
in Petersburg, Virginia, on March 4,2006.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 196.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37340-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rr is - __n_ 00 __nn - - 00 --- - - - - - ---00- - - - - - -00--- - - - - noon - - 0000 . - - - _ _ - __ _n_ - - - - 00 - - - - 0000 - - - - 00_00 - - - 6.
NAYS: None _n_nn___n_n_nnn_nm n_n___n_nn_nnnnnn__n__nnn___nnnnnnnnO.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
The Mayor presented a ceremonial copy of the above referenced measure
to Head Coach Joe Gaither.
PROCLAMA TIONS-HOUSING/ AUTHORITY:
proclamation to Nancy F. Canova, Chair, Fair
month of April 2006 as Fair Housing Month.
The Mayor presented a
Housing Board, declaring the
Ms. Canova advised that the proclamation helps to raise public awareness
of Fair Housing law, and demonstrates the City's commitment to non-
discrimination in housing, mortgage lending and insurance.
350
Angela Penn, Director, Housing and Community Development, Total I
Action Against Poverty, advised that TAP was awarded funds from the U. S.
Department of Housing and Urban Development to implement a Fair Housing
Education and Outreach Program for the purpose of providing education and
outreach at the grass roots level. She stated that TAP's new Fair Housing
Specialist will meet with neighborhood organizations, civic groups, and other
housing agencies to promote fair housing, a hot line will be available to provide
more information about fair housing, a website www.tflpfairhousinq.orq will be
available to assist individuals who need to file housing complaints; and TAP will
continue to coordinate efforts with the City of Roanoke's Fair Housing Board.
She introduced Tom Day, Sr., Region 3 Education and Outreach Specialist,
Department of Housing and Urban Development.
Mr. Day advised that the grant will be the first for HUD's Fair Housing
Initiatives Program in southwest Virginia. He stated that fair housing is the law;
the year 2006 will mark 38 years in the fight for fair housing, and as a result of
the· Fair Housing Act, 9,187 complaints have been filed, complaints have
generated $11 million in monetary awards for settlement, and a national, Fair·
Housing Training Academy has been established which will be attended by
representatives of TAP in the year 2006 and 2007. He advised that the goal of
the President of the United States is to ensure equal opportunity and access to
housing for all persons, to embrace high standards of ethics, management and . I
accountability for housing,' and it is upon the President's goal that HUD
commits itself to continue another 38 years in the fight for fair housing.
PROCLAMATIONS-COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT: The Mayor presented
a proclamation to Roy Mentkow, Director, Department of Technology, and Mike
Crockett, Communications Superintendent, E-911, declaring the week of
April 9 - 15,2006, as National Public Safety Telecommunicator's Week.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by
one motion in' the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if
discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately.
I
I
I'
1
", ."
:.. f. ~ ."
351
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Tuesday,
February 21, 2006, and recessed until Friday, March 3, 2006, were before the
body.
Council Member Cutler moved that the reading of the minutes be
dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor
H a r ri s _00__ -- _u_ - - - - 00 - - - - - -- _nn___ - - - - - - 00 00 _ _ _ __00 _ _ __00 _ _ _ _ _ _00__00 _ _ unn _ __ _ _ _000000_ __ - ___ u _ _ _00_ - - - 00 - 5 .
NAYS: Non e 00 __0000 - - - - - - - - _00___ __ --00 - - _00_ - - - 00 ___u_ - - - - 0000 00 - - -_ -00--- - - - 00 Un - - noon - - 00 -000 .
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.) (Council Member Wishneff was not in
the Council Chamber when the vote was recorded.)
TAXES: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council
schedule a public hearing for Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of Straight Street Roanoke
Valley, Inc., a non-profit organization, for tax exempt status of property located
at 333 Luck Avenue, S. W., was before the body.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and
adopted by the follOWing vote:
AYES: Council Members, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor
H a rri s 00_ - - Un - - noon - - 00 _nO. __ - - _- -0000_00 - - - 0000 _ _ 0000 _ _ 00___00_ 00 u 00 00 - - - - - _000000_ __ __ ____ - - un 00 - - -00- - - 5 .
NAYS: Non e__n__n___nn_n____un__n___n_nn_n_n_nn__nn________n_n____00000000__00___0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.) (Council Member Wishneff was not in
the Council Chamber when the vote was recorded.)
TAXES: A communication from the City Manager requesting that Council
schedule a public hearing for Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of Blue Ridge Gospel
Outreach, Inc., located at 9 Salem Avenue, S. W., was before the body.
352
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council· Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor
H a r ri s - 00 n__00 - - - - - - - - 0000_ _0000_ - - - - 00____00 - - - - - 00 00__0000 _ _ _ _ _ _ ___0000_ - - 00 0000- __00 _ _ _ _ _ _ 00000000_00_ 00 00 00 00 5 .
NAYS: N 0 ne_n_nnnn__h__nn_____hn_n_nn__u___nn_____nn_n_______________00_000000___0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.) (Council Member Wishneff was not in
the Council Chamber when the vote was recorded.)
AIRPORT-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
COMMITTEE: A report of qualification of the following persons, was before
Council:
John E. Dooley as a member of the Roanoke Regional Airport
Commission, for a term ending March 9, 2010;
Carl H. Kopitzke and Mary F. Monk as members of the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board, for terms ending March 31, 2009; and
Quentin J. White as a member of the Human Services AdVisory.
Board, to fill the unexpired term of Corir¡ne B. Gott, deceased,.
ending September 30, 2008.
Council Member Cutler moved that the report of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and Mayor
H a r ri s - - - - - -- 00_00_00 - - - - _00 __00 - - - - - - _00__00_ 00 _ _ _ 00 nnnnnn __ _00_0000 00 00 00_ 00_00_ __ - - nnO__n_ 00 00 00 00 00 - - 5 .
NAYS: Non en-- ___000000_____000000______00__0000___00____00000000______00__00___________00000000___0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.) (Council Member Wishneff was not in
the Council Chamber when the vote was recorded.)
I
I
I
1
I
1
353
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
EASEMENTS-ROANOKE GAS COMPANY: Pursuant to instructions by the
Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 3,
2006, at 2:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a
request of Charles L. Lunsford Sons & Associates for permission to install a new
gas meter on the side of their building located at 16 Church Avenue, S. E., to
allow replacement of the existing heating system with a gas system, the matter
was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, March 27, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Charles
Lunsford Sons & Associates, Inc., has requested permission to install a new gas
meter on the side of their building located at 16 Church Avenue, S. E., to allow
the replacement of the existing heating system with a gas system; as the
bUilding wall is constructed on the property line, the meter would extend
beyond the property line encroaching into Century Square Park; the proposed
meter would extend approximately 12 inches into the Park, at a height of
approximately eight inches, extending upward 22 inches, and will be 14 inches
wide: and liability insurance and indemnification of the City by the applicant will
be provided.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance, to be
executed by the applicant and kept on file in the City Clerk's Office, authorizing
the City of Roanoke to grant a revocable license to the applicant for installation
of a new gas meter at 16 Church Avenue, S. E., encroaching into Century Square
Park.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37341-040306) AN ORDINANCE granting a revocable license to permit
the encroachment of a gas meter at a height above the sidewalk of eight (8)
inches, extending upward twenty-two (22) inches, and with a width of fourteen
(14) inches into Century Square Park, from property bearing Official Tax No.
4011310, upon certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 70, Page 198.)
354
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37341- I
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to be
heard in i:onnection with the request for encroachment. There being none, he
declared the public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No.3 7341-040306 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s 0_0000 00 - - - - 00 0000__0000 - - - - 00 _00_ - - - 00 - - - - - - - - - - -- n____ 00 _ - - - 00 0000_0000 - - 00 00 - - 00 ___00_00 00 - - - - 6 .
NAYS: No n e 0000_____00_000000___________0000___00________000000___000000____0000__00____0000000_00_0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
TAXICABS AND FOR HIRE VEHICLES: A petition from Yellow Cab Services
of Roanoke, Inc., for an adjustment in the rates (fuel surcharge) for taxicab· I
service and for-hire automobiles in the City of Roanoke, was before Council.
It was advised that since the last rate increase in 2004, gasoline pump
charges have risen from an average of $1.10 per gallon to $2.39' per gallon; in
addition, current indicators suggest gasoline prices will continue to dramatically
increase; in an effort to maintain service and to retain taxi drivers, the
petitioner is compelled to petition Council for the addition of a fuel surcharge;
a proposed fuel surcharge of $1.00 per trip would be added to the current
meter price charged for each trip; the fuel surcharge would be posted on rate
stickers displayed in each taxi and is in line with what other taxi companies in
Virginia charge, or are seeking to charge, and would assist drivers in partially
offsetting escalating gasoline prices.
It was further advised that Yellow Cab Services of Roanoke, Inc., agrees to
drop the proposed fuel surcharge, if the average posted price of a gallon of
gasoline drops below the price of $2.00 per gallon for a period of six months.
I
1
1
1
355
Alan D. Carlisle, Manager, Yellow Cab Company, spoke in support of the
request.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the petition would
be referred to the City Manager for report to Council.
BUDGET-RIVER PARKWAY/EXPLORE PARI<: Debbie Pitts, Executive
Director, Explore Park, expressed appreciation for past and current support of
Virginia's Explore Park by the City of Roanoke, which has enabled Explore Park
to provide quality education programs for Roanoke City school students and the
Roanoke Valley region. She stated that over 30 school districts have been
served from as far away as West Virginia and North Carolina; Explore Park
continues to provide a first class living history museum and outdoor recreation
area; and Explore Park provides services to tourists exiting the Blue Ridge
Parkway into the Roanoke Valley. She explained that Explore Park is officially
classified as a non-state agency in the State budget; however, the Park is
actually a political subdivision of the State'; the Commonwealth of Virginia owns
and manages Explore Park through the Virginia Recreational Facilities Authority
(VRFA) which serves as the Board of Directors; and members of the Board of
Directors are appointed by the Governor. She stated that the VRFA was
established in 1986 with a mission to create a major tourist destination in
southwest Virginia, to provide history and natural resource education for
children and adults, to conserve scenic and open space land along the Roanoke
River, and to provide outdoor recreation opportunities; since its inception, $46
million has been invested in the Explore Park through public/private
partnerships, most of which has been invested in the purchase of 1,100 acres
of land; however, the vision for Explore Park has not been achieved and a major
infusion of capital funding is needed, as well as development of features that
will generate revenue to support the Park in the future.
Ms. Pitts advised that in March 2005, the VRFA entered into an option for
a long-term lease of Explore Park to Virginia Living Histories; the goal of
Virginia Living Histories is to develop a family-oriented vacation destination; the
public/private partnership will provide the necessary capital to realize the
original vision for Explore Park and to create a destination attraction that will
generate tourism and tax revenues for the Roanoke Valley and the
Commonwealth of Virginia; and the lease option requires that Virginia Living
Histories spend a minimum of $20 million on capital development over the first
three years of the project, although it is probable that the amount will be closer
to $80 million during the first period. She explained that Virginia Living
Histories is currently in the due diligence phase of the project, including
development of market and feasibility studies; the lease option requires this
process and any preconstruction planning to be completed in three years, or by
June, 2008; however, it is anticipated that the lease may be activated in a
356
shorter period of time; all parties that are involved with Explore Park believe 1
that the project will be much more successful if the Park continues: (1) to
operate during the planning period in order to protect and preserve $46 million
in assets and to continue to provide SOL based education to over 12,000
students who visit the Park for school outings; (2) to serve 60,000 plus visitors
to Explore Park each year, of which 17,500 are tourists visiting the Parkway
Visitor Center for information about the region and the Commonwealth of
Virginia; (3) to support the efforts of Virginia Living Histories in the due
diligence and planning phases: and (4) to plan for the orderly transition of
Explore Park to Virginia Living Histories if the option is activated.
Ms. Pitts stated that representatives of Explore Park have approached
each of the local governments in the region, as well as the Commonwealth of
Virginia, to request an allocation of funds to continue operation of the Park,
and, if possible, to increase funding that will allow Explore Park to continue
current operations until the lease with Virginia Living Histories is activated;
therefore, the City of Roanoke is requested to increase funding from
$35,385.00 to $50,000.00. She stated that if the request is approved, the City
of Roanoke will be investing in an economic development project just seven
miles from downtown Roanoke, a project that will generate regional tourism
and create jobs for the Roanoke Valley in the future. She explained that Explore
Park applied for $50,000.00 in funding through the City of Roanoke Cultural I
Services Committee and was awarded $36,400.00 for fiscal year 2006-2007;
after going through the appeals process, the Cultural Services Committee
explained that it has an established amount of funding with numerous
demands for funds, therefore, the Cultural Services Committee could not
increase the amount of the allocation to Explore Park. She stated that the
Cultural Services Committee supports the request of Explore Park for a special
Council appropriation of $13,600.00, which will bring the City's total
appropriation to $50,000.00.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the request would
be referred to the City Manager for report to Council.
AIRPORT-BUDGET: Jacqueline L. Shuck, Executive Director, Roanoke
Regional Airport Commission, presented a report of the Airport Commission
advising that in accordance with requirements of the Roanoke Regional Airport
Commission Contract dated January 28, 1987, as amended, the Roanoke
Regional Airport Commission submits the Fiscal Year 2006-2007 Operating
Budget for approval by Council. She stated that the budget was adopted by the
Airport Commission at its meeting on March 15, 2006; and a separate list of
capital expenditures which are expected to exceed $100,000.00 in cost and are
intended to benefit five or more future accounting periods is provided.
I
1
1
1
" ,-~
357
She further advised that no deficit is anticipated in either the operating
budget or for the listed capital expenditures; therefore, no additional
appropriations are requested or anticipated from the City of Roanoke or the
County of Roanoke; and formal approval of the operating budget and capital
expenditure list, by resolution, by each participating political subdivision is
requested.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37342-040306) A RESOLUTION approving the Roanoke Regional
Airport Commission's 2006-2007 proposed operating and capital budget, upon
certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 200.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37342-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H arr i s 00 0000 00 _n_00 - - - - 0000 0000_ - - - - - 00 _ _ _ 0000 - - _00__00_ - - - - 00__ _ _ _ _ _ 0000_00_ - - ____ 00 - - 0000 00, _ 00 00 - - - - 6.
NAYS:· Non e m__nnnnnnnn.·_n_n_n_nnnnn_nnnnnnnn_n_nnn_mnn_mn_nnO.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
BUDGET-ROANOKE VALLEY RESOURCE AUTHORITY: Steven R. Barger,
Operations Manager, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, advised that in
accordance with the Member Use Agreement, the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority submits its 2006-2007 annual budget, in the total amount of
$8,790,040.00, to Council for approval.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the follOWing resolution:
(#37343-040306) A RESOLUTION approving the annual budget of the
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority for Fiscal Year 2006-2007, upon certain
terms and conditions.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 201.)
358
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37343- 1
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,. Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s - n_n 00__ 00 00 __00 - - - - - - 00__00 -_ - - - - - - - _00_00_00_ - - - - -0000- - - - - - - - - on 00 _ _ __ 00__000000 00 _00000000_6 .
NAYS: No n e u____uunnn_u__n_nn_nunn___nnnnu_U_nn_un__nnn__h_u_Un_n000.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS-FDETC: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke is the grant
recipient for Workforce Investment Act (WIA) funding, thus, Council must I
appropriate funding for all grants and other monies received in order for the
Western Virginia Workforce Development Board to administer WIA· programs;
the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board administers the Federally
funded Workforce Investment Act (WIA) for Area 3, which includes the Counties
of Alleghany, Botetourt, Craig, Franklin and Roanoke, and the Cities of
Covington, Roanoke, and Salem.
It was further advised that WIA funding is intended for four primary client
populations:
· Dislocated workers who have been laid off from employment
through no fault of their own;
· Economically disadvantaged individuals as determined by
household income guidelines defined by the U. S. Department of
Labor;
· Youth who are economically disadvantaged, or have other
barriers to becoming successfully employed adults; and
· Businesses in need of employment and job training services.
1
I
I
I
.!..:;....
359
It was explained that the Western Virginia Workforce Development Board,
by request, has received a Notice of Obligation (NOO) from the Virginia
Employment Commission transferring $109,000.00 from Program Year 2004
WIA Dislocated Worker Program budget to Program Year 2004 Adult Program
budget and transferring $ 50,000.00 from Program Year 2005 WIA Dislocated
Worker Program budget to Program Year 2005 Adult Program budget.
It was noted that existing activities will continue and planned programs
will be implemented; and funds are available from the Grantor agency and other
sources as indicated, at no additional cost to the City.
The City Manager recommended that Council accept the Western Virginia
Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding transfer; and
adopt an ordinance transferring appropriations of $109,000.00 from Program
Year 2004 from Dislocated Worker Contract Services, Account No. 035-633-
2312-8057, to Program Year 2004 Adult Program Contract Services, Account
No. 035-633-2311-8057; and transferring appropriations of $50,000.00 from
Program Year 2005 Dislocated Worker Contract Services, Account No. 035-633-
2322-8057, to Program Year 2005 Adult Program Contract Services, Account
No. 035-633-2321-8057.
Council Member Dowe offered the fOllowing budget ordinance:
(#37344-040306) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding between various
programs of the 2004 and 2005 Workforce Investment Act Grants, amending
and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations,
and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 202.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37344-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H ar r i s - --- 00 - - -- --- - - - - - un - - - - - - 00 00 - - - - - - - 00 00 - - - - _ _ 0000 00 _000000_ _ _ - _ _ _nn_ __ 00__00_ - - - noon - - - -006 .
NAYS: Non e - on - - - - 00 00 - - - - __n____ - - -000000- - 00 __ noon - 00-0000 - _ _ _ ______ 00_ ____00 00 _ _ 00 0000 - - - _ -000.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
360
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
1
(#37345-040306) A RESOLUTION accepting the Western Virginia
Workforce Development Board Workforce Investment Act funding of
$159,000.00 and authorizing the City Manager to execute the requisite
documents necessary to accept the funding.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 203.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37345-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H arri S____oonoo______oooo________oo_______m___________oooooo____n___00__00_________0000_00__0000__006.
NAYS: No n e_oo_oo______noo_h_oooo___oo__ooh_oooo____________n"___.oonnnn__-0000-------------0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
BUDGET-GRANTS-ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the Virginia Economic Development I
Partnership (VEDP) established Virginia's Opportunity Regions Marketing Grant
to assist local governments in the State with marketing; and in December 2005,
the Division of Economic Development applied for the grant to design and print
marketing brochures for the City of Roanoke, Roanoke Centre for Industry and
Technology (RClT), the Riverside Centre and Enterprise Zones One A and Two.
It was further advised that in March 2006, for the second year in a row,
the Virginia Economic Development Partnership awarded the City of Roanoke a
grant for $10,000.00 which requires 50 per cent in matching funds; and an
additional $5,000.00 in matching funds for the grant are available in the
Economic Development budget, Account No. 001-310-8120-2015. .
It was explained that action by Council is necessary in order for the City
to formally accept and appropriate the funds and to authorize the Director of
Finance to establish a revenue account to receive the funds; and authorization
by Council for the City Manager to execute the grant contract is required.
1
1
I
1
'."'" ,'. .
'.'
.....
,.'";-':; .~.
361
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
grant contract accepting Virginia's Opportunity Regions Marketing Grant, and to
execute any other required grant documents, to be approved as to form by the
City Attorney; that Council adopt an ordinance establishing revenue estimates
totaling $15,000.00 in the Grant Fund, transferring $5,000.00 from the General
Fund Economic Development account, and appropriating funds totaling
$15,000.00 to an expenditure account to be established by the Director of
Finance in the Grant Fund.
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37346-040306) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth for the Virginia Opportunity Region Grant, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General and Grant Funds
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 203.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37346-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote: .
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s ___00_ - - nn - - - - - - - - - - 000000 00 - - 0000- noon 00 00-00 - - - - - 0000 - - - - _ _ _ _00000 - 0 _00__00_ _.000000 - - - - -00 -6 .
NAYS: Non e - 00_00 -. - - 00 0000000000 -0000 - un - - - - - 00 00 00 - - 000000 __ - - unn 00 -00-00_00 _ _ _ _ 0000 - - - - _00 - - O.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:·
(#37347-040306) A RESOLUTION authorizing the acceptance of a
Virginia's Opportunity Regions, Marketing Grant from the Virginia Economic
Development Partnership; and authorizing the City Manager to execute a grant
contract to accept such funds and any other required grant documentation on
behalf of the City.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 204.)
362
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37347-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
1
AYES: Council Members Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a r ri s - - -- 00_n_n - - 00 00 00 - - - - 00 00 00____ 00 - - - - - 00 0000____ 00 - - - - 00 00 - - - - - 000000 - - - - - - __ 00 00 00 -- 0000 00 -- - - 6.
NAYS: No n e--n 00____00_000000_00____00 0000__00_00__000000_____00__00___00_000000__0000____0000_____0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
POLICE DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Certified Crime Prevention Community
Program publicly recognizes and certifies localities that have implemented a
defined set of community safety strategies as part of a comprehensive
community safety/crime prevention effort; the program encourages localities to
develop and implement collaborative community safety plans within a flexible
framework designed by the Virginia State Crime Commission; to either obtain
certification or remain certified, a locality must meet.12 core community safety
elements/strategies augmented by a minimum of seven approved optional
elements; and the Department of Criminal Justice Services administers and
monitors the program.
I
It was further advised that the City of Roanoke has maintained
certification as a crime prevention community since 2001 : every three years the
City must apply for re-certification; as a part of the re-application process,
Council must adopt a resolution affirming the City's interest in maintaining the
certified status, as well as authorizing a City official to provide the required
documentation needed as a part of the application process.
It was explained that maintaining certification is important because
certified localities receive preference points during State grant application
review, insurance policy holders living in the community may receive premium
discounts and the certified designation can be used as a marketing tool to
attract businesses and conference planners.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a· resolution
authorizing the City Manager, or her designee, to begin the application process
for re-certification as a crime prevention community.
1
I
1
I
'! . : ~';. .' , ~ '.
. ,:,.'
"
363
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37348-040306) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City's continued
participation in the Virginia Certified Crime Prevention Community Program.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 205.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37348-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a r ri s - 00 - 00 n__n - - -00- 00 - - - - - - 00 00 __ - - - - 0000- - - - - 0000 00 _ _ noon _ _ ___00 un - - 00 00 00 00 - - - - _00_0000 0000006 .
NAYS: . No n e__u__nnn____n__nn__hnn______n_nnn______nd__u___nnn______00000000_____0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
BUDGET-GRANTS-YOUTH: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that the City of Roanoke has participated in the Virginia Juvenile
Community Crime Control Act (VjCCCA) since its inception in 1996; each
biennium, a local plan is developed to address th~ needs of juveniles who come
before juvenile intake on complaints, or the court, on petitions alleging that the
child is in need of service or supervision, or is delinquent; the intent of VjCCCA
is to establish a community-based system of sanctions that are ordered by the
Juvenile and Domestic Relations District Court, and services to address the
needs of eligible population; and City of Roanoke programs that address such
needs are: Youth Haven, Sanctuary-Crisis Intervention Center, Outreach
Detention, Electronic Monitoring, Substance Abuse Counselor and Enhanced
Community Service.
It was further advised that a resolution from the governing body of each
participating locality endorsing participation in VjCCCA is required by the
Commonwealth of Virginia each biennium; VjCCCA guidelines provide that the
locality may word the resolution such that the locality intends to participate in
VjCCCA until the locality notifies the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice, in
writing, that it no longer wishes to participate, without the need for a new
resolution to be adopted each biennium; and no further action by the Council
will be required to continue participation or to make revisions to future VjCCCA
plans.
364
It was explained that two staff members in VJCCCA programs currently I
operate under a cooperative supervision agreement between the City of
Roanoke and the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice; staff members are City
employees who are provided with supervision from the Virginia Department of
Juvenile Justice and are assigned to assist in the delivery of services to juveniles
under the VJCCCA; an updated Memorandum of Agreement is necessary to
provide terms under which City employees will carry out their duties under the
supervision of the Department of Juvenile Justice for the coming biennium and
subsequent VJCCCA plans each biennium, or revised plans within the biennium,
will require a revised Memorandum of Agreement.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution
endorsing the City· of Roanoke's participation in the Virginia Juvenile
Community Crime Control Act; and that the City Manager be authorized to
execute the required Memorandum of Agreement to be used as guidance for
providing direction and support to City of Roanoke employees assigned to the
Department of Juvenile Justice, in connection with the Virginia Juvenile
Community Crime Control Act, with the agreement to be updated by the City
Manager with regard to renewal and/or revision of future VJCCCA plans.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
I
(#37349-040306) A RESOLUTION endorsing participation by the City in
the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act; authorizing the City
Manager to execute a Memorandum of Agreement between the City of Roanoke
and the Virginia Department of Juvenile Justice to be used as guidance for
providing direction and support to City employees assigned to the Virginia
Department of .Juvenile Justice in connection with the Virginia Juvenile
Community Crime Control Act.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 206.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37349-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
Council Member Dowe advised that he serves in an unpaid capacity on
the Board of Directors, Virginia Criminal Justice Services, and inquired if he
should abstain from voting on the abovereferenced resolution; whereupon, the
City Attorney advised that there would be no conflict of interest inasmuch as
Mr. Dowe receives no remuneration for his services.
I
1
1
1
. ,..., .
.. .
......,,'....::
:¡(.;.).
365
Resolution No.3 7349-040306 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H ar r i s - __n_n - - 00 00 00 - - - - 00 --0000 -- - - 00 - 0000 - _ _ - _00_00 - - 0000 - - _ _ _0000__00 - - nOOn - - 00 0000 00 - - 00-00: - - - - 6.
NAYS: No nenn__nn____nnn_______n_ ______0000.___0000___00000000___00__0000000000____00__00___0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
CITY CODE-ZONING-SIGNS/BILLBOARDS/AWNINGS: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that with adoption of new zoning
regulations on December 5, 2005 (Chapter 36.2 of the City Code), and the
corresponding repeal of previous zoning regulations (Chapter 36.1 of the City
Code), other sections of the City Code must be amended to make reference to
zoning regulations and zoning districts in those sections consistent with
terminology and section numbers used in Chapter 36.2.
It was further advised that with the regulation of temporary signs now
included in Division 6, Signs (Sections 36.2-660 through 36.2-675) of Chapter
36.2, Zoning of the City Code, Article II (Sections 27.1-31 through 27.1-35) of
the City Code should be repealed.
The City Manager recommended that Council· adopt an ordinance
amending sections of the City Code that reference zoning regulations and
zoning districts, consistent with terminology and section numbers used in
Chapter 36.2; and repealing Article II (Sections 27.1-31 through 27.1-35) of the
Code of the City of Roanoke, 1979, as amended.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37350-040306) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining
subsections (a), (b)(2) and (b)(4) of §6-27, Limitation~ on keepinq, subsection
(b) of §6-112, Densitv requirements, and subsections (a), (b)(2) and (b)(4) of §6-
116, Limitations on keepinq of Chapter 6, Animals and Fowl; § 11.1-2,
Definitions, and subsection (d) of § 11.2-19, Performance bond, of Chapter
11.1, Erosion and Sediment Control; §21-43~ 1, Prohibition aqainst operation of
certain liqhted athletic facilities after 10:00 p.m., and §21-205, Definitions, of
Chapter 21, Offenses - Miscellaneous; subsections (1 )(b), (1 )(c), (3)(a) and (7) of
§27 .1-2, Proiections over sidewalks. streets. allevs or other public propertv, of
Chapter 27.1, Siqns and similar proiections over citv riqhts-of-wav or propertv;
§30-14, Procedure for alterinq or vacatinq citv streets or allevs: fees therefor,
and subsection (a) of §30-86, Construction in C-3 zoninq district, of Chapter
30, Streets and Sidewalks; §32-7, Delinquent real estate t(l,xes, of Chapter 32,
Taxation; and subsection (e) of §33-17, Definitions, of Chapter 33, Veqetation
366
and Trash, and deleting Article 11, Temporarv Siqns, of Chapter 27.1, Siqns and
Similar PrQjections over City Riqht-of-wav or Propertv, of the Code of the City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, to make changes in the City Code necessitated by
the adoption of Chapter 36.2, Zoninq; and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
1
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 222.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37350-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s 00 _00___ - - - - - c_ 00__n___00 00 - - 00 00 00- _00_00 - - - - - - - - - - _00__00_ - - 00 - noon 00 __ - - -_ 00 - - 00 _.- 00 0000----6.
NAYS: No n e_n_nn________n_h______n____n_____nnn_____nnhnnn_nnnnn00-00-_________0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
BUDGET-CELEBRATiONS-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in 2007, the City of Roanoke will celebrate its
125'" Anniversary with local events and activities that will occur throughout the
year; as a major event of the celebration, the City will host a performing arts 1
festival which will incorporate all components of the performing arts, including
symphony, theatre, ballet,· and opera; the Roanoke Arts Festival will serve to
commemorate the founding of Roanoke· and to unite its citizens by. way of
music, dance, theatre, and art; the festival will also serve to expose a diverse
group of citizens to artistic excellence and to assist in the City's high priority
efforts in developing regional tourism; and numerous celebratory events will
also be held throughout the year to highlight important historical, cultural, and
educational aspects of the City.
It was further advised that to orchestrate the festival, the City of Roanoke
needs to establish a full time position that will be responsible for logistical and
artistic programming and marketing efforts for the festival; and the position
will also be responsible for planning, coordinating, and managing all
celebratory activities for the 12 5th Anniversary Ceiebration.
It was explained that the Arts Festival Manager position will be classified
as a Pay Grade 15, with a salary range from $47,067.00 to $72,954.00;
projected cost for the remainder of fiscal year 2005-2006 is $10,849.00; and
funding is available in the City Manager's Contingency, Account No. 001-300-
9410-2199.
1
1
I
1
.....
·'>'·:'.~h·
367
The City Manager recommended that Council concur in the establishment
of an Arts Festival Manager position for the City of Roanoke, effective May 1,
2006; adopt an ordinance transferring funds in the amount of $10,849.00 from
the City Manager's Contingency, Account No. 001-300-9410-2199, to the·
following accounts:
Obiect
Amount
Ac;count Number
Regular Employee Salaries
City Retirement
FICA
$9,021.00
$1,138.00
$ 690.00
001-300-1211-1002
001-300-1211-1105
001-300-1211-1120
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37351-040306) AN ORDINANCE to transfer funding from the City
Manager's Contingency for a new Arts Festival Manager position, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations,
and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 222.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37351-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
Council Member Cutler spoke in support of establishing the position of
Arts Festival Manager, and asked for a clarification by the City Manager if an
additional position to be classified as Public Art Coordinator will be established
to maintain City-owned art and to administer the Per Cent for Art Program.
The City Manager responded that funds for the Public Arts Coordinator
pOSition is included in the City's 2006-2007 proposed budget.
There being no further discussion, Ordinance No. 37351-040306 was
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r Harri s ______0000____00n______00______________0000_nn______00_______00________000000__00___________00_6.
NAYS: No n e _____00_______00__00________00___________________00____0000____00_00__00___--------------0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
368
BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare is a community
service board established by the political jurisdictions of the Counties of
Botetourt, Craig and Roanoke, and the Cities of Roanoke and Salem; for a
number of years, the City of Salem has served as fiscal agent for Blue Ridge
Behavioral Healthcare due to restrictions included in old state law which
required that a governing body of a city or county that initially established the
board must serve as fiscal agent; however, effective October 1, 2005, state law
was amended to allow community service operating boards, such as Blue Ridge
Behavioral Healthcare, to act as its own fiscal agent when authorized to do so
by the governing body of each establishing city or county, which provision is
included in Section 37 .2-504A.18, Code of Virginia (1950), as amended.
It was further advised that Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare has
requested that the City of Roanoke adopt a resolution authorizing the
organization to serve as its own fiscal agent; the request has been reviewed and
there are no objections to Council adopting a resolution authorizing the
organization to act as its own fiscal agent; the City of Salem, the current fiscal
agent and the entity most affected by the change, has raised no objection to
the request, and all other jurisdictions have agreed to propose a resolution for
adoption by their governing bodies.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a· resolution
authorizing Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare to act as its own fiscal agent.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37352-040306) A RESOLUTION authorizing Blue Ridge Behavioral
Healthcare to act as its own fiscal agent to receive state and federal funds
directly from the Department of Mental Health, Mental Retardation and
Substance Abuse Services.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 223.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37352-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rr i s _n_ - - noon 00 - - - - - - 00 - - 00 - - - - - - - _00_ - - _0000_ 00 00 - - - - - - noon: - - - - - - - - - - 0000 - - - - - - - - -00--0000---006 .
NAYS: Non e 00 - - - - - - 00 00->00 00 - - - - -00-_ _ 0000 00 - - - - - - - - - _00>0000 - - - - Unhh_n -- - - -_ 00 _0000_ 00 00 00 - - - O.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
1
1
1
I
I
I
:;Õ'.::
369
PARKING FACILITIES: The City Manager' submitted a communication
advising that the City currently owns and/or controls 11 parking facilities in
downtown Roanoke; the City has adopted several strategies to help Roanoke
area residents and visitors become more aware of the abundant parking options
that are provided in the downtown area; a new "Park Roanoke" logo was
designed and approved for use in development of new exterior signage for all
of the City's current and future parking facilities; the naming of parking
facilities is an equally important aid to help drivers identify and locate parking
close to their destination; and short, concise, and recognizable names with this
type of destination association are a proven combination to connect drivers to
the most convenient parking for their destination.
It was further advised that in order to act in concert with new signage
initiatives, renaming of parking facilities should be approved at the same time
as improvements are made to exterior signage for each parking facility, to be
effective June 1, 2006.
The City Manager recommended that Council approve name changes for
City parking facilities; and that Council further authorize the City Manager to
take any appropriate action and to execute any documents that may be
necessary to effect the renaming of City parking facilities.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37353-040306) A RESOLUTION renaming certain City owned and/or
controlled parking facilities; authorizing the City Manager to take any
appropriate action and execute any documents necessary to effect the
renaming of these parking facilities; and establishing an effective date.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 224.)·
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37353-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by·
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s 00- - 00 - - - - - - -- noon 00 - - 00 nnn - - - -00- - - noon - - ----00 - - _00_00_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 00 _00_ 00 _ _ 0000 00 - - -0000- 00--6.
NAYS: Non e 00 - - _00_ - - - - - - - - 00- 0000 - noon _00_00_ - - -0000- - - 00 -00_00 - - - - 00 00_0000 _ _ _ _ 00 - - - - _ _ 0000 - - 00 -0 .
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
370
Council Member Wishneff requested that the naming of a City facility in 1
memory of the late restaurateur, AI Pollard, be referred to the City Manager and
to the City Planning Commission for study, report and recommendation to
Council.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the request would
be referred to the City Manager and to the City Planning Commission for study,
report and recommendation to Council.
ZONING-CITY PROPERTY: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that on August 16, 2004, Council rezoned Official Tax No. 7160113,
located at the entrance to the Roanoke Centre for Industry and Technology
from LM, Light Industrial, to C-2, General Commercial, with conditions,
pursuant to Ordinance No. 36821-081604; the rezoning provided for a range of
commercial uses that would take advantage of the visibility and access provided
by. Orange Avenue, and complement and support· existing light industrial
development in the (entre; with adoption of the current zoning map on
December 5, 2005, the property became CG, Commercial-General District,
subject to previously approved proffered conditions; and the existing proffers
limit the range of permitted commercial uses, prohibit access to the site directly
from Orange Avenue, and limit the number of freestanding signs.
It was further advised that since the property was rezoned in 2004, it has
been determined that the range of permitted commercial uses should be
expanded to enhance the marketability of the property; and the list of uses
should now conform to those specified in the Use Matrix of the current Zoning
Ordinance which was adopted in December 2005.
1
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to file. a petition
to amend proffered conditions, and any subsequent amended petition
necessary and appropriate to effect Vision 2001-2020, the City's
Comprehensive Plan, on property located at the northeast corner of Blue Hills
Drive and Orange Avenue, N. E., identified as Official Tax No. 7160113.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37354-040306) A RESOLUTION authorizing the filing of a petition to
amend the proffered conditions, and any subsequent amended petition
necessary and appropriate to effect Vision 2001 - 2020, the City's
Comprehensive Plan, presently binding on property which is owned by the City
of Roanoke and which is designated as Official Tax No. 7160113.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 225.)
1
1
1
I
.:'..;'.....
371
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37354-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a rri s ______n__ - - - - - - _00__00_ - - - - - - 00 - - - - - ---- - -0000 00 - - - - 00 00 00 - - n.nnU - - - - 00 0000 - - --00-- - - 0000 - - - - 6.
NAYS: No n enn__nnnnnn__unn__n_________oo__n_nn_____nnn_____nnn____0000______00_0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
CITY ATTORNEY:
STREETS AND ALLEYS: The City Attorney submitted a written report
advising that on January 18, 2005, Ordinance No. 36945-011805 was adopted
by Council permanently vacating a 15' alley running between Whitmore Avenue
and Reserve Avenue, S. W., and parallel to Jefferson Street, S. W., upon certain
conditions; a condition of the ordinance was that the petitioners, Carilion
Medical Center and CHS, Inc., would prepare and record a plat, showing the
disposition of the land within the subject right-of-way, in the Clerk's Office of
the Circuit Court for the City of Roanoke within a period of 12 months from the
effective date of the ordinance; and if all of the conditions were not met within
the 12 month time frame, the ordinance provided that it would become null and
void without further action by the Council.
It was further advised that the petitioners, by their attorney, Daniel F.
Layman, Jr., have advised that conditions of the ordinance were not completed
due to a misunderstanding between the Housing Authority and the petitioners
as to the responsibility for meeting the conditions; the attorney has requested
that Ordinance No. 36945-011805 be amended and reordained to allow 24
months for meeting conditions; the Engineering Department and the
Department of Planning Building and Economic Development have reviewed the
request and have raised no objection.
The City Attorney recommended that Council amend and reordain
Ordinance No. 36945-011805, with the condition that the period of time
required for satisfaction of the conditions be changed from 12 months to 24
months.
372
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
I
(#37355-040306) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Ordinance
No. 36945-011805; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book 70, Page 227.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37355-
040306. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H arri s _n_ - - - - --.- - - - - - - 00 ---- 00 - - - - - - 00 0000- - - -- 00 00 - - - - 00 0000 - - 00 00_____00 - - 00 nun 00__ -- 00 - - - - - - - - - - 6 .
NAYS: Non e____nuunu____uuu____u____uuuu_un__u________un_____n__-__________0000000.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
BONDS/BOND ISSUES: The Director of Finance submitted a written report 1
advising that the City issued $4S.675 million of Series 1997B bonds dated
January 15, 1997, to refund a portion of the City's series 1988, 1992A and
1992B public improvement bonds; maturities of the 1997B bonds, due on and
after August 1, 2007, totaling $17.88 million are callable on August 1, 2006;
and the interest rate on the callable maturities is 5.0 per cent.
It was further advised that the City issued $44.245 million· of Series
2002A bonds dated February 1, 2002, to fund various projects, maturities of
the Series 2002A bonds due on and after October 1, 2013, totaling $21.81
million, are callable on or after October 1, 2012; and the interest rates on each
of the callable bonds range from 4.25%to 5.25%.
It was explained that based on recent interest rate movements, the City
could potentially realize annual savings by refunding a portion of the callable
Series 1997B and/or Series 2002A bonds; savings would be contingent upon
interest rates received on the refunding bonds, the interest rate(s) obtained on
the Treasury certificates to fund an escrow, and the final redemption price of
the transaction(s); and based upon discussions with the City's financial advisor,
BB& T Capital Markets, it is believed that an appropriate level of savings to
justify refunding may be achieved depending on market conditions on the date I
of pricing. .
1
1
I
..;."
373
...
The Director of Finance advised that since interest rates fluctuate daily, it
is imperative to the success of a refunding that the City act quickly once
interest rates enable the achievement of an acceptable level of savings on one
or both series of bonds; and a negotiated sale, versus a competitive sale, can
be accomplished in a much shorter timeframe, with lower upfront costs and
with greater flexibility, and is deemed more practical in this situation.
It was further adVised that the City invited two bond underwriting firms,
both of which provided the City with refunding scenarios, to further analyze
refunding opportunities; one firm, Morgan Keegan, managed the City's 2004
refunding transactions; the other firm, Wachovia Securities, purchased three of
the City's last five competitive issues; and the Department of Finance, based on
recommendations from BB& T Capital Markets, selected these two firms to
comprise the underwriting syndicate.
It was noted that refunding bonds will be considered additional debt in
the context of the City's debt policy and from rating agencies' perspective only
to the extent that a slightly higher level of principal would need to be issued
than the amount of bonds being refunded; additionally, to the extent that some
of the debt service on the current general obligation bonds is being provided by
the Western Virginia Water Authority (WVWA), funding for the new bonds would
also come from the Water Authority, resulting in debt service savings for that
entity, as well as for the City.
The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt a resolution
authorizing the City Manager and the Director of Finance to issue up to $42.5
million in refunding bonds to be sold by an underwriting syndicate comprised
of Morgan Keegan and Wachovia Securities; refunding bonds shall be issued to
refund the 19978 bonds if net present value savings of $300,000.00 and a
minimum of 2.5 per cent of net present value of the refunded bonds can be
achieved; and refunding bonds shall be issued to refund the 2002A bonds if net
present value savings of $250,000.00 and a minimum of five per cent of net
present value of the 2002A refunded bonds can be achieved.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37356-040306) A RESOLUTION authorizing the issuance and sale at
negotiated dollars ($42,500,000.00) principal amount of City of Roanoke,
Virginia, General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds; fixing the form,
denomination and certain other details of such bonds and delegating to the City
Manager and the Director of Finance authority, among other things, to select an
underwriter for such bonds, to execute and deliver to such underwriter a bond
purchase contract by and between the City and such underwriter, to determine
the aggregate principal amount of such bonds, the maturity dates of such
374
bonds and the principal amounts of such bonds maturing in each year, the
interest payment dates for such bonds and the rates of interest to be borne by 1
such bonds, the redemption provisions and redemption premiums, if any,
applicable to such bonds and to appoint an escrow agent for the bonds to be
refunded from the proceeds of such bonds; authorizing the preparation of a
preliminary official statement and an official statement and the delivery thereof
to such underwriter; authorizing the execution and delivery of a continuing
disclosure certificate relating to such bonds, authorizing the execution and
delivery of an escrow depOSit agreement relating to the refunded bonds;
authorizing the City Manager and the Director of Finance to appoint a
verification agent; authorizing the City Manager and the Director of Finance to
designate the refunded bonds for redemption; and otherwise providing with
respect to the issuance, sale and delivery of such bonds and the refunding of
the refunded bonds.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 229.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37356-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayor H arris_____________hn__noo___n____n_____uhnn__ -_________________00_______________________00__,_6. I
NAYS: Non e - - 0000 -- -- - - - - - - - - 00 0000 - - - - __ - - - - - - - 00 _____00___ - - 00 ____ -- - - - - 00 - -- 00__________ -- 00 00 -- - 0 .
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
TAXES: The Director of Finance submitted a written report advising that
the Personal Property Tax Relief Act (PPTRA or the Act) of 1998 established a
state-wide program to provide relief to owners of personal use motor.vehicles;
the 1998 Act envisioned a five year phase-in of relief expressed as a percentage
of the bill related to the first $20,000.00 of personal use vehicle value; costs
soared, and the percentage has been frozen at 70 per cent since 2001.
It was further advised that in 2004 and 2005, additional legislation was
passed to amend the original Act; the legislation capped PPTRA at $950 million
for all Virginia localities for tax years 2006 and beyond; PPTRA funds are
allocated to individual localities based on each government's pro rata share of
tax year 2004 payments from the Commonwealth of Virginia and the City's
share of the $950 million is $8,075,992.00.
I
1
I
I
.,
375
It was explained that at the October 17, 2006, City Council meeting,
Ordinance No. 37221-101705 amended the City Code to provide for
implementation of 2004-2005 changes to the Personal Property Tax Relief Act
(PPTRA) of 1998, which included the following:
1. The City chose the "Specific Relief' method (percentage
reduction) of computing tax relief.
2. The City will allocate the relief at a single percentage across the
board to the first $20,000.00 of personal vehicle value.
3. The City will continue to fully exempt vehicles valued at
$1,000.00 and below from taxation.
4. The Treasurer is authorized to "balance bill" any taxes from
2005 and prior that are still delinquent at September 1, 2006, or
when State funding for tax relief is depleted.
It was explained that City staff computed the effective reimbursement
rate based upon both historical trends and the current tax assessment book;
the PPTRA Allocation Model, developed by the Commonwealth of Virginia, was
used to assist with the analysis in determining the rate for the City which is
66.19%; this percentage is similar to neighboring localities that are ready to
adopt, or have already adopted, their relief percentages; Roanoke County
adopted 65.13%, and the Town of Vinton relief rate will be 65.98%; Franklin
County is estimating 64.21 %; Northern Virginia localities are reporting lower
percentages of relief· because they have a greater growth in the number of
vehicles that have been reported; and City Council is required by the
Commonwealth of Virginia to annually adopt a resolution setting the
percentage relief for personal property tax for that year.
The Director of Finance advised that the percentage relief is calculated to
distribute the $8,075,992.00 block grant allocation from the Commonwealth of
Virginia in the manner abovedescribed; acknowledging that the calculated
percentage relief is an estimate, total personal property tax collected should be
approximately the same as if the previous assessment method of personal
property tax were in place; and although the majority of funds from· the
Commonwealth will be received in July 2006, (fiscal year 2006-2007), the City
will accrue funds in the 2005-2006 fiscal year for accounting purposes so that
the City's budget will be balanced.
376
The Director of Finance recommended that Council adopt a resolution I
establishing the percentage for personal property tax relief at 66.19% for the
City of Roanoke for the 2006 tax year.
Council Member Cutler offered the follOWing resolution:
(#37357-040306) A RESOLUTION setting the allocation percentage for
personal property tax relief in the City of Roanoke for the 2006 tax year.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 245.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37357-
040306. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea and
Mayo r H a r ri s - _n__ - - 00 00 00 00 - - - - 00 -----00- - - - - - - - __ 0000--0000 00 - - - - - 0000- 00 - - - -0000- - - - - 000000____00 00 00 00 00006.
NAYS: No ne 0000______00__00______000000___.______00__0000______00__00______0000____0000-00___________0.
(Council Member McDaniel was absent.)
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the
Financial Report for the month of February 2006.
1
(For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Director of Finance advised that the City's adopted 2006 fiscal year
budget anticipated 5.7 per cent revenue, compared to the 2005 fiscal year
adopted budget; revenues increased by approximately 5.6 per cent through
February, 2006; sales tax is up about 5.4 per cent, meals tax is up about 5.8
per cent, business license tax is up about 2 per cent, and for the first time, the
transcient room tax is up almost 12 per cent, which is an indicator of the
number of people who are visiting the City of Roanoke either on business or for
pleasure. He stated that the expenditure side of the budget has grown about
5.4 per cent.
There being no further discussion and without objection by Council, the
Mayor advised that the Financial Report for the month of February 2006 would
be received and filed.
I
1
1
1
377
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL: NONE.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
POLICE DEPARTMENT-FIRE DEPARTMENT-NEWSPAPERS: Ms. Zoe Stennett,
2531 Peters Creek Road, N. W., expressed concern with regard to a recent
newspaper article containing information about an e-mail from a reporter at The
Roanoke Times to. the Mayor. She also expressed concern with reference to
alleged bias in reporting by The Roanoke Times which has reached the point of
misinforming readers. She spoke in support of higher wages for the City's
public safety employees and a School Board that is elected by the citizens of
Roanoke.
YOUTH-SPORTS ACTIVITIES: Mr. James Polk, 1610 Rugby Boulevard, N. W.,
requested funding assistance from the City to secure a building for a year
round youth sports center program.
The Mayor advised that Mr. Polk's request would be referred to the City
Manager for response.
COMPLAINTS-HOUSING/NEIGHBORHOOD CODE ENFORCEMENT: Mr.
Robert N. Richert, 415 Allison Avenue, S. W., spoke with regard to the 9:00 a.m.
. Council briefing on the City's Cooperative Code Enforcement Initiative. He
stressed the importance of educating citizens on an appropriate system for
tracking complaints. As history, he advised that two years ago, the tracking
system consisted of telephone calls and written lists, etc., which were
ineffective, and website citizen input was initiated which offered the advantage
of a tracking number that could be referenced, as well as an e-mail exchange as
the complaint moved through the process. He stated that any new verification·
system initiated by the City must address a specific problem; i.e.: as long as
City staff has the option/authority to close specific issues without resolution,
378
the system will lose its effectiveness and lead to frustration by citizens. He
added that on a number of occasions, citizens were advised by City staff that a 1
complaint would be included on the Permits Plus System, which is the City's
system that tracks actual legal action of formal letters, however, more than 50
per cent of the time, the complaint/issue was not listed on the Permits Plus
System; therefore, the level of frustration by neighborhood representatives was
high. He stressed the importance that any new system initiated by the City will
have the capability to track unresolved issues.
Mr. Richert called attention to Miller's Hill, which is a significant City and
neighborhood investment on Day Avenue, S. W., and advised that if the problem
of prostitution, drug distribution, and Code enforcement issues in the
Mountain, Elm, Day and Marshall Avenue corridor is not adequately addressed,
the Miller's Hill project could fail.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
REFUSE COLLECTION-CLEAN VALLEY COUNCIL: The City Manager advised
that on April 1, 2006, traditional clean up activities commenced in the City of
Roanoke, and she encouraged citizens to use the services of the City's Solid
Waste Management Department to make the community as clean as possible.
SISTER CITIES: The City Manager advised that the 42nd Anniversary of 1
Roanoke Valley Sister Cities was celebrated on Saturday, April 1, 2006, at
Roanoke College. She further advised that the Executive Director of Sister
Cities International served as guest speaker for the event and was most
complimentary of the Roanoke Valley Sister City relationship, the exchange
programs with the various Sister Cities and the medical, social and educational
programs that Roanoke enjoys with its seven Sister Cities.
ROANOKE CIVIC CENTER-SPORTS ACTIVITIES: The City Manager called
attention to correspondence and newspaper articles indicating that the National
Basketball Association is uncertain as to plans regardin9 the future of the
Roanoke Dazzle in the Roanoke community. She stated that the City of
Roanoke worked very hard as a community to bring semi.-professional sports to
the Roanoke Valley, and Roanoke has done much to entice and to keep sports
teams through improvements to the Roanoke Civic Center and minimal
operating charges. She encouraged citizens of the Roanoke Valley to support
the Roanoke Dazzle basketball team and the Roanoke Valley Vipers hockey
team through the purchase of season tickets.
1
1
I
I
379
Council Member Lea· inquired if ticket prices for Roanoke Dazzle
basketball games have been reviewed; whereupon, the City Manager advised
that multiple pricing schemes have been enacted to attract the average person,
and unused season tickets can be applied to another game. She stated that
both teams have become more sensitive to ticket prices, and have a keen
interest in filling seats as an indication of ongoing support for the teams.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting
adjourned at 4:05 p.m.
APPROVED
~T~ J~
~~
Mary F. Parker.
City Clerk
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor
380
SPECIAL SESSIONmROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
1
April 17, 2006
11 :45 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in special session on Monday,
April 17, 2006, at 11 :45 a.m., in the Roanoke City Council's Conference Room,
Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to the following
communication from the Mayor under date of April 12, 2006:
"The Honorable Vice-Mayor and Members
of the Roanoke City Council
Roanoke, Virginia
Dear Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Members of Council:
Pursuant to Section 10, Meetinqs of council qenerallv, of the Charter of
the City of Roanoke, I am calling a Special Meeting of Council on Monday,
April 17, 2006, at 11 :45 a.m., in the City Council's Conference Room, 1
Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W.,
City of Roanoke, for the purpose of interviewing applicants for three
vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board.
The following interviews have been scheduled:
James P. Beatty - 11 :45 a.m.
Jason E. Bingham - 12:10 p.m.
Caren D. Boisseau - 12:35 p.m.
Jay Foster 1 :00 p.m.
Alice P. Hincker - 1 :25 p.m.
The remaining interviews will be held on Monday, May 1, 2006.
With kindest regards, I am,
Sincerely,
s/ c. Nelson Harris
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor"
1
381
I
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.,
Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris mmn_mmnnn5.
ABSENT: Council Members Brian J. Wishneff and Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
(arrived during closed session) _____n_mmnm_mn__monnno_m_mmno_nmmm_nn_2.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Mary F. Parker, City Clerk.
COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: Council Member Cutler moved that Council convene
in Closed Session to interview applicants for three vacancies on the Roanoke
City School Board for terms commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30,
2009. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel and Mayor
H a rr i s -00 - --00 - - 00 - - - - _0000__ - - 0000 - - - - - _00__ - - - un - - - - - - 0000 __ _ 00___ - - 00 on - - - _. - _C --00 - - - - 00 - - 00 - no __ noon - - 5 .
NAYS: No ne-nn----- 0000__________0000_______00_._____00_____000000 ___nn_____m_____n_____nn_O.
I (Council Members Dowe and Wishneff were absent.)
At 11:47 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for one
Closed Session.
Council Member Dowe entered the meeting during the Closed Session.
At 1 :47 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council's
Conference Room, Room 451, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of
the Council in attendance, except Council Member Wishneff.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Session just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
(2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which
any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
1
382
Mayo r AHYaEr~~ s _~~_~_~_~~~__~_~~~~_~~___~_~_~I_~~-,___~~~~~__~_i~~~~~~~~~-'_u~~~~__~_~~~~~~!___~~:. I
NAYS: No n e _______un_nn______00_________________nnn______00___________00_____0000_____00_____0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
There being no further business, at 1 :50 p.m., the Mayor declared the
special meeting of Council adjourned.
~EST: 1 íJ
7ï rOv t..~
Ma y'tPtrker
City Clerk
APPROVED
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor
I
1
1
1
I
383
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSIONmROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
April 17, 2006
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
April 17, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City
Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant
to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rul~s of
ProcedlJr~, Rule 1, B.~.9ular MeetinID" Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by the
Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff
(arrived late) and Mayor C. Nelson Harrismnm-mmn____mmn_mmmnm__u_m_m7.
A BS E NT: Non e - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - --00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - 00-- - - - - n - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - -00- - - - - n - - - - - - -- 0 .
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
PROCLAMATIONS-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-YOUTH: The Mayor presented a
proclamation to Katye Hale, Child Protective Services Social Worker, declaring
the month of April 2006 as Child Abuse Prevention Month.
384
PROCLAMATIONS-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The Mayor advised that Fireman's 1
Fund Insurance Company helps to support fire departments across the country
and, to this end, created the Fireman's Fund Heritage Program, which has
provided assistance to local and national communities for more than 140 years.
He stated that Fireman's Fund Insurance Company has awarded the City of
Roanoke Fire-EMS Department with a $50,000.00 grant to provide funds for
new physical training equipment in recognition of the importance of firefighter
physical fitness and to ensure the optimal physical condition for firefighters to
better serve and protect the citizens of Roanoke.
The Mayor presented a proclamation declaring April 17, 2006, as
Fireman's Fund Insurance Company Day to Scott Smith, Community Relations
Manager, and Chris Anderson, representing Fireman's Fund Insurance
Company. He also presented Certificates of Appreciation to Mark Ruggles and
Nick Deson, representing CalSurance: and to Robert W. Clark, President and
Chief Executive Officer, Shenandoah Life Insurance Company, local
underwriters.
CONSENT AGEND_ð
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by 1
one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if
discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately. He called specific attention to four requests for
Closed Session.
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meetings of Council held on Monday,
March 6, 2006, and Monday, March 20, 2006, were before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the reading of the minutes be
dispensed with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H a r r i s 00- - - - 00 -- - - - - - - - - _n_ -00- 00 00 - - --00- - - --00 - - - - - - - - - - 00 00 - - - - - - - - - - - 00 00'_ - - - - - - 00 00 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - 6.
NAYS: No n e _00_________000000____00____00_______________0000______000000_________0000____________00_0.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
I
1
1
I
I."'."
. .' "). ':(
.,
385
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson
Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies
on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by
Council, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711(A)(1), Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H a rri S--n------ __________0000______00___________ - ---------00------ 00.______0000______ ------------00----6.
NAYS: No ne----unuu_______m - _uoo___nn__Un_m moonn_hU_m m_OO__n__m mum_nO.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting thai
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3). Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H arri S-n---n---------- -------- 00 ________00___00____._0000__00_00________00 ------00.___00________00____6.
NAYS: Non e ------ - - - - mnm -- ___0000_______0000_00 mnnOOOOnnn____nUU - - m_m_n__ ----00-0.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
386
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
1
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H a rr i s - 00 - - - - - - - -- 00 - - - - - - - -00 - - - - - - - - - - - 00 00 00 00 - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - - - 00 -- ___n_ -- 00 6.
NAYS: No n e __nnn_onnn_nm 00 _nnu__hnn__n_nnmnn___nnnnn_n_nnnnnnu_uO.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
COMMUNITY PLANNING: A communication from the City Planning
Commission transmitting the 2005 Annual Report, was before Council.
(For full text, see Annual Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the 2005 Annual Report of the City
Planning Commission be received and filed. The motion was seconded by
Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayor H a rri s mm mnm 00 mUUhnn__n_n_n_m unn_nn_m_nnu___hhn_mnonnnnn_uun6. 1
NAYS: No nenn_nn_nnn 00 mnn_ 00 - - 0000_000000 UUU____n_nn___n___mn_uu u_m 00 00---0.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP: A communication
from Sandra B. Kelly, Chair, advising of the resignation of John Griessmeyer as a
member of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates, was before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the resignation be accepted and that
the communication be received and filed. The motion was seconded by Council
Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H arri s _00_______ -------- - - ---------- -- -- - -------------- -- -------- 00_______ -- ________00 -- ----------------6.
NAYS: No ne _00_______0000 00 ------ 00__0000 __00___ 00 00______0000________ 00_______ -- -------------------0.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
1
1
1
I
. :.".
387
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-HOTEL ROANOKE CONFERENCE CENTER:
A report of qualification of Darlene L. Burcham as a Commissioner of The Hotel
Roanoke Conference Center Commission, for a term ending April 12, 2010, was
before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
M a yo r H a r r is - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - 00 00 00 - - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - 00 00 - - - - - - - -- - - - - -- -- - - - m - - - - 00 00 -- - - 6.
NAYS: Non e m_u________um - 00 oonnn_U_nUooonnn___m - mUoo__nnn__nm mu_n_unO.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H arri s mm 000__00___0000__00 mm 00 nn_nn_____nm 00 _m 00 ooonn__n__n___hmnn_m 000--00-6.
NAYS: No n e _nn____n__m mm 00 ooooonnn__u_..mnm mOO________n_UUUmn_m 00000----0.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
R~ÇULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
Council Member Wishneff entered the meeting.
388
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
BUDGET-ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP: A communication
from Council Member Sherman P. Lea, the City's representative to the Roanoke
Valley Regional Cable Television Committee (RVTV) , advising that on June 8,
1992, Council approved the Roanoke Regional Cable Television Agreement,
which requires that the RVTV Operating Budget be approved by the governing
bodies of the City of Roanoke, the County of Roanoke, and the Town of Vinton:
funding for the Operating Budget is shared by the three governments, based on
the annual proportion of Cox subscribers located in each jurisdiction: and for
the City of Roanoke in fiscal year 2005-2006, RVTV produced 12 Inside
Roanoke shows, 12 Spotlight on City Schools shows, 25 City Council meetings
(includes one special session), and 40 original video productions (27 for the
City of Roanoke, five for Roanoke City Schools, and eight joint City-County
productions).
It was further advised that the Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television
Committee approved the RVTV Operating Budget for fiscal year 2006-2007 at a
meeting in March, 2006, in the amount of $322,563.00, representing a 5.8 per
cent increase from the current year's budget of $304,713.00; RVTV staff is
included on the payroll of Roanoke County and benefit system and will receive
the same salary increase and insurance costs as other Roanoke County
employees; and the proposed budget includes funding for closed captioning
services for both City Council and Board of Supervisors meetings.
It was explained that Cox Communications paid a five per cent Franchise
Fee to the local governments in 2005, which totaled $1,918,355.00; the local
governments informally agreed to allocate up to 20 per cent of the Franchise
Fees collected to the RVTV Operating Budget, for the coming year, the amount
will be $383,671.00, and RVTV's requested budget of $322,563.00 is less than
that amount.
It was explained that Cox calculates the percentage of subscribers
(December 31, 2005) in each locality as follows:
Localitv
Roanoke City
Roanoke County
Vinton
Subscribers
29,757
24,440
2,637
fgrcell..té!gg
52%
43%
5%
1
1
I
1
1
I
,..,;
389
It was noted that based on the above figures, each locality's contribution
to the RVTV Operating Budget is as follows:
1oc~J.i!y
Roanoke City
Roanoke County
\l.in..t_9JL ._
Total
(:ontribution for FY 2006 -2007
$167,733.00
$138.702.00
n~L161128.0.o.
$322,563.00
Council Member Lea recommended that Council approve the proposed
RVTV budget for fiscal year 2006-2007, in the amount of $322,563.00, with the
City's contribution totaling $ 167,733.00.
Elaine Simpson, Cable Access Director, RVTV, reviewed activities of RVTV-
Channel 3 during the past year. She advised that the RVTV Message Board
contains a component of crime line photographs of persons who have
committed felonies and/or have outstanding warrants for their arrest, and
noted that the program, which started approximately 12 - 18 months ago, has
been successful and warrants have been issued for the arrest of 15 persons.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37358-041706) A RESOLUTION approving the recommendation of the
Roanoke Valley Regional Cable Television Committee to approve the annual
operating budget for Fiscal year 2006-2007 for the operation of the regional
government and educational access station, Roanoke Valley Television (RVTV,
Channel 3), and for the City to provide partial funding.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 246.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37358-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi sh neff and Mayor Harri s__m_ooo____mnmmmnnu___unmnmm__mooommm_.uum 7.
NAYS: No ne-n- 0000000_._00000_____ _m -- un - - - 00 mm __ ooo____nnn____nnun m_nn -00------0.
390
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
I
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS:
BUDGET-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager advised that the City of
Roanoke, as one of the largest employers in the Roanoke Valley, continues to
capitalize on opportunities to engage the talents and contributions of the City's
diverse community; during 2005, emphasis remained on increasing the
diversity of the workforce and the City's capacity to be successful in a diverse,
multicultural work environment: the City has built relationships and
partnerships among City staff, EEO/civil rights organizations, colleges,
universities, sororities, fraternities, and other groups interested in diversity; in
addition, as a result of the Mayor's Multicultural Initiative, attention has been
given to the City's growing multi-cultural community and the various ethnic
groups represented therein; and efforts have been made to build relationships
with the emerging cultural organizations in the community.
She further advised that during 2005, the City appointed women to the
positions of Assistant Director of Technology and Acting Director of Human
Resources; several key positions were made available, i.e.: Director of General I
Services, Assistant City Manager of Operations, and Director of Human
Resources; vacancies present opportunities to encourage diverse candidates
with a wide range of skills and experiences to participate in the employment
process: pursuing a broader range of candidates further demonstrates the
City's commitment to a more diverse workforce; emphasis continues to be
placed on strengthening "diversity capacity" within the organization; the City
organization has formalized a "diversity competency" which serves as a critical
component of leadership performance; work continues with diversity
consultants J. O. Rogers & Associates UOR); next steps include engaging a
cross-functional team of employees to further refine the City's diversity strategy
and to incorporate diversity as one of the City's core values; and incorporation
of diversity in the City's Core Values ensures that its diversity perspective as an
organization is far-reaching and influences the way that the City thinks and
does business.
I
1
1
1
391
It was explained that investment in the professional development and
education of all employees remains paramount to ensuring that all members of
the City's workforce will have the opportunity to improve their skills and to
advance within the organization: the Employee Development Program (EDP)
incorporates assessment, education planning and career counseling,
accompanied by job shadowing, mentoring and coaching; during 2005,
participation in EDP remained steady with 110 participants, of which 55% are
women and 41 % are people of color: leadership programs have also afforded all
employees with opportunities to be prepared for advanced roles in leadership;
both Foundations for Leadership Excellence (FLE) and the Leadership
Development Initiative (LDI) support the work of the City to prepare a diverse
leadership team; FLE is an introductory supervisory program and LDI is a
program for middle managers/professionals; and during 2005, 44 attendees
were women and 29 were people of color.
With regard to workforce demographics, it was noted that employment
data for 2005 shows that 40 out of 210 new hires (19.0 per cent) and 18 out of
94 individuals promoted (19.1 per cent) were people of color; statistics reflect
minimal variation from last year's figures of 21.5 per cent and 19.9 per cent,
respectively; most favorable are the number of new hires who are female in the
profeSSionals category which increased substantially this year, or 74.5 per cent
compared to 54.3 per cent in 2004: efforts to refine recruiting methods have
supported progress in attracting diverse applicants; the City of Roanoke
processed over 10,000 applications for employment during calendar year 2005;
from a gender perspective, applications were split fairly evenly, females 50 per
cent and males 48 per cent (two per cent had no gender/race information); the
racial make up of all applications was 32 per cent minority; in a review of
applications actually chosen for interview and referred for consideration, 37 per
cent were male and 48 per cent were female (15 per cent had no gender/race
information); referrals for consideration included 31 per cent minorities; and
the conclusion from the above referenced statistics is that an effort is being
made to include protected class applicants in the applicant pool for
consideration by hiring authorities.
Relative to outreach recruitment, the City Manager reported that during
2005, recruitment efforts continued to explore and to develop greater avenues
to seek out diverse applicants; the Annual Job Fair with the local chapter of the
NAACP remains a mainstay of the City's effort to encourage a diverse
population to pursue careers in municipal government; as a result of this year's
392
efforts with the NAACP Job Fair, several individuals interned with the City of 1
Roanoke during the year; a number of visits were made to both career fairs and
college classrooms to speak to diverse groups of people regarding career
opportunities with the City of Roanoke; career fairs included Career Premier
which was held in Roanoke and was attended by students from eight local
colleges and universities; and City staff attended both the CIAA Career Fair and
the Virginia Hi Tech Career Fair, which attracted students from over 12
historically black colleges and universities along the eastern seaboard.
It was further reported that the City participated as one of 70 employers
in the This Valley Works Career Fair, which attracted 1,294 job seekers:
recruitment efforts continue at the community college level to include
southside Virginia; the Emerging Leaders Workshop, sponsored by Virginia Tech
University, proved to be another venue where 60 students from over 15 black
colleges learned about career opportunities in municipal government; the
Human Resources Department maintained its partnership with the Police
Department in recruiting efforts; in October 2005, both departments were
represented at the Hispanic Heritage Festival sponsored by the Hispanic
Community Resource Center; and John Jay College in New York City was visited
and presentations were made to over 150 Criminal Justice students.
In closing, the City Manager advised that making the City of Roanoke a 1
high quality, diverse employer requires remaining ever mindful of innovative
recruitment opportunities and discovering new venues for reaching potential
candidate populations; and becoming the "employer of choice" of a diverse,
multi-cultural workforce remains the long term commitment of the City.
Daniel Hale, President, NAACP, Roanoke Branch, expressed appreciation
for the efforts of the City Manager toward affirmative action in the City of
Roanoke; however, the NAACP continues to have concerns with regard to
certain City departments, specifically the percentage of new hires in the area of
protective service, which consists of 82.4 per cent white males and only 5.9 per
cent African-American males, 7.4 per cent white females and 2.9 African-
American females. He stated that another area of concern relates to the
disproportion of minorities in the Municipal Auditor's Department, which
currently has one African-American female and no African-American managers;
the Municipal Auditor is appointed by City Council, therefore, it is suggested
that the NAACP work with the Council to create avenues leading to diversity in
the Municipal Auditor's Office and in other departments appointed by the
Council. He added that the NAACP is encouraged by efforts of the City Manager
in the Office of Management and Budget which has one African-American male,
and two African-American female professionals, and the NAACP looks forward
to working with the City Manager and the City Council to address diversity in I
the total workforce of the City of Roanoke.
1
1
I
':-1,. '.' , " .....,.
393
Council Member Cutler: commended ~he City Manager's success with
regard to diversifying the City's workforce. He emphasized that Council should
continue to make appointments to the City's various boards and commissions
keeping in mind the issue of diversity by age, gender, and race, etc.
Council Member Dowe advised that according to research performed by
the City Clerk's Office, over the past four years, minority appointments to the
City's boards and commissions have increased by 30-40 persons. He inquired
as to what can be done to retain minorities in the City's workforce.
The City Manager advised that the question has numerous implications
and suggested that a group of minority employees representing the various
divisions of the City's workforce be convened to discuss the issue.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that much progress has been made over
the past 15 years. He commended the City Manager on her efforts to achieve
diversity in the City's workforce, and stated that diversity is an issue that the
City of Roanoke, as a major employer, should target for attention.
Council Member Lea advised that although some positive steps have been
taken, he continues to be concerned about the low number of black males in
the City's workforce. He stated that the process starts with Council and
Council's appointments to boards and commissions to ensure that
appointments are representative of the total community. He added that
although much progress has been made to date, there is still much work to be
done.
Council Member McDaniel commended the City Manager on her
commitment to diversity in the City's workforce.
The Mayor reiterated the remarks of Council Members Dowe and Lea and
advised that Council takes seriously the need for diversity in appointments to
the City's boards and commissions. He commended the City Manager and City
staff for their efforts and accomplishments during the past six years.
BUDGET: The City Manager called upon Sherman M. Stovall, Director,
Office of Management and Budget, to present the City of Roanoke's Fiscal year
2006-2007 Recommended Budget.
394
The following is a summary of Mr. Stovall's presentation:
I
Objectives/Challenges
· Maintain and, when possible, enhance services to
address City Council's Strategic plan with an
emphasis on
Education
Public Safety
Public Health and Welfare
Economit. Development
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
Recreation and Culture
Efficient and Effective Delivery of Services
· Competitive employee compensation and benefits
· Continue to build debt capacity for planned capital
projects
· Continue progress in budgeting for equipment
replacement, capital building maintenance, street
avin and technolo
1
I
I
FY 2006-07 Budget
· Recommended budget is balanced
· General Fund Budget Totals $239.607.000
. Increase of $15,808,000, 7.1 %
..-ROANOKE
I
FY 2006-07 Budget.
· Recommend reduction of $.02 in the Real
Estate Tax Rate - Revenue Reduction of
$1,134,000
. Recommend increase of $.27 in the Cigarette
Tax - Additional revenue of $1 ,520,000
- Use $1,134,000 to offset real estate tax rate
reduction and hold school division harmless
- Use balance of $386,000 to provide debt service for
bond issuance of $5 million for curb, gutter,
sidewalks, and bridge renovation
- Rate increase puts City of Roanoke at average for
Virginia First Cities jurisdictions
I
395
396
1
FY 2006-07 Budget
. Recommend an increase in the income and
net worth caps for tax relief to the elderly and
disabled.
Increase household income cap to $34,000, based
on the change in the consumer price index since
the last revision in July 200 I
Increase the net worth cap to $125,000
General Fund Revenue Summary
Revenue Increase $15,808,000
local Revenue $6,896,000
+4.17
State $8,912,000
Revenue +15.28%
State revenue growth reflects the restatement of
$3,639,000 in telecommunication taxes as state revenue.
Without this restatement, local revenue growth would be
9.01% and state revenue growth would be 6.41%
1
1
I
Local Revenues
FY 2006-07 FY 2006-07
$ Change % Change
Total Local Revenues $6.896,000 4.17%
.._-~._..
Rcal Estate Tax $4,880,000 7.58%
..!,crsonal Propcrty Tax $ I ,632,000 10.89%
Salcs Tax $1,325,000 6.92%
Cigarette Tax $1,620,000 90.00%
Business License $420,000 3.63%
Transient Room/Lodging Tax $277 ,000 12.31%
Utility Tax ($2,285.000) (17.18%)
E-911 Surcharge ($800,000) (50.00%)
Prepared Food Tax $428,000 4.16%
All Othcr Local Taxes.and Revenues ($601,000) (2.30%)
;
1
State Revenues
FY 2006-07 FY 2006-07
$ Change % Change
T otallntergovernnlental Rcvenue~ $8,912,000 15.28%
Non-Categorical and Other $3,090,000 31.28%
( Personal Property Tax Relief, ,
Telecommunications Recordation, i r
ABC/Wine, Rolling Stock, Rental Car)
Shared Expenses $115,000 1.37%
(Constitutional Officers)
Human/Social Services $3,725,000 16.71%
Categorical $1,982,000 11.17%
Uail Per Diems, HB 599, Street Maint.,
Library, VJCCCA)
I
397
398
I
User Fee Adjustments
Fee Current Proposed
-.
EMS Basic LifG Support EmergGncy $280 $300
EMS Advanced Life Support Emergency $330 $360
-
EMS Advanced Life Support Level 2 $475 $550
Emergency
Copy Charge (Per Page) $.05
BlaclvWhife (8.5Xll) Per Page 5.10
Color (8.5Xll) All Copies $.20
BlacklWhite (8.5X14 & 8.5X17) S.15
Color (8.5X14 & 8.5X17) $.25
BlacklWhite (11X17) $.20
Color (11X17) 5.30
- .-
Library Besf Seller Book Rental Program N/A 52 per book
per week
-"
1
General Fund Expenditure Summary
Revenue Increase 515,808,000
Schools 53,402,998
Employee Compensation and Benefits 55,885,971
Debt Service and Cash Funded Capital 52,017,159
Maintain Existing Services 53,962,261
New Positions and Enhanced Services 51,727,900
Other Adjustments/Budget Reductions ($1,188,289)
1
1
Education
. Increase of $3,402,998,6.2%
Based on 36.42% of adjusted local taxes
Transfer to School Fund - $57,755,298
Debt service of $4,218,455
- Reflects investment in school capital projects
Funding provided is 26% of total General Fund
budget and compares favorably to Virginia First
Cities jurisdictions
1
Employee Compensation and Benefits
. .Employee ComRensation . i1.534.228
Average pay raise of 4.0% of current salary
Salary suryey indicates salaries are approximately 9% behind
First Cities jurisdictions
. Benefits - $2351.743
Increase in contribution rate for the Employee
Retirement System
Increase in the cost of health, dental, and life insurance
1
399
400
Debt Service and Cash Funded Capital,
Equipment Replacement and Maintenance
1
. Additional Debt Capacity...:J 1,450,000
. Support of Planned Capital Projects
. Cap-ita 1 and Eq!!1J:1ment R~-p-I,!cement - $567,159
. Paving-$217,159
Bridge Maintenance - $350,000
Unable to grow funding in the operating budget for
capital building maintenance, equipment
replacement, and technology
. Use one-time funds to provide additional funding
for FY 2007
I
Public Safety
. 10 Police Officer Positions
Respond to increased call volume
Enhance visibility
Support public safety initiatives
· Additional vehicles for the Police Officer
Take Home Car Program
· Officer Next Door Program
. Fire-EMS Facilities Improvements
I
1
Public Health and Welfare
· Support for Social Service and Human
Service Programs
· 4 Social Worker Positions
. Address current caseload for child protective
services
· Support of Human Service/Community
Agencies
I
Economic Development
· Promote efforts of Economic Development Division
· Brand Marketing and Advertising
. Expand marketing of the City of Roanoke brand
Raise Roanoke profile outside of the region
Attract new visitors and residents
· Support the Market District Plan
. Begin concept design and architectural engineering
· Promote Development of Riverside Centre and the
Roanoke Center for Industry and Technology
· Promote and Support the Enterprise Zone
1
401
402
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
I
· Implement Housing Strategic Plan
· Continue the targeted application of federal
housing (Community Development Block
Grant and HOME Investment Partnership)
funds
· Enhanced Code Enforcement
· Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney Position
. Focus on full-time prosecution of code
enforcement cases
1
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
· Streetscape projects in support of
neighborhood plans and to improve the
appearance and function of public streets
· Continue curb, gutter and sidewalk,
improvements
· Enhanced leaf collection activity
I
I
I
1
Recreation and Culture
· Implement Phase I of the Comprehensive Library
Plan
6 additional positions to enhance services to citizens
Enhancements to library collection, programs, and
technology
· Arts Festival and 125th Anniversary Celebration
· Part-Time Arts Coordinator Position
. Coordination and implementation of the Public Art Plan
· Roanoke River Keepers
. Facilitate continuous cleanup and debris removal
· Support of Cultural Agencies
Efficient and Effective Service Delivery
· Building Inspector Position
· Assist with increased volume of inspections
· 2 Maintenance Worker Positions (Facilities Management)
Dedicated to maintenance at Roanoke Jail
· Facilitate the reallo(at;on of resources to focus on energy savings
· Deputy Court Clerk Position - (Clerk of Circuit Court)
· Support courtroom operations
· Maintain Prompt, Professional, and High Quality
Customer service
403
404
Miscellaneous
1
. Inflationary Increases
· Motor Fuels
· Utilities
· Miscellaneous Program Activities
· Expenditure Reductions
· Across department and divisions boundaries
Ted J. Edlich, III, Executive Director, Total Action Against Poverty,
expressed concern with regard to reported decreases in funding to one of TAP's 1
most vital initiatives on behalf of low income citizens; i.e.: This Works
Education and Training Programs which are conducted at the Roanoke Higher
Education Center. He called attention to a number of successful demonstration
programs that were developed approximately ten years ago as a result of the
work of a blue ribbon task force that reviewed TAP's role in education programs
to provide educational opportunities to low income persons who either had
dropped out of school. or had not received the level of education and training
to support their advancement in life. He explained that some of the programs
include Project Discovery, the Dropout Retrieval Program, the Center for
Employment and Training, and the This Valley Works Program_ He asked that
Council review the proposed CDBG budget and restore funds to TAP's
educational programs.
Hazel G. Clay, GED instructor and a teacher with 41 years of experience,
spoke to the merits of TAP's Fast Track to GED program which is needed to
help students achieve their GED diploma.
I
1
I
I
405
Owen Schultz, Manager of TAP's Planning Department, spoke in support
of the This Valley Works Employment and Training Program which focuses
efforts on the highest scores of impoverishment within the City of Roanoke:
those persons who have dropped out of school, who do not have jobs, who
have no skills and cannot find jobs. He stated that the total budget of the This
Valley Works Program for fiscal year 2007 is approximately $400,000.00;
however, without funding assistance by the City, it will be difficult to meet the
critical needs of this segment of Roanoke's citizens.
The City Manager clarified that TAP's This Valley Works (GED program) is
not scheduled for a reduction of funds in fiscal year 2006-2007. She added
that TAP's Forklift Operator and Warehouse Training Program is a new program
that will be addressed as a part of Community Development Block Grant public
hearings and review process.
Council Member Dowe inquired if funds are included in the City's fiscal
year 2007 budget to implement the City Market Study: whereupon, the City
Manager advised that approximately 5200,000.00 is included for concept
design and architectural engineering for Phase I of the project. She added that
it will be necessary for Council to prioritize the various elements of the study;
Downtown Roanoke, Incorporated, will review the study and submit priority
recommendations: a number of items in the consultants report should be the
prerogative of the private sector and some items should be addressed by the
City and funds have been set aside to begin the process.
Council Member Cutler spoke in support of the proposed budget;
however, he expressed concern that the City is not adequately addressing
storm water management/storm drainage needs and it will be necessary to
enact a storm water fee in order to provide the kind of storm water
management program that is needed by the City of Roanoke. He added that
numerous priority items are not included in the proposed fiscal year 2006-2007
budget because there are limits on the City's income.
The Mayor spoke in support of the proposed budget as being both
responsible and responsive to the needs of the citizens of the City of Roanoke.
He stated that the proposed reduction in the real estate tax rate will be offset
by an increase in the cigarette tax, therefore, the proposed 2006-2007 budget
is fiscally neutral. He spoke in support expanding the perimeters for the City's
tax relief program for senior and disabled persons, a four per cent pay increase
for City employees, ten additional police officers, and four additional social
worker positions for the Child Protective Services program. He stated that there
will be more detailed discussion of the school funding formula which has been
in effect for a number of years and did not take into account debt service as a
part of the formula, yet the two largest capital projects in the history of the City
406
of Roanoke are school related; i.e.: the rebuilding of Patrick Henry and William I
Fleming High Schools. He advised that at a recent monthly meeting with the
City Manager, the Superintendent of Schools and the Chair of the Roanoke City
School Board, he proposed the formation of a study group to be composed of
the City Manager, the Superintendent of Schools, City and School finance staff,
a member of City Council and a member of the School Board to study the
school funding formula and to submit recommendations to Council and to the
School Board later in the year. He stated that he would formally present the
proposal at a joint meeting of the Council and the School Board on Monday,
May 1, 2006.
The Mayor advised that Council will hold a public hearing on the
proposed 2006-2007 fiscal year budget on Thursday, April 27, 2006, at
7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, to be followed by budget study
sessions on Thursday, May 4 at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, and on Friday, May 5 at 8:30 a.m., if necessary, and the
City's Fiscal year 2006-2007 budget will be adopted at a meeting of the Council
to be held on Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council
Chamber.
ITEMS ~EC.OMMENDE[HQRAÇTION:
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a I
communication advising that the Fireman's Fund Insurance Company was
founded in 1863 with a mission to donate a portion of profits to the widows
and orphans of San Francisco firefighters; through the Fireman's Fund Heritage
Program, Fireman's Fund Insurance Company is proud to support firefighters
for safer communities: since the beginning of the program in 2004, millions of
dollars have been awarded to fire departments and fire safety and burn
prevention organizations across the country; and today, Fireman's Fund
supports firefighters through the Fireman's Fund Heritage program, allowing
departments to purchase much needed supplies and equipment.
It was further advised that the Fireman's Fund Heritage Program has
selected the Roanoke Fire-EMS to be the recipient of a 550,000.00 grant which
requires no local match.
It was explained that funds will be used by the Fire/EMS department for
physical fitness training equipment: equipment will be purchased to outfit Fire-
EMS Stations 1, 7, 8 and the new Fire-EMS headquarters currently under
construction; the abovereferenced stations were selected to receive new
physical fitness training equipment because they either did not have the
equipment, or current equipment is outdated or in disrepair; and equipment is 1
needed to ensure that firefighters will continue the required ongoing physical
fitness training programs.
1
1
1
407
The City Manager recommended that Council take the following actions:
. Accept the grant award of $50,000.00; authorize the City
Manager to execute the required grant agreement and any other
related documents approved as to form by the City Attorney.
. Adopt a budget ordinance to establish a revenue estimate in the
amount of $50,000.00 and appropriate funding in the same
amount to an expenditure account to be established by the
Director of Finance in the Grant Fund.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37359-041706) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Fireman's Fund Heritage Program, amending and reordaining certain sections
of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 247.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37359-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and
M a yo r H a r r i s -- - - n - - 00 n - - - - - - n - - - - - - - - n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - 00 n - - - - _n_ - - - - n - - - - --- - - - 6 .
NA YS: No ne mnm 00 00 _m 0000 00 _m mm nnn_nn___nnnnnnnnnnnnnnn_nnn______O.
(Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37360-041706) A RESOLUTION accepting a Fireman's Fund Heritage
Program grant to the City from The Fireman's Fund Insurance Company, and
authorizing execution of any required documentation on behalf of the City.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 248.)
408
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37360-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
1
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and
Mayo r H a rri s _00_________ ---------- -- ------- - --- ---------- -- -- ________0000__________00___________00____________6.
NAYS: Non e-m mnm 00 nonm 00 00000000 00 - 0000 unun_muuu_n__u__nhnn_n_nnn__n_O.
(Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.)
CITY CODE-TAXICABS AND FOR-HIRE VEHICLES: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that during the April 3, 2006 Council
meeting, Yellow Cab Services of Roanoke, Inc. (petitioner), submitted a petition
requesting an adjustment of rates for a fuel surcharge for taxicab service and
for-hire automobiles in the City of Roanoke; rates are regulated by Council
pursuant to Section 34-130 of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as
amended: and taxicab service in Roanoke is provided by Yellow Cab, Liberty
Cab Company, Northwest Cab Company, and Quality Taxi Company.
It was further advised that according to the petitioner. since the last
increase (spring, 2004), the cost per gallon of gasoline has risen significantly; 1
and in addition, current indicators suggest gasoline prices will continue to
dramatically increase which has compelled taxicab companies operating in the
City of Roanoke to petition Council for the addition of a fuel surcharge that
would assist drivers in partially offsetting escalating gasoline prices.
It was further advised that the proposed fuel surcharge of $1 .00 would be
added to the current meter price charged for each trip and would be posted on
the rate stickers displayed in each taxi; per the petitioner, the requested
increase is in line with what other taxi companies in Virginia are charging, or
are seeking to charge; and the companies have agreed to drop the proposed
fuel surcharge if the average posted price of a gallon of gasoline drops below
the price of $2.00 per gallon for a period of six months.
It was noted that City staff conducted a survey among other Virginia
municipalities to determine practices with respect to fuel surcharges; and 18
localities responded to the inquiry and provided the following information:
1
1
1
1
409
· Eleven have either received such requests tied directly to fuel
increases, or with the cost of fuel being one of the major
reasons for the request. Each locality has either allowed the
companies to increase rates or to add a fuel surcharge. In most
cases, the net effect was to add $1.00 to the trip price.
· One locality, Fairfax County, agreed to a 51.00 trip surcharge
initially, but the amended ordinance will expire on April 30'h,
and no decision has been made on how to proceed once the
ordinance expires.
· Williamsburg received a request for a temporary $1.00 per trip
fuel surcharge but did not act on the request.
· Five localities indicated that they have not received a formal
request for a fuel surcharge.
It was advised that the proposed surcharge will be posted on the rate
stickers displayed in each taxi, the average cost of gas will be tracked on a
monthly basis by designated City staff using the average cost per gallon of
regular unleaded self-serve gasoline in the City of Roanoke as published by the
American Automobile Association (AAA) to monitor whether fuel prices drop
below 52.00 per gallon for a consecutive six month period; and if such occurs,
designated City staff will notify the taxicab companies to drop the surcharge
effective the first day of the following month and remove the surcharge from
rate stickers displayed in each taxi.
The City Manager recommended that Council amend Section 34-130 of
the City Code to authorize the imposition of a fuel surcharge of $1.00 to be
added to the current meter price charged for each trip, effective May 1, 2006,
with the stipulation that the surcharge will remain in effect until such time as
the average posted price of a gallon of gasoline drops below the price of $2.00
per gallon for a consecutive six month period.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37361-041706) AN ORDINANCE amending subsection (8) of §34-130,
Rªte5çh_e<t[jle, Division IV, Fares, Article 111, Public Vehicles (Taxicabs and for
Hire Vehicles), of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, in order
to adjust certain rates charged for services rendered by taxicabs and for-hire
automobiles; and dispensing with the second reading by title paragraph of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 249.)
410
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37361- 1
041706. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor Harris_uuh_umm_mmmmm_m___u_h____nmnmmmmmmu__7.
NAYS: Non en-m m____um __ __ nU______nn_nn_nnnn_mnnnm __ - 00 00 nnu__nn_nn__O.
BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that several months ago, the Western Virginia
Workforce Development Board (WVWD Board) inquired about the possibility of
making board staff (two full-time regular and two part-time temporary) City of
Roanoke employees, as grant funded positions, with no local cost to the City;
most Workforce Investment Board staff throughout the Commonwealth of
Virginia are affiliated with municipal or local organizations in order to access
employee benefits at a reasonable rate; while many of the municipalities or
local organizations could serve as the host organization for this purpose,
customarily board staff throughout the state are employees of the Board's fiscal
agent: and the City of Roanoke serves as fiscal agent for the Board.
It was further advised that City and Board staff have developed a letter of 1
agreement to allow Board employees to become City of Roanoke employees for
the purpose of providing benefits at a reasonable cost to full time employees;
the WVWD Board provides a needed service to the area, and it is in the best
interest of the City to have well qualified staff performing the work; a
competitive benefit package is a key component to attracting and retaining
qualified personnel; and funding for employee benefits will be provided by
existing grant funds, or the employees themselves, therefore, no local City
funds are required.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute an
agreement, in a form to be approved by the City Attorney, with the Western
Virginia Workforce Development Board, to provide grant funded employee
status (including benefits for full time employees) to staff of the WVWD Board.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37362-041706) A RESOLUTION authorizing the execution of an
agreement and related documents with the Western Virginia Workforce
Development Board to provide grant funded employee status (including benefits
for full time employees) to staff of the WVWD Board.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book 70, Page 250.)
1
1
1
1
411
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37362-
041706. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wish neff and Mayor Harris_mmm__mn___,muummmmmnn_n_,_uumnmmmmm 7.
NAYS: Non e '-000000'- mum - - 00 _m 00000___ __ ooonnooon_m - 00 mm - - 00000________000000000000_0.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
appropriation of $4,100,000.00 in 2002 Capital Bond Funds from the Roanoke
City Capital Fund to the Roanoke City Public Schools Capital Fund, to provide
funds for construction of a football stadium to be located on the campus of
William Fleming High School, was before Council.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in
the request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37363-041706) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the William
Fleming High School Stadium Project, amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects and School Capital Projects Funds
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 251.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37363-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
Council Member Lea expressed concern that the appropriation of funds
to construct an athletic field at William Fleming High School in 2008, as
opposed to 2010, as was previously stated is a political ploy during in a
Councilmanic election year. He stated that he would like to send a message to
Councilmanic candidates that the year is 2006, and the black community
cannot be bought with sound bites and snappy campaign ideals, but must be
earned based on a proven record of achievements.
412
Council Member Wishneff pointed out that the City paid a consultant 1
$150,000.00 for a study of Victory Stadium that included no school athletic
field alternatives. He advised that the consultant's report stated that by using
historic tax credits, the City could construct an 18,000 seat stadium for about
$13 million, compared to a 5,000 seat stadium in the range of $18 to $19
million. He stated that no meeting was held to discuss the results of the
consultant's study, and Council proceeded to authorize athletic fields at both
high schools. He added that the Western Virginia Education Classic will not be
played in Roanoke in the future because there is no appropriate location to play
the football games. He expressed disappointment that the Council did not
support continued funding for the Blue Ridge Technical Academy, yet Council
approved the construction of an athletic field for Patrick Henry High School
after listening to the sentiments of rising seniors at Patrick Henry.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that a decision was made by a majority of
the Council to build stadia at the two high schools at a cost of 58.2 million,
which saves taxpayers in excess of $12 million when adding in the restrooms at
. 'Victory Stadium that were not included' in the consultant's report, and is also
questionable if full historic tax credits could be used. However, he stated that
the real question rests with the numerous issues that currently face the City
that are far more critical than a stadium. He advised that he could not in good
conscience vote to invest large sums of taxpayers' money in a stadium that will 1
provide no rate of return on the money; and the majority of Council is
attempting to move the City of Roanoke forward in a way that will have
implications 20-50 years into the future.
The Mayor advised that the Stadium Study Committee brought forth a
number of recommendations, one of which Council unanimously forwarded to
the School Board to study the question of construction of day stadiums at the
two high schools. He stated that Council engaged in a lengthy and thorough
discussion following the consultant's report in a work session which was
followed by a public presentation by the consultant at a Council meeting. He
advised that when factoring in historic tax credits for the renovation of Victory
Stadium, $19 to $20 million of public money would be required; therefore,
when alluding to the $13 million figure, the impression is given that the total
cost of renovating Victory Stadium is $13 million when, in fact, it would be a
$20 million project versus an $8.2 million high school stadium effort. In
closing, he stated that on November 7, 2005, the majority of Council voted to
1
1
I
I
413
approve high school stadia, with $4.1 million for the Patrick Henry stadium and
54.1 million for the William Fleming stadium; a community engagement process
was agreed to with regard to the Patrick Henry stadium, with the understanding
that as soon as the process was completed, the community engagement
process would proceed with regard to the William Fleming stadium: and at the
end of the respective processes, the Council would adopt ordinances
appropriating funds which were previously approved for the Patrick Henry
stadium and are now being requested for the William Fleming stadium.
Ordinance No. 37363-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
H a rri s------------- ------ - - - ---------00---- _00_____ -- 00 _________00_____00____ - - -- _______00____00______00____00____ 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneffooummmm-mm--m-mnmu-m-2.
LOANS-SCHOOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
that Council approve a State Literary Fund loan application in the amount of $2
million for improvements to Monterey Elementary School. was before Council.
It was advised that the loan application includes a resolution for
architectural supervision; and debt service on the loan will increase the School
Board's debt service expenditure by $80,000.00, commencing in fiscal year
2007-2008, but no debt service liability is incurred until funds are drawn
against the loan account.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in
the request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#3 7364-041706) A RESOLUTION authorizing the School Board for the
City of Roanoke to make application for a loan from the State Literary Fund for
modernizing Monterey Elementary School.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 252.)
414
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37364-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
1
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wish neff and Mayor Harris__ooomnmnuhmm_m_mmmmoo____n_mmmm__hnnmm 7.
NAYS: Non e_ooon__oo_m - - - - ___0000000_000 00 - 00 _00_00000000000______000 m_nn_hn 000000 - - - - 00 00-0.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37365-041706) A RESOLUTION authorizing the School Board for the
City of Roanoke to expend funds for improving the present school building at
Monterey Elementary School and declaring the City's intent to borrow to fund or
reimburse such expenditures.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 253.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution· No. 37365-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
I
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor Harrismooon__ooo_m_mmm_mmoooomu__oo_oo__oooooom__nnmum__7.
NAYS: Non eo_om - - 000000000000000000__00____000 -- mnnnm - - m_noo 000000000_0000__000000000 00 - O.
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
appropriation of the following funds, was before Council:
. $19,171.00 for the Comprehensive School Reform Grant for
Huff Lane Micro Village, to provide for replication of successful
intervention programs from other school divisions; and funds
will provide staffing for a MicroSociety program which includes
staff development and skills instruction for students, said
program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds:
. $19,171.00 for the ComprehenSive School Reform Grant for
Oakland Elementary School to provide for replication of
successful intervention programs from other school divisions;
and funds will provide for staff development for teachers and
math skills instruction for students, said continuing program to
be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds;
1
, .
415
1
· 5105,000.00 for the Title I School Improvement program to aid
the school division in efforts to provide strategies to increase
student learning at seven low-performing schools, said
continuing program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal
funds;
· $3,365.00 for the Title III Grant to provide services to students
with limited English proficiency and to immigrant children, said
continuing program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by Federal
funds:
· $180,000.00 for the William Fleming Community Learning
Center; the Center will be open year round and serve 150
students and 100 adults annually: and the Center will provide
educational services to increase student performance on the
Standards of Learning, said continuing program to be 100 per
cent reimbursed by Federal funds;
1
· $5,000.00 for the William Fleming High School Honor Schools
Project Graduation Expansion Grant, to provide funds for middle
and high school instruction to students requiring remediation in
English/Reading/Writing and Algebra I, said new program to be
100 per cent reimbursed by State funds: and
· 5920.00 for the William Fleming High School NGA Honor
Schools Pr09ram, to provide funds for three teachers to receive
training to teach Advanced Placement or dual enrollment
courses as part of Virginia's NGA Honor Schools Program, said
new program to be 100 per cent reimbursed by State funds.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in
the request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37366-041706) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the
Comprehensive School Reform Grants, Title I School Improvement Program,
Title III Grant, William Fleming Community Learning Center, William Fleming
Honor Schools Expansion Grant, and William Fleming Honors Schools Program,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 School Fund
Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
I (For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 254.)
416
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37366- 1
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi s h neff and Mayor Harri S_m__m_m_um_____nmoo__nm_mm_m_mm_nnmmmnmn7.
NAYS: Non en-m 0000000000_00_0000__ nm - 00 - mn____ nnUUn 00 00 mOO_nnnnnn_ __ --000000-0.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL: NONE.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, I
recommendation or report to Council.
SIDEWALK-STREETS AND ALLEYS: Mr. Jeff Roudabush, 209 Princeton
Circle, N. E., advised that recently improvements were made to neighborhood
streets in the area of Princeton Circle by the addition of curb and sidewalk: and
additions were welcomed and appreciated, not only because they added to the
attractiveness and value of the neighborhood, but to the safety of residents and
to those persons traveling through the area.
He stated that last year, a portion of Princeton Circle (3417 - 3660) was
addressed, paving operations have begun for the entire street and milling has
been done on that portion of the street that was provided with curbs only. He
asked the following questions:
. Why was the remaining portion of Princeton Circle, or
approximately 1150 feet, not provided with curb at the same
time?
I
1
I
I
,.
417
·
When will curbs be installed?
·
How will the present paving operation affect the future
addition of curbs? If curbs are installed at a later date, will
the new pavement be reworked, or will the street have a
patchwork appearance?
· Will manhole locations be indented, or will new pavement be
tapered thin enough to allow smooth passage by vehicles?
Can pavement be tapered and still provide the durability that
is needed since that portion of the street is subject to more
traffic by heavy vehicles than the other portion of Princeton
Circle?
The Mayor advised that the questions raised by Mr. Roudabush would be
referred to the City Manager for response.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Wiley J. Burrows, 325 Willow Oak Drive, S. W.,
spoke in _support of the City oJ Roanoke's economic development program. He
also spoke in support of renovations to Patrick Henry and William Fleming High
Schools which will allow all students to be housed in one building and
maximize the use of land, which is considered to be economic development at
its best. He commended improvements to Henry Street and the Grandin Road
area that will lead to major improvements by business owners, creation of the
Western Virginia Water Authority, the Roanoke Civic Center expansion project,
and establishment of Ivy Market and the Bio Medical Center project. He spoke
in support of construction of the proposed hotel in the area north of Reserve
Avenue and suggested that a sound barrier wall be installed, the O. Winston
Link Museum and the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Plan. He stressed the
importance of resolving the Victory Stadium issue so that the City can move on
to more pressing and important issues. In closing, he commended the City of
Roanoke on past economic development efforts and expressed appreciation to
Council Members Cutler and McDaniel for their service to the City of Roanoke.
CITY MARKET: Anita Wilson, a City Market Building tenant, expressed
concern that no lease renewal option is included in her lease agreement for
space in the City Market Building. She stated that according to the floor plan
contained in the market consultant's report, it appears that one-half of City
Market Building tenants will be disenfranchised. She further stated that
418
numerous businesses have moved out of the downtown area; and the City
Market Building should be renovated, but small businesses cannot afford to be
out of business for 12 - 18 months while renovations are made at a cost of
$2.9 million. In closing, she asked that Council take into consideration the
small businesses in the City Market Building that could be disenfranchised as a
result of recommendations by the City Market consultant.
1
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that Council received a copy of the
consultant's report on Friday, April 27, no decisions have been made with
regard to recommendations and the consultant's report provides numerous
guidelines. He stated that downtown Roanoke is a crucial element in the City's
overall economic development package, there is currently an element of
confusion with regard to what needs to be done, which does not involve just
the investment of money, but an understanding of the dynamics of the City
Market and how it fits in with the rest of the Roanoke Valley. He advised that
the City is attempting to improve the overall situation and nothing is about to
happen in the near future that will change the scheme of the City Market
Building or disenfranchise businesses.
ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia,
advised that both the City Market Building and Victory Stadium have been
neglected for a long time, and suggested that the third floor of the City Market
Building be used as a senior citizens center. He spoke in support of the I
renovation of Victory Stadium and advised that with the proper marketing,
Victory Stadium could be a revenue producing venue for the City, and the
National Guard Armory could be converted into a military, public safety and
sports hall of fame. In closing, he advised that Victory Stadium is an important
part of the history of the City of Roanoke and should be renovated for future
generations of the Roanoke Valley to visit and enjoy.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: None.
Council Member Wishneff left the meeting.
At 5:00 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for four
Closed Sessions.
At 5:20 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council
Chamber, with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council
Member Wishneff, Mayor Harris presiding.
I
1
1
1
419
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (]) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
(2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which
any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H a r r i s n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - n - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - _n_ - - - - n - - 6 .
NAYS: No n em m_n_n_nnnn_ u_m - - mnnn_nn __nom 00 mom mnn_OnnnUUm mnO.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT: The Mayor advised of a vacancy on
the Local Board of Building Code Appeals: created by the resignation of John W.
. .Dreiling: whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Charles R.
Shaver.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Shaver was appointed as an
alternate member of the Local Board of Building Code Appeals by the following
vote:
FOR MR. SHAVER: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea,
McDaniel and Mayor Harrisnmm-------n--------uuumn_u_ummmmm___m_____________6.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
VIRGINIA MUNICIPAL LEAGUE-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised that the
following persons will be nominated to represent the City of Roanoke on
Virginia Municipal League Policy Committees:
M. Rupert Cutler - Environmental Quality
William M. Hackworth - General Laws
Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. - Human Development and Education
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr. - Transportation
Jesse A. Hall - Finance
420
At 5:25 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke.
1
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, April 17, 2006, the Council meeting
reconvened in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal
Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Vice-Mayor
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff
(arrived late), and Mayor C. Nelson Harrismmm_________mmm_nmm__mmnmnm 7.
A BS E NT: Non enm _m n - - n n --000000000000 000 n_nnm - - - - mnm - - n mnn__nnnn_ooo 0000 O.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Mayor C. Nelson Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris.
1
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION-ROANOKE VISION, COMPREHENSIVE
DEVELOPMENT PLAN: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk
having advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 17,2006, at 7:00 p.m., or
as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a proposal of the City of
Roanoke to amend Vision 2001-2020, the City's Comprehensive Plan, to include
the Art for Everyone, Roanoke Public Art Plan. the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Tuesday, April 4, 2006 and Monday, April 10, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that
the proposed Roanoke Public Art Plan recommends an expansion of the City's
public art, recommends ways and means for future funding of public art, and
provides a framework for acquisition, display and maintenance of publicly
owned art; and while there is strong support for the general principles, goals
and objectives contained in the Plan, the Planning Commission's
recommendation includes a number of modifications to the draft plan, as I
follows:
1
1
1
421
·
The Planning Commission does not recommend inclusion of the
proposed Art in Private Development Policy/Ordinance as identified
generally in the Plan and as specifically contained in Appendix
Page A-9; the process that the proposed private development policy
appears to contemplate as it pertains to a developer paying into an
established public art fund to receive development incentives is not
consistent with current State enabling legislation regarding
incentive zoning.
· The establishment of a Public Art Trust Fund as outlined on Page
20, Item #3, whereby public monies are transferred and controlled
by a separate trust fund is also not recommended; currently, funds
designated for the Percent for Art program are retained in a
separate account in the City's financial system with proper controls
and audit review; and proposed modifications to the Plan include
creation of a private foundation for the purpose of collecting
private donations for the program which could be used to leverage
public funds contained in the Percent for Art account.
·
Recommended changes to the Percent for Art policy guidelines
which were established by resolution of Council should be left to
the discretion of Council and not to the Arts Commission as
recommended in the Plan; any changes to either policy guidelines,
or to the Percent for Art ordinance as contained in the City Code
should be considered by Council outside of the parameters of the
Plan: therefore, references to changes in the current Percent for Art
policy guidelines are recommended for deletion from the Appendix
of the Plan.
· Senior City administration staff attended a meeting of the Arts
Commission on March 14, 2006, to further review the salient
points of the draft Plan and discussed modifications to the
contents; two specific points of clarification were identified,
including the commitment to provide professional staff within the
City administration to support Arts Commission activities: and
development of a private trust fund to facilitate the assembly of
private donations and monies in support of the public arts
program; and the Arts Commission was encouraged to adopt
guidelines related to internal processes for procurement of public
art.
422
The City Planning Commission recommended that Council adopt the Art 1
for Everyone, Roanoke Public Art Plan, as a component of Vision 2001-2020,
the City of Roanoke Comprehensive Plan.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37367-041706) AN ORDINANCE approving the "Art for Everyone"
Roanoke Public Art Plan, as modified, and amending Vision 20_01 - 2020, the
City's Comprehensive Plan, to include the "Art for Everyone" Roanoke Public Art
Plan, as modified: and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by
title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 257.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37367-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
In response to a question by Council Member Cutler, the City Manager 1
advised that the Public Art Plan will be available for review on the City's
website.
Question was raised as to whether a public art policy will be included as a
part of the Public Art Plan; whereupon, the City Manager advised that a policy
statement will be drafted for approval by the Roanoke Arts Commission, to be
followed by the approval of Council; however, the document will not be a part
of the Comprehensive Art Plan.
There being no further discussion by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37367-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, and
Mayo r H a r ri s - no - - - - - - - on 00 - - - - - - -- 00 - - - - - - - - - 00 __ - - - - - - - - 0000 -- - - - - 00 -- 00 - - - - - - - _n_ -.- - - - - -00- -- 00 - - - - - - - - - - 6 .
NAYS: Non e - - -- -- - - - - - - -- 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 -00- - - - - - - -00- - - - - - - d__ - - - - - - - -- -00- 00 00 - - - - - - - - - O.
(Council Member Wishneff was not present when the vote was recorded.)
I
1
I
1
423
Council Member Wishneff entered the meeting.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on the request of The Roanoke Mental Hygiene Services, Inc., that a
tract of land located at 3003 Hollins Road, N. E., identified as Official Tax No.
3140817, and adjacent property identified as Official Tax No. 3140811, be
rezoned from RM-l, Residential Mixed Density District, to INPUD, Institutional
Planned Unit Development District, subject to certain conditions proffered by
the petitioner, for the purpose of constructing a group care facility, halfway
house on the properties, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 31, 2006 and Friday, April 7, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that
Roanoke Mental Hygiene Services. Inc., the legal entity that holds property for
Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, requests that the properties located on 3003
Hollins Road, N. E., be rezoned from RM-l, Residential Mixed Density District,
to INPUD, Institutional Planned Unit Development District, with conditions, for
the purpose of constructing a group care facility, halfway house.
The Planning Commission recommended Council approve the request for
rezoning inasmuch as the petition, with condition, furthers the purposes of the
City's Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37368-041706) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-1 00, Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke,
Virginia, dated December 5, 2005, as amended, to rezone certain property
within the City, subject to a certain condition proffered by the applicant; and
dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 258.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37368-
041706. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
424
S. James Sikkema, Executive Director, Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, 1
appeared before Council in support of the request.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing: whereupon, the following persons
addressed the Council.
Ms. Candace R. Williams, 1929 Dupree Street, N. W., inquired if there are
plans to widen the access road leading to the proposed facility; whereupon,
Jack Ellenwood, representing Engineering Concepts, advised that a deed of
easement allows for access across the right-of-way at Hollins Road to the
property in question, a new entrance location plan has been completed where
access will be improved with a turn lane, and a traffic study has been filled with
the City's Transportation Engineer for review. He stated that there are no plans
to improve the existing roadway which will not be the access point for the
project.
Gail Buruss, representing Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, advised that
the facility that is proposed to be sited on Hollins Road is currently located at
801 Shenandoah Avenue, N. W. She stated that the current building does not
allow for more structural improvements, while the demand for services has 1
continued to increase. She explained that Shenandoah Recovery Center
currently has 30 beds and the proposed new site will accommodate 40 beds,
the same services will be provided at the Hollins Road site, and the facility will
be safe, secure and serve as a good neighbor to residents of the area.
Rick Seidell, Director of Clinical Programs, Carilion Behavioral Health and
Carilion Health System, advised that the Roanoke Valley has considerably more
need for resources than currently exists to support citizens with mental illness
and substance abuse issues. He further advised that in his daily
responsibilities, he routinely deals with the consequences of these limited
resources, the back up in Carilion's emergency room, the time it takes to
receive inpatient care, and the difficulty in transferring patients to the State
system and successfully returning those persons to the community. He
explained that most of the demand for inpatient services and psychiatric
services at Carilion involve residents of the City of Roanoke; inpatient resources
for persons in need of acute and crisis care are often strained due to
1
1
1
1
425
insufficient capacity at not only Carilion, but at Lewis Gale and Catawba
Hospitals; and the Shenandoah Recovery Center, operated by Blue Ridge
Behavioral Healthcare, helps to ease the strain by providing crisis stabilization
services, detoxification and substance abuse care. He stated that insufficient
space and other facility limitations at the Shenandoah Recovery Center have
increased the demand for inpatient care and further backs up the system; and
some persons currently in the Carilion system who receive acute level 24 hour a
day nursing care could be provided with safe and effective care at the
Shenandoah Recovery Center. He added that the Hollins Road property will
provide a convenient and accessible location for the new Shenandoah Recovery
Center, and would have minimal impact on the residential area; therefore, he
requested that Council vote in favor of the rezoning.
Ms. Margaret L. Haven, 4629 Long Acre Drive, N. E., spoke in support of
the rezoning. She commended Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare on the manner
in which they maintain their properties and the steps they have taken to ensure
the safety of neighborhoods.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
As a result of questions raised by Council Members, it was advised that
40 persons can be accommodated at the proposed facility; the Cities of
Roanoke and Salem and the Counties of Roanoke, Botetourt and Craig are
served by the facility: the existing building will establish the architectural
character for development of the property; the exterior of the building will be
restored to its original condition; an addition that is not consistent with the
original design will be removed, and the interior of the building will be
renovated to provide general support facilities for the entire complex as the
facility is developed out: the intent is to link a new building with the existing
two story building, and a two story addition is envisioned with an elevator and
an atrium to separate the two buildings, which will provide the flexibility to
build at all levels; the first phase of development includes construction of a
facility for the Shenandoah Recovery Center, which is a 24/7 sub-acute care
facility that will be separate from the Feller's home which is the 1882 structure;
and the Feller's home will be stabilized, the ground floor will be renovated for
meeting rooms, and no 24/7 activities are envisioned for that portion of the
building.
426
There being no further discussion by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37368-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
I
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi sh neff and Mayor Harri Smmmmn_mmmmmu____h_nmmmm_nmm_m__mmm 7.
NAYS: No n e _nnnnnnn_mn__m_m - - mnUUU___n__nn_nnn_n__nnn_m mnm U U - O.
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on the request of Covenant Presbyterian Church to amend the INPUD,
Institutional Planned Unit Development District, to include a development plan
for property located at 1831 Deyerle Road, S. W., Official Tax No. 5070410, to
allow for construction of a new addition on the property, the matter was before
the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 31, 2006 and Friday, April 7, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that
Covenant Presbyterian Church requests an amendment to the INPUD District to
include a development plan for a one-story, 8,930 square foot addition to be
constructed on the west side of the existing building on a portion of the current
off-street parking area.
1
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request
inasmuch as the petition to amend the INPUD, Institutional Planned Unit
Development District to include a development plan, with a proffered condition,
is consistent with the City's Comprehensive Plan.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37369-041706) AN ORDINANCE to amend §§36.2-100, Code of the
City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of
Roanoke, Virginia, dated December 5, 2005, as amended, to amend the INPUD,
Institutional Planned Unit Development District, to include as conditions a
proffered development plan and elevation plans for property located at 1831
Deyerle Road, S. W., Official Tax No. 5070410; and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 260.)
1
1
I
I
427
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37369-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
C. John Renick, Attorney, appeared before Council in support of the
request of his client.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No.3 7369-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wis h neff and Mayor Harris_____u__u_umm_mmm_mmnmmmum_m_______oo___n____n7.
NAYS: Non e ___0000_00000000_____000000______00_0000__0000___ un_m - - mm m mum mu_muuO.
.T AXES:_..Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the CitY.Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of Straight Street Roanoke
Valley, Inc., a non-profit organization, for exemption from local real estate
taxation of real property located at 333 Luck Avenue, S. W., Official Tax No.
1012020, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, April 7, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Straight
Street Roanoke Valley, Inc., owns property described as Official Tax No.
1012020, located at 333 Luck Avenue. S. W.: the primary purpose of Straight
Street Roanoke Valley, Inc., is to serve youth, children and families in the
community: programs include a drop-in center, after-school program,
mentoring for children of inmates through Prison Fellowship, ladies support
group, and other programs that assist families in crisis, or with a teenager in
trouble; and annual taxes due for fiscal year 2005-2006 on the above
referenced parcel of land totals $5,935.00 on an assessed value of
$490,500.00.
428
It was further advised that on May 19, 2003, Council approved a revised
policy and procedure in connection with requests from non-profit organizations
for tax exemption of certain property in the City of Roanoke, pursuant to
Resolution No. 36331-051903, effective January 1, 2003; Straight Street
Roanoke Valley, Inc., has provided the necessary information required prior to
April 15, 2006, which is the deadline for applications for exemptions that
would take effect on July 1, 2006: and according to the Office of the
Commissioner of the Revenue, the loss of revenue to the City will be $4,748.00
annually after a 20 per cent service charge is levied by the City in lieu of real
estate taxes or $1,187.00.
It was explained that the Commissioner of the Revenue has determined
that the organization is currently not exempt from paying real estate taxes on
the property by classification or designation under the Code of Virginia: and the
IRS recognizes Straight Street Roanoke Valley as a 501 (c)3 tax-exempt
organization.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize Straight Street
Roanoke Valley, Inc., to be exempt from real estate property taxation, pursuant
to Article X, Section 6(a)6 of the Constitution of Virginia, effective July 1, 2006,
for property described as Official Tax No. 1012020, located at 333 Luck
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, if the organization agrees to pay the above
referenced service charge by that date.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37370-041706) AN ORDINANCE exempting from real estate property
taxation certain property located in the City of Roanoke of Straight Street
Roanoke Valley, Inc., an organization devoted exclusively to charitable or
benevolent purposes on a non-profit basis; providing for an effective date; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 261.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37370-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
Keith Farmer, Director, Straight Street Roanoke Valley, Inc., appeared
before Council in support of the request.
I
I
I
1
1
1
429
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No.3 73 70-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor Harrisn_mn_nn__uummu___________mnnn_h____u___mm_mnmm 7.
NAYS: Non e - --- u u 00 _m ____ mn_nmnnn_n__UmnU U m_uu________nnnnnnnmn_uO.
TAXES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Blue Ridge Gospel
Outreach, Inc., a non-profit organization, for exemption from local real estate
taxation of real property located at 9 Salem Avenue, S. W., described as Official
. Tax NO.1 01 0512, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, April 7, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Blue Ridge
Gospel Outreach, Inc., owns property described as Official Tax No.1 01 0512,
located at 9 Salem Avenue, S. W.; the primary purpose of Blue Ridge Gospel
Outreach Inc., is to serve the poor, drug addicts, and those in need of a change
in lifestyle by providing counseling services through regular religious services
and charitable and educational experiences; and annual taxes due for fiscal
year 2005-2006 on the above referenced parcel of land totals $ 777 .00 on an
assessed value of $64,200.00.
It was further advised that on May 19, 2003, Council approved a revised
policy and procedure in connection with requests from non-profit organizations
for tax exemption of certain property in the City of Roanoke, pursuant to
Resolution No. 36331-051903, effective January 1,2003; and Blue Ridge Gospel
Outreach, Inc., has provided the necessary information required prior to April
15, 2006, which is the deadline for applications for exemptions that would take
effect on July 1, 2006.
430
It was explained that according to the Office of the Commissioner of the 1
Revenue, the loss of revenue to the City will be 5622.00 annually after a 20 per
cent service charge, or $155.00, is levied by the City in lieu of real estate
taxes; and the Commissioner of the Revenue has determined that the
organization is currently not exempt from paying real estate taxes on the above
referenced property by classification or designation under the Code of Virginia;
and the IRS recognizes Blue Ridge Gospel Outreach, Inc., as a 501 (c)3 tax-
exempt organization.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize Blue Ridge Gospel
Outreach, Inc., to be exempt from real estate property taxation, pursuant to
Article X, Section 6(a)6 of the Constitution of Virginia, effective July 1, 2006, for
property described as Official Tax NO.1 01 0512, located at 9 Salem Avenue,
S. W., City of Roanoke, if the organization agrees to pay the subject service
charge by that date.
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37371-041706) AN ORDINANCE exempting from real estate property
taxation certain property located in the City of Roanoke of Blue Ridge Gospel
Outreach, Inc.. an organization devoted exclusively to charitable or benevolent
purposes on a non-profit basis; providing for an effective date; and dispensing 1
with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 264.)
Scott Lyons, President, Blue Ridge Gospel Outreach, Inc., appeared before
Council in support of the request.
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37371-
041706. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the request. There being none, he declared the public
hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance
No.3 73 71-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wi sh neff and Mayor Harri S______n_nn_________________n___n__mumumum_____________nnn_7.
NAYS: Nonem__nnn______muuuummmmnnnu_umoo_nnn_nnunu_m__u__mooO. I
1
I
1
431
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523, adopted by the Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m.. or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on the request of Marcus O. Brown, Sr., that a portion of a tract of
land located on Viewmont Street, N. W., identified as Official Tax No. 2660514,
be rezoned from R5, Residential Single Family District, to CG, Commercial
General District, for the purpose of a used motor vehicle sale and service
establishment, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, March 31, 2006 and Friday April 7, 2006.
A report of the City Planning Commission advising that the petitioner
filed a petition with the City in August 2002, to rezone the entire portion of the
subject property from RS-3, Residential Single-Family District, to C-2, General
Commercial District; however, the petitioner withdrew the petition at the
August 15, 2002, City Planning Commission meeting; as a part of the
comprehensive rezoning adopted by Council on December 5, 2005, the subject
property is_now zoned R-5, Residential Single-Family District: and the petitioner
requests that a 3,172.9 square foot portion of the property be rezoned from
R-5 to CG, Commercial-General District, to permit used motor vehicle sales on
the adjoining property, which is zoned CG, Commercial-General District.
It was further advised that by a vote of 3-4, a motion to rezone failed,
therefore, the City Planning Commission does not recommend approval of the
request. It was noted that a majority of the Planning Commission found that
the petition to rezone the subject property from R-5, Residential Single-Family
District, to CG, Commercial-General District, did not further the purposes of the
City's Comprehensive Plan, the FairlandfVilla Heights Neighborhood Plan, or the
Zoning Ordinance.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37372-041706) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-100, Code of the City
of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke,
Virginia, dated December 5, 2005, as amended, to rezone certain property
within the City, subject to proffered conditions; and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 266.)
432
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37372-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
I
Marcus O. Brown, Sr., petitioner, appeared before Council in support of
the request for rezoning.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing; whereupon, the following persons
addressed the Council:
The Reverend Shad rack Brown, Jr., 2229 Mattaponi Drive, N. W.,
commended his son on efforts to contribute to the economic growth of the City
of Roanoke and for setting a positive example for other young people. He
. stated that many of Roanoke's young people are leaving the City due to the lack
of job opportunities and the means to provide for their families: therefore, the
petitioner should be commended for providing an opportunity for additional
employment.
Mr. Herbert Coles;-91 7 Viewmont Street, N. W., advised that the petitioner
is to be commended for his efforts to raise the City's tax base and to offer job
opportunities: however, residents are concerned about lighting issues from the I
establishment that will not be conducive to a family setting in a residential
neighborhood; and the view from the top of the hill at Viewmont Street could
become an eyesore if not properly maintained and could have an adverse affect
on residential property values. He expressed concern with regard to how
access to the rear of the property will affect traffic on Viewmont Street; and the
encroachment of businesses further up Viewmont Street which will also
depreciate property values.
Ms. Renee Coles, 917 Viewmont Street, N. W., expressed concern with
regard to the encroachment of businesses into a residential neighborhood. She
stated that she lives directly across the street from the used car business and if
the petitioner is willing to construct a home in the area proposed to be
rezoned, she would support the request for rezoning. She added that she
could support the Melrose Avenue portion of the request, but spoke against the
rezoning of property on Viewmont Street.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
1
1
I
1
,I ~ '
'. , .
..'.::":, : r¡',
433
!,.
1:.';"/
"
Council Member Lea requested clarification with regard to the additional
15 feet of property proposed to be rezoned; whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised
that the property that fronts on Melrose Avenue was zoned commercial prior to
the December 5, 2005, mass rezoning of the City and remained commercial;
however, in order to operate a used car establishment, total square footage of
15,000 square feet on the lot is required and without the additional 15 feet, the
lot which is currently zoned commercial is short of meeting the requirement.
He stated that the petitioner has proffered that the additional 15 feet will be
used solely for the purpose of landscaping which must be completed within six
months of adoption of the proposed zoning change, and all access to the
property must come from curb cuts that are currently in place on either
Viewmont Avenue or Melrose Avenue, but no additional access could occur to
the rear of the property. He added that the lot in question contains 100 feet
fronting on Viewmont Avenue, if the 15 feet closest to Melrose Avenue were
rezoned conditionally to commercial, it would leave approximately 85 feet of
remaining frontage that is currently zoned residential; the area is classified as
an R-5 zoning district which means that the lot can contain no less than 50 feet
of frontage, therefore, the lot could not be subdivided and would have to be
used for a house inasmuch as it contains only 85 feet. He stated that because
the zoning petition applies to only 15 feet, conditions can be applied to the 15
feet of property, and not to other property that will remain residential. He
advised that the remaining 85· feet of property facing Viewmont Avenue will
continue to be zoned residential and the only thing the petitioner could do with
the property would be to construct a single-family house, vehicles could not be
parked on the property, nor could the property be used for any purpose
relating to the used car business fronting on Melrose Avenue. He explained
that a condition could not be added to the petition for rezoning to compel the
petitioner to construct a single-family home on the remaining piece of property
within a certain timeframe.
Upon question by a Member of Council, Mr. Brown advised that he
understands the concerns of his neighbors and would not construct anything
commercial on the residential lot.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the type of trees that will be
planted as a part of the proffer relating to landscaping; whereupon, Mr.
Townsend advised that rezoning of the 15 feet requires the planting of
evergreen trees along the edge of the property and it will be the decision of the
petitioner as to which species of evergreen trees will be planted.
434
Question was raised with regard to measure(s) to ensure that 1
landscaping/vegetation will be well established and properly maintained;
whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that because landscaping is a proffered
condition, the petitioner will be required to establish, maintain and replace
landscaping/vegetation as necessary.
Question was raised with regard to lighting; whereupon, Mr. Townsend
advised that with adoption of the new' zoning ordinance in December 2005,
outdoor lighting standards will prohibit any outdoor lighting in the 15 foot
buffer, and any new light fixture(s) must conform with aiming angles and other
provisions of the new zoning ordinance. He stated that any lighting currently
on the building, or on the site, will be grandfathered and could remain in place.
Following further discussion, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that his
concern will be alleviated with the 15 foot buffer area, along with trees that will
be planted in such a manner that there could be no storage of vehicles which
would address the major concerns expre'ssed by Mr. and Mrs. Coles. He stated
that it will be up to residents of the area to address concerns regarding that
portion of the property that is not-subject to the proffered condition.
There being no further questions or comments by Council Members, I
Ordinance No. 37372-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff and Mayor Harrismmum__m___mh_nnm_mn_mmmm_mmmm_mm__m_7.
NAYS: No n e nm 00_0000 mnnnn_mnmnUUh_mnn__uu__uuu_u_u_m unu 00 00 _unnO.
LIBRARIES-ARMORY /ST ADIUM-BONDS/BOND ISSUES: Pursuant to
instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, April 17, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, on a proposal of the City of Roanoke to appropriate certain remaining
bond funds to a capital account for the purpose of renovating or constructing
new library facilities in the City, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Monday, April 3, 2006 and Wednesday, April 12, 2006.
1
1
1
I
435
. ~ ";:¡ (':":> . ~\;:;!. :':
The City Manager submitted a cornrllunication advising that on March 6,
2006, pursuant to Ordinance No. 37316-030606, Council authorized the
appropriation of $4.1 million for the pâtFick Henry High School Stadium Project
from the Stadium/Amphitheater Project account; an additional $4.1 million is
recommended for reallocation from the Stadium/Amphitheater Project account
for a stadium at William Fleming High School; and on March 15, 2006, the
Mayor requested concurrence by Council in the scheduling and advertiSing of a
public hearing for Monday, April 17, 2006, to reallocate certain remaining
2002A general obligation bond funds into a capital account for the purpose of
renovating or constructing new library facilities in the City.
It was further advised that on December 19, 2005, Council approved the
Roanoke Comprehensive Library Study to become a part of Vision 2001-2020,
the City's Comprehensive Plan; the Library Study recommends a three phase
delivery system of neighborhood, full service and resource centers that will
bring a depth of collections, services and collections, staffing, technology and
programs: Phase I has a total projected cost of $15.4 million and consists of
building a new full service branch, renovation of an existing branch and a stand
alone kiosk branch; and Series 2002A bond funds of $5,590,000.00 are
available in the Stadium/Amphitheater Project account for reallocation.
Following the public hearing and if it is the desire of Council, the City
Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution to authorize
reallocation of Series 2002A bond funds for Library Projects; adopt an
ordinance to reallocate funding in the amount of $5,590,000_00 from the
Stadium/Amphitheater Project, Account No. 008-530-9758-9076, to an account
to be established by the Director of Finance in the Capital Projects Funds,
entitled Library Facilities Project.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37373-041706) A RESOLUTION of the City Council of the City of
Roanoke, Virginia, reallocating the purposes and the amounts of the General
Obligation Public Improvement Bonds in the principal amount of
$31,245,000.00 authorized for issuance under Resolution No. 35489-080601
and the General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds of the City in the
principal amount of $830,000.00 authorized for issuance under Resolution No.
35736-012202.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 268.)
436
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37373-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing; whereupon, the following persons
addressed the Council.
Joyce Waugh, representing the Roanoke Regional Chamber of Commerce
and its 1,400 members expressed support with regard to the recommendations
contained in the Library Comprehensive Study, and encouraged action on the
first phase of the study which includes a much needed investment for new or
renovated Library facilities. She stated that the Library Study made a lot of
good points, including the fact that libraries are an integral part of
communities, and in order to have top tier libraries, investments are needed;
quality of life issues continue to weigh heavily on the decision making process
of employers and employees, and amenities such as libraries play an important
role in determining where entrepreneurs will live. She stated that a specific
threshold of quality is required of a library system to add vibrancy to the
region's economy: therefore, the Chamber of Commerce supports a regional
library system, and any investments that are made in the Roanoke City Public
Library system will enhance the entire Roanoke Valley library system.
Michael Ramsey spoke on behalf of the Roanoke Public Library
Foundation, the Roanoke Public Library Advisory Board, and Friends of the
Library, in support of funding for the Roanoke Public Library. He stated that
last year, Roanoke's library consultants completed a comprehensive study of
public library facilities in Roanoke City and Roanoke County; and the Library
Study was a thoughtful process that was conducted over a two year period,
involving a large number of citizens and library users from every part of the
City, representing a demographic and economic cross section of the
community. He explained that among the findings of the Library Study was the
recognition of decades of neglect, and a need to make major improvements in
facilities and service delivery methods in Roanoke's public library system. He
stated that noting that this valuable public resource had been ignored and
under funded for several decades, the consultant recommended a plan to build
new libraries, renovate existing structures, and find non-traditional means of
disseminating library services; and proposed expenditures included
recommendations for capital expenditures that will allow libraries to expand
services with a modest increase in staff size. He noted that in the past year,
there has been a dramatic increase in the use of public libraries, with general
visitation increasing 15 per cent, the number of patrons attending library
programs increasing 43 per cent, computer use by patrons increasing 82 per
cent, and summer reading program attendance increasing 94 per cent. He
advised that reading comprehension and reasoning skills are crucial to
1
1
1
1
I
I
437
,..::!!; .~ >\~..<.,( ~/.l ' 1~ . ::~ "
increasing standards of learning· performance· in the schools; these skills,
combined with a love of learning, are. best learned at an early age; public
libraries have long been the place where young people are introduced to the
skills and the mindset that will foster success throughout life; and early readers
make early learners and early learners are more likely to perform at a higher
level in school and throughout life. He stated 'that often referred to as the
"peoples' university", the public library offers opportunities for lifelong
learning, improvement of job related skills, and a place for public assembly that
fosters a stronger community; and the public library is a valuable public asset
that needs to be nurtured through a carefully planned inclusive study process.
He added that the 380,000 visits to Roanoke Valley libraries last year
demonstrates that the citizenry wants better libraries; therefore, the intention
of Roanoke City Council to provide funding to improve a long neglected
community asset, the public library system, is applauded.
Mr. John R. Graybill, 2443 Tillett Road, S. W., advised that his career was
devoted to education, therefore, he has a fondness for libraries; however, he
expressed concern with regard to the procedure. He stated that the issue is not
about libraries, but about Victory Stadium and the fact that the City of Roanoke
has neglected.its responsibility to maintain the stadium which was given to the
City by Norfolk and Western Railway with the caveat that the City would
properly maintain the facility. He added that students from Roanoke's two high
schools currently have no place to play football: and past and present City
Councils have failed in their duty to provide oversight of a School Board that
has allowed all of the beautiful buildings at Patrick Henry High School to be
demolished in favor of construction of a new $35 million school building,
followed by another $4.1 million to construct a stadium on school grounds. He
stated that there has been no community input with regard to the Library Study,
therefore, many citizens of Roanoke have lost faith and trust in the Members of
City Council.
Almena R. Hughes, 3156 Linwood Road, N. W., past President of Melrose
Branch Friends of the Library, advised that the library system is the barometer
of a locality's vitality and provides a lifeline to the community. She stated that
the City of Roanoke should invest funds to improve its library system in order
for the City to continue in its efforts to move forward.
438
Ms. Martha Williams, 3758 Red Fox Lane, N. W., spoke not only in support
of the library, but in support of the overall issue of learning in the Roanoke
Valley. She stated that she has serious questions about the value of learning in
the City of Roanoke, which is reflected in the City's library system, and pointed
out that when she left the Roanoke Valley in 1978 and returned in 2002,
Roanoke's libraries were basically the same. She further stated that this is
frightening because it is a reflection on not just the people of the community,
but on the value and importance of learning. She advised that there must be a
commitment to learning, not only in the public libraries, but in the school
system, because libraries are critical for those persons who do not have access
to the public education system. She asked that Council move forward with
funding to improve the Roanoke Public Library system.
Mr. Norbert Weckstein, 2602 Wilshire Avenue, S. W., discussed the
following figures: $13.7 million remains of the original amount that was
budgeted for the stadium, the Mayor is proposing that $8.2 million be used for
high school stadia, or $4.1 million each, and that the remaining 55.5 million be
transferred to the Library Fund, however, no funds are allocated for the
demolition of Victory Stadium. He stated that the $4.1 million estimate for
each high school sports facility is unrealistically low, there are no approved
plans for the high school stadia, and no independent cost study was conducted.
He called attention to an independent national study on file at the Roanoke
Public Library which projects that the estimated cost of a 3,000 seat new
stadium is $2,200.00 per seat, or $6.6 million per stadium, or a total of $13.2
million for both high school stadia, and an updated version of the study which
addresses all recommended improvements, increases the cost to $3,300.00 per
seat, or $9.9 million per stadium. He added that the more realistic cost
projection would completely wipe out the $13.7 million that remains in the
stadium budget, and would require additional funds for the demolition and/or
renovation of the Victory Stadium site. He advised that if Council is serious
about building any stadium, it appears to be extremely short sited and
unbusinesslike to transfer funds from the stadium budget prior to better
defining stadium construction costs. He stated that although he supports
Roanoke's libraries, libraries should be addressed as a separate issue.
Mr. Winfred D. Noell, 2743 Northview Drive, S. W., advised that in the
past, whenever money was needed, funding was addressed as a part of the
City's overall budget process. He stated that he supports Roanoke's libraries,
but does not favor the construction of libraries at the expense of other citizens
in the Roanoke Valley who favor the renovation of Victory Stadium. He
questioned the legality of transferring funds from bonds that were sold to
1
1
1
1
1
I
. ...
, ; ¡:¡:: :t. .~:; :: \~~,
439
,.... .
,(,{::' .:.',: ,:,"'
renovate Victory Stadium, or to construc~ a new stadium. He stated that the
citizens of Roanoke are being pitted ¡:¡gainst each other; i.e.: library patrons
versus stadium patrons, which is not healthy for the Roanoke Valley; therefore,
he objected to transferring money out of the stadium fund for library
improvements.
Mr. Richard Kepley, 550 Kepplewood Road, S. W., advised that all citizens
favor renovated libraries; however, the issue appears to be politically motivated
when the decision is to be made just two weeks before a Councilmanic election.
He read from a newspaper article stating that the City of Roanoke owes $250
million in debt which is $2,600.00 per resident. and inquired as to the funding
source to construct the athletic field at William Fleming High School. He
expressed concern that it was recently reported that another $4 million will be
needed for construction of Patrick Henry High School which started out at $36
million, then went to $46 million, then $48 million, and currently an additional
$4 million is proposed. He stated that spending in the City of Roanoke is out of
control, and the City's $250 million debt needs to be paid off before the City
commits to the funding of other projects. He suggested that the funds not be
. transferred to the library account and that any excess funds be used toward
paying off the City's $250 million debt, especially in view of the future
construction of William Fleming High School and Water Pollution Control Plant
expenditures, etc.
Mr. Mark C. McConnel, 532 Linden Street, S. W., advised that having
studied libraries for the past 19 years, it is economically and educationally vital
to a community to offer a current and up to date library system, second only to
schools. He stated that he supports the funding of the $30 million of
recommendations made by the library consultant and, over the next five years,
Council should develop a creative plan to fully fund each recommendation
contained in the Library study. He pointed out that the library is an information
transfer center, not just a warehouse for books; however, in order to be
successful, all citizens of Roanoke must be supportive of funding for library
improvements and not be made to feel that they have been robbed of funds
that were intended for the stadium. He encouraged Council to develop a
complete funding scenario for Roanoke's libraries, and that Council not
continue to dismember the City's budget and the community.
Mr. Robert N. Richert, 415 Allison Avenue, S. W., spoke in support of
capital investment in Roanoke's libraries. He stated that speaking from the
standpoint of a citizen who spends considerable time in libraries all across the
country, Roanoke's library system is not the worst, but it does not stand out as
440
the best in terms of infrastructure services. He added that the Virginia Room is
second to none in the country for friendliness, availability, and assistance in 1
genealogical research, but additional investment is needed by the City. He
asked that Council support Roanoke's public libraries through the transfer of
resources, followed by additional resources in the future to build a library
system that the citizens of Roanoke can be proud of.
Mr. Robert D. Gravely, 727 29th Street, N. W., expressed concern with
regard to the spending of taxpayers' money for high school stadia, library
improvements, and a consultants report regarding Victory Stadium. He stated
that library improvements should be funded through the school budget. He
advised that reducing the City's real estate tax rate will not help some citizens
of Roanoke because they cannot afford to purchase a house on today's wages;
the City's infrastructure is not properly maintained; the City's crime rate is at an
all time high; many citizens are leaving Roanoke and moving to other localities;
and the City of Roanoke's economic development efforts are lacking.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
Council Member Lea advised that he has supported libraries and will
continue to support libraries, but tonight there is a difference of opinion, not 1
about the library itself, but about funds and the funding source. He added that
he understands the critical need for libraries and the role that life long learning
plays in a community. He stated that he has been a staunch supporter of the
Western Virginia Education Classic College Football Game, which has brought
over 500 young men and women back to school, but the game will be a thing of
the past with the apparent loss of Victory Stadium. He advised that he will not
support the ordinance to transfer funds, not because he is opposed to libraries,
but because he is opposed to the source of funding.
Council Member Wishneff advised that he also supports libraries, but he
could not support transferring funds from the stadium account to the library
account. He called attention to a recent newspaper article which stated that 35
per cent of the public is of the opinion that Roanoke's schools are lacking which
can be related to priorities established by the School Board. He advised that the
mental heath of a community is tied to its memories and it was unfortunate that
Roanoke's newspaper and editorial staff and some Council candidates have
criticized senior citizens and veterans who have expressed nostalgia about
Victory Stadium.
1
I
1
1
, ::¡. ·'?'''~''.'.'1I..,.,..:.:-" '. ,
. ;...'.~:.lt,.·;;;·; ~ i ;,:
. ;: : ".....
441
'1. ,~ .'
IiI..: '. ~
Council Member Dowe advised that Roanoke has become crippled as a
community, with good ideas, nobleness of intentions, and nobility of thought to
the point of doing nothing. He stated that the funds in question will come from
the Orange Avenue site which is no longer an issue; the current administration
takes on the onus of all past administrations, regardless of whether they made
good or poor decisions; and someone .must have the courage to move on
because logically speaking there will never be anything that everyone agrees on
at the same time.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the City of Roanoke is relatively low in
debt when compared to most communities of its size in the United States and
particularly in the Commonwealth of Virginia. With regard to Victory Stadium,
he stated that a considerable amount of time was devoted to discussing the
return on investment, and no available data provides any indication that there
will be a return on investment on a stadium, as opposed to a positive rate of
return on investment in a library. He stated that approximately 380,000
citizens visited the Roanoke Public Libraries last year, compared to a total
attendance at athletic events at Victory Stadium of about 10,000 persons. He
further- .stated that a stadium cannot be built for less than $20 million;
therefore, the City is saving a significant amount of dollars by constructing two
athletic fields at $8.2, or a savings of $10 - $12 million, for Roanoke's
taxpayers, part of which is proposed to be transferred to libraries. He advised
that a stadium cannot be compared with a library because the future economic
benefit of the Roanoke Valley will not be based on Victory Stadium, but on
libraries and schools: and it is difficult to make a decision when there is
acrimony on the Council and acrimony in the community, but the bottom line is
that someone must make a decision and move on. He stated that he intended
to vote in favor of the ordinance because it is incumbent upon Council to make
long range decisions that will have an impact on the City of Roanoke. He
applauded the Members of Council who want to move Roanoke forward and
those citizens who are supportive of Council's efforts and asked that citizens
bear with the Members of Council as they try to do what is the right thing for
the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Valley.
The Mayor advised that the current Council will remain in office until
June 30, 2006, and will continue to conduct the business of the City of
Roanoke. He stated that the City has limited resources and Council is charged
with the responsibility of making the best decisions to allow Roanoke to move
forward and to maximize tax dollars. He further stated that the City has, at its
disposal, essentially $15 million from a defunct stadium/amphitheater project;
the majority of the Council has chosen over the past several meetings to do a
number of things with the money; i.e.: $4.1 million to Patrick Henry High
School for an on campus stadium, $4.1 million was appropriated earlier in the
meeting for an on campus stadium at William Fleming High School, and
442
approximately $5.6 million is proposed for library improvements. He added 1
that the present Council inherited the library system as the system exists today;
the current Council received the Library Study that showed the needs and the
state of condition of Roanoke's public library system; and it is appropriate that
the present Council take an initial step to begin to fiscally implement the
solution.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Resolution
No.3 73 73-041706 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
H a r ri s - -- - - 00 - - - - - - - - ---- 00 - 00 - - - - - - 00 _ _ _ - - - -- -00- - - _ _ _ - - - - - - U -00- - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - - noon - - - - -- 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - _u - 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneffmmmu-hmnmm-mm-mumm2.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37374-041706) AN ORDINANCE to reallocate general obligation bond
proceeds to the Library Facilities Project, amending and reordaining certain
---sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations and dispensing
with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 270.)
1
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37374-
041706. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the follOWing vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel and Mayor
H a r r i s 00 - - - - - - - noon - - - - - - _ -- --- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- 0000 00 - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - u_n U -- - - -- 0000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - __u_ - 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneffmmm-n------mm--n-mm-mnm2.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
1
1
1
1
.'. .A .'. '. .....f..,. ' .
:'. .<; ¡ ..
443
,.:
,
"
,:., .
SCHOOLS: Ms. Barbara Martinet; 823 Orchard Road, S. W., presented
information which was downloaded from a website that is administered by the
Virginia Department of Education with regard to graduation statistics in the City
of Roanoke. She referred to charts that are available to every realtor in the
area, and advised that the numbers, especially graduation numbers, are
alarming. She stated that the new Superintendent of Schools in quoting from
Virginia Department of Education numbers stated that there was an 80 per cent
graduation rate last year, including students graduating with a GED; and
speaking as a volunteer tutor for 15 years, she advised that students of
Roanoke City deserve better. She pointed out that in 1996 and 1997, 63 per
cent of ninth graders graduated and 62 per cent received diplomas; last year,
according to the Superintendent of Schools, 58 per cent graduated, but only 48
per cent received diplomas, special education students took a serious upward
tuin, and only 43 per cent of ninth grade students received a standard or
advanced diploma. She referred to another chart including 20 of the largest
public school systems in the Commonwealth of Virginia; when computing the
ratio of schools accredited to the total number of schools operated by the
locality, Roanoke's school system ranked last in the 20 schools, with 12 out of
--29 public schools fully accredited; and of the 132 public school systems in the
Commonwealth of Virginia, the City of Roanoke has more public schools that
are not fully accredited than any other school division in the Commonwealth of
Virginia.
COMPLAINTS: Mr. Tony Hairston, 1263 Tayloe Avenue, S. E., expressed
concern with regard to the overall management of the City of Roanoke. He
advised that the youth of Roanoke City deserve a stadium and the City should
reevaluate its spending priorities.
COMPLAINTS-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29th Street,
N. W., expressed concern with regard to insufficient wages paid to City
employees and advised that the average City worker cannot afford to purchase
a house using today's wages. He referred to houses on Gilmer Avenue that sell
for $80,000.00 to $90,000.00, and advised that the average City employee
cannot afford to purchase a house in this price range. He questioned why the
City continues to construct new homes for low income persons when the
average pay scale is not high enough for the average worker to purchase a
house.
444
ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia,
advised that very little money has been spent by the City on the maintenance of
Victory Stadium since 1995. He referred to an agreement between the City of
Roanoke and Norfolk and Western Railway which stipulated that the City would
maintain Victory Stadium for stadium/armory and park purposes. He stated
that Victory Stadium does not belong to the City of Roanoke, but to the
taxpayers and questioned the legality of transferring funds from the stadium
account for library purposes, therefore, the question should be submitted to
Roanoke's taxpayers for approval. Instead of constructing an athletic field at
Patrick Henry High School, he suggested that Victory Stadium be renovated and
that an athletic field be constructed at William Fleming High School where there
is sufficient land and minimal expense other than the cost of bleachers. He
further suggested that the National Guard Armory be converted to a sports hall
of fame and a memorial to public safety employees, and that there be one large
stadium to meet the needs of all citizens of Roanoke which would generate
revenue to the City if the facility is properly marketed.
At 9:40 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
Thursday, April 27, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room
450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, at which time the Council will conduct a public hearing on the
proposed 2006-2007 Fiscal year Budget for the City of Roanoke, HUD Funding
Budget and Real Estate and Cigarette Tax Rates.
The regular meeting of the Roanoke City Council, which was called to
order on Monday, April 17, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., reconvened on Thursday,
April 27, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C.
Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with
Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding for the purpose of conducting a public
hearing on the proposed 2006-2007 Fiscal year Budget for the City of Roanoke,
HUD Funding Budget and Real Estate and Cigarette Tax Rates.
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff and Mayor C.
Ne I so n Harri S_____nn__n_nm __00 m____________n_m m_n____n..nn_____ 00 m_____________nnnn___6.
ABSENT: Council Member Sherman P. Leamm_..n__mmm____m___mnm__m 1.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
1
1
I
1
'1
1
'·(";r:~i:)f'· '~'.:~" '··~:~í:·
.~,
445
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered b~::Marior Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of thè United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris. ' ., .
The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was to conduct public
hearings on the recommended fiscal year 2006-2007 City budget, totaling
$239,607,000.00, an increase of 7.1 per cent over fiscal year 2005-2006; the
City's 2006-2007 HUD funding budget, in the amount of $3,730,478.00; and
an increase in the cigarette tax from $.0135 per cigarette to $.027 per
cigarette, or an additional $.27 which will generate an additional $1,520,000.00
in revenue to the City, effective July 1, 2006.
BUDGET: The City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Thursday,
-April 27, 2006, at 7:00·p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard,
for the purpose of holding a public hearing on the City's Recommended 2006-
2007 fiscal year budget, totaling $239,607,000.00, the matter was before the
body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on April 18, 2006.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Mayor advised that 11 persons had signed up speak; therefore, each
speaker would be allotted three minutes.
Roger Elmore, incoming President of the Roanoke Valley Convention and
Visitor's Bureau (RVCVB), expressed appreciation for past support by the City of
Roanoke to the RVCVB. He advised that tourism spending in the Roanoke
Valley, which includes the Cities of Roanoke and Salem and the Counties of
Roanoke, Franklin and Botetourt, exceed $500 million annually, with $280
million spent in the City of Roanoke; valley wide tax receipts from tourism
totaled over $19 million, with City of Roanoke tax receipts representing over
$10 million for the year; and Roanoke Valley tourism employs over 7,300
people, with more than 3,600 from the City of Roanoke: and the Roanoke Valley
Convention and Visitors Bureau (CVB) Program generated over $57 million in
direct spending in fiscal year 2005-2006, or a six per cent increase over the
previous year. He stated that Roanoke Valley CVB Programs generate a 48 to 1
return on investment, which is total spending divided by the CVB budget of
446
$1.17 million; and most government projects do not generate a return on
investment, however, a conservative estimate demonstrates that Roanoke Valley
CVB Programs provide a three to one return on tax dollars on the City of
Roanoke's investment in the CVB. He advised that if funding to the RVCVB is
decreased, it will cause a reduction in marketing and advertising dollars at a
time when the market place is growing more competitive with new products
such as the Arts Museum and the Civic Center expansion; and RVCVB successes
have been made possible by a hardworking professional staff and a consistent
funding source to market the Roanoke Valley. He emphasized that a decrease
in funding at this time will cause a reduction in future visitation to the Roanoke
Valley: therefore, it is most important that funding from the City of Roanoke
remain level as the RVCVB continues to move the Roanoke Valley and the City of
Roanoke to a greater place for people to visit and transact business.
Susan Jennings, Director of the Arts Council of the Blue Ridge and a
member of the Board of Directors, Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors
Bureau, advised that having served on the Board of Directors, the Executive
Committee and the Public Relations Committee, she has witnessed the
effectiveness and professionalism of the RVCVB staff. She reiterated the
remarks of Mr. Elmore regarding the return of investment to the City of
Roanoke as a result of funding of the Convention and Visitors Bureau. She
discussed the "trickle down" effect that a decrease in funding of the CVB will
have on Roanoke's arts and cultural industry, and stated that a survey of major
arts and cultural organizations in the Roanoke Valley revealed that Roanoke's
arts and cultural industry is in a real crisis, many organizations have drastically
cut their marketing budgets and staff, co-op marketing opportunities of the
Convention and Visitors Bureau provide a majority of marketing for numerous
arts and cultural organizations in order to make various venues and
publications more affordable; and with cuts to the Virginia Commission of the
Arts and Virginia Tourism budgets, collaborative opportunities are rarely
available at the State level, therefore, local organizations must turn to the
Convention and Visitors Bureau for assistance. She called· attention to a
cooperative effort with the RVCVB referred to as "Backyard Treasures", which is
a marketing campaign directed at encouraging citizens within a 100 mile radius
of Roanoke to support arts and cultural organizations, which could be in
jeopardy if RVCVB funding is cut. Speaking from a non-profit organization
perspective, Ms. Jennings advised that she has first hand knowledge with
regard to the difficulty of balancing a budget; however, on behalf of the 113
organizations represented by the Arts Council, she urged that Council review
the issue, not only because of the rate of return that the City receives on its
investment to the CVB, but because of the harm that will be inflicted on many
arts and cultural organizations within the Roanoke Valley if RVCVB funding is
decreased.
1
1
I
1
1
1
. :: I i ~ ' ¡ f.- I ,'¡
.. ¡ ,.~:
. /;" ï .' .' ":'fi ~ 'd·-
. ,
447
Roy Chambers, President, Roanoke Valley Hospitality Association,
representing over 135 lodging, tourism and hospitality establishments in the
greater Roanoke Valley, 70 per cent of which are located within the City of
Roanoke, advised that the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau
markets the hospitality industry from all tourism and hospitality aspects, such
as bus tours, sporting groups and other major events. He stated that the rate
of investment from the RVCVB to the City of Roanoke is about six to one, and
decreasing the budget of the Convention and Visitors Bureau by approximately
$60,000.00 is akin to taking $180,000.00 to $360,000.00 out of the City's
coffers.
Elizabeth Stevens, Member of the Roanoke Valley Hospitality Association,
Member of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, and Director of
the Hospitality and Tourism Program at National College of Business and
Technology (NCBT), which is a career division center for tourism hospitality,
called attention to the impact of decreased funding to the RVCVB as it relates to
the Hospitality and Tourism Program at NCBT. She stated that 7,300 employees
in the Roanoke Valley will be affected; and the CVB has a direct impact on the
. . quality of education that can be offered through the Hospitality and Tourism
Program at NCBT. She stated that funding cuts would not only hurt the
economic development of the Roanoke Valley as a whole, but also the Roanoke
Valley employment rate. Therefore, she encouraged Council to give careful
consideration to the proposed decrease in funding of the RVCVB and to support
the marketing efforts of the Convention and Visitors Bureau for the Roanoke
Valley as a whole.
Ms. Lisa Gabourel, 1131 Grayson Avenue, N. W., spoke with regard to
reinstating a request of Total Action Against Poverty for funds for a Technical
Assistant pOSition at the Dumas Drama Guild. She stated that the Dumas
Drama Guild is the only African-American theater in the region.
Angela Penn, Director of Housing and Community Development, Total
Action Against Poverty, spoke in support of an application submitted by TAP for
an initiative that will provide on-going technical assistance and support for
many of Roanoke's recently created and small non-profit organizations, many
of whom operate on a volunteer basis. She explained that it is difficult for
volunteers to conduct the necessary outreach programming of an organization,
in addition to the business and technical aspects of developing and operating a
non-profit organization. She added that throughout TAP's 40 year history, it
448
has been instrumental in incubating and replicating significant programs and 1
services; Le.: Legal Aid of Roanoke, RADAR, CHIP, Blue Ridge Housing
Development Corporation, Virginia Water Project, Project Discovery, Inner City
Athletic Association, The Dumas Drama Guild, Virginia CARES, Southwest
Virginia Second Food Harvest Bank, Southwest Virginia Community
Development Fund and the Center for Employment and Training. She advised
that TAP has requested $19,374.00 from Community Development Block Grant
funds to support a program that will' provide much needed services to small
and non-profit organizations.
Ms. Yolanda Puyana, 5573 Valley Drive, S. W., spoke in support of the
request of TAP which will assist the Latino community in establishing a
Community Information Referral Center in the City Roanoke. She advised that
in the future, it is anticipated that the referral center will offer education, living
assistance, health and medical service programs.
Mr. Freddie Fuentes, 304 Summit Street, Lexington, Virginia, advised that
he has worked with TAP to establish a Hispanic Community Center and
emphasized the importance of the Community Information Referral Center as
an entity to provide leadership and guidance to a community that is growing at
a rate of approximately eight to one versus any other group of persons. He
stated that Hispanic people are arriving at a rapid pace, filling the schools at a 1
rate of 322 per cent over the past ten years, versus ten per cent in the
Caucasian community and 18 per cent in the African-American community. He
explained that there is a significant lack of leadership within the Hispanic
community and it is hoped to address the issue through a community center
where people will find a sense of community, guidance and information to
achieve success in a new locality. He spoke to the national immigration issue
and the fact that the Hispanic community is showing the most significant
growth by groups who migrate from other locations within the United States
due to housing affordability and work opportunities. He stated that the
Hispanic group will be an integral part of the community within the next ten to
15 years, leading to a larger student body growth at local universities and
educational establishments; therefore, the importance of establishing a
community center is emphasized because whether this segment of the
population is successful will depend largely on the quality of leadership that is
provided.
1
1
1
1
: h:" (: ~ :. :"";;"
.' .
'" ,.
449
Annette Lewis, Director, Total Action Against Poverty, This Valley Works
Program, advised that TAP was told on multiple occasions that its application
for CDBG funds, under the economic development category, was not funded
because economic development was eliminated as a category for CDBG funding;
the reasons that were provided pertained to reductions in funding sustained by
HUD and because housing is the City's number one funding priority; however,
after submitting a formal appeal, the City referred to deficiencies in TAP's
application as a root cause for denial of funding. She stated that if TAP's
application was deficient from the beginning, why was the organization not
informed earlier, and why was TAP repeatedly told that its application was
denied based on funding restrictions, and not based on the merit of the
application. She addressed some of the perceived deficiencies by the City in
TAP's Forklift Warehouse Operations Training application for CDBG funds; i.e.:
(1) the review committee was concerned about TAP's ability to sustain the
training program and continued dependence on CDBG funds; however, it was
the intent of TAP to request initial CDBG funds as seed money for the first year,
then ask for diminished CDBG funding support for the program in the second
year and to supplement the program with training accounts and other funds;
(2) TAP was rated low in certain areas that were not understandable, such as
for not leveraging or combining funds from other sources; and (3) the total
budget was $183,000.00 and TAP proposed $ 77 ,091.00 in matching funds,
representing 42 per cent of the overall budget. She took issue with an
evaluation which indicates that TAP was not addressing a vital community need,
TAP's objectives were not clear and measurable, TAP lacked experience, and
TAP lacked a satisfactory track record of demonstrating capabilities and
performance. She stated that connecting low income City residents to jobs that
pay $12.00 to $13.00 per hour with advancement potential is a vital community
need and TAP has a long history of providing training for over 37 years which
should speak to the effectiveness of the organization.
Drew Parsons, Regional Human Resources Manager, Pepsi Bottling Group,
advised that the Pepsi Bottling Group is an $11 billion corporation
headquartered in Summers, New York, which generates approximately $150
million in revenue sales in western Virginia, and employs 750 persons in
western Virginia, 230 of whom are located in the Roanoke area. He stated that
Pepsi operates eight locations in western Virginia, two manufacturing facilities
and six distribution facilities and manufactures and distributes over 300
different types of liquid refreshment. He explained that the Roanoke
warehouse employs 40 - 50 employees, all of whom are skilled operators who
are forklift certified and earn approximately $35,000.00 per year; and Pepsi
Bottling Group enlisted the services of TAP, as opposed to using its normal
staffing procedures, to provide an opportunity for low or no income citizens
from downtown Roanoke to develop a skill that will translate into gainful
employment. Additionally, he noted that once these individuals are employed
450
by Pepsi, they will have an opportunity to advance, to obtain their Certified
Driver's License (CDU and the necessary training that will lead to higher paying I
jobs. He stated that the Forklift Training and Warehouse Program will provide
the opportunity to hire ten persons, with the goal of training an additional 20 to
30 people who would be trained to work for other distribution centers and
companies within the Roanoke Valley. He added that the Pepsi program to hire
ten additional employees is estimated to generate $350,000.00 in additional
tax revenue for the City of Roanoke, and the other 20 to 30 persons, if
employed in positions of equivalent value, could add an additional $700,000.00
of tax revenue. He stated that there is a need for this type of training and the
Pepsi Bottling Group encourages the City of Roanoke to support the program;
currently Pepsi draws employment from the Counties of Botetourt, Bedford and
Roanoke, but the Forklift Training and Warehouse Program is targeted directly
at downtown Roanoke; therefore, he requested that funding for TAP's Forklift
Training and Warehouse Program be reconsidered by the City of Roanoke.
Owen Scholtz, Director of Planning, Total Action Against Poverty, spoke
with regard to TAP's Forklift Training and Warehouse Program. He stated that
TAP was approached by Pepsi Bottling Group to enter into the program in order
to increase their recruitment and retention of low income individuals,
specifically minorities and women. He further stated that representatives of the
Pepsi Group found that most of the individuals who came to them looking for
employment had an undeveloped work ethic and insufficient math and reading 1
skills which prevented them from securing jobs; a short term evaluation
demonstrated that there are at least two other major firms that have the same
needs and will offer the same kind of benefits and employment; therefore, TAP
developed a comprehensive training program over a short period of time to
allow these persons to access jobs in the range of $10.00 to $13.50 per hour,
and could lead to upward mobility within the firms. He asked that the City of
Roanoke reconsider its position to deny CDBG funding for the Forklift and
Warehouse Training Program for the following reasons: the program is
consistent with CDBG goals to serve the low-income population, the program is
consistent with the constituency that the City wishes to serve, the program
works directly with businesses to meet their needs, the program offers earning
power with growth potential to low-income individuals, and the program
addresses a business need and the needs of the low income constituency to
improve their lives and to rise above poverty. He explained that the
participating businesses cannot afford to embark on this kind of training
program which is an expense that should be part of a public responsibility, and
1
I
I
1
451
the program is an effective use of public funds involving an on-going
employment initiative which will achieve substantial independence after two
years. He advised that the Forklift. and Warehouse Training Program is the only
employment and training prograrii offered within all of the CDBG applications
this year; and the curtailment or elimination of other Federal, State and local
funding for employment and training programs across the nation has made it
even more difficult to offer training programs in the face of an increasing need.
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
BUDGET-GRANTS: The Mayor advised that the second public hearing
pertained to the City's proposed 2006-2007 HUD funding budget, in the
amount of $3,730,478.00.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on April 19, 2006.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Mayor inquired if there were persons· present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
At 7:35p. m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
immediately following the public hearing on the City's real property tax levies
and a decrease in the real property tax rate for fiscal year 2006-2007.
At 7:36 p.m., the Mayor called a meeting of the Council to order to
conduct a public hearing on the City's real property tax levies 'and a decrease in
the real property tax rate for fiscal year 2006-2007. The meeting was held in
the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. (Council Member Lea was
absent.)
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
452
BUDGET-TAXES: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was I
to hold a public hearing on the City's real property tax levies and a decrease in
the real property tax rate. He further advised that the City Manager's proposed
budget includes a decrease in the real property tax rate from $1.21 to $1.19
per $100.00 of assessed value; and based on the proposed real property tax
rate and a change in other revenues, the total budget of the City of Roanoke
will exceed last year's budget by 7.1 per cent.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on April 18, 2006.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, the Mayor
declared the meeting adjourned.
Council having previously recessed the 7:00 p.m. meeting, with regard to
a proposed increase in the cigarette tax, at 7:40 p.m., the Mayor called the
meeting back to order. The meeting was held in the City Council Chamber,
Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, with Mayor Harris presiding.
I
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum. (Council Member Lea was
absent.)
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
BUDGET-TAXES: The Mayor advised that the last public hearing was with
reference to a proposed increase in the cigarette tax from $.0135 per cigarette
to $.027 per cigarette, beginning July 1, 2006, which will generate an additional
$1,520,000.00 in revenue to the City.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on April 18, 2006.
(See publisher's affidavit on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
1
1
1
I
453
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the public hearing. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
There were no questions or comments by the Members of Council.
The Mayor advised that Council will convene in budget study sessions on
Thursday, May 4 and on Friday, May 5, 2006, if necessary, at 8:30 a. m., in
Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, with the goal of sending the budget back to the City Manager to
make any necessary adjustments and to prepare the appropriate measures for
adoption by Council on Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 2:00 p. m., in the City
Council Chamber.
There being no further business, at 7:45 p. m., the Mayor declared the
Council meeting adjourned.
ATTEST: f)
A ~ 1: ra-i--<
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
APPROVED
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor
,.
454
REGULAR WEEKLY SESSION-n-ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 1, 2006
I
9:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
May 1,2006, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris and School
Board Chair Kathy G. Stockburger presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2,
Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1,
Reqular Meeti!l9~, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and
pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by the Council on Tuesday,
July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.,
Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler and Mayor C. Nelson Harrismmmm-mn--5.
ABSENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea and Brian J. Wishneffm---m-n2.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was to conduct a joint I
meeting of Council and the Roanoke City School Board.
SCHOOL TRUSTEES PRESENT: Jason E. Bingham, David B. Carson,
William H. Lindsey, Alvin L. Nash, Courtney A. Penn, David B. Trinkle and
Kathy G. Stockburger, Chair__mm___nnm_mm_____u_mmm_m_m_____nh___nmmnm 7.
A BS E NT: Non e - n - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - 0 .
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
Representing Roanoke City Public Schools: Marvin T. Thompson,
Superintendent; Cindy H. Poulton, Clerk to the School Board; Bernard J. Godek,
Associate Superintendent for Management; August Bullock, Associate
Superintendent for Instruction; Sharon Richardson, Executive Director for
Student Services; Dana Thurston, Director for Resource Development and
Communication; Toni Elitharp, Associate Director for Professional Development;
and Timothy R. Spencer, Assistant City Attorney and Legal Counsel to the
School Board.
1
1
1
1
455
SCHOOLS-COUNCIL: Mayor Harris welcomed School Board Members, the
Superintendent of Schools and members of the School administration. He
advised that this would be the last meeting with the current City Council and
the current School Board and expressed appreciation to Ms. Stockburger and to
Dr. Trinkle for their service on the School Board. He stated that as the new
Superintendent of Schools completes his first year, it has been an important
year of transition for the Superintendent and for the school system in general.
He commended the support of the School Board to the Superintendent of
Schools and to other administrators and their initiatives.
Chair Stockburger expressed appreciation for the positive working
relationship that has existed with the Mayor, City Council and the City Manager
during her tenure on the School Board and extended best wishes to her School
Board colleagues. She also expressed appreciation to the staff of the Roanoke
City School system for their assistance. .
Superintendent Thompson advised that the Schools' 2006-2007 fiscal
year budget presentation is designed to provide an overview of certain budget
management strategies that will be implemented during the upcoming fiscal
year in an effort to move the school system forward; and the presentation will
consist of two components, the budget process including identification of
certain challenges and actions that were taken to overcome those challenges,
and the method used to adjust strategic planning process when unfunded
priorities were identified.
Mr. Godek expressed appreciation to the School Board and to the
executive staff of the school system for their assistance and guidance in
preparing the school system's 2006-2007 fiscal year budget. He stated that for
perhaps the first time, the executive staff and the School Board have a true
appreciation of what it takes to work as a team to prepare a budget, how to
identify needs of the school division, and how to list priorities realizing that all
things cannot be achieved. He also expressed appreciation to the City Manager
and to City staff for their assistance in the bUdget process.
Mr. Godek reviewed the follOWing information:
456
1
Reps Division Goals
· Improve academic achievement for all students while
closing achievement gaps.
· Provide safe and effective learning environments.
· Ensure Roanoke City Public Schools' management and
efficiency through division-wide systems of
accountability.
· Implement programs and procedures to train, promote,
and retain a highly qualified and diverse staff.
· Establish strong home, school, business, and community
relationships that support achievement.
SUMMARY OF ALL FUNDS - REVENUES
FY 2003-2007 Revenue History and Estimates
;------.. . u·--_·T--..---l--....---·=r-::--··--::rAÕÕ¡;TËD-,--r;Rop~~Li.á¡------·--;
~==-=~~_-=:=~~···:=--=::~~~liF~~~~~=p~~~~:1;~~=r~·~~~~~~~~['-!ltil~~j
.__._.____u..____._......___.._...__J_______..···_···...·.._...._-o=-j.... .,
'STATE S 45.336)82;:) l.3,6t3,971! S 5:l,P33.220 I $ 52,072,458 I i 56,226.657 $ 5,1:7,3791 9.72%j
E':~"'~- ~ª~"".'--"'".I::::',""'~~~~¡::~"~
~iREVENUE_=_. __ 117~' ',35.134 .._!l~359 ',25.091 142.530 ___12:~9~ 1401i'''-
~~~~ "EVE~U~....::-_=_-=.:_..I:----~~I992,e~sJ:---~~53:;¡~~-::·:~~O:ICO~_m~:!;4~:~~O ~______:~,!,.100: __ -2..~~j
, 'I I J
[O¡A.-~~N:C'IY -=...._.~¡ ~ ':',E:~!.q_~... ó6.259.171=~:iO:21S . $ &7.9;Z,&:~.,-$:=~:~::~~..~,~9.s,6~r=-~
:':'~.F:~~~..___ -1: 47.478.060. __ 49.547.632; 51,<89:~2E_ =~:3E 299 :...578il3:~25 3441.12ê E:;4~
ffÒfÁ·L_?!.~AAf,KG Il~VEÑUE.::_ ··Ti.-~~2.,38,ñili-:~~~.;;¡;:=;6ÓÕ;ç-ïì2.JiŠ.9;¡Š--i3ï.26J.335 l'TG;J3.4Õ¡¡ --~i
. . I I
,. ,
rCA~~A.C~iA1N~~_~~E_~~~_ _u¡-..:-U41?Thr-~.ô3~=0)ð.3ief= ..:::::=-~--" -.. om . _~f; t-----...~~.;
TõfÁ::.G.:E§:~..!:~_=-__=_.::.:!IJ~:,48'J.~~:;:(ï·O,.e~3~.!.._IJÕ}œ471 IS ~¡~,~is~~'if!. ~31.¡63 mY"=9Æf..'~:---=-'::' t-l~
~fÄC'f~~~ SE!V1C~.~~~~~~·.!:..·--:;¡.579,~+---..~~::5¡4)...: 'E"&~' _...~5~~t::_5)54~~49 :-·.··:·.·_'j5ë~~s:~-'f16~-!
I .. l I' ,
~f~,:~~~~~~3!F~Ö!!~~c=jf· iÖ9,öëó:3iöt¡ '1 i4·~57õ:3~·f12J:j55.ï831 n27;316.ã75r¡K618.2ã3~ š-iõ,lö1.;¡Õ81-=:=:~:ö9%!
1
I
· ·~'Y ~". ".' . '
"'~...~
457
I
SUMMARY OF ALL FUNDS - EXPENDITURES
FY 2003-2007 Expenditure History and Estimates
By State Reporting Category
1
1 I Fœl6 Pf&Xl7 1
i ! I'œJl I'f.!X)t Pf.2lI!j JlFI'R:MD HO'lJ:I1 I
I IICIUl. IICIUl. IICIUl. B.J:XEr RE B.J:XEr RE B.J:XEr!RE
! 1 :
IrSndi01 S 75MSllI $ 7l\007,410: $ æ2!iJß13! $ oo.rm,.cas 1.Sl316 $ 97;m,m 1,5R 16 6;P.7,7761 500
, !
s.wrt SNœs 4,014229' 4,:m,7æ 5;Ðlf.JJT 5,3:1E\5'I7 7Il1Ð 1 6,."fil,002 7724 l,017,4ffi 6.ffi
1
TIõf Iltai01 4,a:l4,œ:l 4,400,:H; 5.446,412 5,1199161 177.00 ; 6.3æ,616 18l.oo· 1,ZJl.700 3.00
! I ,
1Q>aáia1& Mirt..-.rœ 10,417,Ãl2 lO,7OO.8l1 11.971,(0) 12,S77.1l74 197.40 13,722,7Zl :DI.4O 1,~ 7.00
,
1 Faililies 1,9l1,ffi4 3,632,fB4 2.115.283 1,Χ.215 - 538,lΠ- (544;410) -
I I
Q j S1\œ 4.515,312, 5.394.610 4.5f1<474 I 7245.248 - a002,478 - 7Sl;z!IJ -
: ;
Tctll ClnnJ Ftrd $11Xl,lJ7W5l' $ 107,&1l,4lti , $117.748,1921 $122,319,9J5 1,9l8.14 $1"D~"nI;, 1,!Øl8l $ \l,943,4Xl 21.65
Fox s.uœs I 4.007,004 . 5128,fm 1 4,!Œ.9lO 94.8li ,
4,414,112 !lI8l 5$4.948 :Hl,cœ (4.00):
! 1 !
Tctll qmtirgf'l1Œ $105,31l0W72' $112.395,5m, $122,817;Jn; $127,316,875 2,0Ili74 $137.618$! i _2,064.40 I $11l,311,«B 17.65'
I 1 1 I I
Chart G
Expenditures by Object
FY 2006-07
Purchased
Svcs
2%
Utilities
3%
Fringe Benefits·
23%
J
..-
\
\
\
,
/
"
"
- - ~
~
/
'"
Salaries
.'.....
57%
Supplies
5%
Other i
4%
Debt Service
6%
1
458
Superintendent Thompson advised that when reviewing alternative
methods of providing career and technical services at Blue Ridge Technical
Academy, the program was expanded in conjunction with Virginia Western
Community College to design programs and goals that will enable all students
to earn a certificate, whether it be at the 12'" grade level, or a program at
Virginia Western Community College.
Mr. Godek advised that certain organizational changes were made since
July 1,2005, and carried over into the 2006-2007 budget; in order to fund the
number one priority of the schools which is a salary increase for employees,
reductions were made in the General Operating Fund of $2.35 million; increases
are considered to be average; increases for classified employees are somewhat
higher as a result of a pay study that was conducted by the City of Roanoke and
based on a recommendation contained in the study; and it is hoped to continue
the five per cent increase for classified employees over the next three years in
order to bring those employees in line with their counterparts in similar
positions in other parts of the state.
1
Council Member Cutler inquired if there is consistency between the pay
scale of the School system and the City; whereupon, Mr. Godek advised that it
is hoped to bring salary parity between employees in the City and in the School
system based on comparable jobs; and the study revealed that many classified 1
employees are underpaid.
He reviewed the following items that could not be funded in the fiscal
year 2006-2007 budget, i.e.: new textbook adoptions division wide, alternative
funding for the eight-step instructional model, which is the instructional model
that has been implemented throughout the entire school division starting first
in Title I schools and expanding to all schools, and commencement of a
division-wide major maintenance plan for all school facilities based on a six, 12
and 18 year maintenance cycle:
FY 2006-07 BudQet Highlights
Budget Does Not Include:
Funding for Division-Wide New Textbook Adoptions.
Funding for the 8-Step Instructional Model Training.
Funding for the Division-Wide Major Maintenance Plan.
Funding for the Replacement of Over Age School BusesNehicles.
Funding for Expanded Summer School. I
Funding for the Leadership Academy and Forum.
Funding for Necessary Reading Initiatives.
Additional Funding for In-Service Materials, Instructional Supplies. Staff
Training and Travei, Equipment Replacement, Furniture Replacement,
and Office Supplies.
1
I
I
!-. '. i ~.
.. I ~.
,.,
459
Mr. Godek reviewed the top five unfunded priorities, and advised that
should funds become available, those priorities will be addressed:
UNFUNDED PRIORITIES
~~t~~t,~~t:~~ >~;ifiq:~~~~T;~r~~~~~r:~~~·:t:;:~~~¡i1¡;i¡i;;~;i!r:~~!~~'):~~~!fÆ~1 t·:r!!f!!?h~J:t:i.·.;ii'¡;f::'::':, ~~'I::i ·r~~::'t!;~. \!.~;:~~ 'J:.: :l~;i .!;.~~~;t
Objective: To increase RepS graduation rate and increase student achievement.
j~1~~'~~;r:,rrï::~;:;~Y~?Mi~~~~~'it;~~~~/;;¡;;il;;~~;;~;~:!:·~:·::·:~2~:~);ä~}¡¡tW;¡~~~;{;~~;~~·~;i.@!:~;~~iC.¡ij¡;;l:;;;i¡;;~¡;;i.T~¡;~:~:;!¡;{;~;;j;/:~;:;~~;m
Objecllve: To provide students with updated textbooks in subject areas.
~:~nf:~~~~t;?~~;ii¡!i~~~.i¡~7~~:~, ~~~~'~~~~~~~[¡\1~ :r~{~g~;:f!;·:~;;~R~i~~¡;~Wfmiif.Ji~;if~Ù;~,:;.~{·;~~;·;~~~¡~ki'~t~!JW~lilli¡i!~~~~Jj/~;:;i+iif~iî
Objective: To keep RepS staff trained with p.ffective Instructional strategies and approaches for increasing
student achievement.
~~tr~:';:;:~iii~Mrf~~Bf~~.~·r::Mr.~1~~r~~;m'~~§f~&;:::¡:!::\jn¡f¡¡H+;:6··::.¡;~·~~:r¡;Úf@r:;¡:!¡!:~¡;!;¡¡~;;¡;¡::'::;:~.;;¡;;,
Objective: To conduct preventive and major maintenance on RepS facilities ot) a scheduled/planned basis to
reduce the need for extensive renovations at shorter periods of time and provide for a conducive learning
environment.
!¡;f;":tr:f~r"0)~~¡;'f;tr¡Ü':fTItm~~~i:1~~.:~i,hif!hf:~~m~!ff~~~::'.' :;: ....:.....:';':..:"'::.: ii,':;' :.';::;:'¡:;;'::::'.':::,,;:.'o::::;;:';;
Objective: To replace school buses and other commercial RepS vehicles on a 15-ycar replacement cycle
which reduces increased maintenance costs ove,- time and. provide for safe student tnmsportation.
';;;t;;:;",·,:·..:,.",;".;;k~;.:¡ .:, .
. '1·. ·""r:ogr;ª-,[h.,:, .
::;f¡:;;}:H¡::;~m:;t~;¡~¡:;::¡:i::'"
.:...:.~,:. :L'~:::" .'.' ·1;: ::\¡'Jf~H;~"': " .....: ""':..': ':.":: ':"''';-;;¡':::;I':';' ~~:";~":~:;"':',~. ..:::'.
. "SUmme"·-Sli~F,l·øð120Q6·-··· . ·..·,,,.:.......'"t."·¡...", ".:,'
:,;'~f:Rtf(,;¡;~m:'i:;:<:i.¡r!¡1~1~f;~~~~t¡jHii:ùjP:1ii!¡~jf¡~}¡~!Ùl;{l:;¡f¡f;;I¡::¡~¡m~~~~~¡f¡;j!~,,:.· ¡;:~.
Objective: To increase RepS graduation rate and increase
student achievement.
Highlights:
-ESOL - secondary 120; elementary 260
-Bridges -180 students
-Off Schedule -1,573 student (High School)
-Total: $1, 240, 411
. ($219,180 Unfunded)
460
.,..,."
I
!:-~.i(~r.p~raml., .:: i:.. .Öüt~al·êd·rextbooks· .......,.. .,.::.:'"
~_ . ···...··....·':-_L."..:..-l.··'··~··· ,. ..,.....
Objective: To provide students with updated textboo_~s...in ~ubject areas.
Highlights
Subject Arca: Science
Current Status:
_Academic Biology -1996
-Advanced Biology- 1995
_Earth Science -1997
.Chemistry - 1996
Subject Area: MaUlcmatics
Current Status
_Textbooks have a 1999 copyright but arc prior to SOL testing
-SOL revisions are aligned in 2003 mathematics tcxtboof(
_New mathematics textbooks hove morc resource materials
_Teachers prefer to use new mathematics textbooks
Subject Area: English
Cuneot Status:
_9_12 grammar books have 1990 copyright date
_9_12Iiteralurc books have a 1993 copyright date
.Some SOL objectives not covered in current textbooks
'[ Subject Arca: Social Studies
Current Status:
_K_3 textbooks have 1991 copyright date
_Grades K.3 have no aligned social studies textbooks or mflterials
-Maps and globes are older products with some errors
Teachers create materials to teach social studies
"f·..··
~
.":p.:.
. ($1,000,000 Unfunded)
:~~\;!~'~~$~~~11~if:;::;:':::~:t~t~~~i?B~!f:~!~¡~,'~~rii~mf'::::(,':;::i,i.i;::,:q:: 'ir'm~~~~:
Objective: To keep RCPS staff trained with effective
instructional strategies and approaches for increasing
student achievement.
Highlights:
-8 Step Instructional Process
-Benchmarking System (Testing, grades 2-12)
-ROS Scanning System (Test scoring scanners)
-Copying and Materials cost (Tests and answers sheets)
$500,000
-Leadership Academy/Forum (leadership training for
RCPS employees wanting to become principals)
$75,000
-Reading Initiative (Improve reading achievement in
primary grades)
$250,000
- ($825,000 Unfunded)
...
1
1
:. .. . ..". -.-.' ~.'
461
1
!~f,~::~r:~~'tm~t1¡il¡~j;i::.·:.·,~t~y:~~¡i,Wmf::~~~:e[1~;~~~~~·~~1~~;;~,ï~~:f~¡~~(t.~j¡'~;
Objective: To conduct preventive and major maintenance
on RCPS facilities on a scheduled/planned basis to reduce
the need for extensive renovations at shorter periods of
time and provide for a conducive learning environment.
Highlights: 2006-07 Schedule
-Garden City - 6 year - $111,262.00
: -Grandin Court - 6 year - $36,940.00
.Preston Park - 6 year - $51,590.00
.Crystal Spring - 12 year - $54,868.00
-Forest Park -12 year - $69,673.00
.Oakland -12 year - $106,636.00
. ($505,971 Unfunded)
1
~~~~~~~I~~~:~~š0~i\~Æ8·~ilir~~ì;f¡~~~~¡f~~~~~~t,~fJ:rnl~li[:;¡:;!¡;~~~I~i¡¡f
Objective: To replace school buses and other commercial
RepS vehicles on a 15-year replacement cycle which
reduces increased maintenance costs over time and
provide for safe student transportation.
Highlights: 2006-07 Schedule
-8 - buses - >14 years old - $520,000.00
-8 - commercial vehicles - >14 years old - $150,000.00
- ($670,000 Unfunded)
1
462
Council Member Dowe made the observation that in some instances the
college community is moving toward on-line textbooks, and inquired if there
are local communities that are entertaining this concept; whereupon, Mr. Godek
advised that as the cost for textbooks and education in general rises, everyone
is looking at the various alternatives; Henrico County has initiated full
technological textbooks, but issues have been encountered with regard to
infrastructure and startup costs are expensive. He stated that not enough
research has been done to prove the validity of on-line textbooks and although
textbooks are important, they represent about forty per cent of the Standards
of Learning.
Council Member Dowe inquired if consideration has been given to
replacing textbooks every four to five years.
Mr. Godek responded that Roanoke City has done a good job in
identifying and adopting textbooks and textbooks have been reviewed
consistently on a five - six year cycle: one of the reasons for the present
dilemma is that funds were not always available because the school system
waited for end of year funds or CMERP funds to purchase textbooks, however,
other issues came up that took priority and caused the funds to be used
elsewhere.
Council Member Dowe inquired as to what comprises the $2.3 million
reduction in operational costs.
Mr. Godek responded that $1.2 million was identified from personal
services, $100,000.00 from contractual services, $456,000.00 from materials
and supplies throughout the division, $230,000.00 from capital outlay,
$300,000.00 from the magnet program, and $25,000.00 from utilities,
insurance and other costs. In those areas where increases were programmed
due to inflation, he stated that inflationary factors were removed, several
programs were deleted and more funds were removed from the operational side
than the instructional side of the budget.
Council Member Dowe inquired as to lessons, if any, that were learned
from construction at Patrick Henry High School that could be applied to
constructing the new William Fleming High School.
1
1
Mr. Godek advised that during the time that Patrick Henry High School
was under construction, a large portion of the original school was vacated and
relocated to modular units; and modular units will be removed and relocated
inasmuch as Phase 1 of construction is now complete. He advised that William 1
Fleming High School will be occupied while the new school is under
construction.
1
1
1
463
Council Member Dowe inquired about the status of middle school
athletics; whereupon, Mr. Godek advised that there will be no change in
programs in middle school athletics.
The Superintendent stated that the Athletic Committee has examined the
issue of athletics as a whole, and although no definitive steps have been taken,
the process will take the next two years to compile community input and to
reach a decision.
Council Member Dowe inquired if leadership academy training is
administered internally; whereupon, Superintendent Thompson advised that
most school divisions try to "grow their own," which is the strongest and the
best way to strengthen cultures and to entrench practices for continuous
improvement. He stated that the program has been well received, there is a
great deal of support throughout the State for Roanoke's leadership academy,
staff is in the process of reevaluating the program and taking future steps, and
members of the community have approached Roanoke City Public Schools with
regard to their involvement.
Chair Stockburger advised that the Roanoke City Public Schools Education
Foundation has completed its strategic planning process and is currently
developing short and long-term goals, one of which is to have a financial impact
on the leadership academy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick inquired as to how much additional money would
be required to fund all school programs that are deemed necessary by the
Superintendent of Schools; whereupon, Superintendent Thompson advised that
his goal is to provide performance standards; the "wish list" concept does not
serve the school system and its particular needs; unfunded priorities will most
likely be consistent over the next four years; those programs, etc., that are
beginning to show progress throughout the school division are not so much
new programs, but opportunities to provide training and to strengthen existing
programs; and the goal of the school system over the next few years will be to
sustain programs and to build a stronger infrastructure.
Mr. Thompson advised that the $2.3 million in reductions came about as
the result of a review of current methods of transacting business and reaching a
decision that certain things could be done differently in order to be more
efficient and to produce cost savings within the school budget. He stated that
the school division will look at attendance zones, how students are bussed to
schools, and utilization of facilities, etc., over the next several years in order to
achieve greater levels of efficiency.
464
Council Member Cutler requested a clarification of a previous statement 1
by Superintendent Thompson that textbooks cover only 40 per cent of the
Standards of Learning. Mr. Thompson responded that textbook makers sell to
regions, and if a textbook company sells to four different states, each state has
adopted different standards, therefore, textbooks are developed to align with a
region; typically, a good textbook is about 40 per cent, therefore, if a textbook
company sells to the Commonwealth of Virginia and four other states, the
standards from each state are incorporated into the textbook.
With regard to the other 60 percent, the Superintendent advised that the
State supplements the curriculum framework, on line teachers are provided
with a framework that sets out certain essential knowledge and skills that
students need to learn relative to each SOL, and additional resources are listed
to supplement textbooks; tl1erefore, much of what has been gained over the
last few years has been through teacher collaboration and available resources
through division content specialists. He stated that enhancing and aligning
textbooks will help teachers and students to be more accountable to the
information they receive, whereas, other resources provided by the state are
teacher driven, and the textbook is more of a student resource.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the status of the Roanoke
Education Foundation; whereupon, Chair Stockburger advised that the 1
Education Foundation has adopted a vision and mission statement, and is now
reviewing goals, with the immediate goal to provide clear communications with
regard to the actual state of Roanoke City Public Schools.
Council Member Cutler inquired as to what extent the outside auditor's
report was helpful with regard to the budgetary process; whereupon,
Superintendent Thompson responded that the audit was more performance and
quality driven than budgetary driven; and the primary objective of the audit was
to look at the alignment of practices of state and federal standards,
performance driven results, and whether or not the City of Roanoke had fully
implemented quality management in the school division.
Mr. Godek advised that a primary effect was with regard to personnel, the
audit recommended a reduction in guidance counselors, and four guidance
counselors will retire next year leading to a savings in attrition, and four clerical
positions were recommended for elimination and will not be filled in the
upcoming budget.
1
1
I
1
465
Council Member Cutler inquired if there are any economies of scale
associated with working with other entities such as the City of Roanoke and
Roanoke County, with regard to administrative activities such as human
resources, fleet management, purchasing, fringe benefits, libraries, etc.
Mr. Godek responded that there are certain advantages and called attention to
an ongoing joint venture to explore the possibility of combining warehousing
operations with the City of Roanoke and the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority. He stated that it is anticipated to expand into other areas
such as purchasing, especially with the purchase of the new finance and
accounting system for the City and the Schools.
Council Member Cutler expressed concern with regard to air quality and
ozone levels as a result of the number of school buses that operate on City
streets, and stated that this is another reason to modernize the school bus fleet
as soon as possible in order to use fuels that are less polluting.
Mr. Godek advised that a grant was awarded to numerous school
divisions throughout the state to add to or to make modifications to bus
.~ngines, and modifications were completed in approximately 90 per cent of the
City's bus fleet this past year; however, the biggest concern with reference to
school bus fleet rotation is the safety issue.
Council Member McDaniel spoke with regard to boundary lines and
inquired if the school system has taken steps to encourage students to walk to
school; whereupon, Superintendent Thompson advised that no definitive
discussion has taken place with regard to changing boundary lines and it would
be presumptuous of the school system to engage in open discussion with
regard to boundary lines when the system is just beginning the process of
evaluating facilities. He stated that the question would be in line with the
potential outcome of the facility study. .
Chair Stockburger advised that she previously served on a health and
wellness committee at the State level, and the committee discussed the concept
of a "walking school bus" which is designed to bring children and adults
together for safety purposes.
Council Member McDaniel inquired if the Roanoke City Schools Public
Education Foundation has established a financial fund raising goal.
466
Chair Stockburger advised that between $40,000.00 and $60,000.00 has 1
been discussed as a frame of reference; currently the Education Foundation is
looking at making contacts throughout the community because the purpose of
a Foundation is not just to raise enhancement funds, but to provide connection
with the community, and by the end of the summer there should be a
manifestation of business relationships.
The Mayor requested the Superintendent of Schools to discuss the
proposed budget and how it dovetails with his initiatives relative to student
performance, student achievement, school accreditation, those issues that the
Superintendent has focused attention on during his first year as Superintendent
and those things that are either different or new with regard to specific goals.
In response to the Mayor's request, Superintendent Thompson called
upon Dr. Toni Elitharp, Associate Director for Professional Development, to
present an overview of strategic planning initiatives.
Dr. Elitharp advised that:
· Having been involved in education for the past 27 years, she is amazed
at the effort that the Roanoke City Public Schools has put into the
strategic planning process.
· A group of 250 people were brought together to work on the process,
150 of whom were selected through a stratified random sampling
consisting of persons who are representative of the community.
1
· The goal of the planning group was to look at the goals established by
the Superintendent of Schools, which were refined by the executive
team.
· The process included a review of: what are the goals of the school
division, how to strategically plan for those goals, alignment of goals
with objectives and strategies, followed by action plans at the division
level initially, then to the department and to the school level, with the
involvement of students at some point.
I
467
I
· The planning group worked with the School Board to develop a mission
statement.
· . The planning group brainstormed and participated in critical thinking,
members were tasked with doing things they had never done before and
they were assigned a certain amount of time to reach an end result.
· A concern was with regard to what to do with the strategic plan upon
completion; i.e.: how will the plan be monitored to ensure that certain
actions occur.
· The Executive Board and the Superintendent has established monitoring
systems that will send notices to the schools to provide progress reports
and a time line for accomplishing various actions.
· The planning group looked at the span of control and the organizational
chart; i.e.: where is the school system redundant in what is being done
and how can roles and responsibilities be streamlined to get the
maximum results.
1
· Through an internal analysis, total quality management practices have
been implemented.
· A second planning team was established in February consisting of 200
participants who worked strategically and were enthusiastic about the
opportunity to make a difference for Roanoke's students.
· A third team of persons came together in March composed of a smaller
representative sampling of the community and school personnel: and
the team developed detailed descriptions of specific actions, objectives,
and strategies that were broken down.
· At the request of the Superintendent, the group changed focus and the
next team addressed compliance, refinement and new initiatives to be
prioritized within the budget; and the group reached a consensus by
looking at every strategy in the strategic plan to determine whether it
was a compliance issue, a refinement issue, or a new initiative.
I
· At this point, new initiatives have been removed from the strategic plan
and the team is focusing on those issues that are compliance oriented,
or required by the Standards of Quality, the Standards of Accreditation,
the Standards of Learning, guidance standards, etc.; and the team then
looked at refinement, or those things that were enacted that are making
a difference.
468
· Compliance issues include such things as: ensuring that faculty and 1
staff are appropriately certified and licensed, revising the school
guidance curriculum, demonstrating best practices of the American
School Counseling Association, and developing an anti-bullying
program.
· Refinement examples are: integrating learning strategy and
differentiating instruction into the general education curriculum,
moqifying instruction for students with disabilities and English language
learners, while implementing appropriate accommodations, and
ensuring that school facilities are clean, safe and secure.
· New initiatives that have been placed on hold are: the division-wide
reading program, aligning textbooks with the Standards of Learning,
and the skills based program.
· Priorities that are under consideration are: continuing to look at
strengthening site based management, implementing professional
learning communities for common planning time, encouraging teachers
to work together as communities and to address the culture that
Roanoke is a school division that is working together for the best 1
interests of students, implementing professional learning communities,
strengthening the remediation program, reducing the number of over
aged students, increasing graduation rates, and closing the achievement
gap.
· It is anticipated that the division level strategic plan will be completed
by the end of May, the strategic plan will go to the various departments,
departments will review the strategic plan and design and align their
individual department plans with plans at the division level; and each
individual school will then follow the same procedure.
The Mayor requested that the Superintendent talk about the English
Language Learners (ELL) student population in terms of the trend, and the
challenge it presents with regard to SOL testing and student achievement.
Superintendent Thompson advised that over the past year, the City has
experienced approximately a 40 percent increase in the ELL population
throughout the entire division; and the challenges to the school division involve
a large number of young people who are not literate in their own language,
therefore, the school system must bring them up to date at all levels of
education. He stated that the problem does not involve any specific culture or 1
group of population and the school system is working with the Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority to monitor and to track the numbers in
1
1
I
469
order to develop an internal identification system that will identify the location
and the date of origination of students. He called attention to an impact on
available resources such as personnel through the identification of quality
certified ELL teachers. He stated that there is an instructional challenge for
teachers because the school system does not have the necessary personnel,
therefore, students are placed in classrooms with teachers who are not trained
in that specific type of instruction. He explained that the pattern suggests that
the· trend will increase and the City of Roanoke will continue to attract this
population of students, the types of offering in the school division will increase
accordingly, and currently this may be one of the biggest challenges facing
Roanoke City, aside from having to close the achievement gap. He advised that
at the request of the State Director of Limited English Proficient Programs,
Roanoke's school division will prepare a three year plan with regard to how the
City of Roanoke plans to respond to the ELL population. Based on February
2006 numbers, he stated that it is anticipated that there will be a 35 per cent
increase from September to February, and this type of growth can be expected
to continue over the next several years.
The Mayor advised that over the past two months, some persons have
interpreted, or misinterpreted, the graduation rate as if it were synonymous
with the dropout rate. He asked that the Superintendent discuss the graduation
rate in comparison to a bona fide dropout rate.
Superintendent Thompson advised that a new formula is being drafted to
calculate the graduation rate and this will be the last year for use of the current
formula. He called upon Dr. Sharon Richardson, Executive Director for Student
Services, to present more speCific information.
Dr. Richardson advised that there are approximately 642 students who
are over age; normally 58 percent is the figure that is used for the graduation
rate; some people may say that Patrick Henry High School graduated 92 per
cent of its seniors, or William Fleming High School graduated 91 per cent of its
seniors, which is a correct statement, however, the State uses a formula for
grades 9 through 12 which provides that GED diplomas may not be counted,
and every child under the GED category counts against the graduation rate,
although it helps the dropout rate. She explained that only standard diplomas
and advanced standard diplomas are counted toward the graduation rate and
certificates of completion, some individual education programs (Special
Education) and General Education Diplomas do not count toward the graduation
rate, even though some of the students may graduate. To compound the
matter, she called attention to two formulas that are used for the dropout rate
which are calculated by the State for grades 7 - 12 and grades 9- 12, and
Roanoke's school system is between four and five per cent on both calculations.
She referred to a bill that is currently in the House of Representatives to
streamline the formula so that everyone will address the matter.
470
Following further discussion, the Mayor advised that the formulas are
complex, and there is a difference between a graduation rate and a dropout
rate; and some persons have publicly stated that because Roanoke has a 58 per
cent graduation rate, 42 per cent of Roanoke's students are not graduating,
which is not a true statement.
I
The Mayor called attention to two issues that deserve further discussion:
(1) a review of the school funding formula which was established over 20 years
ago and has served the City and the School system well, but may need to be
revised for future purposes as it relates to debt service for capital projects
which was not a part of the funding formula; and (2) the joint use of facilities.
He stated that at monthly meetings of the Chair/Mayor and Superintendent/City
Manager, discussions have been held with regard to the appointment of work
groups composed of City and School representatives to address the issues and
to submit recommendations to the Council and the School Board. He added
that the School system should be the City of Roanoke's number one priority;
the health, future and well being of Roanoke is only as good as the health and
well being of its school system; and everything Roanoke does as a City is for
naught if its school division is not progressing and moving forward.
Chair Stockburger presented the following draft proposal containing
specifics with regard to the purpose of the work groups:
"On behalf of the Roanoke City School Board, I wish to propose that
two Council-School Board work groups be formed to study the
following:
1
Funding issues, including the current funding formula
School/City facility-use issues as they relate to capital
improvement
Rationale
. Roanoke City Public Schools and the City of Roanoke
continually face challenging funding and operational issues.
Establishing two work groups, each with a clear focus and
timeframe, to look at long-term, sustainable approaches to
mitigating costs and maximizing investment for both
systems can well result in positive outcomes for both bodies
and the community. Carefully reviewing the current costs in
shared areas such as facility maintenance, purchasing,
transportation, etc., may help us make lasting changes while
1
1
I
I
. ! .,'~"
".....
471
developing effective future strategies that truly benefit the
schools and the City.
.
Both the City and RCPS are engaged in significant capital
improvements projects, and will continue to advance capital
improvement plans in the future. Jointly exploring facility
use, such as schools, recreation facilities, libraries, etc.
(acknowledging that school facilities must align with
program/instruction functions and standards of
accreditation, and any review of school facilities must
recognize that this alignment) may have great potential for
future capital planning.
Composition:
Each group might consist of one School Board member (not the
Chair), one Council Member (not the Mayor) and additional
individuals from the administration of each body with the
knowledge and responsibility related to the issues at hand. If
possible, a convener/facilitator, or part-time paid support person,
may assist with the group.
Process:
As the issues to be studied and the people involved in doing so
overlap, it may be most effective to roll out the two groups
sequentially. Setting a timeframe and specific formative reporting
targets will help the groups stay on track. The work groups can
then return final recommendations to the Board and Council for
further consideration as appropriate.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the plan of action proposed by Chair
Stockburger be approved in concept. The motion was seconded by Council
Member Cutler and adopted.
Council Member Cutler advised that this will be his last meeting with the
School Board inasmuch as he will retire from City Council on June 30, 2006. He
stated that as a Council Member, he is optimistic about the direction of
Roanoke's school system, reports are prepared in a profeSSional manner and
geared toward the future; therefore, he is optimistic about the future of
Roanoke's Public School System as he leaves his Council post on June 30.
472
Council Member McDaniel requested more information with regard to I
those schools that are accredited versus those that are not, some of which have
high percentages of poverty rates based on free school lunches and a
significant minority population.
Superintendent Thompson advised that quality management practices are
driven and written by the Standards of Quality enacted by the State and serve as
a guide to school divisions in implementing and monitoring student
achievement; and the eight step process is designed to facilitate the approach.
He stated that monitoring the eight step process is another important
component to ensure success and to provide teachers and schools with the
necessary feedback as the process moves forward. He called attention to
significant gains throughout the year in all populations of students by using
current data, and teachers appear to be strongly encouraged by what they have
been able to accomplish.
On behalf of the Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation to the School
Board and staff for meeting with the Council to discuss issues relating to the
fiscal year 2006-2007 budget.
There being no further business, at 10:30 a.m., the Chair declared the I
meeting of the School Board adjourned.
At 10:30 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess.
The meeting of Roanoke City Council reconvened at 10:40 a.m., in Room
159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with Mayor Harris presiding and all
Members of the Council in attendance, with the exception of Council Members
Lea and Wishneff.
BUDGET: The City Manager inquired if the Members of Council had items
that they would like to discuss during fiscal year 2006-2007 budget study on
Thursday, May 4, 2006, at 8:30 a.m., whereupon, the Mayor suggested that
Council engage in discussions regarding funding of the Roanoke Valley
Convention and Visitors Bureau and funding for an additional position for the
Clerk of Circuit Court.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson
Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies
on certain authorities, boards. commissions and committees appointed by
Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(l); Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
was before the body.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council concur in the request of the
1
I
1
1
. . .
473
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor
Hélrris -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------< .
NAYS: Non e nnnnhn_nnnnm___mnn__mnn_mnnn.n____unnnnnnnnoo_nnu_O.
(Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) (Council
Members Lea and Wishneff were absent.)
COMMITTEES-COUNCIL-SCHOOLS: A communication from Mayor
C. Nelson Harris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to
interview four applicants for vacancies on the Roanoke City School Board,
pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(I), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was
before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor
rJarris -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------< .
NAYS: No n e nmnn_oo__n__nn_n_____m _.nnm mnn_OO_nn___hU_nUnnnnn _000000000.
(Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) (Council
Members Lea and Wishneff were absent.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
474
Council Member McDaniel moved that Council concur in the request of
the City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion I
was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor
H a r ri s - - 00 - - - - - - - - - - 00 00_00 -- -- - - - - -- __00 00 - - - - 00 - 00 00 00 _ _ _ _ _ _ - - 00 00__ 00 - - - - _n_00_00 - - 00 0000 - - - - - - - - 00 - - 00 00 00 - -4 .
NAYS: Non e n_n______oo_uu_m_nu 0000 00 - u__UU__n_n___oo_U_muu_m 00 000000___00_0000_0.
(Council Member Dowe was not present when the vote was recorded.) (Council
Members Lea and Wishneff were absent.)
ITEMS LISTED ON THE 2:00 P. M. COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING
DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO THE 2:00 P. M.,
DOCKET: NONE.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
NONE.
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
At 10:45 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for three
Closed Sessions, as previously approved by the Council, to be held in the 1
Council's Conference Room, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building.
At 11 :27 a.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council Chamber,
Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke,
Virginia, with Mayor Harris presiding and all Members of the Council in
attendance. with the exception of Council Members Dowe, Lea and Wishneff.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
(2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which
any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and Mayor
rlélrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ll.
NAYS: N one__uuu________uu________unn_u________n 00________0000_____00_00000000_000000_____0.
1
(Council Members Dowe, Lea and Wishneff were absent.)
1
1
1
475
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-WATER RESOURCES: The Mayor advised
that the term of office of M. Rupert Cutler as a Director of the Western Virginia
Water Authority will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor
for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of M. Rupert
Cutler.
There being no further nominations, Dr. Cutler was reappointed as a
Director of the Western Virginia Water Authority .for a term commencing July 1,
2006, ending June 30, 2010, by the following vote:
FOR DR CUTLER: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler and
Mayo r H arri s __n___00_________n_00____00__oo_______00 ______0000____00_________00________ ---------------- ----4.
NAYS: Non e Umnoooon_oo_n_m m_oonoounn_uoo____uunnuum____umu_oooo__n_m_O.
. (Council Members Dowe , Lea and Wishneff were absent.)
At 11 :30 a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, and the Council reconvened in Closed
Session in the Council's Conference Room to interview two applicants for
appointment to the Roanoke City School Board.
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, May 1, 2006, the Council meeting reconvened
in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris
presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.,
Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler and Mayor C. Nelson
Hélrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------E).
ABSENT: Council Member Sherman P. Lea___m_nm_umm__mm_nu___oomm 1.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
476
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris.
1
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-EROSION/SEDIMENT CONTROL: R. Brian
Townsend, Director, Planning, Building & Economic Development, advised that
the City of Roanoke is presently developing a storm water management
program which is consistent with the Commonwealth of Virginia's Pollution
Discharge and Illumination System: the City is currently pursuing an update to
City stormwater management regulations in concert with Roanoke County,
development of an annual inspection program for existing stormwater
management facilities, and a recognition program directed at highlighting
exemplary efforts in stormwater management during project construction.
Mr. Townsend stated that an important element of construction
development is to minimize the amount of sediment transported into creeks
and rivers by stormwater runoff, which is a difficult task that is made even more
challenging when the construction site is the Roanoke River: Phase I of the
Roanoke River Flood Reduction Program presented a difficult challenge to the
contractor, Branch Highways, for erosion and sediment control, however,
challenges were overcome by exemplary efforts in connection with installation,
monitoring and maintenance of required erosion and sediment control
measures.
1
Mr. Townsend emphasized that the management of various controls by
Branch Highways resulted in providing the necessary protection of the Roanoke
River during construction of Phase I; whereupon, he recognized the outstanding
accomplishments of Mike Higgins, Greg Montgomery, Will Karbach and Bill
Bailey, Project Forman, Branch Highways, for protecting the environment during
Phase I of the Roanoke River Flood Reduction Project. In appreciation of their
efforts, he presented Branch Highways with a plaque of appreciation containing
the following inscription:
1
I
1
1
477
Certificate of Recognition
presented to
Branch
I-ligh"Vays, Inc.
~
ror ;tn outstanding job of cnvirofllllcnlal
protc<.:lIon (fuolJgh the (.~fTcc.:·live use of
erosion and sed¡r"cnl control measures
on .a ~·) "ojC<.:1 with c.J1fficull challcng.~s
The Roanoke RIver
Flood Reduction pmgrarn Phase I
.......~~~ C:?~~ .
.·........:.~........_......r.~......
ROANOKL:
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by
one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if
discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately.
BUSES-AUDIT COMMITTEE: Minutes of a meeting of the Greater Roanoke
Transit Company Audit Committee held on Monday, December 19, 2005, were
before Council.
The following items were considered by the Greater Roanoke
Transit Company Audit Committee:
Þ.tS'Jnal Audit Rep9rts-KPMG Reports:
. GRTC - Transit Operations Financial Statements - June 30,
2005 - 2004
. GRTC - Report to the Board of Directors - Year Ended June 30,
2005
· Southwestern Virginia Transit Management Company, Inc.
Retirement Plan and Trust Financial Statements - December 31,
2004 and 2003
478
.
Southwestern Virginia Transit Management Company, Inc.
Retirement Plan and Trust Report to the Board of Trustees - Year
ended December 31, 2004
Council Member Dowe moved that the Minutes be received and filed. The
motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
and M a yo r H a r r i s -- - - - - - 00 h - - - - - - - - - - n__ - - - - - - - - - -- 00 00__00 - - - - _00_ - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - 00 -- - - - - 00 -- - - -- - - 6.
NAYS: No neooooOooooh_h___On__nnnnnnnnnnn_nn__n__nmnnnoo 00 00 00 - - - - 00 00 - - 00 0000.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
TAXES: A communication from the City Manager recommending that
Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or
as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of Commonwealth
Coach and Trolley Museum, Inc., a non-profit organization, for exemption from
taxation of certain personal property in the City of Roanoke, was before the
body.
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
an d Mayo r H arri S-m m 00000_0000__ - - mnnm - - - - - mnnnm 00 nn_m - 00 mm 00 - - 00 noon m_n_nn_6.
NAYS: Non e - - noon - - - - - - -- _00___ - - - - 00 ------------- - - -- ------ - - - - ------ -- - - - - - -------------- ---- - - - 0 .
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
TAXES: A communication from the City Manager recommending that
Council schedule a public hearing for Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or
as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of Norfolk and
Western Historical Society, Inc., for tax exempt status of certain real property
located at 2101 Salem Avenue, S. W., was before the body.
1
1
1
1
1
1
479
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
an d Mayo r H a rri s---- - 00__________00n ________00___0000_______00_00__0000_______0000000000__000000_________-6.
NAYS: Non e_oo_oomnoo___ndoon____ _____00__00 _m 00 ___00__0000_._000000 - _00000000__00_0000_____0.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY-CITY PROPERTY: A communication from
the City Manager recommending that Council schedule a public hearing for
Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may
be heard, with regard to the purchase of three City-owned parcels of land
located adjacent to 119 Wells Avenue, N. W., described as Official Tax Nos.
2012715,2012716 and 2012717 at the assessed value, by the Jacquot
Corporation, was before the body.
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
an d Mayo r H a rri Son 0000 moooo_oo____.un_m moooon_._n_n_noo_m moooooo_nnnoom __000000_0000_6.
NAYS: No n e ---- - - ___________0000_____00____ ____________00_______00 ___________0000__00_.00______ -----0.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
ART MUSEUM OF WESTERN VIRGINIA: A communication from the City
Manager recommending that Council schedule a public hearing for Monday,
June 19, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard,
with regard to the leasing of air rights located above the rights-of-way of
Norfolk Avenue, Williamson Road, and Salem Avenue, S. E., identified as Official
Tax Nos. 4010205 and 4010210, to The Art Museum of Western Virginia for a
60 year period, was before the body.
480
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the recommendation
of the City Manager. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and
adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
and Mayo r H a r r i s --- - - - - nnn - - - - 00 -00--- 00 - 00 - - - - - - -- ____00 - - - - - - __00 - - - - - - - 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -- -- - - - - - - -- - - 6 .
NAYS: Non e __00___________________0000__00__0000_____00____00_____________00_______ -- 00 -- -- - - -- 0000-0.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
OATHS OF OFFICE-PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: A report of
qualification of James Settle as a member of the Parks and Recreation Advisory
Board, for a term ending March 31. 2009, was before Council.
Council Member Dowe moved that the report of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
and Mayo r H a r r i s __ - - - -- ---- - - - - -- _m___ - - - - - - - - - - 00 - -0000-- - - - - ------ - - - - - - - ---- 00 - - - - - -00 00 00 -00--- 00 -00 - 6.
NAYS: Non e nom m_______m___________n 00 ______________00___00____________00____________________0.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City
Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, May 1,2006, at 2:00 p.m.,
or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with re9ard to appointment
of three Trustees to the Roanoke City School Board for three-year terms of
office, commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2009, the matter was
before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, April 14, 2006.
1
1
I
I
I
1
'. '
481
Applications were submitted by James P. Beatty, Jason E. Bingham,
Caren D. Boisseau, Jay Foster, Mae G. Huff, Randy L. Leftwich, Mark S. Lucas and
Todd A. Putney.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to
speak in connection with the matter; whereupon, the following persons
addressed the Council:
Mr. AI Comer, 234 Parkcrest Road, S. W., spoke in support of the
application of Todd A. Putney. He stated that he is impressed by Mr. Putney's
involvement in the community, his volunteer service, and his vision to not only
move Roanoke's school system forward, but his ability to articulate his vision in
a professional manner, both socially and in volunteer organizations. He stated
that Mr. Putney is also open minded, he has a positive approach in carrying out
his responsibilities, he does not dwell on the negative, but takes what is given
to him and makes the most of the situation. He advised that the Roanoke City
School Board has identified certain problems that need to be addressed,
however, the right people must be appointed to the School Board to empower
the Board to move the City forward and to make Roanoke's school system the
best it can be. He stated that Mr. Putney will provide the level of leadership
that is needed to guide Roanoke's school system into the future.
Mr. Abney S. Boxley, 301 Willow Oak Drive, S. W., spoke on behalf of the
application of Todd A. Putney for appointment to the School Board. He stated
that Mr. Putney is qualified for the position, he is a person who has a vested
interest in the outcome of Roanoke's schools, and he has a passion for the
position of School Trustee. He added that Mr. Putney is Vice-President of
Human Resources at Shenandoah Life Insurance Company where he is in the
business of educating and developing people; his work on diversity issues at
Shenandoah Life is unique, broad and particularly relevant to Roanoke City
today: he served on the Board of Directors of Valley Character which is an
important facet of Roanoke's school system and his support of the Governor's
School Foundation is current and on-going. He stated that Mr. Putney has a
vested interest and a commitment to Roanoke's school system because he has
two children presently enrolled in the system; he has done his homework in
preparation for an appointment to the School Board by meeting with several
School Board members, the President of the Addison PT A, the Principal of
William Fleming High School and he has the support of numerous educators
and other professionals who understand the depth of his desire to be appointed
to the School Board. He advised that if Mr. Putney is appointed to the School
Board, he will bring the attributes of an open mind, a willing heart and an
experienced team builder to the position.
482
Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate Avenue, N. E., advised that he did not I
speak on behalf of any School Board applicant; however, he stated that he
applied for appointment to the School Board because the School Board needs a
change for the better. He stated that he has not been successful in past
attempts to be appointed to the School Board because he does not live in the
right neighborhood, he does not have a lot of money, and he does not know the
right people. He pointed out that three School Board members live within a
mile of each other and the City of Roanoke needs a School Board that is
representative of all sections of the City. He spoke in support of an elected,
rather than an appointed School Board, that will represent all citizens of
Roanoke and not just the wealthy and affluent.
Ms. Rita Leftwich, 110 Brookshire Drive, Rocky Mount, Virginia, spoke in
support of the appointment of Mark S. Lucas to the School Board. She called
attention to his integrity, his love of children, and his involvement as an
outgoing, vivacious and energetic parent. She asked that Council give favorable
consideration to his application for appointment to the School Board.
Mr. Russ Ellis, 2731 Jefferson Street, S. W., spoke on behalf of the
application of Todd A. Putney for appointment to the Roanoke City School
Board because he can make a positive impact on Roanoke's School system. He
stated that as he has observed Mr. Putney as a parent, as a coach, and in a I
leadership role as a member of the Roanoke Education Foundation, and he has
been impressed by his passion for the community by giving his time and energy
to matters that will make a difference for Roanoke's children and for the future
of the City of Roanoke. He advised that Mr. Putney's qualifications include
coaching recreation league basketball and softball teams, he serves on the
Roanoke Valley Governor's School Foundation Board and will serve as incoming
President, he is a past board member of Valley Character and continues to serve
as a regular table member of Ethics in the Workplace, he serves as Chair of the
Diversity for Life Office Management Association (LOMA) which is a great honor
in view of the fact that the organization represents the top 350 life insurance
companies internationally, and he will bring a vast amount of practical
experience from business as well as personal activities. He stated that Council
has a large group of qualified applicants from which to select School Trustees,
but when making a final decision, he asked that Council take into consideration
the depth, practical experience and passion for the City's success that Mr.
Putney will bring to the position and appoint a leader and a worker to the City's
School Board.
1
1
1
1
:. t ~·...~·:'-':·:.r';.!~~· . .;;:;:? >,.\::.;"....
',",
",'
483
There being no further speakers, the Mayor declared the public hearing
closed.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS: NONE.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-EMERGENCY SERVICES-GRANTS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Virginia Department of Emergency
Management has announced an additional allocation for the 2005 U. S.
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), State Homeland Security Program
Grant; and the grant is designed to provide equipment, training, planning and
exercises for first responders to develop better preparedness to prevent,
respond and recover from potential acts of terrorism.
It was further advised that the City of Roanoke has been allocated a total
of $53,054.00 in additional funding under the grant, which will be placed in the
City's fiscal year 2006 accounts: funding was based on a regional allocation of
$402,762.00 divided into jurisdictions on a per capita basis; and funding will
be made available upon review of the budget detail listing and approval by the
Virginia Department of Emergency Management and the DHS.
It was stated that the funds, which require no local match, must be used
according to requirements specified by the Department of Homeland Security;
and the 2005 grant allows the expenditure of grant funds in four areas of need
in First Responder Preparedness to include equipment acquisition, training,
plannin9, and exercise.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute the
necessary documents to accept the grant, to furnish such additional
information and to take such additional action as may be required to impleÍ"nent
and administer the grant funds and agreements, such documents to be subject
to approval as to form by the City Attorney; and that Council adopt an
ordinance increasing the revenue estimate in Account No. 035-520-3527-3528,
FY06 State Homeland Security Grant, in the amount of $53,054.00 and
appropriate funds in the same amount to FY06 State Homeland Security Grant,
Account No. 035-520-3527-3030.
484
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
1
(#37375-050106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate additional funding from
the Commonwealth for the State Homeland Security Grant, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 272.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37375-
050106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
and Mayo r H arri soo_oo___n_nn_n_n_nnnnn____u__u_u_n_m_n_nnm mnnm -- 00 un 00 00 00 00 - -6.
NAYS: Non ennnn_nnn_hd_uunn__m nnm mnm un______m____________n -- -- 00 00 --00-0.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37376-050106) A RESOLUTION authorizing acceptance of an additional 1
allocation of a 2005 U. S. Department of Homeland Security Grant from the
Virginia Department of Emergency Management to obtain federal funds under
the State Homeland Security Grant Program administered by the U. S.
Department of Homeland Security; and authorizin9 the execution of any
required documentation on behalf of the City.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 273.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37376-
050106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
an d Mayo r Harri S_____oonn_______________________________oo____uu_____________0000___00_00_____00_______6.
NAYS: No n e 000___00 ___n__oooonn___nnn__nn_________nnnUnn_m mn__________oo_oo____nO.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
1
1
1
1
.,.
..
. ,
485
WRABA (WILLIAMSON ROAD AREA BUSINESS ASSOCIATION)-SPECIAL
SERVICE DISTRICT: The City Manager submitted a communication advising that
in May 1993, Council adopted Ordinance No. 31472-052493, which created the
Williamson Road Area Service District, and authorized execution of a service
agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Williamson Road Area Business
Association, Inc. (WRABA); on May 20, 1996, the initial agreement was renewed
authorizing continued administration of the agreement by WRABA for a one
year term, with nine one year extensions thereafter, subject to termination, with
or without cause, during each period of time; and the current agreement will
expire on June 30, 2006.
It was further advised that WRABA has requested that Council authorize
renewal of the agreement for continued administration of the Special Service
District; WRABA has requested that the renewed agreement be made at the
same tax imposed rate ($0.10 per $100.00 valuation of real estate) and district
boundaries (between Orange Avenue and City limits north on Williamson Road)
and for a similar length of time that was agreeable with Council on May 20,
1996; and WRABA is also requesting that the two per cent administrative fee
.charged annually by the City be removed from the agreement.
It was explained that the projected revenue from Special Service District
tax funds is $82,000.00 for fiscal year 2006-2007; based upon this estimate,
the annual administrative fee will be $1,640.00 for fiscal year 2006-2007; and
WRABA continues to pursue endeavors that will improve economic vitality and
enhance the quality of life in the Williamson Road corridor.
It was advised that WRABA supports the City's efforts with regard to
changes to the Enterprise Zone and has worked collaboratively with the Police
Department through business watch groups and seminar attendances; WRABA's
achievements over the last ten years illustrate its commitment to the areas of
economic development, City beautification, strategic planning, and public
safety; and the two per cent administrative fee charged annually by the City was
deleted from the contract with Downtown Roanoke, Inc., for the Downtown
Service District; therefore, the service fee should be removed from the
agreement with WRABA.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
renewal agreement between the City of Roanoke and the Williamson Road Area
Business Association, Inc., (WRABA) effective July 1, 2006, for an initial term of
one year, subject to nine additional one year terms and subject to termination,
with or without cause, during each term for continued administration of the
Special Service District; and the agreement shall delete the two per cent
administrative fee previously imposed, subject to approval as to form by the
City Attorney.
486
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
(#37377-050106) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to
execute an agreement with the Williamson Road Area Business Association, Inc.
("WRABA"), for continued administration of the Williamson Road Special Service
District, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 274.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37377-
050106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler
and Mayo r H arri S-m m mn_nn_m 00 mn_m mnnnnm mnnm _00 mnnnnnnnn_n 00 00-0000 -6.
NAYS: No ne---- 00 ______________0000____00______________00000______0000_____________0000__0000000000_0.
(Council Member Lea was absent.)
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the
Financial Report for the month of March, 2006.
(For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
There being no discussion and without objection by Council, the Mayor
advised that the Financial Report for the month of March 2006 would be
received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
1
1
I
1
1
I
487
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick
advised that at a picnic recognizing municipal volunteers on Friday, April 28,
2006, a ceremonial check in the amount of $376,000.00 was presented to the
City of Roanoke representing the dollar value of services contributed to the City
by persons who participate in the Municipal Volunteer Program. On behalf of
the City of Roanoke, he expressed appreciation to those citizens who volunteer
their services to make their City a better place to live.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-BRIDGES: Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate
Avenue, N. E., advised that with the death of A. Victor Thomas, the City lost a
great statesman; inasmuch as Mr. Thomas operated a business on Orange
Avenue and represented the East Gate community for many years, he requested
that the bridge connecting Roanoke over Tinker Creek be renovated and
dedicated to the memory of Mr. Thomas.
Council Member Cutler commended the suggestion of Mr. Craft and
stated that the Environmental Education Center, which is proposed to be
constructed in the former Transportation Museum in Wasena Park, could be
named in memory of Mr. Thomas.
COMPLAINTS-POLICE DEPARTMENT: Mr. Howard Cooper, Jr., 3022
Hickory Wood Drive, N. W., Apt. No. 109, spoke as a concerned citizen with
regard to drug trafficking, specifically in the areas of 16th Street and Rugby
Boulevard, N. W., and 13" Street and Salem Avenue, S. W., where drugs are sold
on the streets, both day and night, and such activities prevent citizens from
enjoying the peace and quiet of their homes. He also called attention to the
need to address toxic fumes from a former City landfill site which is located
behind Lucy Addison Middle School.
488
ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. John Graybill, 2443 Tillett Road, S. W., advised
that many citizens of Roanoke want to save Victory Stadium, not necessarily for I
nostalgic reasons, but to provide a stadium that Roanoke's students can be
proud of. He stated that on Tuesday, May 2, 2006, the citizens of Roanoke will
cast their vote in the Councilmanic election and he trusts that they will make
the right decisions for the City of Roanoke.
COMPLAINTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Daniel Hale, President, Roanoke
Branch, NAACP, called upon Delvis O. (Mac) McCadden, Communications Chair,
to read the following communication:
"It is with deep regret that the Roanoke Branch, NAACP is before you
today to voice its displeasure at the hiring process adopted by the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority (RRHA) for its position of
Executive Director. In short, there is no need to go into background; let's
get to the crux of this matter:
·
Earl Reynolds was lured to the RRHA from his job as
City Manager of Martinsville
He was lured to Roanoke to be the Deputy Executive
Director of RRHA (that position usually means one is
being groomed to move into the ED's position)
By virtue of his working with the RRHA in his stint as
Assistant City Manager of Roanoke City, Earl Reynolds
already had a working relationship with the RRHA. Why
would you bring someone back if the relationship was
negative?
Earl Reynolds spent 2)1" years as Deputy Executive
Director
Earl Reynolds is significantly more qualified than
anyone to assume the role of Executive Director
A nation-wide search for an Executive Director was
authorized by the RRHA
Earl Reynolds was interviewed, but he was not a finalist
RRHA Board of Commissioners voted 4-3 against Earl
becoming a finalist (with the vote going down racial
lines)
RRHA Board of Commissioners are appointed by
Roanoke City Council
Roanoke City Council does have a liaison assigned to
the RRHA. Sometimes citizens appointed to boards
and authorities are good friends, relatives, or present
or past work partners of Roanoke City Council
members (that's going to happen at some point in
government)
I
·
·
1
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
1
1
1
-I,..t."'"
489
With all that, Roanoke City Council has not yet decided to take a
look at the hiring process. We are saying that if it looks like a fish,
smells like a fish, and swims like a fish, it must be a fish!
Something should have smelled rotten to you prior to our being
here today. That you have not looked into the situation tells us
that you are not who you claim to be: elected representatives of all
citizens of Roanoke and protecting our interests. Citizens receiving
the services of the RRHA can say that you allowed the RRHA to use
precious public monies to hire an out-of-state consulting firm to
launch a nation-wide search for an infinitely impossible task: to
find someone more qualified than Earl Reynolds to man the helm of
the RRHA.
You, Roanoke City Council, should be ashamed of yourselves for
allowing such a waste of taxpayer money and staff time to
perpetuate such a farce. Shame on each of you for not protecting
our interest. The Roanoke Branch, NAACP demands that you
mandate a halt to the hiring process begun by the RRHA. If you do
not have the intestinal fortitude to do so (or to accept responsibility
for what has occurred), we demand that you call for the
resignations of the RRHA Board of Commissioners and slap yours
on top of theirs. You know, in Britain, when their leaders shuck
their duties, those leaders honorably resign due to a lack of a vote
of confidence. Do you have the personal resolve to do the sameT
COMPLAINTS-CITY COUNCIL: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue,
N. E., invited the Members of Council to read Sermons We See by Edgar A.
Guest. She presented each Member of Council with copy of a sermon entitled,
"Life of the Believer" which states that one's integrity is at the core of who they
are, one loses their integrity when they begin to rationalize; people lose their
integrity when they are afraid of what other people will think of them, or they
want to go along with crowd, or they go along to get along, or through
selfishness they want to fulfill a personal desire, or have an unwillingness to
trust God. She stated that to maintain integrity, one must decide what one's
convictions are and live according to their convictions; and the abuse of power
causes a destructive pattern of leadership that diverts organizational power for
personal use at the expense of others which leads to a culture of fear and
confusion.
490
ARMORY/STADIUM-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. John E. Kepley, 2909 Morrison 1
Street, S. E., advised that Tuesday, May 2, 2006, Election Day, will be judgment
day for the decisions and actions of the present City Council and the jury will be
the citizens of the City of Roanoke. He stated that the City's debt now stands
at $270 million; and in order to meet the reduction in debt, the City's real
estate taxes have increased over 85 per cent in four years and are projected to
reach nine per cent this year. In the interest of time, he stated that he would
conclude his remarks by stating that the citizens of Roanoke will wait for the
decision of the jury on Tuesday, May 2 when citizens cast their vote in the
Councilmanic election.
COMPLAINTS-STADIUM: Mr. Allan Scanlan, 1631 Center Hill Drive, S. W.,
advised that approximately six months ago, after what appeared to have been a
clear, logical and carefully designed plan involving ample citizen input, expert
evaluation and at considerable taxpayers' expense, a Council majority
abandoned a course of action with regard to Victory Stadium that was for the
good of the total community in order to follow a perverted plan with unknown
beneficiaries. He stated that the only rationale offered for the change in
direction was that it was for the children; however, the interest of a few wealthy
persons, some of whom might not live in the City of Roanoke, began to show a
probable reason for the change of direction. He added that citizens were not 1
then nor are they now, happy with a local government that takes its cues from
behind the scenes financial contributors.
HOUSING/ AUTHORITY-COMPLAINTS: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton
Avenue, N. E., concurred in the communication which was read earlier in the
meeting by Mr. McCadden on behalf of the Roanoke Chapter of the NAACP with
regard to the process for selecting the future Executive Director of the Roanoke
Redevelopment and Housing Authority. She spoke against the hiring of out of
town persons for local positions when there are qualified individuals who
currently reside within the Roanoke Valley. She stated that the current Deputy
Executive Director of the RRHA, Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., is qualified for the position
of Executive Director and the citizens of Roanoke are concerned about the
process that was used by the Housing Authority in selecting qualified
applicants. She further expressed concern with regard to recent actions by the
current City Council, and advised that the citizens of Roanoke deserve better.
She stated that Roanoke can be proud of its City Sheriff, Octavia Johnson, who
is a member of the minority community and received the highest number of
votes in every quadrant of the City of Roanoke in her campaign for City Sheriff.
She added that when voting in the Councilmanic election on Tuesday, May 2,
2006, the citizens of Roanoke will vote on the future of the City of Roanoke.
1
I
I
1
", . ".' ",
491
COMPLAINTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: Ms. Valerie Garner, 2264 Mattaponi
Drive, N. W., Chair, Countryside Neighborhood Alliance and neighbor of the
Miller Court area, spoke in support of the position of Daniel E. Hale, President
of Miller Court and President, Roanoke Branch, NAACP, as set forth in a
communication which was read earlier in the meeting by Delvis O. (Mac)
McCadden, with regard to the hiring process for the Executive Director of the
Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority. She stated that the
Countryside Neighborhood Alliance takes pride in its diverse community, which
is dedicated to maintaining quality of life and the natural beauty of
surroundings, and the pride of the organization does not stop at the
boundaries of Countryside, but encompasses all residents who experience
injustice on any level. She stated that it would be an injustice if Deputy Director
Earl B. Reynolds, Jr., is not considered for the position of Executive Director of
the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority inasmuch as he has
Masters Degrees in Urban Development and Criminal Justice, he grew up in
Gainsboro, he was City Manager of Martinsville, Virginia, and through his
efforts, the wounds of past injustices in the City of Roanoke are beginning to
heal. She further stated that there should be no contest as to Mr. Reynolds'
qualifications for the position: bringing in candidates from the States of
Missouri and Iowa who know nothing about Roanoke would be a set back to the
trust that Mr. Reynolds has built within the black community; and Mr. Reynolds'
level of experience with regard to the Roanoke Valley cannot be found in any
out of state candidate for the position. She stated that it is hoped that those
persons who voted to remove Mr. Reynolds from consideration for the position
will see the error of their ways, and agree that he should be promoted to the
position of Executive Director before further damage is done to relations within
the community. Therefore, she asked that Council bring pressure to bear on
the hiring process that was implemented by the Roanoke Redevelopment and
Housing Authority.
COMPLAINTS-STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy,
Virginia, spoke with regard to the renovation of Victory Stadium and the
meaning of the structure to citizens of the Roanoke Valley. He stated that
Victory Stadium is in good condition, the facility was constructed in 1942 at a
net cost of $350,000.00, and using 2006 dollars, Victory Stadium could not be
constructed for less than $75 million in today's economy. He questioned the
wisdom of constructing two high school stadiums when the City currently has a
stadium that will seat 25,000 people, and it would be a waste of taxpayers'
money to construct a new stadium when Victory Stadium could be renovated for
$5 - 7 million.
492
COMPLAINTS-CITY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert E. Gravely, 727 29'h Street, 1
N. W., expressed concerns with regard to insufficient wages that are paid to
City employees. He stated that the composition of Council could change in the
near future as a result of the Councilmanic election on Tuesday, May 2, 2006,
and Council Members should be elected who are interested in education, the
financial condition of the City, and affordable housing.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE.
At 3:20 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for
continuation of previously approved Closed Sessions.
At 4:08 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the Council Chamber,
with Mayor Harris presiding, and all Members of the Council in attendance, with
the exception of Council Member Lea.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and
(2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which I
any Closed Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City
Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Dowe, Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wishneff, and
M a yo r H a rri S__mnnnm u -- 000000000000__ mn_unnn_nnuunnu_muunnn__U_n_____U___oo_oo_ 5.
NAYS: Non e__oooo__nn_______________m_____________oooon____oonn_______________00000000__00___0.
(Council Member Cutler was not present when the vote was recorded.) (Council
Member Lea was absent.)
There being no further business, at 4: 10 p.m., the Mayor declared the
Council meeting in recess until Thursday, May 4, 2006, at 8:30 a.m., at which
time the Council will convene in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building,
215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, for fiscal year 2006-2007 Budget
Study.
The regular meeting of Roanoke City Council, which was called to order
on Monday, May 1, 2006 at 2:00 p.m., reconvened on Thursday, May 4, 2006,
at 8:30 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church 1
Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding.
1
1
1
493
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.,
Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Brenda L. McDaniel and Mayor C. Nelson Harris-mm-S.
ABSENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea and Brian J. Wishneffm--mm-2.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
OTHERS PRESENT: Council Members-Elect Gwendolyn W. Mason and
David B. Trinkle; and Sherman A. Stovall, Director of Management and Budget.
BUDGET: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was to
engage in fiscal year 2006-2007 budget study deliberations. He congratulated
Council Member Dowe and Council Members-Elect Mason and Trinkle on their
reelection/election to City Council, effective July 1, 2006.
The City Manager reviewed the following items that were referred to fiscal
year 2006 budget study:
Referred to Budget Study
· Real Estate Tax Rate Reductio.n
· Eligibility Requirements - Tax Relief for the
Elderly and Disabled
· Retiree Cost of Living Adjustment and Retiree
Supplement for Health Insurance
Funding for Refugee and Immigrant Student
Education
Mr. Stovall advised that since the time that Council Members were briefed
on the proposed budget, ongoing discussions have taken place with regard to
additional funding for Explore Park, a Walkway Ambassador Program for the
Market Square Walkway - Pedestrian Bridge, the level of funding recommended
for the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau, and the level of funding
recommended for Total Action Against Poverty.
494
With regard to the Walkway Ambassador Program for the Market Square 1
Walkway - Pedestrian Bridge, the City Manager advised that a part-time staff
person is needed to control the area, to serve as a greeter, and to report any
problems with operation of the escalator. She proposed that $17,000.00 of the
City Manager's Contingency account be used to fund a 20 hour per week
part-time position.
Council Member Cutler called attention to the door on the Shenandoah
Avenue side of the Market Square Walkway that is in need of continuing repair.
Mr. Stovall advised that other items include an additional position which
has been requested by the Clerk of Circuit Court, the cleanliness and
beautification of the City for the 125'" anniversary celebration, and the level of
funding for Roanoke Valley Court Appointed Special Advocates.
Mr. Stovall stated that Council was previously briefed on the
recommended $.02 reduction in the real estate tax rate, and the revenue
impact associated with the reduction in the amount of $1,134,000.00. He
further stated that in an effort to offset the revenue reduction, there has been
ongoing discussion with regard to increasing the cigarette tax by $.27 and
using the additional revenue, totaling 51,520,000.00, to fund a real estate tax 1
decrease and to hold the school division harmless, with the balance of
$386,000.00 to fund a $5 million bond issue for curb, gutter, sidewalk and
bridge renovation. He explained that the proposed cigarette tax rate increase
will put the City of Roanoke at average with other Virginia First Cities
jurisdiCtions.
Council Member Cutler advised that he would be willing to submit a letter
to The Roanoke Times describing the difference between services that City
residents receive as a result of their real estate taxes compared to Roanoke
County residents, and to explain service reductions if the City of Roanoke were
to impose the same real estate tax as Roanoke County.
The Mayor advised that $386,000.00 of the 51,520,000.00 in revenue
generated from an increase in the cigarette tax will be used to provide debt
service for the bond issuance of $5 million for curb, gutter, sidewalks and
bridge renovation; however, in view of statements made by the school
administration with regard to the William Fleming High School project, he
inquired if the matter should be temporarily held in abeyance. The City
Manager stated that the 5386,000.00 will fund $5 million of debt and that
specifiC use was suggested because when the cigarette tax was increased
several years ago, the increase was directed toward curb, gutter and sidewalk. I
She inquired if the Mayor was suggesting that the $386,000.00 should not stay
strictly on the City side of the budget; whereupon, the Mayor advised that as
1
1
1
495
City and School work groups go forward, this should be kept in mind. Mr.
Stovall advised part of the updated 55 million CIP is allocated to the
abovereferenced project, it is not anticipated that the bonds will be issued until
fiscal year 2008, so there is some flexibility to working with the School Board
on the matter.
Mr. Stovall advised that Council was previously briefed on recommended
revisions to the income and net worth caps for real estate tax relief for elderly
and disabled homeowners. He stated that it is recommended that the
household income cap be increased from $30,000.00 to $34,000.00, based on
the change in the Consumer Price Index since the last revision, and that the net
worth cap be increased from $100,000.00 to $125,000.00.
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation.
The Director of Finance advised that when a potential increase is
considered in pension benefits to retirees, various factors are considered such
as changes in the Consumer Price Index, the level of raises provided by similar
plans within the State, and affordability of the retirement plan; and a cost of
living increase has been provided for the City's retirees since 1986, except for
the year 1991.
The Director of Finance advised that the following chart references
proposed increases by other pension systems within the State; the range is
from 1.7 per cent to 3.2 percent; some localities have cost-of-Iiving adjustments
built into their pension plan; and not all of the localities that do not have built
in cost-of-living adjustments provide a raise each year. He advised that
teachers and administrators in the School system participate in VRS, and new
employees hired by the Western Virginia Water Authority participate in VRS
which has a built in COLA; and building a prefunded cost-of-living adjustment in
a pension plan is quite expensive.
Retiree Benefits - Cost of Living
Adjustment
Association of Municipal Retirement Systems of Virginia
Cost of Living Adjustnlcnts
i Proposed
.!-ocali.~r. ¡ FY 07
- --- .~ -- ... __..n_.
Arlington Coun.~y' _ ! 3.2%
--- -"-- .~-'
Charlottesville I 2.0%
-- ____moo -.,
Fairfax County -Education 3.0%
.... ..._1 -.------.
Falls Church ¡ 1.7%
--. .. -- . ..-.--1 ---.-
~?!:~.News I 2.2%
no" -. , ....-
Oanville , 3.0%
- -. ...- ________. ...- : --'--'-.--'--'"
VRS ; 3.2% ;
496
The City Manager pointed out the City's retirement calculation is more 1
generous than VRS; the multiplier to calculate final compensation and benefits
under VRS is about 1.75 or 1.8, compared to the City's 2.1; the City of Roanoke
has been generous by offering employees a match to the ICMA Deferred
Compensation Plan, and when taking into consideration Social Security, the
City's retirement system, and the ICMA Deferred Compensation Plan, the
combination affords the opportunity for income to City employees that is close
to their pre-retirement job income.
The Director of Finance advised that a three per cent increase is
recommended to eligible members of the City's Pension Plan, effective July 1,
2006; eligible members are those employees who have been retired for at least
one year, or approximately 95 percent of retirees; the average proposed
pension increase is $382.00 per year. which will cost the City $594,643.00 in
additional benefits annually, or $378,000.00 in annual contributions to the
Pension Plan.
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation.
The Director of Finance advised that for the past several years, retirees
have requested an additional health insurance supplement for retirees age 65 1
or older: and the current pension plan provides a supplement of 75 percent of
the amount of health insurance supplement provided to active employees, or
$258.75 to retirees with at least 20 years of service until age 65 when they
reach Medicare eligibility, and the Roanoke City Retirees Association has
requested that the City continue with the supplement after age 65 in some
form. As a point of reference on the cost of granting a lifetime supplement, he
advised that the City's Pension Actuary reports that if the current full
supplement is continued for a lifetime, the annual cost in contributions would
be approximately $2.4 million and would add over three percent to the
contribution rate. Therefore, he stated that due to the cost of maintaining the
current level of benefits and providing a cost-of-Iiving adjustment to retirees, it
is not financially prudent to provide this enhanced benefit.
The Director of Finance advised that Council was previously briefed on
the issue of Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) in connection with
participation by retirees in the City's health insurance program. . He stated that
continuation of the current program will involve an annual cost of
approximately $4 million, which, in general, is unaffordable and a
recommendation will be submitted to Council for fiscal year 2008.
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation of the Director 1
of Finance with regard to approval of a three per cent increase for eligible
members of the City's Pension Plan, effective July 1, 2006.
1
1
1
497
Mr. Stovall advised that the City received a request from the Refugee and
Immigrant Student Education program for funding in the amount of
$75,000.00; the program provides a variety of services such as outreach and
education to ethnic communities, intake and needs assessment of students,
enrollment and assistance with school testing and placement, completing
requested immunizations and health physicals, tracking student progress, and
facilitating parent-teacher conferences. He stated that City staff does not
recommend funding of the program inasmuch as the program should be
funded through the School division, or an application for funding should be
submitted to the Human Services Advisory Board.
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation that the Refugee
and Immigrant Student Education program not be funded.
Mr. Stovall advised that Explore Park submitted an application to the
Roanoke Arts Commission for funding in the amount of $50,000.00, a tentative
recommendation for $36,400.00 will be submitted by the Arts Commission;
and a subsequent request was submitted to Council for $13,600.00 to take
Explore Park to the full $50,000.00.. He stated that $12,565.00 in additional
funding was provided to the Roanoke Arts Commission and $2,500.00 in
incremental revenue was designated for outreach activities.
Mr. Stovall advised that City staff does not recommend additional funding
for Explore Park because to do so would set a precedent for other agencies that
do not receive their request for full funding from the Roanoke Arts Commission
or the Human Services Advisory Board.
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation of City staff that
no additional funding will be approved for Explore Park.
Mr. Stovall advised that the Market Square Walkway requires a significant
amount of custodial and building maintenance support; planned custodial and
facility maintenance includes a new custodial services contractor, replacement
of the escalator steps (completed) and replacement of ceiling tiles and base
molding; and an assessment of additional needs includes an enhanced
presence of staff at the facility, especially during times when The Hotel Roanoke
and Conference Center is holding high volume conferences and meetings.
He advised that City staff recommends a part-time hourly employee to
greet visitors, provide directions, ensure appropriate use and perform light
cleaning, at a cost of $17,300.00.
By consensus, Council concurred in the above referenced
recommendation of staff.
498
Mr. Stovall referred to a letter dated May 2, 2006, to the Council which 1
provided additional information on funding for the Roanoke Valley Convention
and Visitors Bureau, Total Action Against Poverty's Community Development
Initiative and Fork-lift/Warehouse Operations Training Program, an additional
position for the Clerk of the Circuit Court, cleanliness and beautification of the
Roanoke Valley for the 125th Anniversary Celebration, and the Roanoke Valley
Court Appointed Special Advocates.
With reference to funding of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors
Bureau, the City Manager called attention to a document indicating current
appropriations by other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions to the Convention and
Visitors Bureau (CVB). She stated that several years ago, the City of Roanoke
increased the Transient Lodging Tax in order to provide additional funding to
the CVB, but no similar action was taken by any of the other Roanoke Valley
participating jurisdictions. She explained that when the CVB presented its
Strategic Plan approximately 12-18 months ago, as a member of the CVB Board,
she suggested that a funding plan also be created; the CVB came up with
numerous ideas, but no additional money to produce the desired results, and
she was of the opinion that the City of Roanoke should not be agreeable to
continuing, or to increasing its share of contributions, if similar actions were
not taken by other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions. She explained that two
funding options were created and the Executive Director and the then President 1
were to visit other Roanoke Valley jurisdictions and present the request,
however, the two funding options were not adopted or considered by the full
CVB Board, although discussions were held with all jurisdictions except
Roanoke County, and as a result of the meetings, polite responses were
received, but no commitments to increase contributions were made. Slle stated
that the matter is not so much a monetary issue as much as sending a message
to the other jurisdictions that something must be done, and if the Roanoke
Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau is to be the prime marketer of the region,
something different must happen in terms of leadership and funding. She
requested input by Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick suggested that funding for the Roanoke Valley
Convention and Visitors Bureau (RVCVB) be decreased by $20,000.00 in fiscal
year 2006-2007, with the understanding that funding will be decreased another
520,000.00 in each year for the next two fiscal years if the RVCVB does not
produce the appropriate information.
In order to send a stronger message to the Convention and Visitors
Bureau, Council Member Dowe suggested a $30,000.00 decrease in funding in
fiscal year 2006-2007 and a $30,000.00 decrease in fiscal year 2007-2008.
1
1
I
I
499
Council Member McDaniel stated that if CVB funding is cut, the money
should be used for promoting the City of Roanoke, particularly in the year of
the City's 125'" Anniversary Celebration, and she would not support the
reallocation of funds for the City's Annual Report.
Council Member Cutler advised that although he was concerned about
decreasing the budget of the Convention and Visitors Bureau, he understood
the frustration as it relates to the unwillingness of other Roanoke Valley
jurisdictions to make a fair contribution based on either formulas associated
with hotel rooms or lodging and food tax, and a message must be sent to CVB
staff as it relates to the lack of motivation to address this important issue.
The Mayor suggested consideration of a funding formula that would
devote a percentage of the lodging tax to the Roanoke Valley Convention and
Visitors Bureau; whereupon, the Vice-Mayor suggested that the matter be
discussed at a future meeting of the Mayor, Chair of the Roanoke County Board
of Supervisors, City Manager and County Administrator.
By consensus, Council decreased funding to the Roanoke Valley
Convention and Visitors Bureau by $30,000.00 in fiscal year 2006-2007 and an
additional $30,000.00 in fiscal year 2007-2008.
Council Member Dowe left the meeting.
With reference to Total Action Against Poverty (TAP) Community
Development Initiative and Fork-lift Warehouse Operations Training Program,
Mr. Stovall advised that the Community Development Initiative is funded as a
direct appropriation from the General Fund; TAP requested funding for seven
programs, and five programs are recommended for funding in the fiscal year
2006-2007 budget; and the Fork-lift/Warehouse Operations Training program is
not recommended for funding.
The City Manager questioned whether the Forklift Warehouse Operations
Training program could be classified as a Workforce Development Program, as
opposed to a City program.
FolloWing further discussion, it was the consensus of Council to concur in
the recommendation that funds not be appropriated for TAP's Forklift
Warehouse Operations Training Program.
500
With reference to additional positions for the Clerk of Circuit Court, Mr. 1
Stovall advised that the Clerk previously requested three additional positions,
one to support courtroom operation, one to support probate activity, and one
to support the bookkeeping function. He stated that City staff talked with the
Clerk of Circuit Court with regard to adding the positions over multiple years,
and she, in turn, advised that at least two positions are needed for fiscal year
2007. He added that there was further discussion as to the possibility of
reallocating Temporary Wage funding to support the addition of a second
position; however, the Clerk expressed her willingness to use Temporary Wages
to support a third position.
The Mayor advised that he discussed the matter with the Clerk of Circuit
Court and several of the Circuit Court Judges who advised that four judges are
currently served by three clerks, and with the additional Commonwealth's
Attorney position that is proposed for the purpose of addressing code
enforcement issues, more activity will be generated through the court system.
Therefore, he stated that at least two of the Circuit Court Judges have stressed
the need for an additional Deputy Clerk II position. He advised that he supports
the request of the Clerk of Circuit Court for two additional positions because
the Clerk has done an outstanding job, she is a team player, she has raised
considerable revenue for the City, and he takes seriously the request of the 1
Circuit Court Judges.
By consensus, Council concurred in the request of the Clerk of Circuit
Court for two additional employees.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that if the Clerk requests a third position
in fiscal year 2007-2008, the Temporary Wages account should be used as the
funding source.
With reference to cleanliness and beautification for the 125'" Anniversary
Celebration of the City of Roanoke, Mr. Stovall advised that the recommended
budget includes funds to celebrate the City's anniversary and to begin the
Inaugural Arts Festival.
Council Member McDaniel noted that additional funds are included in the
City's fiscal year 2006-2007 recommended budget for hanging flower baskets
and to address issues with regard to weeds and overgrown grass in the City's
rights-of-way.
1
1
I
1
501
The City Manager advised that the Department of Streets and Traffic will
be responsible for rights-of-way management; maintenance of rights-of-way is
key to the appearance of the City and to properties adjacent to the City's rights-
of-way; and after July 1, 2006, staff transfers will be implemented to provide
that all rights-of-way management will be included in a single area of
responsibility.
Council Member McDaniel inquired about the condition of a junkyard
behind the School Maintenance facility on Franklin Road; whereupon, the City
Manager advised that she would call the matter to the attention of the
Superintendent of Schools, and the Mayor stated that the matter would be
discussed at the next meeting of the Mayor, Chair of the School Board, City
Manager and Superintendent of Schools.
Council Member Cutler stated that Valley Beautiful should be challenged
to become more assertive in its efforts with regard to hanging flower baskets
throughout the City.
The City Manager referred to a suggestion offered by the Mayor to enlist
the assistance of Roanoke Valley garden clubs in certain areas of the City, such
as the former Transportation Museum site.
She advised that staff of the Department of Parks and Recreation will
contact local garden clubs to determine their level of interest.
The Vice-Mayor called attention to the declining membership of garden
clubs and adVised that this could be a way to reenergize garden clubs to
become more active in public service.
Council Member Cutler also suggested that neighborhood organizations
and the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates could become involved in
beautification efforts: whereupon, the Mayor stated that it might be best to
focus on one area and/or project at a time in order to build momentum.
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation of the City
Manager with regard to including funds in the City's fiscal year 2006-2007
budget to address cleanliness and beautiful of the City for the 12 5'h Anniversary
Celebration.
Mr. Stovall advised that $38,000.00 in CDBG funds is recommended for
the Roanoke Valley Court Appointed Special Advocates Foundation (CASAl. He
stated that CASA also submitted a late request for funding through the Human
Services Advisory Board, which is not recommended by staff.
502
By consensus, Council concurred in the recommendation to allocate
S38,OOO.00 in CDBG funding to CASA.
I
Mr. Stovall advised that a question was previously raised by a Member of
Council with regard to funding for the New Century Venture Center; whereupon,
he stated that the recommended budget does not include funds for the New
Century Venture Center.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that the New Century Venture Center has
received grants, but no direct funds from the City of Roanoke, although the
Center has requested funding for approximately the last five years. He stated
that Roanoke County contributes $1,000.00 annually to the organization, and
the City Manager pointed out that Roanoke County is the only local jurisdiction
that provides financial assistance.
By consensus, Council authorized $1,000.00 to be allocated to the New
Century Venture Center.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that Roanoke Emergency Medical Services
(EMS), which is the volunteer partner of the City's EMS group, has experienced
problems in connection with covering the assigned area from Fire Station No.1
and has, therefore, requested additional funds. He stated that if the
organization cannot meet the terms of the contract, the City may need to fund I
additional full time EMS employees and the Acting Chief of Fire/EMS will
continue to study the matter.
The City Manager pointed out that the City antiCipates receipt of the
consultant's report on Fire/EMS operations within in the next 30 days, and the
report may contain certain recommendations that will address the issue, or'a
different configuration of staffing.
Council Member Cutler called attention to various initiatives that were
implemented by the City during his four year tenure on Council with regard to
natural resources, parks, protection of the Roanoke River, the Master Plan and
better management of Mill Mountain Park, and the City's assumption of
responsibility for the Carvins Cove natural reserve as a City park. He referred to
a map showing the boundaries of Carvins Cove National Reservoir Park which is
a 12,000 acre park maintained by the City; and advised that the City Manager
1
1
I
1
503
supported an initiative involving the National Park Service, and other agency
representatives initiated a Master Plan for Carvins Cove Park that should be
continued and completed, to be followed by a detailed plan. He further advised
that Mill Mountain Park, Carvins Cove Reservoir Park, Roanoke River Park and
other major parks in the City of Roanoke have a great opportunity for
conservation, recreation and economic development, and encouraged the City
to move forward from the planning process to a management process that
could involve more intensive activity, whether it be law enforcement, trail
management, or modest structures over the next few years.
The Mayor advised that a communication will be included on the May 15,
2006 City Council agenda to initiate the process for demolition of Victory
Stadium. He also advised that he has recommended to the City Manager that
bricks from Victory Stadium be made available to the community, free of
charge, as mementos, although a limit should be placed on the number of
bricks per person, and the City should retain some of the bricks to be used in
some form as a Victory Stadium memorial. He added that in moving forward,
Council should signal to the community that the future design of the park will
involve a commemoration of the fact that Victory Stadium was located on the
.. site, along with some form of commemoration of Coach Bob "Guts" McClelland.
Council Member Cutler inquired if there are concerns with regard to a
communication from Norfolk and Western Railway as to a future use of the
Victory Stadium site; whereupon, the City Attorney advised that the only party
who would have standing to invoke any portion of the deed restrictions would
be the railroad, which has not chosen to become involved in the debate over
the past several years.
The City Manager called attention to previous correspondence with
Norfolk Southern Railway in which the City requested the Railway to relieve
restricted covenants on the property; and the Railway was amenable to the
request, but stated a preference not to do so until such time as a specific reuse
of the property is identified.
The City Attorney advised that there has been considerable
misinformation with regard to the letter from Norfolk & Western Railway, it is
clear that there is no reversion provision, the property does not return to the
railroad under any circumstance, and it has been stated that the City will
maintain recreational uses on the site.
504
The City Manager called attention to Citizen's Appreciation Day which will I
be held on Saturday, May 6, 2006, from 10:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m., at Valley View
Mall and encouraged the Members of Council to attend the event.
There being no further business, at 11 :35 a.m., the Mayor declared the
Council meeting in recess until Thursday, May 11, 2006, at 2:00 p.m., in the
City Council Chamber, for the purpose of considering measures to adopt the
City of Roanoke's 2006-2007 fiscal year budget, the City's real estate tax rate,
and tax rate increase(s).
The Council of the City of Roanoke reconvened on Thursday, May 11,
2006, at 2:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor
C. Nelson Harris presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members M. Rupert Cutler, Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L.
McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff and Mayor C. Nelson Harris------h-u---ouuuuo-uuuuo-5.
ABSENT: Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Council Member
Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. _nnn__nn__nnUU__hUUUnn_mnmuu____n_n____n_______nnn_n_____U- 2.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
1
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Mayor Harris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor Harris.
BUDGET: The Mayor advised that the purpose of the meeting was to
adopt measures enacting the City of Roanoke's 2006-2007 fiscal year budget
real estate tax rate, and cigarette tax increase.
BUDGET: The Director of Finance submitted a Certificate of Funding
certifying that in accordance with paragraphs (h) and (i) of Section 25.1 of the
Charter of the City of Roanoke, funds required for the 2006 - 2007 General
Fund, Civic Facilities Fund, Parking Fund, Market Building Fund, Department of
Technology Fund, Fleet Management Fund, Risk Management Fund, School
Fund, School Food Services Fund, and Grant Fund budgets will be available for I
appropriation.
I
I
I
505
The Director of Finance advised that to date the State budget has not
been adopted; a number of revenue estimates included in the recommended
City's budget which is presently before the Council for adoption include
revenues to be provided by the State; approximately 20 to 25 percent of the
City's revenue source is derived from the State, therefore, should the State
significantly change any revenues committed to the City in the proposed
budget, Council will be requested to approve the necessary adjustments to the
fiscal year 2006-2007 budget.
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the Certificate of
Funding would be received and filed.
PARKS AND RECREATION-FEE COMPENDIUM-LIBRARIES: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that in developing the budget for fiscal
year 2006-2007, City departments were requested to look at fee structures and,
where feasible, to propose fee schedule (compendium) changes that focus on
recovering the cost of providing services.
It was further advised that the recommended fiscal year 2006-2007
budget incorporates proposed fee structure changes for copy charges, EMS Fee
Structure and initiation of a Best Seller Book Rental program.
It was explained that currently, the charge for copies is $0.05 per page or
impression; and to fully recover the cost of making copies, the proposed
amendment will result in the following structure:
Pa er Size __. lC~i~'r Co"'py.
8.% .~J 1 (letter) __ \$0.20 per impression
8 % x__!4 (Ie al) ,s,9.?S er im ression
11 x17 SO.30 per imQres_~.!.~n
Black and White Co
$0.10 per imQres~i.9.!!.....
$0: 15 per impressi00
$0.20 er.i.'!l..Qression
The City Manager advised thin currently, EMS fees for Basic Life Support
Emergency ($280.00), Advanced Life Support Emergency (S330.00), and
Advanced Life Support Level 2 (5475.00) are below the maximum allowed by
Medicare; and an amendment to the fee structure will result in changing the
following amounts:
¡ Pro osed
$300.00
$360.00
$550.00
Basic Life Su ort (BLS) Emer enc
Advanceß_Lif~ Support (ALS) Emergenc
¡Advanced L'-fe. Su ort (ALS) Level 2
506
It was noted that the Roanoke Public Library System will initiate a
program to provide additional best seller books earlier to patrons who do not
wish to wait for a book to become available; and the cost to patrons will be
$2.00 per book per week.
1
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt the appropriate
measures and amend the City's Fee Schedule (Compendium) to reflect the
above referenced fee changes, effective July 1, 2006.
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37378-051106) A RESOLUTION amending the City's Fee Compendium
imposing fees for accessing, duplicating, supplying, or searching for requested
public records and copy charges within all City Departments; and providing for
an effective date.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 275.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37378-
051106:' The motiön -was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor I
H arri S---n------u---------------------------------------------------- 0000_________000000______________000000_00 5 .
NAYS: No n e __nm oomoonnnm mnnmoooooooooooon_nn_nm 00___________00____00___0000000.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37379-051106) A RESOLUTION amending the City's Fee Compendium
imposing certain fees for the provision of certain emergency medical services;
and providing for an effective date.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 276.)
1
1
1
1
507
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37379-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s no - - nnn -00--- - - 000000_0000 - - - - 00 Un 00 _ _ _ 0000 _ _ 000000 _ _ __ _00_00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 00 0000 - - -_ un - - _00_00 - -- 5 .
NAYS None _n_______uuuu_____u____nn____Um___._uu______oonOOOO___nnn--000000-----0.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37380-051106) A RESOLUTION establishing certain fees for the rental
of best seller books from the City's libraries; and providing for an effective
date.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 277.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37380-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a rri s - - - - - 00 - - - - 00 00 - - on - - - - - - - - - - 00 0000 - _ _ _ _ _ 000000 _ 00__00 - - ___00_ __ 000000_ _ _ _ _ _ _ 00_0000 _ _ _ 0000 00 _ _ 000000 - - -00 5 .
NAYS None _0000_______0000_00____0000__000000___0000_00.__00_00___00000000_____00__00__0000____00000.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
BUDGET-CITY CODE-TAXES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that given the fact that for the past few years, City
assessments on real estate have increased at a rate above normal,
consideration for a reduction in the real estate tax rate was referred to fiscal
year 2006-2007 budget study; the increase in real estate tax rate assessments
in recent years has been driven by the healthy real estate market; property sales
have been positively impacted by low interest rates which attract borrowers;
and Roanoke's assessment growth of recent years is consistent with real estate
trends nationwide.
508
It was further advised that a reduction in the real estate tax rate from 1
$1.21 to $1.19 per $100.00 of assessed value is proposed; the proposed
reduction of $0.02 will result in a revenue reduction of approximately
$1,134,000.00; and to achieve revenue neutrality and to mitigate the impact of
funding provided to Roanoke City Public Schools via the current funding
formula, an increase in the cigarette tax of $.0135 per cigarette ($0.27 per 20
pack) is proposed, which will result in additional revenue of approximately $1.5
million, of which approximately $1.1 million will be used to offset the real
estate tax rate reduction and the balance of $.4 million will be used to provide
debt service for a bond issuance of $5 million for curb, gutter, sidewalks and
bridge renovation.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
amending Section 32-16 of the City Code reducing the real estate tax rate from
$1.21 to $1.19 per $100.00 of assessed value, effective July 1, 2006; and adopt
an additional ordinance amending Section 32-190 of the City Code to increase
the cigarette tax from $.0135 per cigarette to $.027 per cigarette, effective
July 1, 2006.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37381-051106) AN ORDINANCE amending §32-16, Levied; rate, Code 1
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to provide for reduction of the real
estate tax rate from $1.21 on everyone hundred dollars of fair market value to
$1.19 on everyone hundred dollars of fair market value; providing for an
effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 278.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37381-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a rri s nn_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _00000000__ _ _ __ 00000000 00 _ - 0000- 00 - - - - - - - - - - noon 00 _ - 00 n_____nn - - 00 000000 - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 - 5 .
NAYS N 0 ne_unnn________nnn___nn_nn___n__uuu__n____nnn__n__________00__00_00__000.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
1
1
1
1
509
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37382-051106) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §32-190,
Levied; amount, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to provide for
an increase in the cigarette tax rate from $.0135 per cigarette to $.027 per
cigarette; providing for an effective date of July 1, 2006, and dispensing with
the second reading of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 275.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37382-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s - _0000_ 00 n__ - - 0000 - - _ _ _ _ _ noon _ _ _ _ _ _ no 00_ _ _ _ 0000 _ _ _ _ 00 00 _ _ _ _ 00____ _ _ _ _ 00 _ 00 00 _ _ _ _ 00 0000 - - - - 0000 - - - - ---- - 5 .
NAYS Non en- ____00____0000_____.00___________000000__00000000__00__0000__00_000000___-0000____00__0.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
BUDGET-CITY CODE-TAXES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the initial Elderly and Disabled Tax Relief Program
for the City of Roanoke was made effective on July 1, 1989; since that time,
several revisions have been made to the limits of the program, the latest of
which was effective July 1, 2001; currently, the total combined annual
household income threshold limit is $30,000.00 and the net combined financial
worth threshold, excluding the value of the primary residence, is $100,000.00
for qualified real estate tax exemption; and given the fact that for the past few
years, assessments on real estate have increased at a rate above normal, review
of program eligibility guidelines was referred to fiscal year 2006-2007 budget
study.
It was further advised that in evaluating revisions to eligibility guidelines,
consideration was given to the change in the Consumer Price Index since the
last revision to the guidelines; comparison was also made with regard to
programs in place in Virginia's First Cities and in surrounding localities; and
based on research, it is prudent to revise the total combined annual income
threshold to $34,000.00 and the net combined financial worth threshold to
$125,000.00.
510
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
amending Section 32-86 of the City Code to increase the total.combined annual
income threshold to $34,000.00 and to increase the net combined financial
worth threshold to $125,000.00 for qualification for real estate tax exemption
for elderly and disabled persons for the tax year commencing July 1,2007.
1
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37383-051106) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining §32-86,
Financial eliqibilitv, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by adding
a new subsection (g) increasing from $30,000.00 to 534,000.00 the total
combined annual income threshold and increasing from $100,000.00 to
$125,000.00 the net combined financial worth threshold for qualification for
real estate tax exemption for elderly and disabled persons for the tax year
commencing July 1, 2007; amending current subsection (g) of §32-86, Financial
~Jjgibill!Y, to redesignate such subsection as subsection (h); and dispensing
with the second reading of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 279.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37383-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted 1
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H arri s_____n____n_n____________uuu____uu_________uuuuu______uuu_________m______________________ 5 .
NAYS: None _u_u_uuunnnnumnnnnnnun_nnnmnnnnu_unun_________________O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
CITY MARKET-BUDGET-GRANTS-FLEET MANAGEMENT-ROANOKE CIVIC
CENTER-COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT-RISK MANAGEMENT FUND-SCHOOLS:
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37384-051106) AN ORDINANCE adopting the annual General, Civic
Facilities, Parking, Market Building, Department of Technology, Fleet
Management, Risk Management, School, School Food Services and Grant Funds
Appropriations of the City of Roanoke for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 2006,
and ending June 30, 2007; and dispensing with the second reading by title of
this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 279.)
1
1
1
1
511
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37384-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s _00_ - _nn - 000000 - - 00 _ 00 _0000_ 00 00 00__ _ _ _ _ _ 00 _ 00_ _ _ _ _ 00_00_ _ _ 00 00 _ _ _ _ _ _ 00___0000 _ _ 00 00 - - - - 0000 00 -00--- - - -00 5 .
NAYS: No ne__u________noo________u____u _______0000_00_000000______00_00_______00___000000___00__0.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
POLICE
SHERIFF-CITY
ordinance:
DEPARTM ENT-BU DG ET-FI RE DEPARTM ENT -COM M ITTEES-ClTY
EMPLOYEES: Council Member Cutler offered the following
(#37385-051106) AN ORDINANCE to adopt and establish a Pay Plan for
officers and employees of the City, effective July 1, 2006; providing for certain
salary adjustments and merit increases; authorizing annual salary increments
for certain officers and employees for use of private motor vehicles; authorizing
annual salary increments for sworn police officers assigned to the Criminal
Investigation Division; authorizing annual salary increments for certain
members of the Fire-Emergency Medical Services Department who are certified
as Emergency Medical Technicians; authorizing annual salary increments for
certain members of the Fire-Emergency Medical Services Department who are
members of the Regional Hazardous Materials Response Team; authorizing
annual salary increments for employees performing fire inspector duties;
providing for continuation of a police career enhancement program; providing
for continuation of a Firefighter/Emergency Medical Technician merit pay
program; providing for a Community Policing Specialist program; providing for
payment of a monthly stipend to certain board and commission members;
providing for an increase in base annual salary for any employee of the Sheriff
who meets the qualifications for and has been appointed Master Deputy Sheriff;
repealing, to the extent of any inconsistency, Ordinance No. 37047-051005,
adopted May 10, 2005; providing for the salaries of the City's Constitutional
. Officers; providing for an effective date; and dispensing with the second
reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 281.)
512
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37385-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s __ - - - - - 00 00 nnn 00 _ _ _ _ _ 00 _000000_ _ _ _ _ - - - - 00 - 00 _ _ 00 0000__00 -- 00 - - - 00-00 00 - - - - - U 0000_00_ 00 -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 .
1
NAYS: Non e __noo_____n_n_____nnmnm m 0000 mnnn_m__nn_n_nnn_n__n__uh_nn_O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
BUDGET-PENSIONS: The City Manager and the Director of Finance
submitted a communication advising that retirees of the City of Roanoke
Pension Plan (Plan) are awarded cost-of-Iiving adjustments (COLAS) on an ad
hoc basis by Council; the Plan does not include a provision for an automatic
COLA due to the significant actuarial cost and related increase in contribution
rates, thus, COLAS are not pre-funded in the Plan, but rather the increased cost
is recognized when the increase has been awarded; factors considered as a part
of the recommendation for a COLA include change in the Consumer Price Index,
the amount of raises provided by similar Plans within the State, and most
importantly, affordability to the Plan to assure that the Plan remains well funded
to sustain the current level of benefits; and eligible members of the City of 1
Roanoke Pension Plan received a 2.25% cost-of-living adjustment on July 1,
2005, which was the tenth consecutive COLA provided to eligible retirees.
It was further advised that all City employees are members of the
Roanoke City Pension Plan (the Plan); the City's Plan, when compared to the
State pension plan (The Virginia Retirement System) and other locality-
sponsored Plans, provides above-average benefits; the City's plan also includes
a provision for an additional supplement of $3,105.00 (indexed) annually for
employees with a minimum of 20 years of service; the supplement is intended
to help offset the cost of health insurance and is paid until the retiree reaches
age 65, the age of Medicare eligibility; additionally, the City sponsors a 457
Deferred Compensation Plan allowing employees the opportunity to save for
retirement while reducing current taxable income; savings are enhanced by a
City match of $650.00 annually; and the City's pension plan, when coupled with
the deferred savings plan and added to social security, provides a career
employee with the opportunity to replace most of their pre-retirement income
upon retirement.
I
1
I
I
..···1·
513
It was explained that the required contribution rate for the pension plan
to fund the current level of benefits will increase for fiscal year 2006 from
12.61 per cent to 15.11 per cent of payroll; the additional cost to the General
Fund is approximately $1,500,000.00; the rapidly rising increase in
contribution rates is due to a combination of factors; a stock market downturn
from 1999 to 2002 resulted in lesser investment returns for the Plan;
additionally, significant enhancements were made to the Plan in 1999 and again
in 2000; the above mentioned pension supplement was added to the Plan in
2001; the cumulative effect of granting annual COLAS adds significant cost to
the Plan; and the combination of these factors has resulted in increasingly
higher contribution rates to sustain the Plan.
It was stated that based on a poll of COLAS recommended, or to be
recommended by other localities within the State, the Consumer Price Index
and the City's ability to absorb increased funding to the Plan, a three per cent
COLA appears to be reasonable; a recommended three per cent increase to
eligible members of the Plan, effective July 1, 2006, will increase the average
annual retirement allowance for eligible retirees by approximately $382.00, or a
total of an additional $594,643.00 in annual benefits; the actuarial cost of a
three per cent COLA is estimated at 55.7 million funded over the next 20 years
through the annual payroll contribution rate, which results in an increase of
approximately $378,000.00 in annual contributions to the Plan; all City
operating funds, along with the Roanoke Regional Airport Commission, School
Board, Roanoke Valley Resource Authority, Roanoke Valley Detention
Commission, Western Virginia Water Authority, and the Commonwealth of
Virginia will assume their pro rata cost for funding the COLA; and the City's pro
rata share of the increase is approximately $333,000.00 for fiscal year 2007.
It was explained that the recommended increase will apply to those
retirees who retired on or before July 1, 2005, i.e., those retirees who have
been retired for at least one year; approximately 1,555 of 1,634 retirees, or 95
per cent of those receiving benefits as of March 31, 2006, will be eligible for
the increase; the increase will also apply to a member's or surviving spouse's
annual retirement allowance; and the increase will not apply to any incentive
payments made under the Voluntary Retirement Incentive Program established
by Ordinance No. 30473-41591, adopted April 15, 1991, or to the retirement
supplement paid according to Section 22.2-61 of the Code.
514
It was noted that a request was also referred to fiscal year 2006-2007 I
budget study to consider a supplemental allowance for health insurance for City
retirees who are 65 years of age or older; the Plan currently provides a monthly
supplement of 75 per cent of the amount of the health insurance supplement
provided to active employees, or $258.75, to retirees with at least 20 years of
service until age 65; the supplement is provided to complement the pension
allowance until Medicare eligibility and is responsible for a significant portion of
the overall cost of the Plan; upon reaching Medicare eligibility, retirees are
eligible to begin receiving both hospital and medical benefits: and a new drug
benefit program began in January 2006, Medicare Part D, that assists with
outpatient prescription drugs.
The City Manager and the Director of Finance recommended that Council
adopt an ordinance granting a three per cent cost of living adjustment for
eligible retirees; the related cost to the City will be approximately $333,000.00
in additional contributions to the Plan; and due to the significant increase in
contributions currently required to sustain the current level of benefits and to
provide a COLA, any benefit changes such as the requested supplemental
allowance for health insurance above noted that would result in additional
funding requirements for the pension plan is not recommended.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
1
(#37386-051106) AN ORDINANCE providing for certain supplemental
benefits under the City of Roanoke Pension Plan to certain members of such
Plan and certain of their surviving spouses; providing for an effective date; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 283.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37386-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s - - - - - 00 00 00 00 00 _ _ _ _ 00 _ 00 _00___ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 00 __n -__ 00 _ _ __ _00_00 -_ __ -- __0000 00 - - - - - 00 un 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 _00_ - 5 .
NAYS: None 0000_____00000000________00_____________0000_______0000_____000000_00__0000____00_______0.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
I
1
I
I
515
BUDGET-CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM: The City Manager submitted
a communication advising that the Capital Improvement Program (ClP) for Fiscal
Years 2007-2011 is a plan recommended for approval by Council for capital
expenditures to be incurred over the next five years, in order to address the
priority long-term capital needs of the City of Roanoke; the ClP reflects the
current status of projects which have previously been approved and funded by
Council, and is a revision to the Fiscal Years 2006-2010 Capital Improvement
Program approved by Council on May 10, 2005; and the CIP also reflects all
planned future debt issuance for projects included in the upcoming five year
period.
It was further advised that on April 17, 2006, Council received the
proposed Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2007-2011 as part of
the Recommended Resource Allocation Plan; the Capital Improvement Program
Summary Section in the document provides a summary of projects; the Capital
Improvement Program for Fiscal Years 2007-2011 is comprised of capital
projects, with an estimated cost of project completion totaling
$235,349,986.00; the CIP includes the addition of the Police Academy, Library
Study, Streetscape Improvements, and Market District Plan projects; and also
reflects additional funding for curb, gutter, sidewalks, and bridge renovation via
debt issuance of $5 million funded from an increase in the cigarette tax.
It was explained that adjustments have been made since the
Recommended Resource Allocation Plan was presented; and adjustments reflect
the following revisions to the Roanoke City Public Schools CIP which was
adopted by the School Board on May 9, 2006.
· An increase in the cost of the high school renovation projects
(Patrick Henry High School, $1,375,000.00, and William Fleming
High School, $625,000.00). The increase in costs will be funded
from School capital reserve (cash funds);
· A change in the timing of expenditures for the Patrick Henry
High School renovation project;
· The addition of stadiums at Patrick Henry High School and
William Fleming High School;
· Exclusion of elementary school renovation projects involving
classroom additions;
516
· It should be noted that the School CIP contains a future issuance
of $2,000,000.00 in Virginia Public School Authority (VPSA)
bonds for renovations at Raleigh Court Elementary School; this
debt issuance is not included in the City's CIP as it is above the
level of school debt agreed to when the cost of the high school
renovation projects increased during FY 2003-2004; the School
Board must request approval to add the issuance of this debt to
the City's CIP.
It was noted that debt will be issued during fiscal year 2006-2007 for the
following projects:
Patrick Henry High School
Elementary School Renovations
- Fallon Park
- Wests ide
- Monterey
$ 7 ,500,000.00
$7,010,900.00
($1,160,900.00)
($3,850,000.00)
($2,000,000.00)
1
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution
endorsing the update to the CIP; and appropriate $2,829,891.00 included in the
FY 2006-2007 Transfer to Capital Projects Fund, Account No. 01-250-9310-
9508, to the respective capital projects accounts established by the Director of I
Finance for the following projects:
· $500,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-530-9552 for
Bridge Maintenance
· $139,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-530-9823 for
Police Academy Construction and A&E
· $49,820.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-530-9736 for
Stormwater Management
· $310,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-530-9575 for
Transportation Projects
· $430,896.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-510-9620 for
Roanoke River Flood Reduction
· $100,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 35-615-8119 for
Home Investment Partnership Program Match
· 5300,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-61 5-9862 for
Market Rate Purchase Rehabilitation
I
1
I
I
517
· $175,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-615-9863 for
Market Rate Mortgage Assistance
· $100,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-615-9864 for a
Housing Initiatives Consultant
· $100,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-615-9867 for a
Housing Pattern Book
· $385,000.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-530-9837 for
Police Building Demolition
· $50,673.00 to Capital Project Account No. 17-440-2642 for
Fleet Replacement
· $94,751.00 to Capital Project Account No. 13-430-1602 for
Technology
· $94,7 51.00 to Capital Project Account No. 08-440-9854 for
Capital Building Maintenance
The City Manager further recommended that Council appropriate
$1,100,000.00 of residual equity from the close-out of Water and Sewer funds
to:
· Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing Authority - Virginia Scrap
Iron Virginia Remediation Program,
Account No. 08-310-9688 - $100,000.00
· Riverside Centre - Streetscape,
Account No. 08-530-9838 - $200,000.00
· Gateway Streetscape,
Account No. 08-530-9847 - $100,000.00
· Downtown and Village Streets cape,
Account No. 08-530-9849 - $300,000.00
· Market District Plan,
Account No. 09-310-8134 - $200,000.00
· Code Enforcement Program,
Account No. 08-615-9868 - $70,000.00
· Capital Project Contingency,
Account No. 08-530-9575 - $130,000.00
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37387-051106) A RESOLUTION endorsing the update to the Capital
Improvement Program submitted by the City Manager by letter of May 11,
2006.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 284.)
518
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37387- I
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s - - - - - - - - - 00 __0000 - - - - - - - - - 00- - - - - - - - - - - - _n_ - - - 00-00- -_ - - - - - - -000000- - - - - - - - 00 0000 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 00 00--- 5 .
NAYS: No n e _nnn__nnnn_n_n_n_nmnnn_n_nnnnnn__nn_n_nun__uu_hnnn___O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37388-051106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding for the FY
2007-2011 Update to the Capital Improvement Program, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2006-2007 General, Capital Projects, Market
Building, Department of Technology, Fleet Management, and Grant Funds
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 288.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37388- I
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s - - - - - -- 00 -00-0000 - - - - - - - 00 .--00- - - - - - - 00 Un - -- -- -00- 00 - - - - - - 00 ------ - - - - - - - - - 000000 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 00 -- - 5 .
NAYS: Non e _mnn_mnnnn__n_n____ - - - 00 m_nnnn_oon__n____nn_nn_nnnnnnmnO.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
BUDGET-Y.M.C.A.-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that beginning in fiscal year 2002, the City of Roanoke
committed to a $2.0 million investment, to be paid in $200,000.00 increments
over a ten-year period to the Downtown Family YMCA; funds cover costs
associated with the design and construction of a new central branch YMCA
complex: and City residents will receive a discounted membership rate, which
will allow them to visit any YMCA facility, including the faCility in the City of
Salem.
1
1
1
1
519
It was further advised that beginning in fiscal year 2002, the City of
Roanoke also committed to contributing $200,000.00 per year for ten years for
a total of $2.0 million to the Roanoke River Greenways project and greenways
development; greenways have become a necessary commodity for communities
across the United States since they are viewed as an essential amenity that
encourages economic development; greenways connect people to various
aspects of a community such as parks, shops, schools and neighborhoods; the
City of Roanoke currently has several greenway projects underway in various
stages of development, with a core design element to include connections to
Roanoke's primary greenway artery, the Roanoke River Greenway; and
significant progress has been made in the construction of the greenway system
which includes the Mill Mountain Greenway, the Lick Run Greenway, the Murray
Run Greenway and the Roanoke River Greenway.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
appropriating $200,000.00 from the Economic and Community Development
Reserve to the Downtown Family YMCA, Account No. 08-620-9757-9003, and
appropriating 5200,000.00 from the Economic and Community Development
Reserve to Greenways Development, Account No. 08-620-9753-9003.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37389-051106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Economic and Community Development Reserve for the YMCA Aquatic Center
and the Greenways Development Projects, amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2006-2007 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations and dispensing
with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 290.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37389-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r ri s ___00 00 - - - - _00 - - - 00 - - - - - - - - - - - 00 00 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 0000 _ _ _ 0000 _ _ _ _ 00 uun - _ u _n___ _00 _ _ nun _ _ _ _ 00 00 _ _ _ _ 0000 - - _00 5 .
NAYS: No n e n_n_________nnn_UUU____uu_____unn______nn____nnu_u__nun00---00----0.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
520
BUDGET-ENTERPRISE ZONE: The City Manager submitted a 1
communication advising that the new Virginia Enterprise Zone program was
established by the General Assembly in 2005 through the Virginia Enterprise
Zone Act; an Enterprise Zone is a geographically defined area designated by the
Governor; the State and local government must enter into a ten year
partnership to encourage business expansion and recruitment by offering both
State and local incentives; the City of Roanoke currently has two zone
boundaries, Zone 1 A and Zone 2: the main difference is that the facade grant is
available only in Zone 1 A and maximum caps differ slightly for certain
incentives; and the zones expire on December 31, 2023 for Zone lA and on
December 31,2015, for Zone 2.
It was further advised that a requirement of designation is that the City of
Roanoke must offer certain local incentives which were set forth in the original
application and subsequent amendments approved by Council; and in order for
the City of Roanoke to continue to offer local incentives as set forth in the
designation application and subsequent amendments, an annual appropriation
of funds is needed.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt an ordinance
transferring $280,000.00 from the Economic and Community Development I
Reserve to the following accounts:
· Account No. 08-310-9630-9003, (Enterprise Zone
Rebates) - $100,000.00
· Account No. 08-310-97369003 (Enterprise Zone
Facade Grants) - $150,000.00
· Account No. 08-310-9738-9003 (Enterprise Zone
Fee Grants) - $30,000.00
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37390-051106) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Economic and Community Development Reserve for the Enterprise Zone
Projects, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2006-2007 Capital
Projects Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title
of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 289.)
1
I
I
1
521
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37390-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H arri soo_oon_____n______oonn____n 0000_______00__ ______00______ 00____0000__ .____00_00_____00______000000___00 5.
NAYS: Non e moo _oonnnoo__nn__Uoonn_m mn_oonnoo_____n___uoonnnnoooon_oohU___O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
BUDGET-HOUSING/AUTHORITY: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in order to receive Community Development Block
Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), and Emergency Shelter
Grant (ESG) funding, the U. S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
(HUD) requires that localities such as the City of Roanoke submit a five-year
Consolidated Plan (CP) and Annual Updates (AU); the City's current, HUD-
approved five-year CP covers the period from July 1, 2005, to June 30, 2010,
and was developed through an extensive process beginning in the spring of
2003; public participation in the CP included community representatives on the
Plan's steering committee, public meetings to obtain community input,
information disseminated to the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates (RNA),
information made available on the City's website, including the ability to
provide comments through e-mail, information in the print media and
announcements to a mailing list of more than 400 organizations and
individuals.
It was further advised that in a letter dated March 31, 2006, Council
Members received a summary version of the draft 2006-2007 Annual Update
(AU) to the City's HUD Consolidated Plan, which included the tentative CDBG,
HOME and ESG funding recommendations for fiscal year 2006-2007 and related
information; comparable information was also provided to City Council on
April 17, 2006, as part of the Recommended Resource Allocation Plan; as with
the five-year CP, outreach to engage the public in the 2006-2007 AU process
took several forms; public meetings were held on November 3, 2005 and March
30, 2006, as well as a City Council public hearing on April 27, 2006; those
attending the March 30'h meeting received the same summary version of the AU
provided to City Council; the summary plan was made available on the City's
website, with links to the full five-year plan and to allow e-mail comments on
522
the documents; the summary was also provided to RNA members and
neighboring localities; letters to the mailing list provided information about
upcoming meetings, how to obtain additional information and how to
comment, and ads were placed in The Roanoke Times and The Roanoke
Tribune; and copies of the complete draft 2006-2007 AU were placed at all
library branches and the Law Library, the Roanoke Redevelopment and Housing
Authority main offices, the City Clerk's Office and the Department of
Management and Budget for public inspection for a 30-day period beginning
April 4, 2006.
It was further advised that funding for fiscal year 2006-2007 will be
available from the following sources:
New HUD Entitlements
Estimated New Program Income
Local HOME Match Funds
Estimated Prior Year Excess Program Income
Estimated Prior Year Carry-over
52,665,532.00
455,431.00
100,000.00
365,000.00
144.515.00
$3,730,4 78.00
Total HUD Funds
To ensure that the City's HUD fiscal year begins on July 1, 2006, it was
noted that HUD must receive the Annual Update by May 16, 2006.
The City Manager recommended that Council approve the 2006-2007
Annual Update, as abstracted in an attached summary, and that the City
Manager, or her designee, be authorized to submit the complete Annual Update
to HUD for final review and approval, including execution of all necessary
documents pertaining thereto, such documents to be approved as to form by
the City Attorney,
Council Member Cutler offered the following resolution:
(#37391-051106) A RESOLUTION approving the 2006-2007 Annual
Update ("Annual Update") to the 2005-2010 Consolidated Plan and authorizing
the City Manager, or the City Manager's designee, to submit the approved
Annual Update to the United States Department of Housing and Urban
Development ("HUD") for final review and approval, and authorizing the
execution of all necessary documents pertaining to such Annual Update.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 275.)
1
1
1
1
1
I
.,
523
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37391-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea.
Council Member Wishneff advised that he may, or may not, be retained by
Kuumba Community Health & Wellness Center to search for a new location;
therefore, he stated that he would abstain from voting on the abovereferenced
resolution.
Resolution No.3 7391-051106 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, and Mayor
Harris-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Ll.
NAYS: Non e unn___n__UU___hU_UUnu unn_nmnnnuunuu_n_n__uunnuunnn_O.
(Council Member Wishneff abstained from voting.) (Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and
Council Member Dowe were absent.)
BUDGET-CITY CODE-CITY EMPLOYEES: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that City employees who utilize their personal vehicles
in the performance of City of Roanoke business are currently reimbursed at a
rate of $.325 per mile for the first 15,000 miles and $.13 per mile for all
additional miles over 15,000 per fiscal year; and the rate was approved by
Council on July 3, 2000, when Council set the rate at the rate established from
time to time by the Commonwealth of Virginia for reimbursing State employees
for such purpose.
It was further advised that historically, the City of Roanoke has set its
mileage reimbursement rate at the same level established by the
Commonwealth of Virginia for State employees (as provided in the City Code),
however, in consideration of the increase in the cost of motor fuels, it is
recommended that the Internal Revenue Service standard mileage rate for
reimbursement for business use be adopted by the City of Roanoke; the current
Internal Revenue Service rate is $.445 per mile; use of the Internal Revenue
Service rate for mileage reimbursement results in the use of the Internal
Revenue Service rate for meals, lodging and mileage; and sufficient funding is
budgeted in departmental accounts for fiscal year 2007.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize amendment of
Section 2-35, "Use of Personal Automobile for City Business - Mileage
Allowance", of the City Code, to establish that the City of Roanoke mileage
reimbursement rate will be and subsequently remain at the same level as
established from time to time by the Internal Revenue Service for
reimbursement for business use.
524
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37392-051106) AN ORDINANCE amending '2-35, !,!~e of personal
automobile for citv business- Mileaqe allowance, of Article III, Officers and
Emplovees, Chapter 2, Administration, of the Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, in order to link the mileage allowance paid to employees
of the City for use of their personal vehicles on City business to the Internal
Revenue Service's reimbursement rate per mile for business use; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 290.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37392-
051106. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Cutler, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff and Mayor
H a r r i s -- - - - 00 _n___nn 00 - - - - - - - -- 00 - - - - - - - - -- 00___00__ - - - - - - -- 00 ---- - - - - --00 - - - - - - - - - -- 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5 .
NAYS: None _____00_____0000_____________0000_________00____________00___________0000------00-------0.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Dowe were absent.)
On behalf of the Council, the Mayor expressed appreciation to City staff
for developing a budget for the City of Roanoke that is both responsive and
responsible. He stated that the 2007 fiscal year budget reduces the real estate
tax rate by two cents, and the loss of revenue will be offset by an increase in
the cigarette tax; and ten additional police officer positions are funded in the
budget, as well as a number of other initiatives.
The City Manager was requested to review revisions to the fiscal year
budget as a result of actions that were taken by the Council during budget
study on Thursday, May 4, 2006.
1
1
The City Manager advised that the May 4 budget study session resulted in
approximately $80,000.00 of changes to the fiscal year 2007 budget. She
stated that her original recommendation to reduce the appropriation to the
Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau budget by $60,000.00 was later
changed by the Council to a $30,000.00 reduction, a contribution of $1,000.00
was approved for the New Century Venture Center, a part-time position was
authorized to monitor the condition of the escalator and the general condition
of the walkway between The Hotel Roanoke and downtown Roanoke, as well as
to respond to questions and provide direction to visitors, in the amount of
$17,000.00, and the Council reinstated additional Deputy Clerk II position to I
the budget of the Clerk of Circuit Court.
I
I
I
.;..
" ~;".'
525
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting
adjourned at 2:30 p.m.
APPROVED
ÄTT,:: J ~
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
c}vM,,~
C. Nelson Harris
Mayor
526
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
May 15, 2006
I
2:00 p.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
May 15,2006, at 2:00 p.m., the regular meeting hour, in the Roanoke City Council
Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W.,
City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris presiding, pursuant to Chapter 2,
Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15, Rules of Procedure, Rule 1,
Beqular Meetin.~, Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, and pursuant
to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by the Council on Tuesday,July 5,2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea,
Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J. Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and
Mayor C. Nelson Harris _____nm_nmmmm_mmm__n__mmm_mm_m______nuummnn____7.
tlBSlE:NT: NClr\e-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker, I
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Council Member Alfred T. Dowe, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Harris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTSl:
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-CITY COUNCIL: Delegate Onzlee Ware read
House Joint Resolution No. 90 which was adopted by the House of Delegates on
January 13, 2006, and concurred in by the Senate on January 19, 2006,
recognizing the service of Council Member M. Rupert Cutler:
"WHEREAS, Dr. M. Rupert Cutler, respected citizen and City
Council member since 2002 is recognized for his outstanding service
to the City of Roanoke, and,
I
,'.
527
1
WHEREAS, a native of Detroit, Michigan, Rupert Cutler earned
an under graduate degree in Wildlife M.anagement from the University
of Michigan, and Masters and Doctoral degrees from the Department
of Resource Development of Michigan State University, and,
WHEREAS, Rupert Cutler was an editor for Virginia Wildlife and
National Wildlife, and for the magazine of the Virginia Game
Department, and served as the Assistant Director of the Wilderness
Society, Director ofthe Population Environment, Vice President of the
National Audubon Society, and President of Defenders of Wildlife,
and,
WHEREAS, because of his vast knowledge of natural resources
and environmental issues, Rupert Cutler was appointed by President
Jimmy Carter to serve as Assistant Secretary of Agriculture for
Conservation Research and Education in 1977, and he served as Policy
Director for the United States Forest Service Soil Conservation Service
and various agencies of the Department of Agriculture until 1988,
and, .
I
WHEREAS, Rupert Cutler has generously given of his time and
talents on numerous Civic organizations and advisory boards,
including Director of Virginia Explore Park, and founding Director of
the Western Virginia Land Trust, Chairman of the Board of the
Western Virginia Water Authority, Trustee of the Virginia Outdoors
Foundation, President of the Kiwanis Club of Roanoke, and as a
member of the Board of Opera of Roanoke, and,
WHEREAS, Rupert Cutler has been a valuable member of
Roanoke City Council from 2002 to 2006, and has contributed
immensely to enhancing the environment and the quality of life for all
the residents of Roanoke.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the House of Delegates,
the Senate concurring, that the General Assembly commends Dr.
M. Rupert Cutler on his many achievements, and,
BE IT RESOLVED FURTHER that the Clerk of the House of
Delegates prepare a copy of this Resolution for presentation to Dr.
M. Rupert Cutler as an expression of the General Assembly's
gratitude for his outstanding service and commitment to the citizens
of the City of Roanoke.
I
528
On behalf of House Patrons Delegate Onzlee Ware and Delegate William I
Fralin, Mr. Ware advised that the resolution is only a small token of appreciation
for Dr. Cutler's life time of community service.
Council Member Wishneff entered the meeting.
PROCLAMATIONS-EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES: The Mayor presented a
proclamation to David H. Hoback, Acting Chief, Fire - Emergency Medical Services,
declaring May 14 - 20, 2006, as Emergency Medical Services Week.
PROCLAMATIONS-POLICE DEPARTMENT: The Mayor presented a
proclamation to A. L. Uoe) Gaskins, Chief of Police, declaring May 14 - 20, 2006,
as National Police Week and Monday, May 15, 2006, as Peace Officers' Memorial
Day.
PROCLAMATIONS-PUBLIC WORKS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to
Robert K. Bengston, Director, Public Works, declaring May 21 - 27, 2006, as
National Public Works Week.
Mr. Bengtson, recognized Laura Wallace, David Twigg, Lewis Andrews, Doug
Beard, and Gary Walker, Public Works Department employees, who recently
participated in a Heavy Equipment Rodeo in Richmond, Virginia, and advanced to I
Virginia/Maryland/Washington, D. C. competition. He advised that they
participated in events involving the operation of front end loaders, backhoes,
snowplows, street sweepers, trash trucks, and Mr. Twigg was a first place winner
due to his ability to maneuver a refuse vehicle with skill and dexterity. He
presented a five minute video featuring the work of the City's Public Works
Department.
ACTS OF ACKNOWLEDGEMENT-COUNCIL: The Mayor congratulated Council
Member Brenda L. McDaniel, recipient of the Hollins University Distinguished
Service Award.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by one
motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if discussion was
desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda and considered
separately. He called specific attention to three requests for Closed Session to
discuss vacancies on certain Council appointed boards and commissions; a
~equest to discuss the annual performance of three Council-Appointed Officers:
and a matter with regard to acquisition of real property for public purpose, where 1
discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the bargaining position or
negotiating strategy of the public body.
1
1
I
.' ,
,.
'.
. .
'. }".'
,......
529
MINUTES: Minutes of the regular meeting of Council held on Monday,
April 3, 2006, were before the body.
Council Member Dowe moved that the reading of the minutes be dispensed
with and that the minutes be approved as recorded. The motion was seconded by
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harris-mmnmnnm__n__mmmmmm_mnm__umm_mnmmmmm____mumn 7.
NAYS: No ne_mumnnnmu_mnnmnm_n___mmm_nnm_mmumnm_mmm__m_mO.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris
requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies on
certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by Council,
pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(I), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was
before the body.
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the Mayor's request as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea. McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harrism_nmnnmm_______ummmnm_m_mmm____n_mm_mnmnnnmmnn___7.
NAYS: None___mm_mm_n_mnmmmmm__mnnnmnm__mmmmmm_________m_mO.
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T. Dowe,Jr.,
Chair, City Council's Personnel Committee, requesting that Council convene in a
Closed Meeting to discuss the annual performance of three Council-Appointed
Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(I), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
was before the body.
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request as
abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harri s u_unm___unn__n_mm_n_n_mm_mnnnnm__n_mnnm__n__n_n__m_u__7 .
NAYS: Nonem-m-nnnn--___n_m_n_n_m_n_n__mnnm__n_nnmnm_m_nn____-000-000.
530
. CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Attorney requesting that I
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for a
public purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-
3711(A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the request of the City
Attorney as abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick
and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harris__n_n_nn_n___nn____nnn_m__m__n_m_mnn_n__m_n_m_m__m_nm_nnn 7.
NAYS: Non e__n__n__n_m_m__n_m__n___m______mmnn_nn__mnmm_oo_m_m_m_unO.
BLUE RIDGE BEHAVIORAL HEALTHCARE: A communication from S. James
Sikkema, Executive Director, Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, recommending that
Council concur in the appointment of Daniel E. Karnes as a member at-large of the
Board of Directors Blue Ridge Behavioral Healthcare, to fill the unexpired term of
John M. Hudgins, Jr., resigned, ending December 31, 2006, and a three-year term
beginning January 1,2007 and ending December 31,2009, was before the body.
It was explained that at a regularly scheduled meeting on April 6, 2006, the I
Board of Directors voted unanimously to nominate Daniel E. Karnes to fill the
Board member at-large vacancy which occurred upon the resignation of John M.
Hudgins, Jr.; the unexpired term that Mr. Karnes will complete will expire on
December 31, 2006, and his first full three-year term will commence in January
2007 and expire in December 2009.
It was stated that because the by-laws require at-large appointments to be
ratified by all member jurisdictions of the Community Services Board, the request
will be sent simultaneously to the other four local governing bodies for
ratification.
Council Member Dowe moved that Council concur in the appointment of
Daniel E. Karnes as a member of the Board of Directors of Blue Ridge Behavioral
Healthcare as abovedescribed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
an d Mayo r H arri S_noo__m_n_noo_oo____.____oon_noo_m_mmoooomoon__noo_m_____m_oo_nm000000_7.
Nt\ 'fS: None---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------0.
I
I
I
I
531
ELECTIONS-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Carl T. Tinsfley, Sr.,
Secretary, Roanoke City Electoral Board, transmitting the following Abstract of
Votes cast in the General Election held in the City of Roanoke on May 2,2006, was
before Council.
ABSTRACT OF VOTES
cast in the City of ROA!-:OKr.
al the May 2. 2006 General Election, for:
. Virginia,
MEMBER
CITY COUNCIL
AT I.ARGF.
INJE",oT ~"Gr C'" APf'Il(.IPF ,llTE ¡;'~T"IC 0.<0 W"RD~"W
N"II£I fJ' C"NOJl)"lÆ~..s .litfO_OIfSAUOI
70r.., VOJTS
RfCflllED
(lNI-lfõiIR£S)
llo'l."1d ^. bllwer!!"
¿.710
'.J. GJOlllHr HI.c:Lorl(rnE:
4.ibl
1oi1l!jllm "Bill" w1Ii~.e. $t".
3,969
4,:14]
4,270
SO<:
Mark C. ~cC"T1Tlcl
~tuilrt H. h~v~rc~rnb
CST 1 D. (OC"PPT
A1fred 'J. i)owp. Jr.
.'i,5<'2
Rill C. ì.C'ckard
396
¡;We!l W. M¡¡!icm
s.an
Ilavid :E. Trh:ldc
~.e71
Total Write·ln Votes
[Valid Write·lns of Invalid Write-Ins I: 10181 W,ite_ln Votes] .
67
WiE, Ihe UflOf:.f$'pned ElttclOfDI SObra, upon e).(,mmät,on of the official recoros cJepe;/SilceJ with the Cier#f of thE'
C,rellit Cúun 01 OlE (¡lee/IOn held on May;, 2006. do hEreto}' certify tMt the; st,ove 1$ a truE and correcl AbEtrscl of
Votes cesl 8/ ~8id f:'/eclion étnd oc, thl::/t'foff:, df;If:lmifl~ hr¡d declare thaI the loJlowing persons tl(jV~ receIved the
gtehlc,sr "vmbE-1 01 voles cast lOt Ihe above offICe in saia l'Jeclion
T¡¡;\'id Tl. Trl¡,kle
Gwe:1 .... M.:H.;r,
Alf~ed r. Duwe, Jr.
GIven tmder our t.ands Ihis ~ Day of May, 2006.
..'-J( _~. (~. __~:~., --s.:....~..__..'< ~...
. Chairman
<' I} /,!j ·-L
.L....L....::t.:<t~ ·{..â~/...·_~
/' ("; ~ ."::J ¡::¡ ~~ I:J-
/ I ~
( -.:1 r1 ' ,)
.__-.(tL.'\..,.(- ...-J i.A··,A 7 Secretary. Electoral8oard
,VICe Chairman
. Secretary
532
Council Member Dowe moved that the Abstract of Votes be received and
filed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the 1
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
an d Mayo r H a rri s __n_n__n__n___n__m__n________m___n___mm__hoo_hmnnmn____m_________n00 7 .
NAYS: Non e_oon____n____m___nmm_m_n_______n_____m_m_mnmnmmn_m____h____--0.
OATHS OF OFFICE-BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT-PARKS AND
RECREATION-COMMITTEES: A report of qualification ofthe following persons was
before Council:
Evelyn W. Manetta as a member of the Parks and Recreation
Advisory Board, to fill the unexpired term of James C. Hale,
ending March 31, 2009; and
Charles R. Shaver as an alternate member of the Local Board of
Building Code Appeals.
Council Member Dowe moved that the report of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
an d Mayo r H a rri s _000_000__00__000_000__ 00__00000__00___00_00____0000000000___0000_0000000000000__________000___7 .
I
~A ,(S: NClr\e--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC HEARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
ARMORY/STADIUM: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson Harris advising
that on March 6, 2006, Council authorized, by Ordinance No. 37316-030606, the
appropriation of $4.1 million for the Patrick Henry High School Stadium Project
from the Stadium-Amphitheater account; on April 17, 2006, Council authorized, by
Ordinance No.3 7363-041706, the appropriation of $4.1 million for the William
Fleming High SChOClI Stadium Project from the Stadium-Amphitheater account;
since its dedication on November 26, 1942, to the mid 1980's, Victory Stadium
has served the City well; however, the location, age and present condition of
Victory Stadium, as well as the loss of its major tenant, high school football, does I
not merit the investment of additional public funds in the stadium's ongoing
maintenance.
1
1
1
,..
.;
533
The Mayor recommended the following:
· Council authorize the City Manager to take all appropriate steps to
demolish Victory Stadium; currently there are funds available in the
Stadium-Amphitheater Project account to cover the cost of such an
activity.
· A stockpile of brick will be retained from the structure and up to four
bricks will be made available to individual residents free of charge as
a memento of the stadium.
· To honor the contribution the stadium has made to the history of
Roanoke, he requested that Council direct that any future planned
use for the existing stadium site include a memorial, composed of
some of the original brick reflecting the presence and significance of
the stadium, as well as memorialize Coach Bob "Guts" McClelland for
whom the playing field was named.
Mr. John R. Graybill, 2443 Tillett Road, S. W., suggested that the Members of
Council should abide by the three minute rule that applies to all persons who
speak at City Council meetings. He called attention to a number of letters to The
Editor of The Roanoke Times that have been edited by the newspaper to the extent
that it would appear that the newspaper is on the City's side. He took issue with a
letter to the Editor of The Roanoke Times written by G. W. Wilson with regard to
the demolition of Victory Stadium and advised that contrary to Mr. Wilson's letter,
he has found the people with whom he has worked on the Victory Stadium issue
not to be selfish people, but good people who have exercised their democratic
prerogatives, and it has been a pleasure to know and work with them. He stated
that the citizens of Roanoke will continue to monitor actions taken by the Council.
Mr. Carl Sherertz, 2033 Maywood Road, S. W., advised that he is a life long
resident of Roanoke, however, he stated that he was puzzled by the City's
governmental leadership; on one hand, Council is delighted with revitalizing old
neighborhoods such as Day Avenue, but on the other hand, it is willing to destroy
Victory Stadium which is a City landmark. Further, he stated that City Council
does not like the location of Victory Stadium because it is located in a floodplain,
but Council has strongly advocated a biomedical facility across the street in the
same area; the Mayor developed a book of historic picture postcards, but favors
the demolition of Victory Stadium which quite possibly is included on one or more
of the post cards; and the Vice-Mayor supports destroying a veteran's memorial,
when an immediate member of his family was instrumental in saving Jefferson
High School.
534
Ms. Mary Bowers, 2330 Carlton Road, S. W., advised that Council Members
may wear one of two hats: first, the hat of a politician which may involve money,
power and position, sometimes acquired by dubious means and, second, and more
important, the hat of a public servant which may require caring, sharing, and a
sincere dedication for the good of many. She stated that the recent Councilmanic
election was not a referendum on the fate of Victory Stadium, and the winners
waged a successful campaign backed by money, power and one section of the City
of Roanoke. She asked that Council consider plans for Victory Stadium and asked
if Council will be saviors or executioners, will Council take action to desecrate the
hallowed ground on which Victory Stadium was constructed, or will the Council
think of the men and women in the military who are currently serving in Iraq, will
Council feel guilt and discomfort, will Council's conscience be tweaked now and
forever, will the demolition of Victory Stadium be for the good of many or just a
few; and if Victory Stadium is replaced with a stadium at Patrick Henry High
School, will Council think of the residents of the area whose quality of life will be
damaged by Council's decision. She advised that saving Victory Stadium harms no
one, but tearing it down affects many; however, if Council must vote to demolish
Victory Stadium, it is requested that the citizens of Roanoke be spared a dinky
amphitheater with a dinky tombstone dedicated to Roanoke's veterans.
Mr. Winfred Noell, 2743 Northview Drive, S. W., advised that some Members
of Council chose to construct high school stadia because they will be less
expensive than renovating Victory Stadium; however, Council's action has divided
the citizens of Roanoke and the demolition of Victory Stadium will not do anything
to repair the damage that has already been done. He further stated that it
appears that the numbers are in favor of renovation of Victory Stadium because
not only would it bring the community back together; but Roanoke would have a
facility that could be used for more than just high school football. He added that
with the proper marketing, Victory Stadium could be a money making venue for
the City of Roanoke, and asked that Council take into consideration the best use
of taxpayers' dollars.
Ms. Suzanne Osborne, 1702 Blair Road, S. W., advised that she could not
think of anything that could be more divisive, politically inappropriate, or
demonstrate more of a lack of leadership and regard for the majority of Roanoke's
citizens than a decision to demolish Victory Stadium. She stated that Citizens
For A Sensible Stadium Decision, totaling approximately 600 people, which is
larger than any neighborhood association, was hopeful that Council would take off
its political hat and exhibit the quality of statesmanship. She added that no
proposal has been submitted with regard to a proposed use if Victory Stadium is
torn down, which should be a part of the decision making equation, and without a
definitive plan for the site, the City could potentially spend years and hundreds of
thousands of additional dollars trying to decide on a use for the site while further
dividing the community. She stated that 56 percent of the votes that were cast in
the May 2, 2006 Councilmanic election were for those candidates who supported
1
I
1
1
1
I
...
:¡.,
.':~:;¡.:~:
535
the renovation of Victory Stadium, yet the majority of Council tends to ignore the
wishes of the citizens of Roanoke. She agreed with critics who say that there are
other more critical issues facing the City of Roanoke than Victory Stadium,
however, it should be noted that the Victory Stadium issue has not kept the City
from addressing any of those issues in a timely manner because government is
multi-faceted and addresses numerous issues simultaneously on a daily basis. She
advised that if certain Members of Council had honored their promises, the City
would not be faced with issues such as the Countryside Golf Course property,
southeast Roanoke traffic calming, the Social Security Administration office
building in the historic Gainsboro area, and a lawsuit filed by residents in the area
of Patrick Henry High School who oppose construction of a 3,000 seat high school
stadium in their neighborhood.
Mr. Stuart Revercomb, 2408 Stanley Avenue, S. E., advised that the vote in
the May 2006 Councilmanic election was in effect, a referendum and it was clear
that the supporters of Victory Stadium won. He called attention to Pulitzer Prize
winning nominee Frederick Beekner's words that "Christians are not better than
anyone else, they are just better informed", and suggested that the 56 percent
majority of Roanokers who voted for candidates who supported a renovation of
Victory Stadium are not better than anyone else, but they are better informed and
they know that every other community in America with a similar stadium has
successfully marketed their facilities, thereby increasing their quality of life, as
well as enjoying the millions of dollars in revenue that streams in through hotels,
food and other retail taxes. He stated that they also know that engineering
reports previously indicated that structurally, Victory Stadium is in near perfect
condition, which led the City's own consultants to remark that Victory Stadium was
in the best condition of any structure its age that they had ever inspected, and in
their combined 150 years of experience, they had not heard of a community
destroying such a facility. He added that citizens also know that flooding is a non
issue as referenced in Corp of Engineers reports, as well as reports provided by
the City's consultants; and citizens are keenly aware of forces at work in the
Roanoke Valley that seek the demise of Victory Stadium for their own self serving
agendas, and those forces have come together to plot a path that has led the City
to where it is today. He advised that it is difficult to fight big money and good ole
boy back room politics, especially when it is supported by a press that only allows
certain information to reach the publiC eye, and when that is not enough, a press
that is willing to completely misrepresent the truth. He stated that by demolishing
Victory Stadium, Council will be voting to destroy not only a monument to those
who gave their lives for their country, but a community asset that the City of
Roanoke will never be able to replace.
536
Dr. Keith Bohn, 5012 Cave Spring Circle, Roanoke County, spoke as a friend 1
of Victory Stadium and expressed concern that there appears to be a hidden
agenda as to the future use of the Stadium. He referred to the agreement
between the ·City of Roanoke and the N & W Railway, and inquired if Victory
Stadium is demolished, will the land on which the stadium is constructed revert
back to the railroad, or will the land be donated to Carilion Health System for the
new technology park. He stated that any action to demolish Victory Stadium is
unbelievable and will be a desecration to the memory of those persons who lost
their lives as they fought for the freedom of our country.
Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy, Virginia, advised that with $5 to
$ 7 million, the City could renovate Victory Stadium and retain a memorial to those
persons who served their Country in World War II, as well as the City's public
safety personnel who gave their lives in the line of duty. He stated that Victory
Stadium has not been properly maintained since it was removed from the
responsibility of the Department of Parks and Recreation. He added that the City
of Roanoke has not honored the agreement between the City and N & W Railway to
maintain the property; according to a recent newspaper article, Carilion Health
System is not interested in acquiring the property; and it appears that the City
wishes to demolish Victory Stadium and donate the land to developers without
regard to the wishes of Roanoke's citizens. He added that the City of Roanoke is
not business friendly and does not offer the necessary incentives to attract certain I
types of entertainment to the locality. He asked that Council reconsider any
decision to demolish Victory Stadium and that the stadium be renovated for the
enjoyment of all citizens of the Roanoke Valley.
Mr. John E. Kepley, 2909 MorrisonStreet, S. E., advised that the May 2,2006
Councilmanic election revealed that 56 percent of Roanoke's citizens voted for
candidates who supported the renovation of Victory Stadium. He stated that for
many years, the soul of the City of Roanoke has been at stake and the outcome of
the Councilmanic election on May 2, 2006, signed the death warrant for Roanoke
because the City will continue to be destroyed by leaders who are not qualified to
lead. He stated that three groups will control the decision making process of
elected officials; Le.: Carilion Health Systems, The Roanoke Times, and a small
group of businessmen who stand to benefit financially. He advised that some
Members of Council have not honored their word with regard to their stated
positions on the Victory Stadium issue, and a vote to demolish Victory Stadium will
deprive Roanoke of something that the vast majority of its citizens want to
preserve, it will deprive the City of the peace and unity that was once displayed in
the Roanoke Valley with neighbors who are at war against one another over
1
1
1
1
~ '.
. . : .
537
stadiums, taxes, crime, and a host of other subjects, and it will deprive the once
beautiful neighborhood of Raleigh Court by building an institutional type high
school and a new high school stadium of 3,000 seats. He stated that past actions
of the Council have aligned the citizens of South Roanoke against the remainder
of the City, and tearing down Victory Stadium will be symbolic of the tearing down
of the City of Roanoke.
Ms. Estelle McCadden, 2128 Mercer Avenue, N. W., inquired as to the
funding source to demolish Victory Stadium, and who will be responsible for
maintenance of a memorial at Victory Stadium. She expressed concern that funds
that were approved for Victory Stadium were diverted to another account for
library improvements, and advised that the funds should have been used for
school related purposes to help Roanoke's students pass their Standards of
Learning test, or to purchase much needed classroom textbooks. She advised that
Roanoke's neighborhoods are the fabric of the City, yet no elected officials were
present at recent activities celebrating Neighborhood Month.
Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., expressed concern with regard
to the leadership of the majority of Council, and advised that citizens of Roanoke
must be more watchful and active in order to hold each Member of Council
accountable for their actions. She stated that if one does not respect the past,
one will repeat past mistakes; the City of Roanoke lost the American Theater and
the Roanoke Academy of Music to the wrecking ball, therefore, it is unbelievable
that a majority of Council would ignore the informative and detailed report from
the City's own consultants which stated that historic Victory Stadium could be
renovated for $13.5 million with the use of historic tax credits. She advised that
the City is divided, with neighbors who are pitted against neighbors, therefore,
Council Members should work toward bringing unity to Roanoke's citizens.
Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E., advised that if Council votes
to demolish Victory Stadium, it will live in infamy because the will of the people
will have been ignored. She expressed concern with regard to the leadership of a
majority of the Council and stated that a Council majority could have moved the
City forward on any issue during the past two years, but now there appears to be
an all out effort to demolish Victory Stadium before the new Council takes office
on July 1, 2006. She stated that Council Members will regret any decision to
demolish Victory Stadium.
Ms. Patricia Pruett, 4902 Grandin Road, S. W., called attention to a recent
article in The Roanoke Times regarding the May 2, 2006 Councilmanic election
which stated that the five Council candidates who were in favor of Victory Stadium
renovation received approximately 5,000 votes over and above the other five
538
candidates who were in favor of demolishing Victory Stadium. She stated that in
honor of veterans, Roanoke dedicated Victory Stadium before World War II was
won; the V stands for Victory; and the renowned poet, Henry Wadsworth
Longfellow said that the lives of great men remind us that we can make our lives
sublime and, when departing, leave behind us footprints in the sands oftime. She
added that Mr. Longfellow's statement can be applied to leadership by City
officials as it relates to the City's stewardship of Victory Stadium.
Mr. E. Duane Howard, P. O. Box 8111, stated that this is an historic day for
the City of Roanoke, albeit a sad one; Roanoke has lost its basketball team, and,
for the second time, its hockey team, and it is surprising that there appears to be
a lack of understanding as to the reasons why. He stated that it is fascinating that
five Members of Council believe that the City of Roanoke is looking forward and
acting progressivly by destroying Victory Stadium; some citizens of Roanoke have
been accused of living in the past, when, in fact, City officials are living in the past
by not being able to see the future of sports and its potential impact for the City
of Roanoke with a facility the size of Victory Stadium; and today, Council will vote
to close the door on the future of sports for the entire Roanoke Valley. He added
that for today's generation and for those of tomorrow, athletic events will be
about gravity sports and the x-games, therefore, it is shortsighted for the future
to close the door forever with the destruction of Victory Stadium, and for many
years to come, future Councils and citizens will bemoan the fact that such a great
City asset was destroyed. He advised that it is ironic that some people believe
that a vote to destroy Victory Stadium will stop any future discussion of the issue,
however, it will take many decades, if ever, before the citizens of Roanoke cease to
talk about Victory Stadium.
Council Member Cutler stated that he will vote in favor of the resolution to
demolish Victory Stadium. He advised that as he has stated consistently during
his four year tenure on the Council, his lifetime of university education and
professional experience in the field of environmental poliCY and planning bears
out the fact that Victory Stadium is a liability that the City of Roanoke will be
better off without; and there is no way to justify the premium that the City would
have to pay to flood proof and to maintain an aging and wrong-sized structure in a
floodway, compared to the cost of building and maintaining the right size stadium
in an outdoor concert amphitheater venue, on uplands out of harms way. He
added that he strongly supports the construction of a sports stadium at each of
the City's two high schools because of the convenience and availability for use by
students on a daily basis. He stated that he may be among a minority of
Roanoke's citizens who continue to believe that the City should use the already
prepared site that the City owns near Orange Avenue and Williamson Road for an
1
I
1
1
1
1
>:'.
539
outdoor concert amphitheater; and it is hoped that the Council that will take office
on July 1, 2006 will give the site across Orange Avenue from the Roanoke Civic
Center one more review with this purpose in mind before committing the City to
build a new amphitheater structure next to the Roanoke River or elsewhere. He
pointed out the no U. S. Army Corps of Engineer's flood reduction project can
guarantee that the Roanoke River will stay within its banks at all times; and the
river bank now occupied by Victory Stadium should be devoted to soccer fields and
a memorial to Coach Bob "Guts" McClelland.
Council Member Lea expressed appreciation to the citizens of Roanoke for
their passion, dedication and commitment to saving Victory Stadium; however, he
stated that Council will vote on the fate of Victory Stadium today and, in all
likelihood, the pro Victory Stadium group will lose, but it is important to recognize
that the process was handled in a democratic way. He added that he may
oftentimes disagree with his Council colleagues, but he respects their right to vote
according to their conscience to move the City forward. He stated that other
issues need to be addressed such as economic development, education, housing,
and crime, etc.; he respects the fact that everyone has the right to change their
mind and he looks forward to working with Council Members-Elect Trinkle and
Mason as they join the Council on July 1; there will be times when the Council will
disagree on various issues, but the Council will have to work as a group for the
good of the City; therefore, he encouraged the citizens of Roanoke to join with the
Council and to respect the process that was used and to not engage in personal
attacks.
Council Member Wishneff advised that he would not vote in favor of the
resolution. He apologized to those persons who supported the renovation of
Victory Stadium and to the people of Raleigh Court, some of whom are currently in
the process of selling their homes, due to the construction of a football stadium
at Patrick Henry High School. He expressed concern over the number of schools
that have received accreditation in the City of Roanoke; the fact that the City of
Roanoke has the second highest crime rate in the Commonwealth of Virginia,
second only to the City of Richmond; Roanoke has lost approximately 5,000 jobs,
and no economic development announcements have been made in some time; and
downtown Roanoke is beginning to look like a "ghost town." He stated that the
demolition of Victory Stadium will be a reflection on the City of Roanoke which is
in a state of decline, and it is difficult to understand how the City could make the
choice of abandoning an asset like Victory Stadium in order to construct two small
high school stadiums. He called attention to a proposal which he offered to the
Council for consideration earlier in the week that would provide the opportunity
for the citizens of Roanoke to raise the necessary funds to renovate and to
operate Victory Stadium over the next 12 months, which would not involve City
funds, and with the understanding that if the funds cannot be raised within a
period of 12 months, the City would proceed with the demolition of Victory
Stadium.
540
Council Member Dowe advised that this is not a day of celebration and
during his four years on Council, no sitting Council has favored the demolition, or 1
disintegration of any structure if it made sense to maintain the building. He
stated that during his tenure on Council, numerous persons have said that they
would like to maintain Victory Stadium, but those same persons have also said
that they will not attend events at the stadium, therefore, the two comments must
be synonymous, because there must be support for Victory Stadium. He added
that the City does not have the propensity, consistently, historically or
futuristically, to support a facility the size of Victory Stadium; therefore, the City
must move on. He commended Council Member Lea for having the courage to
make the above referenced remarks.
The Mayor also commended the remarks of Council Member Lea and
expressed appreciation for his call for civility.
There being no further discussion, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the
following resolution:
(#37393-051506) A RESOLUTION directing the City Manager to proceed with
the demolition of Victory Stadium.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 306.)
I
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37393-
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor
H a r ri s n_n _00_ _00 _0000___ moo _____0000000000000 _0000000_000. ___0000 ___um____ __u__m___m _m_____ 000. ___umn 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff _00__m____nooooooooooo_ooonnnnnnooonn2.
BUDGET-CLERK OF COURTS: A communication from Brenda S. Hamilton,
Clerk of Circuit Court, advising that the Clerk of Circuit Court is responsible, by
statute, for the recordation of legal instruments which include land records,
marriage licenses, financing statements, assumed names, wills and other probate
records, and Law, Chancery and criminal orders; and the Clerk's records must be
maintained and available to the public.
It was further advised that the Compensation Board, through the
Technology Trust Fund, has made funds available to be allocated toward
contractual obligations for those offices that have indicated that funds were
needed: and the Circuit Court Clerk's Office for the City of Roanoke has been
allocated $26,360.00 for reimbursement for charges by the Supreme Court of I
Virginia and Sutton Information Systems, which charges represent equipment
maintenance and scanning fees.
I
I
1
541
The Clerk of Circuit Court requested that Council take the following actions:
. accept funding from the Compensation Board Technology Trust Fund
in the amount of $26,360.00;
. adopt a budget ordinance establishing a revenue estimate in the
amount of $26,360.00; and
appropriate funds in the same amount to an expenditure account to be
established by the Director of Finance in the Grant Fund, as follows:
Account No. 035-120-5151-2005 - $21,300.00
Account No. 035-120-5151-9005 - $5,060.00
A communication from the City Manager concurring in the request of the
Clerk of Circuit Court, was also before the Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37394-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia through the Technology Trust Fund for the
improvement of operations in the Office of Circuit Court Clerk, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Grant Fund Appropriations, and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 307.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7394-051506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler and
Mayo r H a rri s -._______________________m_______m_____________________________n.______mnn_mm____-----000006.
NAYS: Non e------n____ooom_______n_nu__nmnm______mnn___mnmmn.ooom___________ooo_O.
(Council Member Dowe was out of the Council Chamber when the vote was
recorded.)
542
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
I
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-BRIDGES: The City Manager submitted a communication advising
that the City of Roanoke has received bids for the renovation of the Martin Luther
King,Jr. Memorial Bridge, in accordance with the direction provided by Council; at
the April 3, 2006, City Council briefing, Council supported the use of Virginia
Department of Transportation Urban Allocation Funds for the Project; the Virginia
Department of Transportation's current Six Year Improvement Program identifies
Federal Omnibus funds, in the amount of $497,100.00, for the Bridge; and City
staff has coordinated with VDOT staff to allocate an additional $1,500,000.00 in
Urban Allocation funds to the project, which funds were originally intended for the
Wonju Street project, but are no longer needed due to a reduction in project
scope.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance
appropriating funds in the total amount of $1,997,100.00 to the Martin Luther I
King, Jr. Memorial Bridge account and to establish revenue estimates for the
project; and sources of funds are: $497,100.00 from Federal Omnibus funds,
Account No. 008-052-9574-9002, and $1,500,000.00 from Virginia Department of
Transportation Urban Allocation to the City of Roanoke, Account No. 008-052-
9574-9007.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37395-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate federal and state funds for
the Martin Luther King, Jr. Memorial Bridge Project, amending and reordaining
certain sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects Fund Appropriations, and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 308.)
1
1
I
I
543
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7395-051506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler.
Council Member Lea requested a status report on the Dr. Martin Luther
King, Jr. Memorial Bridge Project.
The City Manager advised that several weeks ago, Council was advised that
there were insufficient funds for the project at that time, and rather than rebid or
delete certain elements from the project, Council approved a request to transfer
excess Virginia Department of Transportation funds from the Wonju Street project
to the Martin Luther King,Jr. Bridge project. Following Council's action today, she
stated that the contract for construction or renovation of the bridge will be
executed, and sufficient funds exist within the appropriation for enhancements to
the bridge in order to depict the life and significance of Dr. King, as well as funds
for the statue. She explained that the statue will be addressed separately and is
not a part of the contract award, and renderings of statues by artists that are
currently under consideration are on display in the City Manager's Conference
Room.
Ordinance No. 37395-051506 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
an d Mayor H arri su-mn_umnnmmnmnmmn_nm_h___m___mm_mm__mmnmn_mmmu 7 .
NAYS: Nonenm-mm-nmn-__nmnmnnoo__mm_____umuh___m_m_mnmm.mummO.
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT-INDUSTRIES-GRANT5: The City Manager
submitted a communication advising that the City of Roanoke and Valley View
Mall, LLC (VVM), developer of property at Valley View Mall to be known as The
District at Valley View, have negotiated an annual Economic Development Grant
Performance Agreement; the Economic Development Grant will be funded by the
City, but issued and administered through the Industrial Development Authority of
the City of Roanoke, Virginia (IDA); the grant will assist in the demolition of
structures and parking areas, upgrades to the storm water runoff system, and
realignment of electrical lines and other related utilities to the site; Valley View
Mall will then construct a lifestyle center consisting of several buildings along with
a larger structure attached to the existing Valley View Mall; and the project will
provide additional tax revenue, jobs, and services to and benefit the citizens of
the City and the Roanoke Valley, in addition to providing an economic benefit to
the City.
544
It was further advised that a proposed Performance Agreement outlines the I
obligations of Valley View Mall in order to qualify for and receive the grant; some
of the main provisions provide that Valley View Mall must complete the demolition
of certain items within 12 months after the date of the Agreement; a requirement
for construction of new buildings with at least six new retail establishments that
will be open to the public for business within 18 months following the date of the
Agreement; and Valley View Mall will have spent, or caused to have been spent, at
least $17.4 million on development of the Project, including $1 million on the
demolition and related infrastructure improvements and enhancements within 24
months after the date of the Agreement.
It was explained that after the retail stores are opened, Valley View Mall can
make up to five annual grant requests to the IDA under certain conditions; the
various tax revenues, as listed in the proposed Agreement, that the City actually
receives from the property or project must exceed $550,000.00 for the preceding
grant year; if so, VVM may make a grant request to the IDA for up to an amount
equal to 50% of the amount of revenue the City actually received during the
preceding grant year, subject to certain other provisions as set forth in the
Agreement; however, the maximum amount of all grant funds VVM may receive
shall not exceed $1 million.
It was further explained that the Agreement requires WM to provide the
City and the IDA with appropriate supporting documentation for each grant
request; and funding for each annual grant request will be subject to
appropriation by Council to the IDA and no funding will be required during the
upcoming fiscal year.
I
The City Manager recommended that Council approve the terms of the
Performance Agreement among the City of Roanoke, Valley View Mall, and the
Industrial Development Authority, and determine that such grant will promote
economic development within the City; and that the City Manager be further
authorized to execute a Performance Agreement and to execute such other
documents and to take such further action as may be necessary to implement and
administer the Performance Agreement, subject to approval by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37396-051506) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the proper City officials to
execute a Performance Agreement among the City of Roanoke (City), the Industrial
Development Authority of the City of Roanoke, Virginia (IDA), and Valley View Mall,
LLC (VVM) that provides for certain undertakings by the parties in connection with
the development of certain property located in Valley View Mall, in the City of
Roanoke; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this Ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 309.)
I
1
I
1
,.
545
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37396-051 506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
an d Mayo r Harri S__umn_m_mnnm.mm__________umnmm_.unm____m_mmnmm_.nmmn 7 .
NAYS: No n eunnmnnmnnn_mm____uu_unmnmmm____nn__________ummnnm_mnO.
DOWNTOWN ROANOKE, INCORPORATED-SPECIAL SERVICE DISTRICT: The
City Manager submitted a communication advising that in December, 1986,
Council adopted Ordinance No. 28453-120886, which established the Downtown
Service District in the City of Roanoke; at that time, and for various terms since
creation of the District, the City of Roanoke has entered into agreements with
Downtown Roanoke, Inc. (DR ) in order for Downtown Roanoke, Inc., to undertake
development activities and other additional services that are not provided
uniformly throughout the City, including economic and business development
promotional activities and other activities provided under State Code Section 15.2-
2403; and the agreement between the City and DRI was last authorized by Council
in July, 2001, pursuant to Resolution No. 35448-070201, for a five-year term to
expire on June 30, 2006.
It was further advised that in July, 2002, Council, pursuant to Resolution No.
35964-070102, authorized amendment of the agreement to eliminate the
$2,000.00 charge that the City retained from actual tax receipts collected for
costs incurred in collecting and administering receipts
It was explained that DRI has informed the City of its desire to continue the
contractual relationship with the City in order to provide services within the
Downtown Service District; in a request dated April 17, 2006, DRI proposes to
enter into an agreement with an initial one-year term with a series of nine, one
year mutually agreed upon renewals, which would potentially extend the
agreement from July 1, 2006 through June' 30, 2016; all other terms and
conditions as contained in the previous agreement, as amended, will carry forward
into the new agreement, such as boundaries of the District and the additional
service district tax rate of $.10 per $100.00 valuation of real estate.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute a
Downtown Service District Agreement between the City of Roanoke and Downtown
Roanoke, Inc., such agreement to be approved as to form by the City Attorney;
and that she be further authorized to take such action as is necessary to
implement and administer the agreement.
546
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following resolution:
1
(#37397-051506) A RESOLUTION authorizing the City Manager to execute an
agreement with Downtown Roanoke, lnc., for continued administration of the
Downtown Service District, upon certain terms and conditions.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 311.)
Vice-Mayor Fizpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No.3 7397-051506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harris______m_mmm_nnnmmnnmnmnmnm___mmnmm_nmmumu__________7.
NtI'(S: NonE!-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS-BUDGET-HUMAN DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE:
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the Human Services
Advisory Board budget, in the amount of $ 5 78,841.00, was established by Council
with adoption of the General Fund budget for fiscal year 2006-2007; requests
from 33 agencies (46 programs), totaling $887,483.00 were received; Advisory 1
Board members studied each application prior to meetings to discuss funding
allocations held on March 7, March 17, and March 22, 2006; and agencies were
notified of tentative allocations and advised that they could appeal the
recommendations, however, no appeals were heard by the Board.
It was further advised that performance audits will be conducted by the
Council of Community Services to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of all
funded programs.
The City Manager recommended that she be authorized to execute any
contracts required with recipient agencies, such contracts to be approved as to
form by the City AttornE!Y; and that Council transfer $ 5 78,841.00 from the Human
Services Advisory Board, Account No. 01-630-5220-3700, to new line items to be
established within the Human Services Advisory Board budget by the Director of
Finance.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
1
1
I
1
547
(#37398-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding to the Human
Services Committee, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2006-2007
General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of
this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 312.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37398-051 506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harris_huunmmmmmmn__.mnmm__mm_____n_______h_n___h__mmummu_m 7.
NA YS: Nonemnmnmnm__mm___nn_mumnmmnmmnmnmmmmmmmnmm_O.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the follOWing resolution:
(#37399-051506) A RESOLUTION concurring in the recommendations of the
Human Services Advisory Board ("Board"') for allocation of City funds to various
nonprofit agencies and performance audits for Fiscal Year 2006-2007; authorizing
the City Manager, or her designee, to execute any required contracts with the
qualified agencies for provision of services, and to execute a contract with the
Council of Community Services to perform the necessary audits to evaluate the
effectiveness and efficiency of all funded programs.
(For full text of Resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 315.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37399-
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor HarriSunmnn_umnmnmn___n_nn_nmnnnunmmnn_n__m_n_nmmnn_nm00 7.
NAYS: None_mmumnmnmnm._mnmumummnmm.um_mnmm___mmmnmnO.
BUDGET-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Roanoke Arts Commission Agency Funding
Advisory Committee budget, in the amount of $348,077.00, was established by
Council with adoption of the General Fund budget for fiscal year 2006-2007; of
548
the total amount, $2,500.00 was set aside for Arts Commission funding; total
funding amount represents an increase in funding of $12,565.00 as recommended I
to Council in February 2006; requests from 19 agencies (including the Arts
Commission), totaling $532,270.00 were received; Committee members studied
each application prior to an allocation meeting which was held on March 3, 2006;
agencies were notified of tentative allocations and advised that they could appeal
the recommendations of the Committee; one appeal was filed by Virginia's Explore
Park; and no changes were recommend~d by the Committee.
The City Manager recommended that Council transfer $348,077 .00 from the
Roanoke Arts Commission Agency Funding Advisory Committee, Account
No. 01 310-5221-3700, to new line items to be established by the Director of
Finance within the Roanoke Arts Commission budget.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
. .
(#37400-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding to specific Art
Commission agencies, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2006-
2007 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by
title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 316.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37400- 1
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayo r Harri sn________mmnnnmnmmnm_nnn_m_·umnmnm__mnmm__nmn_mn_n_7 .
NAYS: None________mummmmnmn_nmnnnmnmmnn__u_m_m_mmm___m_mm_O.
TRAFFIC-BUDGET-STATE HIGHWAYS: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that the Virginia Department of Transportation's (V DOT)
Six-Year Improvement Program (SYIP) includes funds for the following projects:
. Riverland Road, Bennington Street & Mt. Pleasant Boulevard
Intersection Improvement (UPC #71741) - Total project funding of
$1,020,000.00 which includes a fiscal year 2005 allocation of
5224,000.00 (VDOT $220,000.00, City match $4,000.00) and a fiscal
year 2006 allocation of $796,000.00 (VDOT $780,000.00 and City
match $16,000.00), and
1
1
1
I
549
·
City-wide Signal &ïTS Imþrovêii1êìüs (UPC #71740) - Total project
funding of $1,144,000.00., which includes a fiscal year 2005
allocation of $554,000.0'0 (VDOT $543,000.00, City match
$11,000.00), a fiscal year 2006 allocation of $322,000.00, and a
fiscal year 2007 allocation of $268,000.00 (fiscal year 2006 and fiscal
year 2007 combined are VDOT 5579,000.00, City match 511,000.00).
It was further advised that because the projects are to be locally
administered, it will be necessary for Council to appropriate funds to project
accounts for disbursement against project development and implementation
expenses; in February 2005, Council appropriated fiscal year 2005 allocations to
the appropriate accounts; the Riverland Road account includes $50,000.00 of local
match funding, which is more than the amount required by VDOT as the locality's
two per cent match; and funds for the local match for all phases of the City-wide
Signal & ITS Improvements Project are available in VDOT highway project Account
No. 008-530-9803.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the following:
·
Appropriate 5780,000.00 of VDOT project funding to the existing
project account Riverland Road/Mt. Pleasant/Bennington Street,
Account No. 008-530-9512; increase the revenue estimate by the
same amount for State reimbursement through VDOT's Six-Year
Improvement Program; funds currently exist in this capital account
which provides for the City's two per cent match; and
· Appropriate $579,000.00 of VDOT project funding to the existing
project account "Signal & ITS Improvements", Account No. 008-530-
9833; increase the revenue estimate by the same amount for State
reimbursement through VDOT's Six-Year Improvement Program; and
in order to address the two percent local match, transfer funds
totaling $22,880.00 from VDOT Highway Projects, Account No. 008-
530-9803, to the "Signal & ITS Improvements" account.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37401-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding to be provided by
the VDOT Six-Year Improvement Program for the Riverland Road, Mt. Pleasant
Boulevard Intersection, Bennington Street and Signal & ITS Improvements Projects,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 Capital Projects Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 317.)
550
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7401-051506. I
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
an d Mayor H arris_m_nmmmnmnnmm______mnnmnnmmmmn__mnmnn____m_nnnnn 7 .
NAYS: Non e 00 00 moo ooo___n__oooooonoooooooom 00 00 00 - 00 mm_nooon____moon 00 nm_ooom___ooooooO.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES:
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A report of the Roanoke City School Board requesting
that Council appropriate $2,000,000.00 from the Virginia Literary Loan Fund for
the addition of central air conditioning, installation of energy efficient window
systems, and upgrade of facility electrical circuits at Monterey Elementary School,
was before the body. .
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37402-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the Virginia I
Literary Loan Fund for improvements to the Monterey Elementary School,
amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 School Capital
Projects Fund Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of
this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 318.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37402-
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
Council Member Wishneff inquired about the status of the Literary Fund
Loan.
Kenneth F. Mundy, Jr., Executive Director for School Fiscal Services, advised
that the Literary Loan Fund will issue a new statement of availability, although it is
likely that improvements and upgrades to Monterey Elementary School will not be
funded directly from the Literary Fund but will be moved to a VPSA bond issue. He
added that the process starts with a Literary Loan application, and as funds
become available, requests are ranked on a priority list; the new priority list will be
issued in June or July 2006 and it is anticipated that Patrick Henry High School and I
Monterey Elementary School will be moved up on the priority list. He explained
that the request currently before the Council will involve VPSA bonds.
1
1
I
551
There being no further discu,~.sior:1; Ordi~ance No. 37402-051506 was
adopted by the following vote: '.. ,
AYES: C~uncil Members Fitzpatri~~;'Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayo r H arn Smnmnmmmnm_m___u_'m__mnmmoomnnnmnmmnmmoooonmm_.__7 .
NAYS: No nemmoonnmnmoon_oo _n_n____oomoo:_,__oomoomoomoommooou___________m__ooO.
BUDGET-SCHOOLS: A communication from the Roanoke City School Board
requesting that Council appropriate the following funds:
. $12,000.00 for the William Fleming High School Ninth Grade
Transition Grant, to provide Federal funds for the transition of
middle school students to high school, which new program will be
100 per cent reimbursed by Federal funds;
. $2,912.00 for the 2006 Advanced Placement (AP) Fee Payment
Program to reimburse part, or all of the cost of fees for low-income
students who take the test, said continuing program to be 100 per
cent reimbursed by Federal funds.
A report of the Director of Finance recommending that Council concur in the
request of the School Board, was also before the body.
Council Member Cutler offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37403-051506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the federal
government for the William Fleming Ninth Grade Transition Grant and the AP Fee
Payment Programs, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006
School Fund Appropriations and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 319.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37403-
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the
following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
and Mayor Harrisnm---mnmnnm--nm--nmmnnmmm__OUhmm_oomnn_nmnnnn__mn 7.
NAYS: Non e - mm__mm__m_ moo 000 00_000 000_000 000 00 000 00 nm mn_mnmn_ moon - - -000-000__000.
552
UNFINISHED BUSINESS: NONE.
I
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND RESOLUTIONS:
NONE.
At this point, Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick left the meeting.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY THE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT: Council Member Cutler called attention
to a $9.5 million construction permit that was issued by the City for improvements
to The Patrick Henry Hotel.
SPECIAL EVENTS: Council Member Dowe commended organizers of the
Annual Jabberwock, Strawberry Festival, Local Colors, Annual Chili Cook-off, and
Kiwanis Young Leaders Program.
HEARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response, I
recommendation or report to Council.
COMPLAINTS-CITY COUNCIL: Mr. John E. Kepley, 2909 Morrison Street, S. E.,
advised that some Members of Council have not listened to the wishes of the
citizens of Roanoke. He called attention to instances when certain Members of
Council have not honored their word with reference to statements and/or
commitments regarding Victory Stadium.
COMPLAINTS-CITY COUNCIL: Ms. Helen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E.,
advised that the City of Roanoke is divided because on numerous occasions,
Council has not honored its word on various issues. She stated that citizens in the
area of Patrick Henry High School are divided on the issue of constructing a small
high school stadium in their neighborhood, and Council should listen to the
wishes of the majority of citizens who live in the area who are opposed to the high
school stadium. She requested that Council take immediate action to unite the
citizens of Roanoke.
1
1
I
1
553
..... :,.. :.,.' :..... . ~ ,I' .
COMPLAINTS-ARMORY/STAbiuM: Mr:Jim Fiëlds, 17 Ridgecrest Road, Hardy,
Virginia, advised that Victory Stadium was constructed as a memorial to the
veterans of World War II, the facility has;' served as the home for VMI and VPI
football games, as well as other college·ànd professional football games, and in
more recent years, Victory Stadium has been the home of high school football
games and the City's 4th of July celebrations. H.e stated that the City of Roanoke
has allowed the stadium to fall into a state of disrepair, even though funds were
appropriated for stadium repairs, and the funds were used for other City projects.
He advised that the Stadium could be renovated for $5 - $7 million, and with the
proper marketing, the Stadium could be used by all citizens ofthe Roanoke Valley
and could become a profitable venture for the City of Roanoke. He advised that
Council has not listened to the wishes of the majority of its citizens who want
Victory Stadium to be renovated. He called for a complete investigation of all City
funds that have been issued to Carilion/Roanoke Memorial Hospital, and a
complete audit of City funds pertaining to Victory Stadium from 1985 to date.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick returned to the meeting.
COMPLAINTS: Mr. E. Duane Howard, 1135 Wasena Avenue, S. W., advised
that nothing destroys faith and trust in government more than the "good old boy
system," nepotism, and back door politics. He expressed concern with regard to
alleged nepotism in the Sheriff's department and stated that elected officials
should be prohibited from appointing family members to government positions.
He expressed further concern with regard to a potential conflict of interest in the
appointment of members ofthe same household to City Council appointed boards
and commissions.
COMPLAINTS-HOUSING/AUTHORITY-ClTY EMPLOYEES: Mr. Robert E. Gravely,
727 29'" Street, N. W., spoke with regard to an inadequate pay scale for City
employees and the lack of housing opportunities for the City's work force because
they cannot afford to purchase a house in the City of Roanoke based on current
wages. He stated that Roanoke's citizens will not be united if the City's
infrastructure continues to be neglected, or if there is no compassion,
understanding or expressed purpose by City leaders. He expressed concern that
the cost of utilities have increased, the price of gasoline has increased, the price
of tickets to events at the Roanoke Civic Center has increased to the point that the
average person cannot afford the price of a ticket, and the need for better
marketing of Roanoke's downtown area.
554
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS:
I
CELEBRATIONS-SPORTS COMPLEX: In response to concerns expressed by
citizens earlier in the Council meeting, the City Manager advised that the Annual
4th of July celebration will again be held at River's Edge Sports Complex.
At 4:20 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess for three
Closed Sessions.
,
At 5:40 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member Wish neff,
Mayor Harris presiding.
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-PENSIONS: The Mayor advised that the
terms of office of David C. Key, Änthony P. Wallace, Michael W. Hanks and Efren
Gonzalez as members of the Board of Trustees, City of Roanoke Pension Plan, will
expire on June 30, 2006; Mr. Wallace is ineligible to serve another term inasmuch
as the position must be filled by a representative of the Police Department; and
the position held by Mr. Gonzalez will be filled by a representative of the Western
Virginia Water Authority; whereupon, the Mayor opened the floor for nominations.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of John G. Reed,
Curtis L. Davis, Michael W. Hanks and David C. Key.
I
There being no further nominations, Mr. Reed was appointed for a term
commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2010; Mr. Davis was appointed for a
term commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2008; Mr. Hanks was
reappointed for a term commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2008; and
Mr. Key was reappointed for a term commencing July 1 , 2006 and ending June 30,
2010, as members of the Board of Trustees, City of Roanoke Pension Plan, by the
following vote:
FOR MESSRS REED, DAVIS, HANKS AND KEY: Council Members Fitzpatrick,
Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor Harrism_m__mmnnnnn_mmmm7.
ROANOKE NEIGHBORHOOD PARTNERSHIP-OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES:
The Mayor advised that there are two vacancies on the Roanoke Neighborhood
Advocates to fill the unexpired term of Althea L. Pinkington, ending June 30,
2006, and Carol Jensen, ending June 30, 2007; whereupon, he called for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
1
1
I
1
555
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick pláced' ¡~ nomi~~tiöri the names of Clarice E. Walker
and Brian G. Gibson.
J.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Walker was appointed to fill the
unexpired term of Althea L. Pilkington, resigned, ending June 30, 2006; and Mr.
Gibson was appointed to fill the unexpired term of Carol Jenson, resigned, ending
June 30, 2007, as members of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates, by the
following vote:
FOR MS. WALKER AND MR. GIBSON: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea,
McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harris _mmm_mummmmmm_____n____7.
OATHS OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-SCHOOLS: The Mayor advised that the
terms of office of Jason E. Bingham, Kathy G. Stockburger, and David B . Trinkle as
Trustees of the Roanoke City School Board will expire on June 30, 2006;
. whereupon, he advised that the following names would be placed in nomination:
James P. Beatty, Jason E. Bingham, Caren D. Boisseau, Jay Foster, Mae G. Huff,
Randy L. Leftwich, Mark S. Lucas and Todd A. Putney.
The Mayor advised that Council Members would cast their votes for up to
three candidates.
FOR MR. BEATTY: None_mm_m__mnnm_mmm_.moo_mmmmmm_mmmm_O.
FOR MR. BINGHAM: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler,
Dowe and Mayo r H a rr i s um 00 mum 00 000 Uh____mnnmoonoonnnmnm____mmmmnn moo moo 6.
FOR MS. BOISSEAU: Nonemnn_nm_m_mnmmumm_mmmm_m_mnnnuh__h____O.
FOR MR. FOSTER: Nonemm____nnm__nm_mnm_nmnmnmnmmnnnnmh__h_m_O.
FOR MS. HUFF: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff,
Cutler, Dowe and Mayor Harrismnnmmmh__mmnmnmnmnmmmoom_mmummum7.
FOR MR. LEFTWICH: Nonem-h__mmmm_mmm_mm_m_m_mmuuh__mmm_m_O.
FOR MR. LUCAS: Council Members Lea, Wishneff and Cutlerm-mmm-m-mu3.
FOR MR. PUTNEY: Council Members Fitzpatrick, McDaniel, Wish neff, Dowe
and Mayor Harri sumnUU_Umh_mnm_mmmu_hu_nnnmn_n__mmnmnn_nmmhm_moo 5.
556
The Mayor advised that Mr. Bingham was reappointed and Ms. Huff and Mr. I
Putney were appointed as Trustees of the Roanoke City School Board for terms of
three years, each, commencing July 1, 2006 and ending June 30, 2009.
At 5:45 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess, and the
Council reconvened in Closed Session to conduct performance evaluations of three
Council Appointed Officers.
At 6:53 p.m., the Council meeting reconvened in the City Council Chamber,
Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of
Roanoke, with all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member
Wishneff, Mayor Harris presiding.
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meeting just concluded, Vice-Mayor
Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of his or
her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted from open
meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and (2) only
such public business matters as were identified in any motion by which any Closed
Meeting was convened were heard, discussed or considered by City Council. The
motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor I
fiarris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1).
NAYS: No nennnm_m_umnmnmnnnoon_____mnmnmm___mnm________uu_nnm_mO.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
At 1):55 p.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess to be
reconvened at 7:00 p.m., in the City Council Chamber.
At 7:00 p.m., on Monday, May 1 5, 2006, the Council meeting reconvened in
the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson Harris
presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr., Sherman P. Lea,
Brenda L. McDaniel, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson
Harris---------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------1).
ABSENT: Council Member BrianJ, Wishneff _mm__mnm_mmoon__umm_mmm_l.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
1
1
1
1
557
: . ',~. ". .., 1'/ ;.' .,:. . . : . ,:.'.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene; L.;BLikham, City Manager; William M.
Hackworth, City Attorney, Jesse A. Hall, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.' ,
The invocation was delivered by Vice-Mayor Beverly T. Fitzpatrick, Jr.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was led
by Mayor Harris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: NONE.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the request of Highland Park United Methodist Church that a portion of
property located at 702 Ferdinand Avenue, S. W., identified as Official Tax No.
1120908, and an adjoining parcel of land identified as Official Tax No. 1120909,
be rezoned from IN, Institutional District, to RM-l, Residential Mixed Density
District, to allow for single family residential housing, the matter was before the
body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, April 28, 2006 and Friday, May 5, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that as
part of a comprehensive rezoning adopted by Council on December 5, 2005, the
subject properties were rezoned from RM-2, Residential Multifamily, Medium
Density District, to IN, Institutional District; the properties are located in the H-2,
Historic Neighborhood Overlay District, and the petitioner requests that a portion
of property bearing Official Tax No. 1120908 and an adjoining parcel of land
bearing Official Tax No. 1120909, be rezoned from IN, Institutional District, to
RM-l, Residential Mixed Density District, to allow for a single-family dwelling.
The Planning Commission recommended that Council approve the request
for rezoning, inasmuch as the petition to rezone the abovedescribed property
furthers the purposes of the Old Southwest Neighborhood Plan and the City's
Zoning Ordinance and Map.
558
Council Member Dowe offered the following ordinance:
(#37404-051506) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-1 00, Code ofthe City of
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke, dated
December 5, 2005, as amended, to rezone certain property within the City; and
dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance by title.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 320.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37404-
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea.
Edward A. Natt, Attorney, representing the petitioner, appeared before
Council in support of the request of his client.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the request for rezoning. There being none, he declared the
public hearing closed.
Council Member McDaniel requested clarification with regard to the
opposition of Old Southwest, Inc., to the request.
R. Brian Townsend, Agent, City Planning Commission, advised that the old
Southwest neighborhood was concerned about future use of the church. He called
attention to a church parsonage which is located on the property, and under the
zoning ordinance, in order for the church to sell the property or use the property
for single family purposes unrelated to the church, the zoning must to be changed
on that portion of the property, therefore, the concern of the neighborhood
related to the impact on the church insofar as split zoning. He stated that the
attorney for the petitioner could not confirm the name of the purchaser of the
church property, which was also a question raised by the neighborhood, the
Planning Commission confirmed that the matter was irrelevant to the nature of the
request, and the City Planning Commission opted to recommend approval of the
request for rezoning.
Mr. Natt advised that another church has executed a contract to purchase
the church building, but has no interest in the church parsonage inasmuch as the
church has no pastor and the denomination does not use the parsonage concept.
He stated that the neighborhood's concerns relate to marketing the single family
residential structure and the Planning Commission took the position that
marketing of the structure was not an issue, as opposed to land use, and the
desire was to have the church remain a church and the single family residence to
remain a single family residence, with the ability to sell the structures in that way.
I
1
1
1
1
1
559
.,. i..::,.'.,'.'.'..:: ,
.~. '>: ";.¡. '. ,. "::
There being no further questions 'or comments by Council Members,
Ordinance No.3 7404-051506 was ado.Pte,9 by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatriêl<;"Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor
rlélrris--.------------------------------------------------------,--------------------------.-----------------------------E).
" .:'
NAYS: Nonennmnmmmm____uumnm..cmm_numnnmmummmmmnm_m_mnO.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
ZONING: Pursuant to Resolution No. 25523 adopted by the Council on
Monday, April 6, 1981, the City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for
Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be
heard, on the request of Pheasant Ridge Land Investors, LLC, to repeéll and replace
proffered conditions on a 4.09-acre property located on Pheasant Ridge
Road, S. W., identified as Official Tax No. 5460129, such new proffers relating to a
new development plan for the subject property, in order to construct one
additional multifamily structure, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, April 28, 2006 and Friday, May 5, 2006.
The City Planning Commission submitted a written report advising that on
December 3, 1979, élt the request of Roanoke Health Care Center, Council rezoned
the 49.23 acre parcel of land to Cl, Office District, and RM-2, Residential
Multifamily District, with conditions; and on February 5, 1996, at the request of
Roanoke Health Care Center, Council rezoned the RM-2 portion of the property to
C-l, with conditions, for the purpose of constructing a group care facility, upon
certain proffered conditions.
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the request inasmuch
as the second élmended petition to amend the proffered conditions with regard to
Official Tax No. 5460129 to construct one additional multifamily structure
furthers the purposes of the City's Comprehensive Plan, the Southern Hills
Neighborhood Plan, and the City's Zoning Ordinance.
Council Member Dowe offered the follOWing ordinance:
560
(#37405-051506) AN ORDINANCE to amend §36.2-1 00, Code of the City of 1
Roanoke (1979), as amended, and the Official Zoning Map, City of Roanoke,
Virginia, dated December 5, 2005, as amended, by amending the conditions
presently binding upon certain property conditionally zoned MX, Mixed Use
District, with conditions; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 322.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37405-
051506. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the request. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37405-051506 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor
Hélrris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------E).
NAYS: Non e_n___nnn___nn___mnmm__mnnm__mnnm_m___________nnnnoooooo_ooo000000. 1
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
TAXES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on a request of Commonwealth Coach and
Trolley Museum, lnc., a non-profit organization, for exemption from taxation of
certain personal property located in the City of Roanoke, the matter was before
the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday May 5, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Commonwealth
Coach and Trolley Museum, Inc., located at 602 18th Street, S. W., provides
transportation for non-profits throughout the Roanoke Valley, serving
approximately 6,000 - 8,000 citizens annually; the Museum owns four active
buses and requests that they be exempt from personal property taxation; and
annual taxes due for fiscal year 2005-2006 for the four buses are $54.17 on an
assessed value of $1 ,570.00.
1
1
1
1
561
. r"
!.~
It was further advised that on May 19, 2003, Council approved a revised
policy and procedure in connection with requests from non-profit organizations
for tax exemption of certain property in the City of Roanoke, pursuant to
Resolution No. 36331-051903, effective January 1, 2003; and Commonwealth
Coach and Trolley Museúm, Inc., provided the required information prior to April.
15, 2006, the deadline for receipt of applications for exemptions to be in effect on
July 1, 2006.
It was explained that according to the Office of the Commissioner of the
Revenue, the loss of revenue to the City will be $54.1 7 in annual personal property
taxes; the Commissioner of the Revenue has determined that the organization is
currently not exempt from paying personal property taxes on the four buses by
classification or designation under the Code of Virginia and the IRS recognizes
Commonwealth Coach and Trolley Museum as a 501 (c) 3 tax-exempt organization.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize Commonwealth
Coach and Trolley Museum, Inc., to be exempt from personal property taxation,
pursuant to Article X, Section 6{a)6 of the Constitution of Virginia, effective July 1,
2006.
Council Member Cutler offered the following ordinance:
(#37406-051506) AN ORDINANCE exempting from personal property
taxation certain personal property located in the City of Roanoke and owned by
Commonwealth Coach and Trolley Museum, Inc., an organization devoted
excfusively to charitable or benevolent purposes on a non-profit basis; providing
for an effective date; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 324.)
Council Member Cutler moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37406-
051506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
562
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37336-032006 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, Mco'ani'el, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor Harris----n5.
NAYS: No ne_unmmunm_mnmm_"nnmnnmnmmn_mnmnnm_m_h_____n__m____O.
(Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick abstained from voting inasmuch as he serves as President
of Commonwealth Coach and Trolley Museum, Inc.)
(Council Member Wishneff was absent,)
TAXES: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the City Clerk having
advertised a public hearing for Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of Norfolk and Western
Historical Society, Inc., a non-profit organization, for tax exempt status of certain
real property located at 2101 Salem Avenue, S. W., the matter was before the
body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, May 5,2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that Norfolk and
Western Historical Society, Inc., owns property known as Official Tax No. 1311225,
located at 2101 Salem Avenue, S. W.; the primary purpose of the organization is to
preserve records and drawings of Norfolk and Western Railway; the mission of the
organization is to preserve history and memories of N & Wand Virginia Railways,
both of which were important contributors to the economy of the Roanoke area;
and annual taxes for fiscal year 2005-2006 on the above referenced parcel of land
are $2,049.74 on an assessed value of $169,400.00.
It was further advised that on May 19, 2003, Council approved a revised
policy and procedure in connection with requests of non-profit organizations for
tax exemption of certain property in the City of Roanoke, pursuant to Resolution
No. 36331-051903, effective January 1, 2003; and Norfolk and Western Historical
Society provided the required information prior to April 15, 2006, which is the
deadline for receipt of applications for exemptions to be effective on July 1,2006.
1
1
1
I
1
1
f· ".
563
It was explained that according'to the Office of the Commissioner of the
Revenue, the loss of revenue to the City will be $1,639.80 annually after a 20 per
cent service charge is levied by the City in lieu of real estate taxes; the service
charge will be $409.94; the Commissioner of the Revenue has determined that the
organization is currently not exempt from paying real estate taxes on the above
referenced property by classification or designation under the Code of Virginia;
and the IRS recognizes Norfolk and Western Historical Society as a 501 (c)(3) tax-
exempt organization.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize Norfolk and Western
Historical Society, Inc., to be exempt from real estate property taxation, pursuant
to Article X, Section 6(a)6 of the Constitution of Virginia, effectiveJuly 1,2006, for
the above described property, if the organ ization agrees to pay the subject service
charge by July 1, 2006.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37407-051506) AN ORDINANCE exempting from real estate property
taxation certain property located in the City of Roanoke of Norfolk and Western
Historical Society, Inc., an organization devoted exclusively to charitable or
benevolent purposes on a non-profit basis; providing for an effective date; and
dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 325.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37407-051506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe.
The Mayor inquired if there were persons present who would like to speak in
connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37407-051506 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor
Harris------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------l).
N)\,(Si: N()r1e-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------().
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
564
PURCHASE/SALE OF PROPERTY: Pursuant to instructions by the Council, the
City Clerk having advertised a public hearing for Monday, May 15, 2006, at 7:00 1
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, on the request of the
Jacquot Corporation to purchase three parcels of City-owned property located at
the intersection of Wells Avenue and Gainsboro Road, N. W., identified as Official
Tax Nos. 2012715, 2012716 and 20127L7, the matter was before the body.
Legal advertisement of the public hearing was published in The Roanoke
Times on Friday, May 5, 2006.
The City Manager submitted a communication advising that the City of
Roanoke currently owns property located on Wells Avenue, N. W., identified as
Official Tax Nos. 2012715, 2012716 and 2012717; Trent C. Gibson, Ted W.
Gibson and Jacquot Corporation, adjacent property owners, have contacted the
City with regard to purchase of the property; as contained in correspondence
dated March 29, 2006, the above referenced property owners have submitted a
request to purchase the parcels of land by quitclaim deed; the parcels of land are
currently assessed at $45,600.00, $25,800.00 and $3,800.00 respectively; figures
are based on former zoning regulations which zoned the parcels of land in the C-3
downtown district; under current zoning regulations, the parcels of land are zoned
residential and the assessed values will be significantly lower; at this time,
proposed estimates for the new assessments are $5,200.00, $1,900.00 and
$600.00 respectively; although the Department of Real Estate Valuation has not
offiCially assessed the parcels of land at the new lower estimates, the adjacent
property owners have offered to purchase'the property for a total purchase price
of $6,400.00; the proposed new assessment will total $ 7,700.00 if each parcel is
sold individually, but since none of the parcels of land are developable on their
own the adjacent property owner has cifferëd $6,400.00 for all three parcels which
City staff believes to be a reasonable value; and it has been determined that there
is no benefit for the City to continue o\.Nnership of the parcels of land.
, ;
The City Manager recommended,: following the publiC hearing, that she be
authorized to execute the appropriate documents to convey the property to Trent
C. Gibson, Ted W. Gibson and Jacquot ;Corporation, for a consìderation of
$6,400.00, such documents to be app~ove'd as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
1
(#37408-051506) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the City Manager to execute
the necessary documents providing for the conveyance of Official Tax Map Nos.
2012715,2012716 and 2012717 containing 0.1103 acre, 0.0640 acre and 0.0640
acre, respectively, located at the intersection of Wells Avenue, N. W. and Gainsboro
Road, N. W., to Trent C. Gibson, Ted W. Gibson and Jacquot Corporation, upon
certain terms and conditions; and dispensing with the second reading of this 1
ordinance.
(For full text of Ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 327.)
" - :.. -. ¡; ~.. :-, . ::.; ;;:. ~ ¡; : ~. . .'
565
I
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No.3 7408-05 1506.
The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel.
The Mayor inquired if thÙé Wère pe~sòhs present who would like to speak in
connection with the matter. There being none, he declared the public hearing
closed.
('.
There being no questions or comments by Council Members, Ordinance No.
37408-051506 was adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Fitzpatrick, Lea, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, and Mayor
~arris------------------------------------------o-----------------------------------------------------------------------6.
NAYS: Non e 000 000 -0 00 ____________ -00 000 000 ___ ___ ___m_____m_ 000 00 m_____m___m 00000000-------------0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.)
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters requiring
referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
I No citizens signed up to speak.
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the meeting adjourned
. at 7:20 p.m.
APPROVED
il:J.f~
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
c,l)&
C. Nelson ~arris
Mayor
I
566
ROANOKE CITY COUNCIL
June 5, 2006
I
9:00 a.m.
The Council of the City of Roanoke met in regular session on Monday,
June 5, 2006, at 9:00 a.m., in Room 159, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris presiding,
pursuant to Chapter 2, Administration, Article II, City Council, Section 2-15,
Rules of Procedure, Rule 1, Reoular Meetinos, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, and pursuant to Resolution No. 37109-070505 adopted by
the Council on Tuesday, July 5, 2005.
PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel (arrived
late), M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr. (arrived late), Beverly T.
Fitzpatrick, Jr., and Mayor C. Nelson ~arrisn-------mmn----m---------ooo--ooo----ooo-----6.
ABSENT: Council Member Brian J. Wishneff __mmmm__m________mmmmm1.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M. I
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
COMMITTEES-CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Mayor C. Nelson
~arris requesting that Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss vacancies
on certain authorities, boards, commissions and committees appointed by
Council, pursuant to §2.2-3711 (A)(l), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
Mayor to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, Cutler, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris----------4.
NAYS: Non e ___0_______________00____________000__00______________________________------------------0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Members Dowe and McDaniel
were not present when the vote was recorded.)
I
I
I
I
567
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from Council Member Alfred T.
Dowe, Jr., Chair, City Council's Personnel Committee, requesting that Council
convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss the annual performance of two Council-
Appointed Officers, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711 (A)(l), Code of Virginia (1950),
as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of
Council Member Dowe to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The
motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following
vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, Cutler, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris----------4.
NAYS: Non e m_____n________________________________________________________________________-------0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Members Dowe and McDaniel
were not present when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss acquisition of real property for
a public purpose, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the City, pursuant to Section 2.2-
3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor
~ arri s - ---- - - - - ------ -- -noon n ------ -------- - - ------- - - -- ---- -- -------- -- n -000000-- - - ____ - - ---- - - ---- - - -- 00 - - - - 5 .
NAYS: Non e__nnn_n_____________________________________nn___n_________________----00---------0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Members Dowe and McDaniel
were not present when the vote was recorded.)
Council Member Dowe entered the meeting.
568
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that I
Council convene in a Closed Meeting to discuss disposition of publicly-owned
property, where discussion in open meeting would adversely affect the
bargaining position or negotiating strategy of the public body, pursuant to
Section 2.2-3711 (A)(3), Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, was before the
body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, Cutler, Dowe Fitzpatrick and Mayor
~ a r ri s - 00 00 00 - - - - - - un - - - - - - - 000 - - - nnn - - - - 00 00 -00 00 00 - - - - - - - - -00- - - - - 0000 - - -00 00 noon - - - - - - - - - - - - 00 000000 00 - - 5 .
NAYS: Non e 000000- - -00- -- - - - - 000.__ - - - - 0. 0. U - U --0. - - - - u__ - - _0._0. __ - - - - -0. 00 0. -00000000- 00 00 00 - - - 0 .
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Member McDaniel was not
present when the vote was recorded.)
CITY COUNCIL: A communication from the City Manager requesting that
Council convene in a Closed Meeting, pursuant to Section 2.2-3711.29, Code of
Virginia (1950), as amended, to discuss certain confidential proprietary records I
excluded from Chapter 37 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended,
pursuant to subdivision 11 of Section 2.2-3705.6, Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager to convene in Closed Meeting as abovedescribed. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor
~ arri s - nU - - - - - - 00 - - - - 00 00 - 00 - - ____ - - - - -000000- 00 - __ 0. _ _ 00 un 00 - - - - 0000 - - noon - __ 00 00 -0000000000-000000 00 00 - - - - 5 .
NAYS: No n e 00_0000__000000__00_00______________000000_____00_______00__0000_____________0000_00_0._0.
(Council Member Wishneff was absent.) (Council Member McDaniel was not
present when the vote was recorded.)
I
I
I
I
569
ITEMS LISTED ON T~E 2:00 P. M., COUNCIL DOCKET REQUIRING
DISCUSSION/CLARIFICATION, AND ADDITIONS/DELETIONS TO T~E 2:00 P. M.,
AGENDA.
TOPICS FOR DISCUSSION BY T~E MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF COUNCIL:
NONE.
BRIEFINGS:
Council Member McDaniel entered the meeting.
PROPOSED C~ANGEs TO PENSION CODE:
PENSIONS: The Director of Finance presented an oral briefing proposing
that Council consider amending the Roanoke City Pension Code to provide that
on and after July 1, 2006, all new School Board employees will participate in the
Virginia Retirement System (VRS), and providing for a service credit proration
for positions eligible for the retirement benefit who work less than a full time
schedule. ~e stated that the City's Pension Plan is a multi-employer plan that
includes agencies that are a spin-off from the City, such as the Roanoke Valley
Resource Authority, Roanoke Valley Juvenile Detention Commission, Western
Virginia Water Authority, and Roanoke City School Board employees. ~e
advised that the proposed amendments would not affect any employee
currently in the City's pension system, but would acknowledge employees who
work less than full-time schedules and allow those employees to receive a pro-
rata amount of service credit equal to their pro-rata schedule. ~e stated that a
recommendation will be submitted to the Council on June 19, 2006 for
consideration and approval.
The following proposed Pension Plan amendments were reviewed:
. Modify City Code to add a provision for all newly hired employees
of the Roanoke City School Board to enter the Virginia Retirement
System (VRS)
. Modify the City Code to provide for pro-rata retirement service
credit equivalent to hours worked for less than full-time service
570
Multi-Employer Plan:
I
· City Employees
· Roanoke Regional Airport Commission
· Roanoke Valley Detention Commission
· Roanoke Valley Resource Authority (All new employees participate
in VRS)
· Certain Roanoke City School Board employees
School Board Employees;
· Certain employees participate in VRS
o Administrators
o Teachers
o Paraprofessionals
o Clerical Staff - Classified Employees
· Certain employees participate in Roanoke Pension Plan
o
o
o
Maintenance - Classified Employees
Operations - Classified Employees
School Cafeteria - Classified Employees
I
Proposed Plan Amendment: Effective July 1, 2006 - All new employees
will participate in VRS
· Consistency of pension benefits for all School Board employees
· Avoids confusion in compliance with IRS guidelines
. School Board concurs with proposed modifications and has
amended its Administrative Policy to accommodate the proposed
change
Service Credit and ~ours Worked
· Infrequent occurrences of permanent positions staffed by
employees working less than a full time schedule
· Employees working less than the full time schedule currently earn
full time service credit
· Pension Code does not currently provide for partial service credit
based on actual hours worked
I
I
I
I
571
Proposed Plan Amendment: Effective July 1, 2006 - Amend Pension Code
to provide service credit equivalent to hours worked
· Provide for equity of benefits between employees working a full-
time schedule vs. those working permanent positions at less than a
full-time schedule
Service Credit Example
· Employee working 20 hours receives 20/40, or 50% of a full year's
service credit
· Employee working 32 hours receives 32/40, or 80% of a full year's
service credit
· Employee working 40 hours, or a normal full-time schedule,
receives full year service credit
Proposed Plan Amendments:
.
Modify City Code to add provision for all newly hired employees of
the Roanoke City School Board to enter the Virginia Retirement
System (VRS)
Modify City Code to provide for pro-rata retirement service credit
equivalent to hours worked for less than full-time service worked
.
SOCCER FIELDS ON RESERVE AVENUE:
PARKS AND RECREATION: The City Manager advised that a deficit in the
number of soccer fields in the City of Roanoke not only impacts the ability of
citizens to participate in soccer and lacrosse, but the City's ability to host
tournaments. She stated that a plan has been prepared to provide for potential
soccer fields at the Reserve Avenue site which could help the City to address
the issue on a short term basis while providing for long-term master planning
of the site.
Steven C. Buschor, Director, Parks and Recreation, stated that the primary
goal is to identify the need for soccer fields; and the national standard for
soccer fields for a community the size of Roanoke is 20 to 22, and Roanoke
currently has five multi-use soccer fields which has a direct impact on the
amount of play on each field. ~e explained that the national standard is
between 40 and 50 play opportunities per field, while Roanoke currently has
approximately 150 - 200 play opportunities per field, which contributes to the
difficulty in maintaining each field.
572
~e provided the following summary of the Roanoke River Park
Revitalization Conceptual Plan:
I
· The site would incorporate the proposed flood reduction berm
which is approximately 75 feet wide and eight feet high.
· A portion of the parking lot would be used to incorporate one other
full size soccer field, in addition to the second field and the
existing field at the Victory Stadium site, with two potential smaller
fields on the side
· Depending on storm water issues, spaces in between may have to
be broadened to allow for surface drainage which may cause a
reduction in the size of the field
· An additional parking area would be constructed near the river with
porous paving material which will allow the water to percolate
downward rather than flow off the surface.
~e explained that the process could be started as early as May 30, 2007,
and the fields could be ready for play in the fall of 2007; during the process,
the City would not include any permanent facilities or structures in the plan
until the Master Plan is developed; and portable restroom facilities and
concession stands will be utilized. ~e stated that the City is working on an
amphitheater feasibility study which will be released in the fall, and it is hoped I
that other amenities will be identified and included in the study.
Mr. Buschor reviewed the following:
Reserve Avenue Renovation Proiect
A. Create an Engineering/Construction Administration Solicitation
Process Post-Demolition.
Survey, engineering, landscape architecture, cost estimating,
procurement, project management
Cost Estimate: $50,000.00
This brings in one full-service firm that can manage all of the different
disciplines that have to be intertwined so that the project has a high level
of quality control, continuity, and efficiency. This effort will provide one
point of contact for all disciplines, as follows:
I
573
I
B. Scope of Work
1. Create base map of project area with one foot contours
2. Identify the maximum spatial locations of soccer and lacrosse
facilities possible
3. Identify and locate the necessary median parking spaces necessary
to facilitate the new fields, as well as service the existing fields at
the River's Edge Complex. Any new or renovated parking must
comply with new zoning regulations: dust-free, curb and gutter,
storm water, landscaping, and tree canopy.
4. Storm water and flood environment compliance
5. Inventory existing water supply and develop above ground
irrigation plan
6.
Locate potential future athletic and park lighting and electrical
needs and incorporate appropriate spatial relationships in the
design
I
7.
Identify utility needs and hook-up configurations for portable
restroom needs
8. Identify security fencing requirements
9. Design spectator seating areas (portable bleachers)
10. Identify greenway trail connections from the pedestrian bridge of
the Roanoke River Greenway trail for pedestrian and cyclists
through the site to connect to the Mill Mountain Greenway through
the streetscapes of Reserve Avenue and Jefferson Street to
Williamson Road
11. Phase development cycle for procurement phasing
12. Cost estimate entire project elements before development bid
package process is activated
13.
Firm shall manage all procurement processes to create both the
necessary planning and development work for the full project
I
574
Time Line
May 30, 2007
Authorization to proceed to solicit firm for Item A
above
June 9
Bid Item A needs through Engineering
June 30
~ire firm for development of documents and
specifications
July 4th
July 21
Demo of existing site conditions complete
75% plans due-provide development cost estimates to
City
Aug 4
Bid development processes
Aug 25
~ire all subcontractors (45-day contract)
Oct 13
Final sodding and seeding complete
Play Fall 2007
Can play on existing field in spring 2007
Post Fields Development Proiect(s):
1. Receive the results of the Amphitheatre Feasibility Study
(Completed in fall 2006)
2. Prepare Scope of Work for Master Plan of the Reserve Avenue Site.
(Commence fall 2006)
3. Identify timeline for the evacuation of Armory, Parks and Recreation
Building, and School District Maintenance Facility.
4. If implementation of Master Plan is recognized as a Council
priority, integrate Master Planning process, architectural and
engineering, and construction into the City's Capital Improvement
Program.
I
I
I
I
I
I
575
Council Member Cutler inquired as to how the Victory Stadium drainage
problem will be addressed; whereupon, Mr. Buschor advised that the entire site
will be regraded with fill material and resodded, grade levels will be elevated
and fields will be crowned in order to provide for positive drainage toward the
river. The City Manager stated that it may be possible to use the services of the
same contractor that was engaged by the City to demolish Victory Stadium to
initiate some of the grading for the soccer fields which will not only expedite
grading, but could reduce overall costs.
Council Member Cutler inquired about the possibility of recycling
concrete and bricks from the Victory Stadium site to elevate the soccer field
site; whereupon, Mr. Buschor stated that the material could not be used due to
flood reduction restriction guidelines, and debris material will be moved to
another location by the contractor. ~e further stated that moving the National
Guard Armory, Parks and Recreation Administration Division, Parks and
Recreation Divisions, and the School Maintenance Building will offer other
opportunities in the future which will be addressed in the Master Plan process.
Mr. Buschor stated that the targeted timeline is to complete the work in
the spring, and with ideal growing conditions and utilizing sod as an alternative
to seeding, the soccer fields could be available for activity in the spring,
however, the real need will occur in the fall in order to accommodate youth
soccer leagues. ~e explained that the month of October is the latest month in
the year to place sod in order to grow a stand of grass before the winter
months, and some of the work could be done with the existing contractor which
will also help to expedite the process.
Council Member Dowe inquired about the type of field surface to be used
and the flexibility of using the fields for other sports; whereupon, Mr. Buschor
advised that the fields will have multi-use purposes and the turf will consist of a
Bluegrass Athletic Pro-mix, rather than Bermuda grass which requires a much
higher investment; and after the Master Plan has been completed and
permanent fields have been identified, the City could explore a potential
synthetic sports field that would accommodate extensive playing time.
Council Member Dowe encouraged the City Manager to review various
options with regard to an amphitheater, such as a raised stage; whereupon, the
City Manager advised that the amphitheater study must show that there is a
sufficient demand and capacity within the region to support construction of an
amphitheater before proceeding to the next phase.
576
Council Member Dowe inquired about the number of available parking
spaces; whereupon, Mr. Buschor advised that 340 spaces will be available to
support all field activities and there will be opportunities to patrons with
Carilion Roanoke Memorial ~ospital to use the hospital's parking deck structure
free of charge.
At 9:30 a.m., Council Member Lea left the meeting.
Council Member Dowe inquired about the timing of the demolition of
Victory Stadium and the July 4'h celebration; whereupon, Mr. Buschor advised
that the area that is used for shooting off fireworks may be affected, and other
logistic questions are under consideration.
The City Manager advised that it will be necessary to review the results of
the Amphitheater Demand Study before the process for the Master Plan starts in
the fall of 2007, with an anticipated completion in early 2007. She further
advised that an investment in soccer fields is not only a recreational, but an
economic issue because the City receives the benefits from out of the City
visitors who spend their money at local motels, restaurants and shopping malls
while visiting the area to participate in the various sports activities. She pointed
out that for some time the City's competitive edge for attracting sporting
events has declined; therefore, it is critical for the City of Roanoke to develop
the proposed facilities.
Mr. Buschor stated that the trends of other communities with multi-
purpose playing fields revealed that clustering the fields together would make
the City's venue more attractive for hosting these types of tournaments.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that the City of Roanoke is losing most of
the major tournaments that bring much needed tax revenue to the locality and
increasing the number of soccer/lacrosse fields will provide an immediate
impact on revenue. ~e suggested that the City officials work with IDICO to
place the City of Roanoke in a more positive position.
Council Member Cutler inquired about potential locations where the City
could host track and field events, both now and in the future; whereupon, Mr.
Buschor advised that currently, the only options available to the City are at the
respective schools and tracks that are already established. ~e stated that
planning future high school sites with track and field facilities will offer
opportunities for the City of Roanoke to participate in national track and field
events, and William Fleming ~igh School would be an ideal site to develop for
this purpose.
I
I
I
I
I
I
577
Council Member Cutler inquired about the status of Mill Mountain Park
and the children's playground facility; whereupon, Mr. Buschor stated that the
Mill Mountain Advisory Committee recently took the position that the next step
will be to bring the issue to the attention of the City Manager.
Mayor ~arris advised that the proposal allows the City to proceed in a
way that meets both recreational and economic needs; the plan is and will
remain somewhat fluid until a full Master Plan is completed and as certain
changes occur such as removal of the National Guard Armory and other
buildings on Reserve Avenue, certain things may need to be reconfigured over
time; and the Master Plan will include the total site and will be implemented
over a period of years.
Council Member Cutler moved that Council endorse the Reserve Avenue
Renovation project. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and
adopted.
MARKET STUDY:
CITY MARKET: The City Manager advised that Tom Low, Consultant,
Duany Plater-Zyberg and Company (DPZ), recently presented Council With an
overview of multiple recommendations contained in the Market Study, and since
that time the City has received input from Downtown Roanoke, Inc., with regard
to the recommendations. She also called attention to correspondence from
Mark Woods, representing City Market vendors, urging Council and City
Administration to move quickly on the recommendation.
She requested the guidance of Council to prioritize those items that
should be addressed first which will enable the City administration to
aggressively pursue those issues that would be appropriate building blocks for
future implementation.
R. Brian Townsend, Director of Planning, Building and Economic
Development, presented the following:
(¡tv Market District Plan
General Recommendations
.
Farmer/vendor info displays
o Quick and easy
o DRI should take the lead
578
· Fill gaps between buildings to create a more pedestrian friendly I
atmosphere
· Facade Improvement "Kit of parts" guidance for development of
fi rst floors
· Parking strategies should encourage multiple-destination
shopping as part of the marketing strategy
· Make garages easier to find and use (new signage)
· Encourage liner buildings along Franklin Road (expansion on
ground floors)
· Use the Merchandizing Plan as a strategy to recruit and establish
anchors and to attract new businesses downtown
· Expand/reconfigure pocket parks and encourage strong
utilization of parks downtown such as Century Park,
encouraging monthly activities with "Local Colors" and display of
Sister City sculpture pieces
I
· Incorporate public art into district
Special Projects:
Centurv Station Parkino Garaoe (to be renamed "Market South Parkino
ç¡lraoe"
. Description:
o Add four stories of residential or boutique hotel
o Reconfigure and expand parking (relocate entrance)
o First floor retail
· Cost estimate: $18.5 million
· Responsibility: Public/private
· Action: Market the development opportunity
I
I
I
I
579
The City Manager requested input by Council as to whether the City
should aggressively market the Century Station Parking Garage for upper floor
development, which would require a commitment by the City to reorient
parking and to some extent ban parking on the first floor to lead the way for
the retail aspect to occur.
Council Member Dowe inquired about security in the parking facilities;
whereupon, Mr. Townsend advised that a separate entrance through the
parking garage could be created which would separate public activities from
private activities, or access to the upper floors could be allowed by a type of
key card system within the existing garage which would negate the need for a
separate entrance, however, the developer may wish to approach security issues
in a different manner. ~e added that it would also depend on whether the
residential area is located in an abutting building rather than in the garage
facility.
Council Member Dowe stated that he was particularly concerned about
overall safety and enhanced visibility of the parking garage facilities;
whereupon, the City Manager stated that the garage would have few open
spaces for daily parking during the day, and has served as a monthly parking
facility for a considerable period of time, and all parking facilities are regularly
patrolled by police officers.
Market Souare and Stalls
Mr. Townsend advised that:
. This segment of the project had the most alternatives with
the most discussion as it relates to long-term improvements,
and initially, a long-term solution would be to replace the
awning and canopy system with a balcony system that would
be attached, particularly in the block between Campbell
Avenue and Kirk Alley, and integrated into the buildings
along the frontage on the west side of Kirk Avenue.
. This would provide a long-term solution that would
reconfigure the way trucks park under the balconies, as
opposed to a canopy system, with balconies to afford the
benefit of both the market cover and the opportunity to
enliven the second level of the buildings along Market Street.
580
·
Numerous details will have to be worked out for a long-term
solution, including cooperation by property owners of those
buildings where balconies will be attached in order to
maximize use and to ensure that the buildings will have
accessibility to the second floor.
I
· The proposed improvements will cost approximately $1.2
million.
· Discussions have taken place with regard to removing
everything currently on the front of the buildings and moving
the Farmer's Market function to a kiosk or a covering in the
middle of Market Street, with the ability for pedestrian and
vehicular traffic to pass on either of the two sides. The idea
was met with much concern by farmers insofar as function
and operations, primarily in terms of loading and handling
large quantities of produce and the comfort level of citizens
when walking and sharing the street with vehicles from a
shopping perspective.
·
The consultant suggested a balcony treatment for the first
block and a mid-block configuration for the block between
Kirk Alley and Church Avenue.
I
· A short-term issue pertains to existing canopies and awnings
on the City Market, and it will be necessary to make a
decision in terms of whether to replace the awnings and
existing canopies from a visual and functional point of view,
which will allow for sprucing up the Market while working on
two long-term solutions for the street.
· It is clear that the condition of the existing awnings from
Campbell Avenue along Market Street need to be addressed
even if structural elements are not changed at this time.
The City Manager advised that input received from Downtown Roanoke,
Inc., suggests that the City proceed with an alternative relative to the balconies
and center staging of farmers' stalls; and Downtown Roanoke, Inc., is looking
for some immediate reaction to replacement of awnings or canopies.
I
I
I
I
581
·
Descri ption
o Replace canopies with balconies
o Consider center stalls along a portion of Market Street
· Cost estimate - $1.2 million total
o Stalls
o Balconies
o Awnings
o Kiosk
$169,000.00
$698,000.00
$180,000.00
$ 42,000.00
· Responsibility: City
· Considerations
o Phasing: Bottom up - need to do the underlying infrastructure
first
o Timing: If balconies will take more than two years, need to
consider replacing canopies
·
Description
o Paving options
o Unified, high quality design for street furniture and fixtures
· Cost: $254,000.00 (streetscape only)
· Responsibility: City
· Considerations
o Brick prohibitively expensive
o Stamped asphalt not recommended
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that short-term and long-term issues should
be separated, and immediate needs should be reviewed as soon as possible as
opposed to planning for potential changes.
582
Mr. Townsend stated that Center in the Square will engage in a level of
strategic planning due to the future relocation of the Art Museum and it should
be determined if the balcony concept resonates with their planning efforts. If
so, he stated that would give the City another opportunity for long-term
planning, balconies should be constructed on both sides of the street, and all
ideas will be brought to the table and considered in conjunction with any
private property decisions that will have to be made.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and Council Member Cutler agreed that balconies
should be constructed at both sides of the street, however, a considerable
amount of discussion needs to occur prior thereto.
The City Manager called attention to the need for indepth discussion as
to what the City will control. She added that Downtown Roanoke, Inc., has
made the assumption that the City will be responsible for creation of the
balconies, however, she could take the opposite position by suggesting that
balconies should be addressed by individual property owners as an
enhancement to their property. Since balconies could cause the upper floor to
be marketed in a different manner, she stated that it could playa large part in
the decision as to who will be ultimately responsible for the costs.
Council Member Dowe called attention to concerns that have been
expressed with regard to functionality and the ability to load and unload at
Market stalls, and inquired if the cadet squad or some other entity could be
engaged to assist with loading and unloading. Mr. Townsend replied that this
would be a role that DRI and the City could play in terms of owner and operator
of the Farmer's Market, there is currently an area in the market square for
loading and unloading, but options in the narrow portion of Market Street are
more limited because stall space is smaller with less freedom of movement than
in the Market Square, and another option would be the placement of vendors in
locations where they could best function in terms of available space and needs.
~e stated that the Market Square was conceived as a permanent structure that
could be used by vendors and during off times or in the evening, the area could
become an impromptu meeting or gathering place, but the idea is that the
Market Square will be a much more prominent architectural element as a
centerpiece in the street, as opposed to on the side of the street, and will be
more viable within its own context, as opposed to being an appendage to the
buildings on the west side of the street.
Council Member Dowe inquired about access to the area by emergency
vehicles; whereupon, Mr. Townsend stated that the vehicle passage way on both
sides of the street will be over 13 feet.
I
I
I
I
I
I
583
Council Member Cutler stated that balconies on both sides of Market
Square have merit, but he could not envision balconies along Market Street,
since offices currently exist on the second floor of some buildings. ~e added
that the treatment should be consistent from Campbell to Kirk to Church
Avenues, and he was concerned about the architecture that resembles the Paris
Metro, which may be attractive but may not be workable. ~e also suggested
the widening of sidewalks, the provision of parking at an angle, and
refurbishing and making the awnings deeper while maintaining the current
modes operindae.
Mayor ~arris called attention to certain information that was provided to
the Council indicating that if installation of the balconies takes longer than two
years, the City should consider replacing the canopies. ~e stated that his
assumption was that it would take more than two years to install the balconies.
~e agreed that the City Market area has a "tired look" and encouraged the City
Administration to proceed with plans to replace awnings and sidewalk cleanup,
etc., because he did not anticipate that plans for balconies will be implemented
within the next two years. ~e questioned whether automobiles and trucks
sharing the same space with pedestrians would cause visitors to sense that the
market area is not as open or free in terms of mobility as it currently is,
therefore, he stated that was not receptive to that particular concept. ~e
advised that balconies will provide a mechanism to give life to the second floor,
as opposed to an aesthetic architecture amenity to the Market Building, and
discussion should center around the kind of life, retail or otherwise, that
balconies would provide for the second floor of many of the buildings, rather
than some type of architectural novelty.
Mr. Townsend referred to streetscape and paving and noted that the
consultant stated that there would be areas of opportunity to improve
streetscape and to create more uniformity, including the use of new crosswalks
and sidewalks. ~e pointed out that some of the current streetscape has existed
for over 20 years. ~e stated that the consultant identified brick crosswalks as
the desired type of crosswalk improvement, however, the City is of the opinion
that asphalt will be a better choice and provide for a smoother surface than
bricks.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that in the past when improvements were
made throughout the City, bricks and pavers were removed and filled in with
concrete, there is no way that the City could go back to uniformly using bricks,
therefore, the use of asphalt will be more affordable and should only be used
on both sides of the Market area, in the Market Square, and up Campbell
584
Avenue, which would help to set the City Market apart as a unique place, along
with crosswalks that would be designed in a different way. In order to set the
Market apart, he added that there should be some physical change that would
allow the area to be immediately noticeable. Mr. Townsend noted that the use
of certain types of street lights could also set off the Market area, and asphalt
or other special paving would be easier to maintain.
With regard to outdoor dining opportunities, Council Member Cutler
stated that current sidewalks are too narrow, particularly for wheelchairs and
for pedestrians in general, and people sometimes have to step off the sidewalk
into the street to move past barriers that separate the dining area from the
sidewalk. Therefore, he suggested that the City consider closing the streets to
vehicular traffic on weekends which would attract more people to the downtown
area on a regular basis.
Stepped Plaza
Mr. Townsend advised that there is currently a weak relationship between
the pedestrian bridge, The ~otel Roanoke and Conference Center and the
Market area corridor in terms of internal circulation through a series of
escalators that transport pedestrians down at a 45 degree angle in route to the
Market area. ~e explained that the proposed plan calls for a reconfiguration of
the pedestrian bridge ending where pedestrians reach onto an open plaza, with
steps that will bring pedestrians to the end of Market Street, Wall Street and
Salem Avenue, which will replace the current escalator system and retain the
elevator within the stair tower for handicap accessibility. ~e added that the
plan re-invigorates and recommits how the area terminates, however, it is a
costly endeavor at approximately $2 million, but provides a different gateway
between the north side of the railroad tracks and The ~otel Roanoke to
downtown, and also creates a gathering place in downtown Roanoke with a
series of plazas and steps.
· Description
o Stairs leading from pedestrian bridge to street level
o Designed as a social gathering place
· Cost: $2 million
· Responsibility: City of Roanoke
I
I
I
I
I
I
585
. Considerations:
o Stand-alone activity
o Could be structured with retail/vending stalls, so potentially
income producing
The City Manager advised that the escalators have been closed during the
late evening hours until early morning in order to avoid unfavorable activities
that have occurred in the past and improved location signage has been erected
for the benefit of those persons who prefer to use the elevator within the stair
tower. She reminded Council that a position was approved in the City's 2006-
2007 fiscal year budget for a part-time position to serve as an ambassador for
persons coming across the walkway who need directions, to monitor the
cleanliness of the walkway and to report any necessary activities. She advised
that the style of stepped plaza which is proposed by the consultant is costly,
and if Council has a specific interest, other design and construction options
could be explored.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick stated that Downtown Roanoke, Inc., will playa
significant role to ensure that there is a connection between The ~otel Roanoke
and downtown; there is a consensus that the project needs to be done, but it
does not need to be quite as elaborate as is proposed by the consultant, and it
is essential to create a plaza with a plan and a theme for a gathering place.
Citv Market ~all
Mr. Townsend stated that in the short-term, upon completion of roof
replacement, certain exterior painting and maintenance issues will need to be
addressed, along with interior upgrades and cosmetic improvements, new
furniture and ceiling lights.
.
Description
o Overall FF&E/cosmetic improvements
o Improve appearance of food court (e.g. lighting)
o Third floor: Should become flexible event space, install
bathrooms
o Second floor: 1-2 restaurants with balcony dining to allow
outdoor dining on that level
o First floor: Push food court dining to exterior of building,
opening dining literally to the streets, but retain activity on the
inside
586
· Cost: $2.96 million
· Responsibility: City of Roanoke
· Considerations:
o Top-down sequencing
o Third floor tenant upfit
o Save first floor for last, with most impactful activity in terms of
reconfiguration of the building and its operation
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick advised that other than Mill Mountain, the Market
Building is the greatest jewel in the City of Roanoke, but the building has never
operated in the way that it should. ~e stated that the City should consider
closing the streets on both sides of the Market Building since they are no longer
necessary for traffic movement, and the critical mass of the Market Building is
not sufficient to make the building work as a shopping center or retail center.
~e suggested removal of the mezzanine and establishment of the third floor
level as a place to dine, with a curved stairway, and cut a whole in the roof, if
architecturally feasible, to enable sunlight to filter through the window down to
the first floor.
Council Member McDaniel inquired if improvements starting on the first
floor would provide the greatest impact; whereupon, Mr. Townsend stated that
from a construction point of view, renovation normally starts on the top floor
and works down, and infrastructure must be in place on the third floor before
moving to the first floor. ~e stated that it is believed that the third floor could
be renovated with minimal impact on the first floor.
The City Manager asked for input by Council with regard to closing two
one-way streets in the City Market area.
Council Member Dowe stated that prior to making a decision, he would
like more information on the hours of operation, and all plans for Market
improvements and inquired about the success of the Sunday operating hours
on the City Market.
I
I
I
I
I
I
587
Mr. Townsend responded that Sunday business on the Market is going
well, but there has not been a lot of interest by vendors as a group in the City
Market building toward Sunday operating hours, and speaking from a landlord
point of view, to open the Market building for one or two vendors would not be
cost effective. ~e also stated that any street closing would be a sensitive issue,
and suggested that the City take Hbaby steps" by installing barriers on the
streets for a period of time so as to ease people into a certain level of comfort
and at some point in the future more permanent steps could be taken.
Williamson Road Development
Mr. Townsend called attention to three locations at one intersection
where the consultant felt strongly that there was an opportunity for infill
development that would give the corner an urban feel; Le.: at the end of
Church Avenue, at a jointly owned parking lot, and in front of the Norfolk
Southern building. ~e stated that it is the City's responsibility to market the
idea consistent with the plan in order to receive private sector responses; it is a
good development site downtown and provides a good vista to terminate
Church Avenue at Williamson Road versus looking at the back of the interstate
abutment, and offers an infill opportunity for more density and activity at an
important intersection in downtown Roanoke. ~e stated that the new Art
Museum will provide an important anchor to the northeast corner of the
district, there is an opportunity to anchor the southeast corner, and the biggest
opportunity to anchor the southwest corner of the district is at the corner of
Church Avenue and Jefferson Street with the former ~eironimus Building being
a key consideration, as well as the northeast corner next to Wachovia Tower
and the area immediately to the west.
. Description
o Multipurpose retail/entertainment building
. Cost: $13.6 Million
· Responsibility: Private sector
588
lefferson Street
I
Mr. Townsend stated that Jefferson Street is synonymous with the
entrance and exit into downtown Roanoke; and the consultant submitted a
variety of recommendations related to establishing anchors along the street
with a merchandizing plan to begin to identify an appropriate range of uses
along this important corridor, and development design of guidelines from the
outset for property owners along the street for both utilization of facades and
first floor activity. ~e stated that a major anchor was established at 204
Jefferson Street, and if the City can begin to replicate those types of new
developments at key intersections, other infill will occur.
· Various recommendations to make Jefferson Street a retail destination
o Recruit/establish anchors for merchandizing plan
o Kit of parts for storefront improvements
· Responsibility: Public/private
The City Manager presented the following summary of her understanding
of the Council's comments:
· Reinforce the concept of a stepped plaza and create a place for people
to gather.
I
· Immediately address the issue of awnings that will be discussed at a
later time and whether or not there is an opportunity for balconies to
create additional locations for retail or office space.
· Council was not supportive of relocating the farmers' stalls to the
center of the street.
· Council was supportive of the marketing of Century Station Parking
Garage, Council would be committed to public participation in the
project if a developer could be identified, and the City would bare the
expense of relocating and expanding the parking spaces.
· Council supported the idea of defining the City Market area with
asphalt paving in various locations, and identifying a way to deal with
those areas that are currently bricked that do not have rideability,
including Wells Avenue.
I
I
I
I
589
· City staff should address exterior issues and cosmetics of the Market
Building and identify, at least temporarily, a way to improve the
interior, with the lighting issue being addressed first, and costing out
third floor improvements.
· City staff will submit options with regard to the closure of the two
one-way streets on a temporary basis in order for vendors to become
accustomed to the idea of closure, while moving long-term toward
permanent closure of the streets.
· Council supported the aggressive marketing of private sector
development along Williamson Road.
If any Member of Council has questions or concerns with regard to the
above summarization, the City Manager requested that she be advised as soon
as possible. She stated that the City Market project will be a multi-year activity
and some issues warrant more discussion prior to implementation.
The Mayor stated that various issues will continue to come back to the
Council piecemeal, and there will be opportunities for further discussion by
Council and for public input.
Council Member Lea returned to the meeting.
At 10: SO a.m., the Mayor declared the Council meeting in recess until
following a meeting of the Audit Committee which was scheduled to convene at
11 :00 a.m., in the Council's Conference Room, Room 451, Noel C. Taylor
Municipal Building, 215 Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke.
The Council reconvened at 11:45 a.m., in the Council's Conference Room,
Room 451, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, with Mayor ~arris presiding and
all Members of the Council in attendance, except Council Member Wishneff.
TRAFFIC: The City Manager introduced a briefing on the Central Roanoke
Mobility Study and called upon Mark Jamison, Traffic Engineer, and Paul P.
Anderson, ~ayes, seay, Mattern and Mattern, for a briefing on Elm Avenue,
Franklin Road, Colonial Avenue/Wonju Street, and New Roberts Road to
Overland Road Connector.
590
Elm Avenue
Alternative EA-1
Remove the concrete median and the south sidewalk across both the
mainline and the railroad. Restripe the bridges to provide six lanes (two
through lanes and a left-turn in each direction) in a tight diamond
configuration. Add an eastbound through-right between the southbound
exit ramp and 4'" Street. Taper the eastbound Elm Avenue lanes back to
two lanes just past the convenience store east of 4'h Street. Add a right
turn lane westbound between 4'" Street and the northbound entry ramp.
Add retaining walls as required and an extra lane on both the
southbound and northbound exit ramps. This lane will allow dual lefts
northbound and a shared left-through-right lane southbound. Adjust
sidewalks, islands, and crosswalks to accommodate pedestrians with the
new configuration. If pedestrian access is required on both sides of the
bridge, a separate pedestrian bridge should be constructed on the south
side of the bridge.
Alternative EA-2
Construct the southbound ramps and bridge modifications as described
above for Alternative EA-1. On the northbound ramps, shift them to the
east to the current location of 4'" Street, which would be closed between
Mountain Avenue and Bullitt Avenue. This would provide significantly
more storage between the ramps and would eliminate several conflicting
movements by closing 4th Street. It would also require the purchase of
several business properties.
Alternative EA-3
Construct a Single Point Urban Interchange at Elm Avenue. Provide a new
bridge with 16' - 6" vertical clearance and adjust the grade as necessary
between Williamson Road and 4'" Street. Provide for dual left turns on all
approaches. Close the median at 4'h Street. Provide a median turnaround
loop between Bullitt and Jamison Avenues at 6'" Street. Lengthen the
merge zone on both northbound and southbound ramps to accommodate
merging on the ramp and mainline. The northbound bridge at Tazewell
Avenue and both the northbound and southbound bridges at Albemarle
Avenue would need to be widened to accommodate the dual lane ramps.
I
I
I
591
I
Alternative EA-4
Southbound - Construct a grade-separated flyover using retained earth
structure and bridge to allow southbound 1-581 to eastbound Elm Avenue
traffic to cross above the interchange and merge into eastbound Elm
Avenue west of 6'" Street. This would require the widening of the bridge
over Tazewell Avenue to lengthen the ramp to provide adequate decision
time. It would also require construction of piers in the median and
adjacent to the mainline lanes. The convenience store at the southeast
corner of 4'h Street and Elm Avenue would be acquired. The connection to
5'h Street would be closed and a new connection parallel and south of the
ramp terminus would be provided across the convenience store property.
The ramp from southbound 1-581 to westbound Elm Avenue would be
converted to serve dual rights at a signalized intersection, which would
also accommodate the westbound Elm Avenue to southbound 220 left
turns.
I
Northbound - Construct a new loop ramp north of the bridge to allow
free flow right turns from northbound Route 220 to westbound Elm
Avenue. The ramp radius and horizontal clearance to bridge piers are
less than desirable, and construction of the ramp would require the
acquisition of two commercial properties. Remove the sidewalk on the
north side and the median to provide room for the lane from the loop
ramp. The sidewalk on the south side of the bridge would remain open.
Close 4'" Street to southbound traffic onto Elm Avenue and relocate the
Elm Avenue to northbound 1-581 entrance ramp to the existing 4'" Street
location.
I
Alternative EA-5
Southbound - Construct a grade-separated flyover using retained earth
structure and bridge to allow southbound 1-581 to eastbound Elm Avenue
traffic to cross above the interchange and merge into eastbound Elm
Avenue west of 6'" Street. This would require the widening of the bridge
over Tazewell Avenue to lengthen the ramp to provide adequate decision
time. It would also require construction of piers in the median and
adjacent to the mainline lanes. The convenience store at the southeast
corner of 4lh Street and Elm Avenue would be acquired. The connection to
5'" Street would be closed and a new connection parallel and south of the
ramp terminus would be provided across the convenience store property.
The ramp from southbound 1-581 to westbound Elm Avenue would be
converted to serve dual rights at a signalized intersection, which would
also accommodate the westbound Elm Avenue to southbound 220 left
turns.
592
Northbound - Add retaining walls as required and an extra lane on both
the 220 northbound exit ramp to allow dual lefts onto westbound Elm
Avenue. The 1-581 northbound entrance ramp would remain in its
current configuration.
I
Alternative EA-6
Construct a diverging diamond interchange at Elm Avenue. Utilize the
existing bridge. Realign the southbound exit ramps and widen to allow
dual lefts and a single right turn lane. Close the median at 4th Street and
shift the northbound ramps to this location. Reconfigure Elm Avenue to
allow the crossover of through traffic at each of the signalized
intersections.
Franklin Road
Alternative FR-1
Southbound - Lengthen the merge area by adding an additional lane
across the Roanoke River and NS Railroad Bridge to create an auxiliary
lane that serves as the acceleration lane for traffic from Franklin Road to
southbound 220 and also serves as the deceleration lane for the Colonial
Avenue exit ramp.
Northbound - Widen the bridge over the Roanoke River and NS Railroad to I
create an auxiliary lane between the Wonju Street entrance ramp and the
Franklin Road exit ramp.
Note: This bridge widening will require the reconstruction of the Brandon
Avenue Bridge with center piers to allow the removal of the outside piers
to create room for the auxiliary lanes.
Alternative FR-2
Southbound - Lengthen the merge area by adding an additional lane
across the Roanoke River and NS Railroad Bridge to create a longer merge
length for traffic from Franklin Road to southbound 220. Increase the
radius of the southbound on ramp to allow a higher speed entry to
provide less speed differential at the merge point. The merge area would
terminate just north of the Brandon Avenue Bridge, so no reconstruction
of that bridge would be required.
I
593
I
Northbound - No change
Colonial Avenue/Woniu Street
Alternative CW-1
Southbound- At Colonial Avenue, extend the deceleration lane back as
part of the auxiliary lane between the Franklin Road entry ramp and the
Colonial Avenue exit ramp. This will require widening of the bridge over
the Roanoke River and NS Railroad and the reconstruction of the Brandon
Avenue Bridge to allow extra width for the lane. Create dual left turn
lanes and a single right turn lane on the exit ramp. Modify Colonial
Avenue to provide two through lanes and one left turn lane southbound
to the southbound entry ramp. Provide a narrow raised median to
prevent left turns northbound from Colonial Avenue at 23" Street. Modify
the southbound 220 to eastbound Wonju Street loop ramp to shift it
closer to Colonial Avenue and move the (gore) point west.
I
Northbound - At Wonju Street, eliminate the northbound 220 loop ramps
(exit and entry) and replace with an at-grade signalized intersection that
serves as the entry and exit ramps northbound. Consider adding a new
two lane link between Broadway at Colonial Avenue and Winthrop Avenue
at 26'" Street to provide access to vehicles turning left from a turn lane
rather than allowing them to block flow on Colonial Avenue while waiting
to turn left onto 26'" Street. This would create potential increased cut
through traffic which would require traffic calming measures to mitigate.
The alternative is the construction of a narrow median along Colonial
Avenue at 26" Street to prevent left turns from Colonial Avenue to 26th
Street. This would prevent the potential for cut through traffic and
backups on Colonial Avenue near 26" Street, but would also significantly
reduce accessibility to properties along Winthrop Avenue and to the
southwest part of Towers Mall.
I
Alternative CW-2
Southbound - At Colonial Avenue, extend the deceleration lane back to
the Brandon Avenue bridge (This is compatible with Alternative FR-2).
Create dual left turn lanes and a single right turn lane on the exit ramp.
Widen Colonial Avenue to provide two through lanes, one right turn lane,
and one left turn lane southbound to Wonju Street. Provide one left turn
lane, one through lane, and one right turn lane on the northbound
approach on Colonial Avenue at Wonju Street. Provide a new fourth leg
on Wonju Street at the Colonial Avenue intersection to connect with the
extension to Brandon Avenue (Alternative 2 from the Colonial Avenue/
Wonju Street Study) with one left turn lane, two through lanes, and one
right turn lane. At Wonju Street, eliminate the northbound loop ramps
594
(exit and entry) and replace with an at-grade signalized intersection that
serves as the entry and exit ramps northbound. The loop ramp
southbound should be modified to shift it closer to Colonial Avenue and
move the (gore) point west.
New Roberts Road to Overland Road Connector
Alternative RO-1
Construct a new two lane connector between Franklin Road and Overland
Road across Route 220 to provide relief to Wonju Street and a better
connection between South Roanoke and the schools (Fishburn Park,
James Madison, Patrick ~enry, and Virginia Western Community College)
and businesses along Brandon Avenue and Brambleton Avenue. This
road would generally follow the alignment of Roberts Road, continue
along the edge of the Cycle Systems property before swinging to the
south on bridge structure across Ore Branch, Route 220, and the NS
Railroad before tying back to grade and connecting to Colonial Avenue
opposite Overland Road.
Mr. Jamison advised that in approximately 30 days Council will be briefed
on the Orange Avenue/Williamson Road portion of the study.
At 12:45 p.m., Council convened in Closed Session.
At 2:00 p.m., on Monday, June 5,2006, the Council meeting reconvened
in the City Council Chamber, Room 450, Noel C. Taylor Municipal Building, 215
Church Avenue, S. W., City of Roanoke, Virginia, with Mayor C. Nelson ~arris
presiding.
PRESENT: Council Members Sherman P. Lea, Brenda L. McDaniel, Brian J.
Wishneff, M. Rupert Cutler, Alfred T. Dowe, Jr., Beverly 1. Fitzpatrick, Jr., and
Mayor C. Ne I son ~arris n______________mnm___mmnn________n____________u__________nnnm_7.
A BS E NT: Non e - 000 - - - - - - - - -----00- 00 00 00 -00-0000- - - - - un - - - - 00 00 - - - - - - -00- 00- 00 - - 00 00 - - - - - - - - - - 00 O.
The Mayor declared the existence of a quorum.
I
I
I
I
I
I
595
OFFICERS PRESENT: Darlene L. Burcham, City Manager; William M.
~ackworth, City Attorney; Jesse A. ~all, Director of Finance; and Mary F. Parker,
City Clerk.
The invocation was delivered by Mayor C. Nelson ~arris.
The Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America was
led by Mayor ~arris.
PRESENTATIONS AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS:
PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to Abigail
Bartley, Regional Development Director, American Cancer Society, declaring
June 16 - 17, 2006, as Relay For Life Days.
PROCLAMATIONS: The Mayor presented a proclamation to James R.
Justice, former President of the Fincastle Resolutions Chapter of Sons of the
American Revolution and Past President of the Virginia Society of Sons of the
American Revolution, declaring June 9, 2006, as Sons of the American
Revolution Day.
CONSENT AGENDA
The Mayor advised that all matters listed under the Consent Agenda were
considered to be routine by the Members of Council and would be enacted by
one motion in the form, or forms, listed on the Consent Agenda, and if
discussion was desired, the item would be removed from the Consent Agenda
and considered separately.
CITY COUNCIL: Minutes of the special meeting of Council held on
Monday, April 17, 2006, and the regular meeting of Council held on Monday,
April 17, 2006, were before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council dispense with the reading of
the minutes and that the matter be approved as recorded. The motion was
seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s umnnnmm_h_mm_mnm_______mmmm__hnm_mmn7.
NAYS: Non e 00-00-- 00000000---00-----------00---00-00--------00-00--00-00---------00--00----000----0.
596
EASEMENTS-STREETS AND ALLEYS: A communication from the City
Manager requesting a public hearing be scheduled on Monday, June 19, 2006,
at 7:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, with regard to a
proposed encroachment into the public right-of-way of Southern ~ills Drive, S.
W., for a retaining wall for ~ome Depot, was before the body.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council concur in the request of the
City Manager. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wish neff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s nm_m_n_mm_mmnmmm_mm_mmm_mnnm_m_m7.
NAYS: No n e 000000000000000000_____00___00_____0000000000000000000000000000000000_000000000000_00000.
PARKS AND RECREATION-COMMITTEES: A communication from
Gwendolyn W. Mason tendering her resignation as a member of the Parks and
Recreation Advisory Board, was before Council.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that Council accept the resignation and
receive and file the communication. The motion was seconded by Council
Member Lea and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s mmnmmmmm_mmnmmm__nn______nnnnnn___n___7.
NAYS: Non e n_nn______n__n__n_n________nnnnnnh____nnnn_______nnnnn00--------0.
OAT~s OF OFFICE-COMMITTEEs-PENsIONS-WATER RESOURCES: A report
of qualification of the following persons, was before Council:
Michael W. ~anks for a term ending June 30, 2008, and John G.
Reed for a term ending June 30, 2010, as members of the Board of
Trustees, City of Roanoke Pension Plan; and
M. Rupert Cutler as a member of the Western Virginia Water
Authority Board of Directors, for a term commencing July 1, 2006
and ending June 30, 2010.
I
I
I
I
I
I
597
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that the report of qualification be received
and filed. The motion was seconded by Council Member Lea and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris _nu_h_nn__mnnm_mmm_m__mmmmnnnm_mm_m7.
NAYS: Non e __m____UU____nnnn____nnn____n___nnn____nU__hnn___nnnn__-00-----0.
REGULAR AGENDA
PUBLIC ~EARINGS: NONE.
PETITIONS AND COMMUNICATIONS:
SC~OOLS:
Dr. Robert ~. Sandel, President, Virginia Western Community College
(VWCC), presented an update on activities during the past year. ~e advised that:
·
There are 23 community colleges in the Commonwealth of Virginia,
with over 250,000 students in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
· VWCC started in Roanoke in 1966 as Roanoke Technical Institute
on the southern side of the present campus and the University of
Virginia was located on the northern side of the campus; the two
colleges were merged and in 1966 VWCC became operational.
· VWCC serves the City of Roanoke, the City of Salem, the County of
Roanoke, Craig County, a portion of Botetourt County and portion
of Franklin County and it is the fourth largest community college in
the Commonwealth of Virginia.
· 70 per cent of the student population comes from the City of
Roanoke and Roanoke County, approximately 15 per cent from the
City of Salem, Franklin and Botetourt Counties, and 15 per cent
from Montgomery and Bedford Counties.
598
·
During the past year, VWCC had 12,576 unduplicated credit
students, with 25 to 30 per cent of students from the City of
Roanoke, and approximately two-thirds of the 12,576 students are
part-time.
I
· The City of Roanoke has the largest single campus in the
community college system, about one in every three students is a
parent,· excluding dual enrollment, and about 80 per cent of the
students work.
· VWCC is a commuter campus, with no dormitories, and no athletic
teams.
· VWCC continues to experience growth, about one-third of the
student population receives some type of financial aid, and the
college has the highest per centage of high school graduates of any
of the 23 community colleges, with 20 to 25 per cent of all high
school seniors attending VWCC upon graduation from high school.
·
Students who transfer from VWCC have the highest grade point
average of any of the other 23 colleges in the Commonwealth, as.
well as the highest writing sample and writing comprehension of
any of the 23 community colleges, and VWCC ranks in the top three
community colleges in Virginia in math and computer literacy.
I
· 85 per cent of graduates remain in the Roanoke area upon
graduation.
· The average age of students is 29, with 60 per cent being female.
· VWCC offers allied health programs, including the registered
nursing program, licensed practical nursing, dental hygiene, and
radiography, all of which have maintained a 95 per cent national
score passage rate since 2001; the national average of the
programs is in the high 80's, with VWCC scoring 95 to 98 per cent
passage, and the registered nursing program maintained the
highest test scores of every two and four year colleges in the
Commonwealth of Virginia during the past year.
I
I
I
I
599
·
A new $18 to $20 million complex consisting of 70,000 to 80,000
square feet for a health, natural sciences and math complex is
currently under consideration by the State legislature.
· VWCC employs 22 5 full-time persons and 300 part-time persons.
· 40 per cent of students attend VWCC in order to transfer to other
colleges and universities; 60 per cent of students enroll to learn a
skill in order to enter the world of work, and 80 per cent of future
jobs will be for non-four year college graduates at the
technician/skilled worker level.
· VWCC offers a full staff of Workforce Development employees who
provide training programs for industry and business, and a City
Emergency Medical Technician program and Fire and Rescue
Academy programs are offered.
· Construction is currently underway for a new engineering and
technology building that will include the latest in technology and
equipment; and VWCC is the first of the 23 community colleges
offering a full transfer to the Virginia Tech Engineering program.
Marilyn ~arris, representing Cox Communications, advised that VWCC
worked with the cable company to establish a two year certification program
which is a combination of Virginia Western Community College courses, Cox
Communication web courses and on-site training, leading to a certified program
with credits that can be used toward a collage degree. She stated that the
program has been so successful that it will be expanded to include front line
employees in the near future.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick expressed appreciation for the classes offered at
VWCC to address workforce development which is one of the most serious
issues facing the Commonwealth of Virginia, as well as transportation
problems. ~e stated that the sooner both issues are addressed, the better off
the Commonwealth will be in terms of creating jobs and providing benefits, not
just for the City of Roanoke, but the entire Roanoke Valley and the region.
600
Council Member Dowe commended Dr. Sandel and his executive staff for
the quality of education that is offered by VWCc. ~e stated that statistics
would suggest that a large number of students enrolling at VWCC are products
of the Roanoke City Public School system.
Dr. Sandel advised that VWCC is working with the Superintendent of
Schools with regard to offering occupational technical programs.
REPORTS OF OFFICERS:
CITY MANAGER:
BRIEFINGS: NONE.
ITEMS RECOMMENDED FOR ACTION:
BUDGET-FIRE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that in 2005, the United States was hard hit by the
most active hurricane season in history; hurricanes Katrina, Rita and Wilma
devastated Louisiana and Florida, leaving paths of destruction that continue to
be cleaned up today.
It was further advised that to assist with the hurricane recovery in the
devastated regions, Roanoke Fire-EMS was called upon by the Virginia
Department of Emergency Management (VDEM) during fiscal year 2005-06 for
three different deployments; the first deployment consisted of six individuals
who departed from Roanoke on October 3 to assist Calcasieu Parish in
Louisiana; while there, they helped get the City back on its feet after ~urricane
Rita and assisted with clean up and basic day to day activities; the group
returned to Roanoke on October 23; on October 25, a second team of six
individuals left for Moore ~aven County, Florida, to help the area recover from
~urricane Wilma; the team assisted with getting sewage and water back on-line
and staffed the Emergency Operations Center, and returned to Roanoke on
November 9; in December, Roanoke Fire-EMS sent the final deployment back to
Louisiana to Cameron Parish, and the seven man team also worked in the
Emergency Operations Center and assisted in the recovery from ~urricane Rita.
I
I
I
I
I
I
601
It was explained that Roanoke Fire-EMS incurred expenses due to
overtime and supplies which are now being reimbursed by the Virginia
Department Emergency Management (VDEM); funds recovered from VDEM will
be used to cover expenses incurred by Fire-EMS during the three deployments
in 2005; and Roanoke Fire-EMS has submitted all requested receipts and
paperwork will work with VDEM to secure reimbursements.
The City Manager recommended that Council authorize the Director of
Finance to establish a revenue estimate in the General Fund from VDEM, in the
amount of $158,939.00, and appropriate funds to the following Fire-EMS
accounts:
001-520-3211-1003 - (overtime)
001-520-3212-1003 - (overtime)
001-520-3213-1003 - (overtime)
001-520-3521-1003 - (overtime)
001-520-3212-2044 - (training and development)
001-520-3213-2030 - (administrative supplies)
001-520-3212-2144 - (business meals and travel)
001-520-3521-2066 - (program activities)
$ 6,950.00
$ 7,883.00
$60,377.00
$ 4,467.00
$ 5,000.00
$11,545.00
$22,717.00
$40,000.00
The City Manager further recommended that she be authorized to
execute the required agreements and any other related documents, to be
approved as to form by the City Attorney.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37409-060506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Commonwealth of Virginia for reimbursement to the Fire Department of
hurricane deployment related expenses, amending and reordaining certain
sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations, and dispensing with
the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 329.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37409-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s nnmmm_mm_hmnmmmmmhm_nnmnmhnn_mn7.
NAYS: Non e 00 m 00 - - - - - - - - - - - - noon - - - 00-00 - - - n__ - - noon - - - - - - n nn 0. 00 - - - noon - - _n_ - - -0000- O.
602
CITY CODE-CITY MARKET: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that Downtown Roanoke, Inc. (DR!) is the City's operator of the ~istoric
Roanoke City Market (Market) area spaces; DRI has received many requests
from market vendors, storeowners, and others to provide regular Sunday
operating hours for the Market; in response, DRI has been coordinating, under
a Special Event Permit for DRI, for use of the Market area on Sundays from
10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. by various vendors since March 20, 2006, to ascertain
the response to Sunday hours; and the response has been positive.
It was further advised that in view of the positive response, DRI has
requested that the City amend Section 24-64, Code of the City of Roanoke
(1979), as amended, to change the days of operation from Monday through
Saturday to Sunday through Saturday on a regular basis; DRI has also requested
that Council amend the Fee Compendium for Fees for use of market spaces to
reflect Sunday operations; such change would require that the current Daily
Permit Fee reflect that $10.00 per space per day would now apply to Sunday
use as well as Monday through Thursday use; fees for Friday and Saturday use
and other permits would remain the same; the changes will provide for more
activities to be available for the downtown area on Sundays; and DRI has
requested that the changes be made effective July 1, 2006.
The City Manager recommended that Council amend Section 24-64,
Operatino hours, of the Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, to
change the days available for operation of the Market from Monday through
Saturday to Sunday through Saturday, with the days and hours for operation of
the Market to be established by the City Manager; and that Council approve the
change for market space fees, and amend the Fee Compendium to reflect the
change, effective July 1, 2006.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37410-060506) AN ORDINANCE amending and reordaining Article III,
Public Markets, of Chapter 24, Public Buildinos and Propertv Generallv, of the
Code of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, by amending §24-64,
Operatino ~ours, to change the days the Market is available for operation from
Monday through Saturday to Sunday through Saturday; providing for an
effective date; and dispensing with the second reading of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 330.)
I
I
I
I
I
I
603
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37410-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Dowe and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s nm_nmnnmm_nm_nm_mn__________________n_mnm_nn7.
NAYS: Non e _m___nnnn___n_____________nn____n______nn_n____nn__n__n----00----00---0.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the fOIl¿Wing resolution:
I
(#37411-060506) A RESOLUTION providing for an amendment to the
fees charged for the use of market spaces at the Roanoke City Market, with
such changes to be effective July 1, 2006; and directing amendment of the Fee
Compendium.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 331.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37411-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayo r ~arris _mnmmmmnnmm__m_mooonmmmmmooo_mmnm_7.
NAYS: Non e n______n_n__nnn___n____n_______n___unn__________nnn_nnnnn00-00_____0.
BUDGET-~UMAN DEVELOPMENT: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that Social Services, through the Foster Care Program,
provides out-of-home placements for children who are in need of protection
and can no longer live at home; for those children who are deemed eligible for
Title IV-E funding, the Federal and State governments will reimburse localities
for the costs of out-of-home placements at 100 per cent of maintenance, day
care and visitation-related transportation; and Federal and State funding is also
available to assist with maintenance costs and special needs for adoptive
families and to assist with refugee resettlement.
It was further advised that the City of Roanoke will receive additional
funding for Foster Care, Special Needs Adoption, Subsidized Adoption and
Refugee Resettlement for fiscal year 2005-2006, in the amount of $355,000.00;
Social Services currently maintains over 600 children who are in Foster Care, or
receive some type of adoption assistance, and the cost of providing services to
these children continues to increase; and many of children have difficulties that
require special needs payments.
604
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance
to increase General Fund revenue estimates by $355,000.00 and appropriate
funding in the same amount as follows:
I
Revenues
001-110-1234-0679 (Refugee Program)
001-110-1234-0675 (Foster Care)
$ 5,000.00
350.000.00
355,000.00
$ 5,000.00
200,000.00
100,000.00
50.000.00
355,000.00
Appropriations
001-630-5313-31 SO (Indo-Chinese)
001-630-5314-3115 (ADC Foster Care)
001-630-5314-3130 (Special Needs Adoption)
001-630-5314-3155 (Subsidized Adoption)
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37412-060506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate additional funding from
the Commonwealth of Virginia for the Department of Social Services, amending
and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund
Appropriations, and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 332.)
I
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37412-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris _____mummmmmummmnnmm_nnmmnm_nnm___7.
NAYS: No n e nnnnnnnnnnnnnnn_nnn____nn_o._uu_nnn_n_nnnnn_uunnnnO.
BUDGET-YOUT~: The City Manager submitted a communication advising
that the City of Roanoke Outreach Detention/Electronic Monitoring and
Sanctuary/Crisis Intervention Programs provide court-ordered, pre-dispositional,
intensive supervision of juveniles living within the community; program services
are provided to juveniles who reside in the City of Roanoke and other
jurisdictions such as Roanoke County, Botetourt County, the City of Salem,
I
I
I
I
605
Craig County, and Alleghany County and each outside jurisdiction pays for the
services provided; the fiscal year 2005-06 revenue estimate for Outreach
Detention/Electronic Monitoring Services is $50,000.00; the fiscal year 2005-06
revenue estimate for Sanctuary/Crisis Intervention is $30,000.00; it is
anticipated that actual revenue for Outreach Detention/Electronic Monitoring
will exceed the estimate in the amount of $9,850.00; and it is also anticipated
that actual revenue for Sanctuary/Crisis Intervention will exceed the estimate in
the amount of $13,000.00.
It was further advised that in accordance with State mandates, all
program revenue must be used for services that are specifically outlined in the
Board approved VJCCCA plan; and excess revenue must be appropriated for
program activities.
The City Manager recommended that Council increase the General Fund
revenue estimate by $9,850.00 in Revenue Account No. 001-110-1234-1310
and increase the General Fund revenue estimate by $13,000.00 in Revenue
Account No. 001-110-1234-1311, and appropriate funds in the amount of
$22,850.00 to the following accounts:
001-631-3330-1004 Temporary Wages
001-631-3330-2021 Cell Phone
001-631-3330-3070 Equipment Rental
001-631- 3350-2020 Telephone
001-631-3350-2066 Program Activities
001-631-3360-2020 Telephone
001-631-3360-2022 Electric
001-631-3360-2024 Gas
001-631-3360-2035 Equipment
001-631-3360-2032 ~ousekeeping
001-631-3360-2064 Wearing Apparel
001-631- 3360-2066 Program Activities
$ 3,000.00
$ 450.00
$ 3,000.00
$ 2,400.00
$ 1,000.00
$ 3,500.00
$ 1,250.00
$ 3,100.00
$ 1,500.00
$ 2,000.00
$ 650.00
$ 1,000.00
Council Member Dowe offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37413-060506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate additional revenues
from the Outreach Detention and Sanctuary programs, amending and
reordaining certain sections of the 2005-2006 General Fund Appropriations,
and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 333.)
606
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37413-
060506. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
I
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayo r ~arri s nmmm_m_mnnmm_mmnm__nmmmmm_mumm_7.
NAYS: None -00-0000-0000-00-00----0000-00----00-------00------00-----0000-------______0000000000__0.
BUDGET-FLOOD REDUCTION/CONTROL: The City Manager submitted a
communication advising that a local emergency was declared in the City of
Roanoke on September 28, 2004, as a result of flooding; cleanup, debris
removal and repair efforts were initiated by City departments following the
flood; the Virginia Department of Emergency Management (VDEM) was notified
by the Governor's Office that State funding was approved to assist the City of
Roanoke in clean-up required following the flooding; and approval was for 72
per cent of eligible costs up to $504,000.00.
It was further advised that over the course of several months, supporting
documentation regarding flood related expenditures was subsequently
collected; final expenditure documentation was available in recent months and
a complete request was submitted to VDEM; VDEM has notified the City that
funding in the amount of $115,642.00 is being provided as a reimbursement
for expenses incurred; and the reimbursement represents 72 per cent of total
eligible expenses of $160,613.00 incurred during the prior fiscal year; and
additional flood insurance proceeds have been received in the amount of
$50,168.00 for repairs to the National Guard Armory.
I
It was noted that a budget adjustment for motor fuels in the amount of
$296,800.00 was made on March 20, 2006; as a result of a cost increase since
the prior adjustment, it is anticipated that motor fuel expenditures will exceed
the current budget in the amount of $100,000.00: the Fleet Management Fund
revenue and expense budgets will need to be adjusted, and funding in the
amount of $95,500.00 will need to be allocated in the General Fund to cover its
share of motor fuel billings; and the remaining $4,450.00 will be billed to the
Roanoke Redevelopment and ~ousing Authority, Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority, Roanoke Valley Detention Commission, Civic Center Fund, and
Department of Technology Fund.
I
I
I
I
607
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a budget ordinance
establishing a revenue estimate of $11 5,642.00 from VDEM in the General Fund
and increase the revenue estimate for Flood Insurance Proceeds in the Capital
Projects Fund, in the amount of $50,168.00; appropriate $50,168.00 to
Facilities Management (BCAP) (008-440-9854-9003) in the Capital Projects
Fund; increase the revenue estimate for Fleet Management Billings for Motor
Fuels (017-110-1234-1279) by $100,000.00; appropriate funding in the amount
of $100,000.00 to Fleet Management Motor Fuels, Account No. 017-440-2641-
3013; and appropriate funding in the amount of $95,550.00 to General Fund
Department Motor Fuel accounts and $20,092.00 to Contingency, Account No.
001-300-9410-2199.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following budget ordinance:
(#37414-060506) AN ORDINANCE to appropriate funding from the
Virginia Department of Emergency Management and insurance proceeds to
various department motor fuel accounts and to Facilities Maintenance BCAP and
to increase the motor fuel revenue and expenditure budgets in the Fleet
Management Fund, amending and reordaining certain sections of the 2005-
2006 General, Capital Projects, and Fleet Management Funds Appropriations,
and dispensing with the second reading by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No.70, Page 334.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37414-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member McDaniel and adopted
by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris mnnmnn__m_____nmonnnmmmnnm_n_mmm_m_m7.
NAYS: No n e nmnnmnmnnnmnn_nnnn_n____nnn_nnnn_n____nnnnnnnnn_O.
POLICE DEPARTMENT: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that over the years, several automotive dealers have donated the use
of motor vehicles to the City of Roanoke for use in community-oriented policing
and crime prevention efforts, at a cost of either one dollar per year or one
dollar per month; and citizens of the City of Roanoke have benefited from the
donations through increased police presence and enhanced community support
in the neighborhoods.
608
In support of the City's mission to develop public/private partnerships
and to enhance community-oriented policing efforts within the community, a
local car dealership has offered to donate the use of one vehicle for this
purpose; and the conditional offer includes a mileage stipulation regarding
usage, whereby the mileage shall not exceed 15,000 miles per year and will be
monitored on a monthly basis to ensure that the conditional requirement is
met.
The City Manager recommended, pursuant to Section 2-263 of the Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979), as amended, that Council accept donation of one
Mitsubishi Galant LS vehicle from Sarmadi and ~arper, Inc., d/b/a Dave Sarmadi
Mitsubishi, at a lease rate of one dollar per month, or $12.00 per year for up to
15,000 miles within the one year term of the lease and that the City Manager be
authorized to accept this type of donation in the future and to execute vehicle
lease agreements, to be approved as to form by the City Attorney, with any auto
dealer who is willing to lease vehicles to the City at a lease rate of $1.00 per
month, or S 1.00 per year, on a year-by-year basis.
Council Member Dowe offered the following resolution:
(#37415-060506) A RESOLUTION authorizing and accepting the donation
of certain motor vehicles for the use by the City and authorizing the City
Manager to enter into agreements between the City and the owners of the
motor vehicles.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No. 70, Page 337.)
Council Member Dowe moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37415-
060506. The motion was seconded by Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s nmnnnnmnmmnmm_n_mm_mnmmuh__nnnnnn_7.
NAYS: No n e 00-00----------00----00-----00--------000000----00--00000000-----------00__0000000000000.
BUDGET-INDUSTRIES: The City Manager submitted a communication
advising that FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., presently located in the former Norfolk
Southern East End Shops in the City of Roanoke, produces aluminum railroad
cars; in February 2005, Council adopted Resolution No. 36961-020705 in
support of FreightCar Roanoke, Inc.'s application for Railroad Industrial Access
Funds of up to $450,000.00; the funds have been received and used; the site
now needs an additional rail line costing approximately $600,000.00 to
increase production; FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., has requested the City's support
I
I
I
I
I
I
609
of its application to the Virginia Department of Rail and Public Transportation
(DRPT) Railroad Industrial Access Program for funds to help defray a portion of
the cost; the application must be supported by the City and accompanied by a
resolution from the local governing authority in support of the application; and
the City of Roanoke will not incur any monetary obligation to provide any part
of the funds.
. It was further advised that the Company will invest $600,000.00 over and
above its original $5.45 million and retain 440 employees; as part of the
project, the Company has again requested $300,000.00 in Industrial Access
Railroad Track Funds from the Department of Rail and Public Transportation
(DRPT); and in addition, if the Company spends an additional $300,000.00 in
upgrading the railroad track, it will request DRPT to grant additional monies
equal to $150,000.00.
The City Manager recommended that Council adopt a resolution in
support of the application, and that the City Manager be authorized to execute
and/or provide appropriate documents to the Virginia Department of Rail and
Public Transportation for the Railroad Industrial Access Program in connection
with the application of FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., to assist in obtaining up to
$450,000.00 in Program funds and setting forth the City's support for
FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., to receive such Program funds from the
Commonwealth of Virginia.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the follOWing resolution:
(#37416-060506) A RESOLUTION supporting the application or other
documents to be filed with the Virginia Department of Rail and Public
Transportation by FreightCar Roanoke, Inc., for up to $450,000.00 in Industrial
Access Railroad Track Funds and to state the City's support for FreightCar
Roanoke, Inc., receiving such funds.
(For full text of resolution, see Resolution Book No.70, Page 338.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Resolution No. 37416-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris mnmm_mmhm_mnmmmmmhmn_mm_mmnm___7.
NAYS: Non e _mmnnn_nnnnnnnnnnn_h__n___n_nnnn_n_hnn_nnnnn_nnnuO.
610
CITY ATTORNEY:
CITY CODE: The City Attorney submitted a written report advising that
since 1982, Council has reenacted and recodified the City Code on an annual
basis in order to properly incorporate in the Code such amendments made by
the General Assembly at the previous Session to State statutes that are
incorporated by reference in the City Code; the procedure ensures that the
ordinances codified in Roanoke's Code incorporate the most recent
amendments to State law; incorporation by reference is frequently utilized in
local codes to preclude having to set out lengthy provisions of State statutes in
their entirety; and the technique ensures that local ordinances are always
consistent with State law as is generally required.
The City Attorney further advised that the procedure whereby a local
governing body incorporates State statutes by reference after action of the
General Assembly has been approved by the Attorney General; therefore, he
recommended that Council adopt an ordinance to readopt and reenact the Code
of the City of Roanoke (1979). ~e explained that if the ordinance is not
adopted, City Code sections incorporating provisions of the State Code
amended at the last Session of the General Assembly may not be deemed to
include the recent amendments and may be impermissibly inconsistent which
could result in the dismissal of criminal prosecutions under the various City
Code sections.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(37417-060506) AN ORDINANCE to readopt and reenact the Code of the
City of Roanoke (1979), as amended; and dispensing with the second reading
by title of this ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 340.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37417-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s nmmm_nnnnm_____nmmnn__mum_m_m_mummm7.
NAYS: No n e nnn_nnnnn__nnnnunu_nmn_n___nnnnnnnn__unnn_nnn_n_n_O.
I
I
I
I
I
I
611
ARMORY/STADIUM: The City Attorney submitted a written report
advising that by deed dated March 15, 1941, Virginia ~olding Corporation
conveyed to the City of Roanoke approximately 30.15 acres of land upon the
condition that the land be used for stadium, armory, park, and recreational
purposes only; Victory Stadium was subsequently constructed on the property;
Virginia ~olding Corporation has executed a deed releasing the City from any
requirement that the property be used for stadium purposes; and the City
would continue to be required to use the property for armory, park, and
recreational purposes.
The City Attorney transmitted a measure authorizing the Mayor to
execute a deed of release.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick offered the following ordinance:
(#37418-060506) AN ORDINANCE authorizing the Mayor to execute a
Deed of Release dated May 26, 2006, between Virginia ~olding Corporation and
the City of Roanoke; and dispensing with the second reading by title of this
ordinance.
(For full text of ordinance, see Ordinance Book No. 70, Page 341.)
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick moved the adoption of Ordinance No. 37418-
060506. The motion was seconded by Council Member Cutler and adopted by
the following vote:
AYES: Council Members, McDaniel, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor
~ arr i s - - - - 00 - - - - _n_ - - 00-00 - - - - -00- - - noon 00 00 -00---- - - - - 0000 - - - - 00 - - - - 00-00 - - - - -000000- noon - - noon - - 0000 - - - - 5 .
NAYS: Council Members Lea and Wishneff omnmmnooomnnm___m_m__nm2.
DIRECTOR OF FINANCE:
AUDITS/FINANCIAL REPORTS: The Director of Finance submitted the
Financial Report for the month of January 2006.
(For full text, see Financial Report on file in the City Clerk's Office.)
612
The Director of Finance advised that the City's meals tax, which typically
has a long term growth trend of four to five per cent, was up 6.9 per cent at the
end of April; the sales tax which typically has a growth trend in the three to five
per cent range annually was up 5.8 per cent; the business license tax, which
typically has a growth rate of two to three per cent annually, was up seven per
cent on a year to day basis; and extraordinary growth has been observed in the
transient occupancy tax which typically has a growth rate of about five per cent
per year, however, on a year to date basis the room tax is up 13 1/2 per cent.
I
Without objection by Council, the Mayor advised that the report would be
received and filed.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES: NONE.
UNFINIS~ED BUSINESS: NONE.
INTRODUCTION AND CONSIDERATION OF ORDINANCES AND
RESOLUTIONS: NONE.
MOTIONS AND MISCELLANEOUS BUSINESS:
INQUIRIES AND/OR COMMENTS BY T~E MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF
COUNCIL:
I
BUILDINGS/BUILDING DEPARTMENT: Council Member Wishneff inquired if
building permits are available for review on-line at the time the permits are
issued; whereupon, R. Brian Townsend, Director, Planning, Building and
Economic Development, advised that all building permit activity is on-line and
can be assessed through the Real Estate file, under permits and activities.
COUNCIL: The Mayor advised that he would not be present for the next
regular meeting of Council on Monday, June 19, 2006, and inasmuch as it
would be the last official City Council meeting for Council Members Cutler and
McDaniel, he would like to express appreciation for their service to the citizens
of the City of Roanoke.
~EARING OF CITIZENS UPON PUBLIC MATTERS: The Mayor advised that
Council sets this time as a priority for citizens to be heard and matters
requiring referral to the City Manager will be referred immediately for response,
recommendation or report to Council.
I
I
I
I
613
COUNClL-ZONING-ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Chris Craft, 1501 East Gate
Avenue, N. E., requested that citizens be permitted to take photographs of
Victory Stadium as a memento prior to demolition. ~e asked that the City of
Roanoke enforce the sign ordinance prohibiting the posting of yard sale signs
on City property.
~e congratulated Council Members-Elect Gwendolyn W. Mason and
David B. Trinkle on their recent election to Roanoke City Council, and expressed
appreciation to retiring Council Members M. Rupert Cutler and Brenda C.
McDaniel for their service to the citizens of the City of Roanoke.
Mr. Jesse E. Blessard, 1406 East Gate Avenue, N. E., stated that the
income limit for real estate tax relief for elderly and disabled homeowners in
Roanoke County is $56,000.00, the income limit is $34,000.00 in the City of
Roanoke and State guidelines place the income limit at $50,000.00. ~e inquired
as to the City's rationale for not increasing the income limits for real estate tax
relief for elderly and disabled homeowners in the City of Roanoke.
ARMORY/STADIUM: Ms. ~elen E. Davis, 35 Patton Avenue, N. E.,
expressed concern that even though Victory Stadium is closed for public use,
Carilion ~ealth System used the facility to celebrate the 25th anniversary of
Lifeguard 10.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick clarified that the activity was held on the Parks and
Recreation parking lot next to Victory Stadium.
SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION: Ms. Evelyn D. Bethel, 35 Patton
Avenue, N. E., advised that "haste makes waste"; and Council has voted to
demolish Victory Stadium as soon as possible without taking into consideration
the vote of wishes two newly elected Members of Council who will take office
on July 1, 2006. She stated that another issue of concern relates to the
proposed Social Security Administration Office building, especially in view of
numerous questions that have not been answered by the City. She advised that
the ~enry Street area occupies one acre of land and the black community,
consisting of approximately 25 per cent of Roanoke's citizens, favor a village
center in the area. She explained that 85 per cent of those persons to be served
by the Social Security Administration office do not live in the City of Roanoke;
and City officials have stated that location of the office building in the area will
increase economic development, however, the only way that economic
development can occur is to further encroach upon the residential area;
therefore, she requested that Council give serious consideration to locating the
proposed Social Security Administration Office building in historic Gainsboro.
614
ARMORY/STADIUM: Mr. Jim Fields, 17 Ridgecrest Road, ~ardy, Virginia,
advised that Victory Stadium belongs to the taxpayers of the City of Roanoke
and the agreement between the City and the Norfolk and Western Railway
provides that the City will maintain the Stadium and the National Guard Armory.
~e stated that the votes that were cast in the May 2, 2006 Councilmanic
election revealed that over 17,000 voters favor the demolition of Victory
Stadium, while 21,000 persons voted to save the stadium. ~e added that any
memorial service to honor World War II veterans and those persons who died on
9-11 should be held on hallowed ground such as Victory Stadium, a church, or a
cemetery.
COMPLAINTS-CITY COUNCIL-COMMONWEALT~'S ATTORNEY: Mr. Robert E.
Gravely, 727 29'" Street, N. W., advised that: "The last time I talked to you all, I
told you, five of you, all was coming down, you all did not listen. Timing is of
the most excellence to God because God fills time. I told you one more too,
stand up but you all did not listen. Under the due process of law, and I am not
to judge you, you are going to put your hands on your head and in your heart,
cause that's where your life is at, and you thought of this mess, you made it.
According to the Book of Ecclesiastes, there is a time to live and a time to die,
and according to the Spirit that dwells within me as I am standing here
speaking to you, this Wednesday according to your law, I didn't make the death
penalty, according to what you have did, and if you give to one of them you
give to all of them, according to the law of the land with the City Attorney there,
I can and I will have you shot. I am not to be..."
The Mayor ruled Mr. Gravely out of order and instructed the City Attorney
to forward his remarks to the Commonwealth Attorney's Office.
CITY MANAGER COMMENTS: NONE.
At 3:05 p.m., the Mayor declared the meeting in recess for five Closed
Sessions.
At 5:15 p.m., the Council reconvened in the Council Chamber, with all
Members of the Council in attendance and Mayor ~arris presiding.
I
I
I
I
I
I
615
COUNCIL: With respect to the Closed Meetings just concluded, Vice-
Mayor Fitzpatrick moved that each Member of City Council certify to the best of
his or her knowledge that: (1) only public business matters lawfully exempted
from open meeting requirements under the Virginia Freedom of Information
Act; and (2) only such public business matters as were identified in any motion
by which any Closed Meetings were convened were heard, discussed or
considered by City Council. The motion was seconded by Council Member
Dowe and adopted by the following vote:
AYES: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s mmm_nmom_m____mnmmmmmnmn___mnmmm__7.
NAYS: No n e n__nn_n__nn__n__nm______n__nnnn__nnn____n_n__n___n__nn---0000000.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-~OUSING/AUT~ORITY: The Mayor
advised that there is a vacancy on the Fair ~ousing Board for a term ending
March 31, 2007, due to the resignation of Rich G. McGimsey; whereupon, he
opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Anthony M.
Reed.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Reed was appointed as a
member of the Fair ~ousing Board, to fill the unexpired term of Rich G.
McGimsey, resigned, ending March 31, 2007, by the following vote:
FOR MR. REED: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe,
Fitzpatrick and Mayor Harris m__mnmnmnmmnmn_mmmmuooonm_nm_mm_m7.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-FIRE DEPARTMENT-COMMITTEES: The Mayor advised
that the four year term of office of John C. Moody, Jr., as a member of the Board
of Fire Appeals will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor
for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of John C.
Moody, Jr.
616
There being no further nominations, Mr. Moody was reappointed as a I
member of the Board of Fire Appeals for a term ending June 30, 2010, by the
following vote:
FOR MR. MOODY: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler,
Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri s _mnmnm_m___m_mm____mnmnmnm_____mn7.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-CITY EMPLOYEES: The Mayor advised
that the three year terms of office of Edward C. Bradley and Virginia B. Stuart as
members of the Personnel and Employment Practices Commission will expire on
June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the
vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Edward C.
Bradley and Virginia B. Stuart.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Bradley and Ms. Stuart were
reappointed as members of the Personnel and Employment Practices
Commission, for terms each ending June 30, 2009, by the following vote:
FOR MR. BRADLEY AND MS. STUART: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris mmm_mo.nnm____nmnm_7. I
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-ROANOKE ARTS COMMISSION: The
Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of Sandra K. Brunk, Charles E.
Jordan, George Kegley, and Susannah Koerber as members of the Roanoke Arts
Commission will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Sandra K.
Brunk, Charles E. Jordan, George Kegley, and Susannah Koerber.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Brunk, Mr. Jordan, Mr. Kegley,
and Ms. Koerber were reappointed as members of the Roanoke Arts
Commission for terms each ending June 30, 2009, by the following vote:
FOR MS. BRUNK, MR. JORDAN, MR. KEGLEY AND MS. KOERBER: Council
Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor
~ a r ri s - 000000-00- 00 00 00 00 00 - un - - 00 --000. - - noon 00- - - -00000000- - - __ -00- 00 - - - - - - - - - 00 00 un - - - - - - - - 00 00000000 -- - - 7 .
I
I
I
I
617
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-GREENWAY SYSTEM: The Mayor advised
that the three year term of office of Lucy R. Ellett as a member of the Roanoke
Valley Greenways Commission will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he
opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of Lucy R. Ellett.
There being no further nominations, Ms. Ellett was reappointed as a
member of the Roanoke Valley Greenways Commission for a term ending
June 30, 2009, by the following vote:
FOR MS. ELLETT: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler,
Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris n____umnm_m_mmmm______mn____mmmnm_7.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-L1BRARIES: The Mayor advised that the
three year term of office of Wilburn C. Dibling, Jr., and Michael L. Ramsey as
members of the Roanoke Public Library Board will expire on June 30, 2006;
whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Wilburn C.
Dibling, Jr., and Michael L. Ramsey.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Dibling and Mr. Ramsey were
reappointed as members of the Roanoke Public Library Board for terms of three
years each, ending June 30, 2009, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. DIBLlNG AND RAMSEY: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris 00000000000-000000000000000-000-000007.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMM/TTEES-COURT COMMUNITY CORRECTIONS
BOARD: The Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of Gail Burress
and Clifford R. Weckstein as members of the Court Community Corrections
Program Regional Community Criminal Justice Board will expire on June 30,
2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Gail Burress
and Clifford R. Weckstein.
618
There being no further nominations, Ms. Burress and Mr. Weckstein were
reappointed as members of the Court Community Corrections Program
Regional Community Criminal Justice Board for terms of three years each,
ending June 30, 2009, by the folloWing vote:
I
FOR MS. BURRESS AND MR. WECKSTEIN: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris muumuh__hnmmnnnmn7.
COMMITTEES-ROANOKE NEIG~BOR~OOD PARTNERS~IP-OAT~S OF
OFFICE: The Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of Bobby R.
Caudle and Sandra B. Kelly as members of the Roanoke Neighborhood
Advocates will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for
nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Bobby R.
Caudle and Sandra B. Kelly.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Caudle and Ms. Kelly were
reappointed as members of the Roanoke Neighborhood Advocates for terms of
three years each, ending June 30, 2009, by the following vote:
FOR MR. CAUDLE AND MS. KELLY: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris-nmmnnmmm-nnmmmn7.
I
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-CONVENTION AND VISITORS BUREAU:
The Mayor advised that the one year terms of office of A. Morris Turner, Jr., and
Barton J. Wilner as members of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors
Bureau Board of Directors will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened
the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of A. Morris
Turner, Jr., and Barton J. Wilner.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Turner and Wilner were
reappointed as members of the Roanoke Valley Convention and Visitors Bureau
Board of Directors, for terms of one year each, ending June 30, 2007, by the
following vote:
FOR MESSRS. TURNER AND WILNER: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris-ooo-nnm-nn--hnumu_ooonn7.
I
I
I
I
619
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-TOWING ADVISORY BOARD: The Mayor
advised that the three year terms of office of Michael W. Conner, Walter T.
~inkley, Thomas W. Ruff, and ~arold F. Wallick, Jr., as members of the Towing
Advisory Board, will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor
for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Michael W.
Conner, Walter T. ~inkley, Thomas W. Ruff, and ~arold F. Wallick, Jr.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Conner, ~inkley, Ruff, and
Wallick were reappointed as members of the Towing Advisory Board, for terms
of three years each, ending June 30, 2009, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. CONNER, ~INKLEY, RUFF, AND WALLICK: Council Members
Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris-----mnnnn7.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-SC~OOLS: The Mayor advised that the
four year terms of office of Barry W. Baird and Dennis R. Cronk as members of
the Virginia Western Community College Board will expire on June 30, 2006;
whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of Barry W. Baird
and Dennis R. Cronk.
There being no further nominations, Messrs. Baird and Cronk were
reappointed as members of the Virginia Western Community College Board, for
terms of four years, each ending June 30, 2010, by the following vote:
FOR MESSRS. BAIRD AND CRONK: Council Members Lea, McDaniel,
Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris------n_n-------_nn---no.uooom7.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-VIRGINIA'S FIRST REGIONAL INDUSTRIAL
FACILITY AUT~ORITY: The Mayor advised that the four year term of office of
R. Brian Townsend as a member of the Virginia First Regional Industrial Facility
Authority will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
620
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of R. Brian
Townsend.
I
There being no further nominations, Mr. Townsend was reappointed as a
member of the Virginia First Regional Industrial Facility Authority, for a term
ending June 30, 2010, by the following vote:
FOR MR. TOWNSEND: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler,
Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arris_mm_n____o._mnm_mnmmnhnmnmmn_m_ooo7.
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-VIRGINIA ALCO~OL SAFETY ACTION
PROGRAM: The Mayor advised that the two year term of office of A. L. Gaskins
as a City representative to the Regional Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program
Policy Board will expire on June 30, 2006; whereupon, he opened the floor for
nominations to fill the vacancy.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the name of A. L. Gaskins.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Gaskins was reappointed as a
City representative to the Regional Virginia Alcohol Safety Action Program Policy
Board, for a term ending June 30, 2008, by the following vote:
FOR MR. GASKINS: Council Members Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler,
Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arri Snnm__mm_mnnmnmmmnhnnnnnmmmm_7.
I
OAT~S OF OFFICE-COMMITTEES-FIFT~ PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION:
The Mayor advised that the three year terms of office of William D. Bestpitch,
Darlene L. Burcham, and Robert ~. Logan, III, as members of the Roanoke
Valley-Allegheny Regional Commission will expire on June 30, 2006;
whereupon, he opened the floor for nominations to fill the vacancies.
Vice-Mayor Fitzpatrick placed in nomination the names of William D.
Bestpitch, Darlene L. Burcham, and Robert ~. Logan, III.
There being no further nominations, Mr. Bestpitch, Ms. Burcham, and Mr.
Logan were reappointed as members of the Roanoke Valley-Allegheny Regional
Commission, for terms of three years each, ending June 30, 2009, by the
following vote:
FOR MR. BESTPITC~, MS. BURC~AM, AND MR. LOGAN: Council Members
Lea, McDaniel, Wishneff, Cutler, Dowe, Fitzpatrick and Mayor ~arrism-mmnm-7.
I
I
I
I
621
There being no further business, the Mayor declared the Council meeting
adjourned at 5 :20 p.m.
~:.. J L
Mary F. Parker
City Clerk
APPROVED
c.~~~~
C. Nelson ~arris
Mayor