HomeMy WebLinkAbout6/27/2016 - City Council - Agenda -RegularSalem City Council
Work Session Agenda
June 27, 2016
City Manager’s Conference Room
City Hall
114 North Broad Street, Salem
6:30-7:30p.m.
I. Call to Order
II. Roll Call
III. Discussion Items
a. National Accreditation, DUI Task Force &
Section 86 City Code amendment, Chief
Crawley
b. Economic Development Update, Melinda Payne
c. Other topics for discussion, City Manager
IV. Adjournment
City Council Meeting
Monday, June 27, 2016, 7:30 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, Salem, Virginia 24153
1.Call to Order
2.Pledge of Allegiance
3.Bid Openings, Awards, Recognitions
4.Consent Agenda
A.Minutes
Consider acceptance of minutes of the June 13, 2016 Work Session and regular meetings of
Salem City Council.
5.Old Business
A.Admissions Tax
Consider and adopt an ordinance on second reading imposing an admissions tax on certain
events within the City of Salem, by amending the admissions tax definitions and rate.
(Passed on first reading at June 13, 2016 meeting)
B.Water Rates
Consider ordinance on second reading to amend Chapter 90, Article IV Division 2, Section
90-257 of the City Code to adopt water rates for fiscal years 2017 - 2021. (Passed on first
reading at June 13, 2016 meeting.)
C.Sewer Rates
Consider Ordinance on second reading to amend Chapter 90, Article IV, Division IV,
Section 90-303, Subdivision I, and Chapter 90 , Article IV, Division IV, Section 90-322,
Subdivison II, of the City Code to adopt changes pertaining to charges for sewage disposal
for fiscal years 2017 - 2021. (Passed on first reading at June 13, 2016 meeting.)
D.Vacation of Right of Way
Receive report of viewers and consider Ordinance on first reading permanently
vacating two portions of Peery Drive with the right-of-way on the northern and southern
sides at Thompson Memorial Drive, containing less than 0.1 acre, adjacent to "John's
Bridge," in the City of Salem. (Viewers appointed at June 13, 2016 meeting)
(AMENDED)
E.Vacation of Right of Way
Consider Ordinance on second reading permanently vacating an undedicated right of way
located on the South side of Rose Lane approximately 340' to North Stonewall Street,
bounded on the East by the City of Salem. (Passed at June 13, 2016 meeting)
(AMENDED)
6.New Business
A.Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance
Hold a public hearing and consider Ordinance on first reading, the request of Judah Land,
LLC, contract purchaser, and General Electric Company, property owner, for the rezoning of
eight parcels located in the 1500 block of Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #'s 221-3-8, 9, 10,
11, 12, 13 and 14, and 222-1-1) from RBD Residential Business District to HDB Highway
Business District. Advertised in the June 2 and 9, 2016 issues of the Salem Times
Register. Recommend approval with the voluntarily proffered conditions; see Page 1
Planning Commission minutes.) STAFF REPORT
B.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to approve the School Board's appropriation changes of $25,000 to the
Grants Fund approved at the School Board meeting on May 10, 2016. Audit - Finance
Committee
C.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate supplemental Children's Services Act (CSA) revenue and
expenditures. Audit - Finance Committee
D.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate proceeds from the sale of equipment. Audit - Finance
Committee
E.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate insurance proceeds to purchase a replacement dumpster
truck. Audit - Finance Committee
F.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate budget for the Community Development Building lease and
transfer lease payment budget to the Debt Service Fund. Audit - Finance Committee
G.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate funds to purchase software. Audit - Finance Committee
H.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to amend School Capital Projects Fund budget as approved by the School
Board at the meeting on June 14, 2016. Audit - Finance Committee
I.Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to appropriate fund to pay prior year liability for Other Post-Employment
Benefits (OPEB). Audit - Finance Committee
J.Fiscal Agent Contracts for Fiscal Year 2017
Consider approval for City officials to execute contracts authorizing the City to continue to
act as fiscal agent for Court-Community Corrections Regional Alcohol Safety Action
Program Board and Cardinal Justice Academy. Audit - Finance Committee
K.Cooperative Purchasing Agreement
Consider request for City staff to execute an Interlocal Contract for Cooperative
Purchasing with HGACBuy. Audit - Finance Committee
Supplemental Item
L.Miscellaneous Fees
Consider adoption of Resolution 1298 approving reaffirmation of miscellaneous fees and
policies.
Supplemental Item
M.Miscellaneous Fees
Consider adoption of Resolution 1299 establishing miscellaneous fees.
Supplemental Item
N.Tipping Fees
Consider adoption of Resolution 1300 to establish the fee schedule for the Solid Waste
Transfer Station (tipping fees).
Supplemental Item
7.Closed Session
A.Closed Session
Hold a closed session pursuant to provision of Section 2.2-3711A(3) of the 1950 Code
of Virginia, as amended, to discuss property the City may wish to sell.
8.Adjournment
Audit Financ e Committee, Mond ay, June 27, 2016, 8:00 a.m., City Manager's Conference Room
OP EB Trust Board Meeting 9:00 a.m., City Manager Conference Room
Work Session, Monday, June 27, 2016, 6:30 p.m., City Manager's Conference Room
lrruno)ro )iialf
-roler t
'uId lz:l le pauinofpe
^olol
rolef'l 'peq aq ol uorssn)srp.raqun, ou se^ araql'SVldfH^\
pue
lsnl I arl uo etepdn us a^e6 ueurl)rd ]arql
^lndao
pue ueurellud,arq) 'SVIUIHM
pue lueuralsqV ]q6rlg uo uorleluesa.rd e ?^e6 saurM sN'SVfdlH/\
PUe luotssas lloM e plorl o]
lr)uno) aqlJolrap]o ur ]as uaaq Peq aturl Pue 'aleld 'aleP srql leql pauod?r l?lol rolsN
:pallesuerl se/t^ ssaursnq 6ur/!^ollol aq] pue !3rq) arj
^lndao
'ueurl)ru
uen lorqf orl 'ueuJelllrd uqof 'roler]srurLUpV 6uruoZ 'saur6 ue113 fue4 'alueurj ,o]otra.rO
lueprssv 'ppo1 lu-Luel la6euel I1r1 'ssa66og S ur^a) qlrm roqla6ol l6ulplserd 'Aalol
qdlopueS uo-r,(g qlqrra lLuoslrl) -l souref pue 'sauof O urerllrl 'uosuqof M auef'sue^r9 ) urlof
',(elogqdlopueguolAg:1r',rol1r)uno)preslosraquar"u6urr,rol;o;aq]luasard6uraqaraql"uld
o€:9le '9roz '€r aunf uo 'erur6rA 'L!aleS 'laarts peo]E quoN lrir 'uJoog aruara;uo) s,ra6eueyl
Ilrl aq] u! plaq servr 'erur6rrtr 'u,ra;e5 1o .{11 aql Jo lr)uno) aq} lo uorssas lJo,l/\ V
groz '€! aunf
NOTSSSS )dol 1)Nnol AIll
sllnNtr\ cl^osddvNn
drTdE{.llvo
-.--z
r # IllI
City Council Meeting
MINUTES
Mondau Juru 13.2016,7:30 PM
Council Chambers, City Hall, 114 North Broad Street, Salem, Vrginia24153
1. Call to Order
A regular meeting of the Council of the City of Salenr, Mrginia was called to order
at 7:30 p.m, there being present the following members to wit: Byron Randolph
Foley, Mayor, John C. Givers, Mce-Mayor, Councilmembers: Jane W. Johnson,
Wlliam D. Jones, and James L. Chisom; along with Kevin S. Boggess, City
Manager; James E. Taliaferro, II, Assistant City Manager and Clerk of Council;
Melinda J. Payne, Director of Planning and Economic Development; Rosemarie B.
Jordaq Director of Finance; Charles E. Van Allmann, Jr., City Engineer; Mike
Stevens, Communications Director; and Stephen M. Yost, City Attomey.
2. Pledge ofAllegiance
3. Bid Openings, Awards, Recognitions
4. Corsent Agenda
A. Minutes
Consider acceptance of the minutes from the May 23,2016 Work Session and
regular meetings of Salem City Council.
B. Financial Report
Consider the Acceptance of the Statement of Revenues and Expenditures for ten
months ending April 30, 20 1 6.
5. Old Business
A. Tax Exempt Property City Code
Corsider the Ordinance on second reading of Chapter 82, Article I, Section 82-
8 amending the City Code to direct triennial applications. (Passed on first reading at
May 23,2016 meeting.)
Vice-Mayor John Givens motioned to approve the ordinance on second reading of
Chapter 82, Article I, Section 82-8, amending the City Code to direct triennial
applications. (Item passed on first reading at May 23,2016 meeting). Jane Johnson
seconded the rnotion
Ayes: Chisorn, Foley, Givens, Jolrsoq Jones
B. Vacation of Right of Way
Receive report of viewers and consider ordinance on first reading permanently
vacating an undedicated right of way located on the South side ofRose I-ane
approximately 340' to North Stonewall Street, bounded on the East by the City of
Salern (Viewers appointed atMay 23,2016 meeting.)
Mr. Taliafeno stated the viewers met and reviewed the vacation request and
recornrnended approval ofthe vacation subject to the City retaining an easement for
utilities.Vice-Mayor John Giverx motioned to approve the ordin;ance on second
reading perrnanently vacating an undedicated right ofway located on the South side
ofRose lane approximately 340' to North Stonewall Street, bounded on the East by
the City of Salern (Viewers appointed atMay 23,2016 meeting). Jim Chisom
seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chisorq Foley, Givens, Johnsoq Jones
6. New Business
A. Vacation of Right of Way
Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of Resolution of 1296 appointing
viewers to consider pernranently vacating two portions of Peery Drive with the
right-of-way on the northem and southem sides at Thonpson Memorial Drive,
containing less than 0. I acre, adjacent to "John's Bridge," in the City of Salern (As
advertised in the May 29,2016 and June 5, 2016 issues of tlre, Roanoke Times.)
Mr. Taliaferro stated Roanoke College has requested to vacate portions of the Peery
Drive right-of-way, adjacent to Thonpson Memorial Drive, being the two eastem
comers of the right-of-way on Peery Drive. Roanoke College would like to place
the name of the college on JoMs Bridge and create a main entrance into the
carpus. Due to the sign ordinance not allowing off-site advertising, the college
camot put the sip on City right-of-way. The City's recommendation to Roanoke
College is to vacate a portion ofthe right-of-way around the parapet walls of the
bridge.
Mayor Foley asked if there were any conrnents. There were none and the public
hearing was closed.
Jim Chisom motioned to adopt Resolution 1296 appointing viewers to consider
B.
permanently vacating two portions of Peery Drive with the right-of-way on the
northem and southem sides at Thornpson Memorial Drive, containing less than 0. 1
acre, adjacent to "John's Bridge," in the City of Salern (As advertised in the May
29,2016 and June 5, 2016 issues of The Roanoke Times). Wlliam Jones seconded
the motion.
Ayes: Chisorn, Foley, Givers, Jotrrson, Jones
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Joinder Public Hearing
Hold a public hearing to receive public cornrnent on the joinder of the City of Salem
to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority and on approval and execution of
Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority for acconrplishing such joinder of City of Salerrl Mrginia, together with
any related matters. (As advertised in the May 12, 2016 issue of the Roanoke
Times. )
Mr. Boggess gave some background information to explain what options were
available in regards to Solid Waste Disposal. Mr. Boggess fi.rther stated he had
diffrculty finding the right answer to make a recommendation because there were so
many variables, including the number ofemployees involved. Jay Taliaferro,
Rosemarie Jordan and Mike Tyler assisted in helping with the process to evaluate
the options.
The term of the City's agreement with Waste Management expires July 1,2016.
The group started reviewing the solid waste options early 2013. Prior to bidding
out, the group met with Solid Waste Management and the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority to research option, available to the City. Mr. Boggess went on site visits
both at the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority. Jim Fender went along with Mr.
Boggess and together they spent nrost of the day talking to the Waste Management
group. There was a lot of research done in addition to evaluating bids. As part of
the evaluation, the City had a corsulting engineering finrq Draper Aden and
Associates put togeth a review and analysis of the existing operation and an
overview of the optiors the City was evaluating, including the continuation of the
option as the City had been runring it if the City moved into another five or 10 year
agreement. The main option Draper Aden evaluated was what it would look like if
the City would become a part of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority and
become a part of the regional solid waste rnanagement effort for the Roanoke
Valley. This was done both Iiom a operational and a financial perspective from the
City of Salem and also a look at the regional advantages to having the City become
a member of the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority. The City put out an RFP last
sumner seeking proposals for waste disposal to what we do currently as well as
opening altemative optiors which is what the Roanoke Valley Resource Authoriff
took advantage of ultimately offering altemative optiors to City Council.
Currently, the City marutges the tipping floor, the day to day operatiorq
corrpacting the hash into tractor trailers; and Waste Management tlrough a contract
with Thompson Trucking, delivers the trash to a Waste Management facility in
Amelia County where the tractor trailer goes on a tipper and dunps into a landfill.
The altemative would be joining the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority where
trash would be handled differently and that process is still in discussion but would
go to the Smith Gap landfill in Roanoke County. Mr. Boggess then gave the pros
and cors ofthe options being evaluated.
The financial arnlysis did not give a black and white answer. The majority of staff
reconrnended in favor of membership to the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority
after negotiating fees and buy in cost that would leave the City with no debt and
would provide fair job offers to City enrployees who would become Roanoke
Valley Resource Authority enployees. There was one ernployee that decided to
stay with the City as he is near retirement. The long term analysis showed better
long term pricing trends for the City of Salem and the Roanoke Valley Resource
Authority.
The public hearing was opened.
Albert Crowder of 114 Valleydale Avenue, stated after hearing the comments from
Mr. Boggess there are still unarswered questions. He expressed concem over the
cornment that "the rnajority of the staff agreed" and thought Council
should consider that since solneone on the staff felt the joinder was not the right
thing to do. There were no further corffnents and the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Jones stated he made his decision based on what is best for the citizens for
Salern He firther stated he was not in favor of the joinder at first but after looking
at it, this solution will be a long term fix for the City of Salern
Vice-Mayor Givens stated the City has been talking about this issue for the last year
and a half and while he also was not in favor in the beginning however after
weighing the pros and cons, along with the reduction of the City's debt, he felt
this was best for the City of Salern
Jane Johnson stated she agrees with Mr. Jones and Mr. Givens. She firther stated
Council has done due diligence and looked at what would be best for the enployees
and the citizers. Mr. Jones stated after looking furtheq he felt the staff member that
was not origunlly in agreement had changed their mind but would not speak for that
persol].
Mr. Chisom stated he agreed with the previous cornrnents and from a financial
perspective this is a good option for citizers. He also felt it is srnart to partner
regionally and will give the City an opportunity to partner with our community and
the citizens will not see any difference in their disposal of waste.
Mayor Foley stated once you look at the numbers it makes perfect serse to join the
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority as well as ifyou look at the cost and the
savings to the City.
There were no flrther cornrnents.
C. Conveyance of Property
Hold a public hearing and consider conveyance of 1271 krdiana Street,
approximately 7.0 acres, more of less, being a portion of Tax Map # 198-6-2.1 and
Tax Map # 219-l-l in relation to the joinder with the City of Salem and the
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority. (As advertised in the June 6, 2016 issue of
tIrc Roanoke Times.)
A public hearing was held. There were no cornrnents.
D. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Joinder Agreement
Consider and adopt resolution 1293 approving the reorganization and expansion of
the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority by providing that the City of Salem join the
authority, approving and authorizing the execution of amended and restated Articles
of Incorporation.
Jim Chisom motioned to adopt resolution 1293 approving the reorganization and
expansion ofthe Roanoke Valley Resource Authority by providing that the City of
Salemjoin the authority, approving and authorizing the execution of amended and
restated Articles of Incorporatio[ Vice-Mayor John Givens seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chisonl Foley, Givens, Johnso4 Jones
E. Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members and Facilities Use Agreement
Consider adoption of Resolution 1294 authorizing the amended and restated
Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members and Facilities Use Agreement,
upon certain tenm and conditiors.
Jim Chisom motioned to adopt Resolution 1294 autl:r:iizng the amended and
restated Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Members and Facilities Use
Agreement, upon certain terms and conditiors. Mlliam Jones seconded the motion
Ayes: Chisorg Foley, Givens, Johnsoq Jones
E Roanoke Valley Resource Authority Extension
Consider adoption of resolution 1295 authorizing and providing for an additional
period of time for the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to exist as a corporatiorl
upon certain terrns and conditions.
Jim Chisom motioned to adopt resolution 1295 au1"tninngand providing for an
additional period of time for the Roanoke Valley Resource Authority to exist as a
corporatioq upon certain terrns and conditions. Mce-Mayor John Givens seconded
the motion
Ayes: Chisor4 Foley, Givens, Johnso4 Jones
G. Amendment to Solid Waste Agreement
Corsider request to amend the Solid Waste Disposal Ageement between the City
of Salem and Botetourt County.
William Jones motioned to approve the amendment to the Solid Waste Disposal
Agreement between the City of Salem and Botetourt County. Vice-Mayor John
Givers seconded the motion
Ayes: Chisonl Foley, Givens, Jokson, Jones
H. Amendment to Solid Waste Agreement
Consider request to arnend the Solid Waste Disposal Ageement between the City
of Salem and Craig County.
Vice-Mayor John Givens motioned to approve the amendment to the Solid Waste
Disposal Agreement between the City of Salem and Craig County. Jane Johnson
seconded the motion
Ayes: Chisonl Foley, Givens, Johnson, Jones
I. Public Improvements Bond
Hold a public hearing and consider adoption of ordinance, with emergency
provisiors to authorize the issuance of general obligation public irrprovement bonds
in the City of Saler4 Mrginia in an aggregate principal arnount not to exceed
J.
$11,500,000. (As advertised inthe May 29,2016 and June 5,2016 issues of the
Roanoke Ttmes.) Audit - Financc Committco
Doug Gebhart with Davenport & Corrpany, a financial advisor to the City of Salem
gave presentation On May 9,2016, after consulting with City stafl Davenport &
Corrpany distributed an RFP to obtain a commercial bank loan on 2016,4. and
20168 bonds. There were responses from six banks, local and national which
include, Bank of Floyd, Capital One, Carter Bank, Key Bank, Pinnacle Public
Financing and Union Bank. The terms include: a 2}-year, fixed rate at 2.50o/o \ith
no closing costs and prepayable at anytime. The taxable rate was at 2.50oh for l0
years.
Mr. Boggess gave the figures of what the money would be used for. Approximately
$5,000,000 ofthe bond is an enterprise obligation for automated meter reading for
water and electric meters being replaced. The remainder is for the Red Sox ball
field improvements, a ladder truck and fire engine, new roof at the library, new roof
and reorientation for security puposes at the courthouse, Salem Stadium furf, social
services building rehabilitatio4 downtown inprovements, Red Sox field scoreboard
and tlree pieces of equipnrent, an excavator, rubber tire loader and dump truck for
the Street Department.
A public hearing was held and no corffnents were made.
Mce-Mayor John Givens motioned adoption an ordinance, with emergency
provisions to authorize the issuance of general obligation public inprovement bonds
in the City of Salenrq Mrgoia in an aggregate prirrcipal arnount not to exceed
$ I 1,500,000. (As advertised in the May 29,2016 and June 5, 2016 issues of the
Roanoke Times). Wlliam Jones seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chisorq Foley, Givens, JohnsorL Jones
General Obligation Public Improvement Bond
Consider adoption of resolution 1297 atthoinngthe issuance and sale of General
Obligation Public Inprovement Bond, Series 201 64 and Series 201 68. Audit -
Finance Comnlttee
Ms. Boggess stated just prior to the meeting there was an amendment to resolution
1297 under number 2 Bond Details, ItemA. Due to part of the bond being taxable
and part tax exerrpt, the City is only allowed to use up to $10,000,000 in private
placement of tax exenpt bond. The Regiorul Jail Authority also has issuance and
due to the City being a part of the authority some of ttnt debt is assigred to the City
which would exceed the $10,000,000 limit. Therefore, since the rate is the same
the City would move the money between the taxable and tax exerrpt sides. Jim
Chisom motioned to adopt the amended resolution 1297 autlniantgthe issuance
and sale of General Obligation Public Inprovement Bond, Series 2016A and Series
20168. Jane Johnson seconded the nntion.
Ayes: Chisorn, Foley, Givens, Johmon, Jones
K Appropriation of Funds
Consider request to accept and appropriate 510,245,561 in FY2016 bond proceeds
for capital projects. Audit - Finance Cornnittee
Mce-Mayor John Givers motioned to accept and appropriate $10,245,561 in
FY2016 bond proceeds for capital projects. Wlliam Jones seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chisorrl Foley, Givers, Johnson, Jones
L. Admissions Tax
Corsider and adopt an ordinance inposing an admissiors tax on certain events
within the City of Saleq by amending the admissiors tax definitiors and rate.
Audit - Financc Commrttec
Mce-Mayor John Givers motioned to adopt an ordinance irrposing an admissions
tax on certain events within the City of Salerq by amending the admissiors tax
definitions and rate. William Jones seconded the rmtion
Ayes: Chisorq Foley, Givers, Johnsor; Jones
M. Water Rates
Corsider ordinance on first reading to amend Chapter 90, Article IV Division 2,
Section 90-257 of the City Code to adopt water rates for fiscal years 2017 - 2021 .
Audit - Finance Commrttee
Mce-Mayor John Givens motioned to adopt ordinance on first reading to amend
Chapter 90, Article IV Division 2, Section 90-257 of the City Code to adopt water
rates for fiscal years 2017 - 2021. William Jones seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chisonl Foley, Givens, Johnsorl Jones
N. Sewer Rates
Consider ordinance on first reading to amend Chapter 90, Article I! Division I[
Section 90-303, Subdivision I, and Chapter 90 , Article IV Division IV Section 90-
322, Subdivison II, ofthe City Code to adopt changes pertaining to charges for
sewage disposal for fiscal years 2017 - 2021. Audit - Finance Corunirtee
Mce-Mayor John Givens motioned to adopt an ordinance on first reading to amend
Chapter 90, Article I! Division I[ Section 90-303, Subdivision I, and Chapter 90,
Article I[ Division I{ Section 90-322, Subdivison II, of the City Code to adopt
changes pertaining to charges for sewage disposal for fiscal years 2017 - 2021.
William Jones seconded the motion_
Ayes: Chisorrl Foley, Givens, Jotrson, Jones
O. dpropriation of Funds
Consider request to accept and appropriate \ML ksurance Prograrns (VMLtr) grant
in the anrount of $2,899. Audit - Finance Conrnuttce
Mce-Mayor John Givens motioned to accept and appropriate VML ksurance
Programs (VMLJP) grant in the amount of $2,899. William Jones seconded the
motion
Ayes: Chisorq Foley, Givens, Johrson, Jones
7. Closed Session
A. Closed Session
Hold a closed session pursuant to provision of S ection 2.2-37l1A(3) of the
1950 Code of Mrginia, as amended, to discuss property the City may wish to
sell.
The certification was read by Vice-Mayor Givens for Council to move into a
Closed SessionMce-Mayor John Givers rrntioned hold closed session pursuant to
provision of Section2.2-37llA(3) of the 1950 Code of Mrginia, as amended, to
discuss property the City may wish to sell. Jane Johrson seconded the motion
Ayes: Chisonl Foley, Givers, Jokson, Jones
Adjoumment
The meeting adjoumed at 9: l5 p.mMce-Mayor John Givens motioned for
adjoumnrent. Jane Johnson seconded the motion.
Ayes: Chisonl Foley, Givers, Johrson, Jones
IEM#54_
DArE t ^a'1 -tb
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIry OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CIry HALL
MEETING DATE: June 13,2016
AGENDA ITEM: First Reading to amend the Ordinance imposing admissions
tax on certain events within the City
SUBMITTED BY: Rosemarie B. Jordan, Direclor of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City has amended the admissions tax ordinance to reflect an increase in the rate from
5o/o to 7o/o. ln addition to the rate change, City staff has amended the calculation of interest
and penalties. Additional language has been added to describe the maximum amount of
the penalties to be calculated. These changes have been reviewed by the Commission of
the Revenue and the City Attorney.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adopting the first reading of the ordinance concerning admissions tax.
AN ORDINANCE IMPOSING AN ADMISSIONS TAX ON CERTAIN EVENTS WITHIN THE CITY OF
SALEM,VIRGINIA, BYAMENDINGTHE ADMISSIONS TAX DEFINITIONS AND RATE.
BE lr oRDAINED BY THE couNCtL oF THE ctw oF SALEM, vtRGtNtA, that Article vil, section 82-
20-239 the following ordinance be amended, revised and reordained to read as follows:
ARTICLE VII. - ADMISSIONS TAX
Section s 82-209-239
State Law reference- Excise tax on admissions, Code of Virginia, $ 58.1-3840.
Sec. 82-206. - Definitions.
The following words, terms and phrases, when used in this article, shall have the meanings
ascribed to them in this section, except where the context clearly indicates a different meaning:
Admission chorge means the charge made for admission to any amusement or
entertainment, exclusive of any federal tax thereon, including a charge made for season tickets,
whether obtained by contribution or subscription, and including a cover charge or a charge made
for the use of seats or tables, whether reserved or otherwise, and for similar accommodations in
the city.
Ploce of omusement or entertoinmenf means any place in the city, including the Salem-
noanet<e+er#i+y Salem Civic Center and the municipal athletic field, wherein or whereat any of
the following are located, conducted, performed, exhibited or operated and for which an
admission charBe is made: a circus; a carnival; a menagerie; a moving picture show; a fair; a show
or an exhibition of any kind; a dance; a baseball, basketball or football game; a wrestling match
or a boxing match or a sport of any kind; a swimming contest or exhibition; a swimming pool; a
concert; a theatrical, vaudeville, dramatic, operatic or musical performance or a performance
similar thereto; a lecture, talk, literary reading or performance similar thereto; an attraction such
as a merry-go-round, Ferris wheel, roller coaster, leap-the-dips or the like; an automobile race; a
midget auto race; a horse race; a horse show; an ice skating or roller skating rink or arena; or any
other public amusement, performance or exhibition. The foregoing enumeration of specific
amusements and entertainments shall not be deemed to exclude other amusements and
entertainments otherwise within the meaning of those words.
(ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-ss.1)
Cross reference- Definitions and rules of construction generally, g 1-2.
Sec. 82-207. - Levy; rate.
There is hereby imposed
and levied by the City a tax at the rate of seven percent (7%) of the amount paid for the
admission to any place of amusement or entertainment is hereby levied upon and shall be
collected from every person who pays an admission charge to such a place.
Page 1
(Ord. of 2'9-81, S 14-55.2)
sec. 82-208. - Collection.
Every person receivin8 any payment for admission to any place of amusement or
entertainment with respect to which a tax is levied under this article shall collect the amount of
tax hereby imposed from the person making an admission payment at the time of the payment
of such admission. lftickets or cards of admission are issued, the tax shall be collected at the time
of the issuance of such tickets or cards. The taxes required to be collected under th is article shall
be deemed to be held in trust by the person required to collect such taxes until remitted as
required in this article.
(ord. of 2-9'81, I 14-55.3)
Sec. 82-209. - Report and remittance.
The person collecting any admission tax required by this article shall make out a report upon
such forms and setting forth such information as the commissioner ofthe revenue may prescribe
and require, showing the amount of admission charges collected, exclusive of the federal tax
thereon, and the tax from the admissions for which he is liable, and shall sign and deliver such
report to the commissioner of the revenue with a remittance of such tax. Such reports and
remittances shall be made on or before the last day of each month covering the amount of tax
collected during the preceding month. lfthe remittance is by check or money order, the check or
money order shall be payable to the city, and all remittances received under this article by the
commissioner of the revenue shall be promptly turned over to the city treasurer.
iord. of 2-9 81, 5 14-55.4)
Sec.82-210. - lnterest and penalties.
(a) lf any person shall fail or refuse to remit to the commissioner of the revenue the tax
required to be collected and paid under this article within the time and in the amount
specified in this article, there shall be added to such tax by the commissioner of the
revenue interest at the rate of@
i5
frem the date su€h tax is Cue and payable, there shall be added therete by the
eeRFissi€n€+ ten
percent (10%) for the first month the taxes are past due and five percent (5%) for each
month thereafter, up to a maximum of twenty-five percent (25%) of the taxes due but
not remitted, or 510.00, whichever is greater. The penalty in no .ase shall exceed the
amount of the tax assessed.
(b) ln the eveht that any tax under this section is not paid by the due date, interest at the
rate often percent (10%) shall begin accruing on the 30ih day of said delinquency until
the tax is paid in full.
Page 2
(c) ln the case of a false or fraudulent return with intent to defraud the City of any tax due
under this anicle, a penalty of fifty percent (50%) of the tax shall be assessed against
the person required to collect, account for and pay over such tax.
(ord. of 2-9-81, S 14-55.s)
Sec. 82-211. - Failure to collect and report tax.
lf any person shall fail or refuse to collect the admissions tax required by this article and to
make, within the time provided in this article, any report and remittance required by this article,
the commissioner of the revenue shall proceed in such manner as he may deem best to obtain
facts and information on which to base his estimate of the tax due. As soon as the commissioner
of the revenue shall procure such facts and information as he is able to obtain upon which to
base the assessment of any tax payable by any person who has failed or refused to collect such
tax and to make such report and remittance, he shall proceed to determine and assess against
such person the tax and penalties provided for by this article and shall notify such person by
registered mail sent to his last known place of address ofthe total amount of such tax and interest
and penalties, and the total amount thereof shall be payable within ten days from the date of
such notice.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-55.6)
Sec. 82-212. - Records to be kept.
It shall be the duty of every person liable for the collection and payment to the city of any
tax imposed by this article to keep and preserve, for a period oftwo years, such suitable records
as may be necessary to determine the amount of such tax as he may have been liable for the
collection of and payment to the city, which records the commissioner ofthe revenue shall have
the right to inspect at all reasonable times.
(Ord. of 2-9 81, 5 14-55.7)
Sec. 82-213. - Cessation of business.
Whenever any person required to collect and pay to the city a tax under this article shall
cease to operate or otherwise dispose of his business, any tax payable under this article to the
city shall become immediately due and payable and such person shall immediately make a report
and pay the tax due.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-55.8)
Sec. 82-214. - Exceptions.
No tax shall be payable under this article by the following persons if admitted to any place
of amusement or entertainment free:
(1) A bona fide officer or employee of the operator of such a place.
(2) Any federal, state, city, cou nty or town official or em ployee on official business.
Page 3
(3) Any person whose admission to such a place is required for the performance of some
duty or work for the operator of such a place.
(4) Any newspaper reporter, photographer, telegrapher, radio announcer or person
performing a similar vocation who is admitted for the performance of special duties in
connection with any event and whose special duties are the sole reason for his presence.
(5) A child under 12 years of age.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-55.9)
Sec. 82-215. - Temporary places of amusement or entertainment.
(a) Whenever any place of amusement or entertainment makes an admission charge which is
subject to the tax levied in this article and the operation of such a place is of a temporary or
transitory nature, the commissioner of the revenue shall require the report and remittance
of the admission tax to be made on the day following its collection if the operation is for one
day only, or on the day following the conclusion of a series of performances or exhibitions
conducted or operated on more than one day, or at such other reasonable time or times as
he shall determine.
(b) Before any temporary or transient amusement or entertainment shall begin operation, and
before any license shall be issued therefor if a license is required, the person operating such
temporary or transient amusement or entertainment shall deposit with the city treasurer a
sum of money, or in lieu thereof a bond with corporate surety conditioned upon the faithful
compliance with this article and in a form approved by the city attorney, in an amount to be
estimated by the commissioner of the revenue as sufficient to cover the admission tax
required to be collected by such person under the provisions ofthis article, which money or
bond shall be security for the collection of and payment to the city of the admission tax. At
the conclusion of such transitory or transient operation in the city, such person shall file with
the commissioner ofthe revenue the report required by this article and pay the tax collected
to the treasurer of the city. Upon such report being filed and payment being made, the city
treasurer shall refund the deposit, or cancel the bond, as the case may be.
(c) Should any person fail to file the report required by this article or pay the amount of tax
collected within five days from the termination of the operation of such amusement or
entertainment, the commissioner of the revenue may thereupon assess such person with
the tax computed on the basis ofthe best information available to him and proceed to collect
the tax out ofthe deposit, or by virtue ofthe bond, and by any other lawful means.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-s5.10)
Sec. 82-216. - Admission charges of less than S0.10.
Where the admission charge is less than S0.f0, no tax shall be payable. Amounts paid for
admission by season tickets or subscription shall be exempt only if the amount to be charged the
holder or subscriber for a single admission is less than $0.10.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-55.11)
Page 4
Sec.82-2t7. - Penalty for violation of article.
Violating or failing to comply with any of the provisions of this article shall constitute a class
1 misdemeanor and be punishable as such, and each such violation or failure shall constitute a
separate offense. Such conviction shall not relieve any such person from the payment, collection
or remittance of such tax as provided in this article.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-55.13)
Sec. 82-218. - Powers and duties of license inspector.
It shall be the duty of the license inspector to enforce the provisions of this article.
(Ord. of 2-9-81, 5 14-55.14)
Secs. 82-219-82-239. - Reserved. All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the
provisions of this ordinance be and the same are hereby repealed.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days after its final passage.
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
James L. Chisom -
William D. Jones -
Jane W. Johnson -
John C. Givens -
Byron Randolph Foley -
Passed:
Effective:
/sl
Mayor
ATTEST:
James E. Ta liaferro, ll
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia
Page 5
c:{A
lTEL4 # :'JY
DATEb-al-tb
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE: June 27,2016
AGENDA ITEM: Second Reading of the Ordinance to adopt water rates for
'fiscal yeat 2017 - 2021
SUBMITTED BY: Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City has received the report from DraperAden and Associates that proposes the water
rate changes for fiscal year 2017 thru fis cal yeat 2021 . The attached ord inance shows the
proposed rates which include a 3yo increase for fiscal year 2017 lhtu 2019 and a 2'/o
increase for 2020 thru 2021. This ordinance also includes the change to add a rate for
"Duplex-Residential". This would change the base rate charged for all residential duplex
customers. This new base rate would become effective July '1, 2016. The rate changes, if
adopted, would be effective as of January lstofeach year. Thiswillbethe second reading
of the ordinance for the proposed water rates.
FISCAL IMPACT;
The fiscal impact of these changes on the budget for fiscal year 2017 is anticipated to be
an increase in revenues of approximately $181 ,300.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adopting the second reading of the ordinance to adopt water rates
proposed by the Draper Aden study for flscal year 2017 - 2021.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND, REVISE, AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 90, ARTICLE IV, DIVISION 2,
SECTION 90-257, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, PERTAINING TO RATES
WITHIN CITY.
BE lT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VlRGlNlA, that Section 90-
257, Division 2, Article lV, Chapter 90, of The Code of the City of Salem, Virginia, be amended,
revised, and reordained to read as follows:
CHAPTER 90
UTILITIES
Article lV. Rates and Charges.
Division 2. Water.
Sec. 90-257. Rates within city.
There are hereby established the following customer classes and rates for consumers of
water within the City effective July 1, 201e6. The following consumer classes are: Residential,
generally characterized as serving single family residential household regardless of the level of
consumption; Smoll Commercial, a business entity that generally uses less than 75,000 gallons
of water per month; Large Commerciol, business entities both commercial or industrial using in
excessof75,000gallonsofwaterpermonth;Multi-Unit,those
residential customers with more than two ene housing units er+usin€s+
l€€aties receiving water through one meter or those commercial customers with more than
one business location receiving water through one meter; Duplex-Residential, those
residential customers with two housing units receiving water through one meter; Fire Service
are the connections that are for metered fire suppression systems.
The following base charges are hereby established and effective January I,2O!7 a+
n€+€d:
WATER BASE SERV]EE FEE
l.qf:e{3 Jan#14 Ja+2CI12 Jen#t3 Jan#14
Residential Ss#ss-.se S+as S{eJs sr+31
5'tq€l{4€{H'rq€+€iat S{Js sJJ+e saeJe s2es7 Sae^63
te+g+€€mm€+€ial Sss#Ssss $3s5s w S4€s
Multi Unit $26-oe re S2.g#w w,
Fire Serviee $rzse Suse SJsJe s2e57 w
WATER BASE SERVICE FEE
lan.2OL7 Jan. 2018 Jan.2019 lan.2O2O lan.2O2L
Residentia!$L2.24 S12.oo S12.98 $L3.24 s13.s1
Smal! Commercial $za.qt 52s.2L s2s.96 s25.48 Szt.ot
Large Commercia!Sso.gg Ssr.go Ssg.+s Ssq.sg sss.52
Multi-Unit Sgz.+g Sge.ss Srg.zr s40.s0 s41.31
Fire Service s24.47 Szs.zr s2s.e6 s26.48 s27.OL
WATER BASE SERVICE FEE
July 2016 lan. 2OL7 Jan.2018 Jan. 2019 lan.2O2O lan.2O2L
Duplex-
Residential
523.76 izq.qe s2s.2o s2s.e6 s26.48 $27.O2
The following base charges are hereby estabtished and effective July L, zot6:
The following volume charges are hereby established and effective as noted:
Non-User Fees are fees charged to customers if service is available to the property
whether or not they use this utility.
WATER VetUME RATE (6PM - Gallens Per Menth)
JsIf2elS Ja+=411 Jen#tz Jan#13 Jan#;14
Si+st+f0e€+U s2Js 5+65 s442 5442 s4+6W$s#S+8e S4Js S4.€e $5#W SBs 54+g $4+l s4+6 $5#
75pee€Pr4-
l@Bee€+M
s4.€e s4+1 $4Jt Ss+l Ss-23
W
ener
$;et Ss+s *4e
*Effeetive with all bills rendered en er after Mareh li 2012,
WATER VOLUME RATE (GPM = Gallons Per Month)
lan.2017 Jan. 2018 Jan. 2019 lan.2O2O lan.2O2L
First 5,000 GPM $s.zs 5s.ar Ss.sz Ss.sa Ss.80
5,000 - 10,000 GPM Ss.az $s.eg Ss.eo Ss.gz s6.04
10,000 - 75,000
GPM
Ss.go Se.oa Se.ze $s.gg s6.s1
75,000 GPM -
1,000,000 GPM
Se.zo Se.gg Ss.sa Ss.zr s5.84
1,000,000 GPM and
over
Sg.ss Sg.zg Sg.go Sg.gs s4.05
Water Nen User Fees
UV+ef^g Jan#Il Jan#12 Jan#43 Jan#14
a291€f#eew
Residential Rate $t44 Ss#$e42 5{"0,39 +rl4e
Water Non-User Fees
lan.2Ot7 Jan. 2018 Jan.2019 lan.2O2O lan.2O2L
32% o15,000 GPM
Residential Rate SLz.32 s12.6e $rg.oz s13.32 s13.60
All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance
be and the same are hereby repealed.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect on luly 1, 2016, W++E*€A5,i€-+he-
epinion ef eesn€il an emer8en€y exists, theref6re, the fa€t ef the ei(isten€e 6f su€h emergen€y
is hereby nevj de€lared tg exist and this qrdinan€e is se adgpted and 5hall be€€me effe€tive
l' i+€]1l'lel+
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
tis€-Mars4ye
James L. Chisom -
William D. Jones - Aye
Jane W.lohnson - Aye
lohn C. Givens - Aye
Byron Randolph Foley - Aye
Passed: F€b+ce+y+#P
Effective: Ma+€h-l':et2 July 1, 2016
/s/ Bvron Randolph Folev
Mayor
ATTEST:
y+ys+af+,a-6ema+ James E. Taliaferro, ll
Deps+ Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia
</'ITEM#5_
DAIE
(o-a'l-\\a
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
June 27,2016
Second Reading of the
fiscal yeat 2017 - 2021
Ordinance to adopt sewer rates for
SUBMITTED BY:Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City has received the report from Draper Aden and Associates that proposes the
sewer rate changes for fiscal yeat 2017 thru flscal yeat 2021. The attached ordinance
shows the proposed rates which include a 0% increase per year through fiscal year 2021 .
This ordinance also includes a change to add a rate class for "Duplex-Residential". This
new rate would effectively change the base rate charged for all residential duplex
customers to be equal to two times the base rate of regular residential service. The rate
changes, if adopted, would be effective as of JanuaryI sr of each year. The new base rate
category would be effective July 1, 2016. This will be the second reading of the ordinance
for the proposed sewer rates.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact of these changes on the budget for fiscal year 2017 is anticipated to be a
zero increase in revenues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends adopting the second reading of the ordinance to adopt sewer rates
proposed by the Draper Aden study fot fiscal yeat 2017 - 2021.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND, REVISE, AND REORDAIN, SECTION 90-303, SUBDIVISION I,
DIVISION 4, ARTICLE IV, CHAPTER 90, AND SECTION 90-322, SUBDIVISION II, DIVISION 4,
ARTICLE IV, CHAPTER 90, OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, PERTAINING TO
CHARGES FOR SEWAGE DISPOSAL.
BE lT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGlNlA, that the sewage
disposal rate schedule be amended, revised, and reordained to read as follows:
ARTICLE IV.
DIVISION 4. SEWER SERVICE CHARGES lN CITY; PROHIBITED DISCHARGES
Subdivision l. ln General
Section 90-303. Domestic and industrial sewage, charges for disposal.
(a) There are hereby established the following customer classes and rates for the
consumption of sewer utility services within the City of Salem effective July 1, 2016 J€.ns€+)Fl-
2€f5. Residential, generally characterized as serving single-family residential households
regardless of the level of consumption; Small Commerciol, is a business entity that utilizes less
than 75,000 gallons per month; Lorge Commerciof are businesses entities both commercial or
industrial using in excess of 75,000 gallons per month; Multi-lJnit, those residential customers
beth residential and smalleemmereia{ with more than two ene housing units €r$rrsi+es}
le€ati€n served by a single meter or those commercial customers with more than one business
location served by a single meter; Duplex-Residentiol, those residential customers with two
housing units served by a single meter.
The following base charges are hereby established and effective January L,2OL7 a+
n€t€d:
W
Je+lel5 la+-2e{5 l€{1+€t17 Jen#lA Jan#19
Residential $22J€.SaJJ3 s23J5 s23s s23S3
S'ts€+14€tnm€"E€i€l $4541 S4s€6 w $4$Je $4tat
fa+e€aemm€r€ia+$sgs2 Se{J3 $9244 SessT Se4+1
Multi Unit Sgsll $68Je 56+48 $t€+7 $tg^gl
SEWER BASE SERVICE FEE
)an.2077 Jan. 2018 Jan. 2019 )an.2O2O Jan.202L
Residential 522.7O 5zz.to 5zz.to 522.7O 522.70
Small Commercial s4s.41 S+s.+r S+s.+r Sqs.qt S+s.+r
Large Commercial S90.82 Sgo.ez Sgo.sz Seo.82 Sgo.sz
Multi-Unit Soz. rr Sez.rr Sez. rr Soz.rr |ot.tt
The following base charges are hereby established and effective July L,2OL6:
The following volume charges are hereby established and effective as noted:
Non-User Fees are fees charged to customers if service is available to the property
whether or not they use this utility.
Unmetered Sewer Fees are fees charged to customers who have sewer service but not a
metered water service that provides a monthly reading for usage.
SEWER BASE SERVICE FEE
July 20L5 )an.2O!7 Jan. 2018 Jan. 2019 Jan.2O2O Jan.2027
Du plex-Residentia I S+s.+o s4s.40 s4s.40 s4s.40 s4s.40 s4s.40
Ja+#15 Jan#l€J€{#€87 Ja+#;18 Ja+JeI9
Fi+*€pee€P+4 Sss Ss=4s Sss s5+6 SsslWSssSs+s Ss#$s#$sslWSs€e S+4s Ssse $s#Sss+
Ss€s s5=45 ss+g $s=ss Ss€+
SEWER VOLUME RATE (GPM = Gallons Per Month)
Jan.2OL7 Jan. 2018 Jan. 2019 Jan. 2020 Jan.2O2L
First 5,000 GPM Ss.3e Ss.:g ss.39 Ss.sg Ss.gg
5,000 - 10,000 GPM Ss.sg Ss.gg ss.3e Ss.ag Ss.gg
10,000 - 75,000 GPM Ss.ss Ss.gg ss.3e Ss.gg ss.3e
Allover 75,000 GPM Ss.ss Ss.sg Ss.sg Ss.3s Ss.sg
M
Jan#15 Jan=4t6 J€nJ€il7 Jan#t8 Jan#-19
e296€f#eew
Residential Rate $ule ${^6s6 w sr6€8 $+9s4
Sewer Non-User Fees
Jan.2OL7 Jan. 20L8 Jan. 2019 Jan. 2020 lan.2O2t
32% of 5,000 GPM
Residential Rate Sr+.+o s14.40 Sr+.+o Sr+.+o 5r+.+o
Unmetered Sewer User Fees
Jan=2ei5 Jan#J€nJ€r47 Ja+#{A Jen419
@
Residential Rate w $4AJ1 S4s#S4ss3 w
Unmetered Sewer User Fees
Jan.2OL7 Jan. 2018 Jan. 20L9 Jan.2020 Jan.2O2t
LOO% of 4,000 GPM
Residential Rate 544.26 iqq.ze S+q.zo s44.26 544.26
(b) All consumers who purchase from the city only a part of the water consumed or used
by them and all persons who purchase or acquire water from any other source, regardless, shall
pay based on such volume as set forth in subsection (a) as would have been assessed against
such consumers had they been furnished all their water from the city's water system for
disposal of industrial sewage. ln order to determine the amount of water used by such
consumers, regardless of its source, when less than the entire amount of water so used is
furnished through the city's water system, such consumers shall install water meters of a type
currently used by the city's water and sewer department, so that the same may be read in like
manner as the city water meters are now read, and the proper charge for industrial sewage can
be fixed and determined on a monthly basis as if such water had actually been purchased each
month from the city at the city's prevailing rates, and in addition thereof, the surcharges as are
provided for in this subdivision.
Sec. 90-322. Reserved
The sewer rates herein established shall applyto all bills rendered afterJuly t,2OtG
lanuaq,4#1s.
All ordinances, or parts of ordinances, in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance
be and the same are hereby repealed.
This ordinance shall be in fullforce and effect on July L,zOtG la#a+V-l#fS.
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
James L. Chisom -
William D. Jones -
Jane W. Johnson -
John C. Givens -
Byron Randolph Foley -
Passed:
Effective: July 1, 2015
/s/ Bvron Randolph Folev
Mayor
ATTEST:
James E. Taliaferro, ll
Clerk of Council
City of 5alem, Virginia
nrn/l+s6e4
DATE b -a-t-tt'
AN ORDINANCE ENACTED PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 15.2-2006
OF THE 1950 CODE OF VIRGINIA, AS AMENDED, PROVIDING FOR VACATING
PORTIONS OF STREETS IN THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA,
WHEREAS, a petition has been filed with the Council of the City of Salem, Virginia
pursuant to the provisions of the aforesaid Section 15.2-2006, requesting that a portion of Peery
Drive, as described in the petition as two portions of Peery Drive on the northern and southern
sides at Thompson Memorial Drive, containing less than 0.1 acre, adjacent to "John's Bridge," of
and up to and including the inside face or each parapet wall, excluding sidewalk and roadway ,
be permanently vacated and discontinued, said petition being filed by The Trustees of Roanoke
College; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said Code Section 15.2-2006, the petitioner in this proceeding
has caused a Public Notice to be published in the The Roonoke Times, a newspaper published
and having general circulation in the City of Salem, Virginia, such publication having been made
twice, with at least six days elapsed in between the first and second publication, to wit: May 29,
2016 and June 5, 2016, and such notice specified the time and place of hearing, to wit: June 13,
2016 at 7:30 p.m., in Council Chambers in the City of Salem, Virginia, at which time persons
affected may appear and present their views, all of which is shown by certificate of publication
executed by The Roanoke Times and filed with the papers in this proceeding;
WHEREAS, proper notice has been given to the land proprietors along the street affected
by the closing; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence submitted, is of the opinion that
vacating, discontinuing, and closing the aforesaid portion of Peery Drive will not abridge or
destroy any other rights and privileges of any person, that no inconvenience would result to
anyone therefrom, and that such closing fosters public safety and welfare, and is funher of the
opinion that the request of the petitioner should be granted; NOW, THEREFORE,
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CTTY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, thAt A
certain portion of Peery Drive, as described herein, be permanently vacated, discontinued, and
closed as provided in Section 15.2-2006 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended to date,
subject to the conditions herein, and in accordance with the law in such cases made and
provided, title to said land shall be vested in the adjoining property owners as provided by law.
BE IT FUTHER ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA, that the said vacation is expressly conditioned upon and subject to the following:
(1) The City of Salem retains an easement for public utilities across the vacated
portion of Peery Drive described as two portions of Peery Drive on the northern and southern
sides at Thompson Memorial Drive, containing less than 0.1 acre, adjacent to "John's Bridge," of
and up to and including the inside face of each parapet wall, excluding sidewalk and roadway.
(2) Any signage attached to the parapet walls situate within the vacated portion of
Peery Drive shall be installed and maintained as depicted on the plans of
{0002s73r-l }
dated ,2016 and shall comply with the sign ordinances of
the City of Salem.
(3) The Trustees of Roanoke College shall maintain said signage and the parapet
walls in a good, proper and workmanlike manner in accordance with the requirements of law.
(4) The City of Salem shall retain an easement and right-of-way across the vacated
portion of Peery Drive to each parapet wall for the purpose of maintenance and repair in the
event that the Trustees of Roanoke College defaults on its obligations as set forth herein.
(5) The City of Salem and the Trustees of Roanoke College shall enter into a
maintenance agreement conceming the signage and parapet walls located within the vacated
portion of Peery Drive and that said maintenance agreement may be recorded in the Clerk's
Office of the Circuit Court of the City of Salem, Virginia, at the option of the City of Salem.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA, that, upon the fulfillment of all requirements and conditions as provided herein
above, a certified copy of this ordinance be delivered by the City Clerk to the Clerk of the Circuit
Court of the City of Salem, Virginia, for recordation therein and to the City Engineer of the City
of Salem, Virginia, and that the City Engineer of Salem, Virginia make appropriate notation of
the vacation herein approved, on the maps and other documents in his office.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions of this ordinance be
and the same hereby repealed.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days after its final passage and
upon the fulfillment of all conditions, by the Trustees of Roanoke College, herein required.
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
James L. Chisom -
William D. Jones -
Jane W. Johnson -
John C. Givens -
Byron Randolph Foley -
Passed:
Effective:
Byron Randolph Foley
Mayor
City of Salem, Virginia
{0002s731-l }
ATTEST:
James E. Taliaferro, II
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia
I!;iiH. i*)-{>os*
FJ.r;=::
erurErrn'tueps
eEe11o3 o>loueog
eArJC ,{ree4 uo eSpug s,uqof
ACNJS ESNVJSIC IHCIS
,ffi
c
=os6
6
id
(Eo
U)
(o
cj
<ci
id
(Eo
o
(l,os
<t)
"ltt)
o
P(!
C)&
trt
EI
olUI
orlbo
H
ca
€
(.)otr(€
a
Ei-l
fNUo AU33d
c6:
EOYo -' i^Fo-i3oOll,,E-".=EaEE=
Et!.-EE O tro q ooo 9.E oO !Y C'-oo=
Q AETEboto o9 o
= c-9 O.::6EEE;s5g IE;
- o=-o.z o=
= 8.5iv Ifl Epssn] 5Ek=
=l'5E39vl = P,
Hl : ABF
IrI BE H;t-l=l -Not
391
HLil
Yle.#lxFiqlfr
ru lI
+lgl
EIRI
sl?l
3l3t
EIEIzl-1ol2ltr trJl(.)l=l
Lrl]UIL
uJ ol(ts<iuz
Elsl
Errc
E,lo I itl
=lr+=-g ts"."'|il -l
z |, l IOro':O- I T--=-
= I t, to r l" Ir r ll IF r I===-r t,!
I :l ^i ,'i I tc. ; 'i igE
ic J o o
oa il : =-6' I r | : C3=, t ,!! ' E$t
I o:Ee6r, ,t' : 6[9
Ep.g I ',t I )6 =c I /
a----l__*,;' l
,,,,,,,,,,
:=
:vor.rvou\Hotrv3nol No[rul1sHt\:7 97:1 1 0 r -9-9 I 0z vuY'lc:corue sHr-ron\:cotue ru.l.H:\lcErrocoi\c s03
UJ
tro
J
go
llJ
zooo
=IF
b
L
DNIIPAND ASSOC]ATES INC
RE:
June 13,2016
City of Salem
P.O. Box 869
Salem, VA 24153
Attn: Chuck Van Allman
Peery Drive and Thompson Memorial Drive
B&A,Inc. Project No. 05160005.00
Dear Mr. Van Allman:
'Ihis is to certiff that on June 8, 2076, Balzer and Associates, Inc. performed a site distance survey at the
intersection of Peery Drive and Thompson Memorial Drive in Salem, Virginia. The Sight Distance was
measured from the center of the travel lane 14.5' from the edge of the pavement of Thompson Memorial
Drive. I have reviewed the results of the site distance survey and the plans dated 0611012016 prepared by
Harvey Design Land Architects (HDLA) showing Sight Distance Study John's Bridge on Peery Drive
Roanoke College in Salem, Virginia. It is our understanding that the locations and horizontal dimensions
of the columns are not changing from the current locations; the columns are simply getting taller. Based
on the field data obtained on June 8, 2016; and noting that the speed limit on Thompson Memorial Drive
is 35 MPH and that Thompson Memorial Drive is a four (4) lane major road with divided median, the
Sight Distance Right for vehicles making a left tum exceeds the minimum required 480' and the Sight
Distance Left for vehicles making a right or left turn exceeds the minimum required 475' per VDOT:
Intersection Sight Distance Requirements Appendix F-Access Management Design Standards for
Entrance and lntersection Page 34.
Respectfully Submitted,
Balzer and Associates, Inc.
Wl,n n/,".-
John R. McAden, L.S.
JRIWcw
PLANNERS . ARCHITECTS . ENGINEERS o SURVEYORS
ROANOKE ,,?;j--,Vtlf,!i-), i.l;:r
1208 Corporoie Ckcle o Roonoke, Virginio 24018 o l54)l 172-9SBO. FAX (540) 172-BOSO
RETLECTING TOMORROW
fut,*m
$er'r-rto]
Lic. Nir.2002
&"u*r4$
www.bolzer.cc
F-34
lntersection Sight Distance
The following table shows intersection sight distance requirements for various speeds
along major roads:
ObloctHeight(3 s)
Linc of Sight \
TABLE 2.5 INTERSECTION SIGHT DISTANCE
Source: AASHTO Green Book, Chapter 9, Section 9.5.3, page 9-37 thru 9-52,'Table 9-
5 thru 9-14
**For all tables, use design speed if available, if not use legal speed.
' Rev. 1/'14
'' io.'l'.,'l Mrn.Y"tr--
l
SDR
(For a vehicle making a left turn)
a vehicle making a right or left turn)
rrro- l
- I ---:'\
]Frai"tl'llttl-I SDL
Sight Distance Right
ht Distance Left (For
SDR =
SDL = Sis
Height of Eye 3.5'Height of Object 3.5'
Design Speed (mph)**20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 70
SDL=SDR: 2 Lane Major
Road
oolt
225 280 22E 390 445 500 610 665 720 775
SDR: 4 Lane Major Road
(Undivided) or 3 Lane 315 375 440 500 565 625 690 815 875
SOL: 4 Lane lvlajor Road
(Undivided) or 3 Lane 240 295 355 415 530 590 650 710 765 825
SDR: 4 Lane Major Road
(Divided - 18'Median)275 340 410 480 545 615 680 750 820 885 955
SDL: 4 Lane Major Road
(Divided - 18'Median)240 295 355 415 475 530 590 650 710 765 825
SDR: 5 Lane Major Road
(continuous two-way turn-
lane)
265 335 400 465 530 600 665 730 800 860 930
SDL: 5 Lane Major Road
(continuous two-way turn-
tane)
)qi Jtc 375 440 500 565 625 690 750 815 Q'7 E
SDR: 6 Lane Major Road
(Divided - 18' Median)290 360 430 505 575 645 720 790 860 935 1005
SDL: 6 Lane Major Road
(Divided - 18' Median)315 375 440 500 565 625 690 815 875
SDL: (Where left turns
are physically restricted)210 260 310 JrrS 415 465 515 566 620 670 725
F-35
Note: Both SDR and SDL must be met at the entrance or intersection' unless left turns
are physically restricted by a median or channelization island; then only SDL is needed
lntersection sight distance determinations apply both horizontally and vertically,
measured in each direction, and are to be based on a height of driver's eye of 3.5' and a
height of object 3.5'.
The term "Major Road" refers to the road with the higher functional classification, or if
both have the same classification, the road with the higher volume.
lntersection sight distance does not control the access spacing for entrances and
intersections shown in f abh' 2-2.
For major roadways of more than four lanes, large truck volumes on a minor road or
median crossover, or median widths over 60', see MSHTO'S A Policv on Geometric
Desion of Hiqhwavs and Streets.
The Engineer must check each entrance and intersection to insure that adequate sight
distance is provided. On a typical two-lane road horizontal curve there are numerous
objects that restrict sight distance such as cut slopes, buildings, vegetation, vehicles,
etc.
These obstructions should be considered when reviewing commercial entrances. A
divided highway can have similar problems. lt is very important to obtain adequate
intersection sight distance for all "New" and "Reconstructed" commercial entrances from
the entrance as well as the left turn position into the entrance. lf the minimum
intersection sight distance values in the table mentioned above gellqtbe met, including
applying the adjustment factors for sight distances based on approach grades, a Design
Waiver shall be requested in accordance with llM-LD-227, see 2011 MSHTO Green
Book, Chapter 9, Section 9.5.3, page 9-32 for further guidance. Design Waiver and
Design Exception requirements are based on the following;
'l) Design Waiver - Meets Stopping Sight Distance but not lntersection Stopping
Sight Distance.
2) Design Exception - Does not meet the minimum Stopping Sight Distance.
The lntersection Sight Distance values in the table above permit a vehicle stopped on a
minor road or median crossover, to cross the major road safely or merge safely in the
case of turns.
The lntersection Sight Distance table above is based on the following criteria:
The MSHTO Green Book shows that it requires 7.5 seconds for a passenger car to
turn left onto a two-lane road. For a passenger vehicle to lurn right into the first lane, the
Green Book shows that only 6.5 seconds is required because drivers making right turns
generally accept gaps that slightly shorter than those accepted in making left turns.
The reference to 18'median in Table 2-5'applies to medians up to 18' in width ('18'or
leSS). For medians up to this width there is not suffcient room to stop so more sight
distance is needed. For wider medians, there would be room to stop in the middle of
the highway so sight distance can be less.
'Rev.'ll'16
(,
=c
oo
U(,o
E(D
EFzU
U(,U)Joo
onNo
n
I
@
I
@
oN
E.I
1.
2.
3.
4.
24" wide white pavement marking for stop bar.
Extend existing 4" wide white pavement line marking perpendicular
to stop bar marking. Place in same location as existing.
Stop bar markings per VDOT ROAD AND BRIDGE STANOARDS.
All pavement markings shall be installed in accordance with these
standards, the MUTCD, and the Virginia Supplement to the
MUTCO, unless otherwise specified.
The location, width, and type of the pavement markings shall be
specified in the drawing.
HTIAHARVEY DESIGN
L A N D ARCHITECTS
flff;[;l,l'^"'"H.Iiflff
z9
9XF: o)
3r_q'Oo: E EiftrOS
rs s ?
SE E
-
9-, -2 &
9.EHOa t-,
=m
Scale: As shown
Date: 6.'13.16
Sheet 1 of 1
New Stop Bar Postion
Sqlc: l" = 20'-0"
DNITI)axo essobte-rEs tNc
Legal description Northerly portion of Perry Drive to be vacated:
Commencing at a point on the Westerly right of way of Thompson Memorial Drive -
Rte. 311 at the Southeasterly corner of Roanoke College Trustees City of Salem T.M.
#72-1-1.1; thence following the Westerly right of way of Thompson Memorial Drive with
a curve to the left having a radius of 1472.39 feet, an arc distance of 176.53 feet, and a
chord bearing and distance of 510'45'17'W 176.42 feet to a point at the Northwesterly
intersection of Thompson Memorial Drive and Perry Drive, said point being the actual
point and place of Beginning (P.O.B. #1); thence with a proposed line along Thompson
Memorial with a curve to the left having a radius of 1472.39 feet, an arc distance of
33.13 feet and a chord bearing and distance of S06'40'33'W 33.13 feet to a point;
thence leaving Thompson Memorial Drive and with two proposed lines through Perry
Drive N85'20'02'W 55.21 feet to a point; thence N04'39'58'E 8.11 feet to a point on
the Northerly right of way line of Peery drive; thence with Perry Drive S85'20'02'E 3.00
feet; thence N04'39'58"E 25.00 feet to a point; thence S85"20'02"E 53.37 feet to the
point and place of Beginning, containing 0.041 AC. or 1,770 SF being a portion of Perry
Drive to be vacated and combined with City of Salem T.M. #85-1-1, property of
Roanoke College Trustees. Said proposed parcel being located in the City of Salem,
Virginia.
PLANNERS . ARCHITECTS. ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS
1208 Corporate Circle ' Roanoke, Virginia 24018 . (540) 772-958A . FAX (540) 272-8050
Legal description Southerly portion of Perry Drive to be vacated:
Commencing at a point on the Westerly right of way of Thompson Memorial Drive -
Rte. 311 at the Southeasterly corner of Roanoke College Trustees City of Salem T.M.
#72-1-1.1; thence following the Westerly right of way of Thompson Memorial Drive with
a curve to the left having a radius of 1472.39 feet, an arc distance of 176.53 feet, and a
chord bearing and distance of S'10'45'17'W 176.42 feet to a point at the Northwesterly
intersection of Thompson Memorial Drive and Perry Drive; thence with a curve to the
left having a radius of 1472.39 feet, an arc distance of 75.86 feet and a chord bearing
and distance of S05'40'40'W 75.85 feet to a point; thence 504'20'52'W 44.48 feet to a
point at the Southwesterly intersection of Perry Drive and Thompson Memorial Drive,
being the actual point and place of Beginning (P.O.B. #2); thence leaving Thompson
Memorial Drive and with the Southerly right of way of Perry Drive N40"27'32'W 6.11
feet to a point; thence N85'20'02'W 50.73 feet to a point; thence with three proposed
lines through Perry Drive N04'39'58"E 8,90 feet to a point, S85'20'02"E 54.98 feet to a
point along the Westerly right of way of Thompson Memorial Drive, and S04"20'52'W
13.21feet to the point and place of Beginning, containing 0.011 AC. or 499 SF being a
portion of Perry Drive to be vacated and combined with City of Salem T.M. #85-1-1,
propefty of Roanoke College Trustees. Said proposed parcel being located in the City
of Salem, Virginia.
PLANNERS. ARCHITECTS . ENGINEERS . SURVEYORS
1208 Corporate Circle'Roanoke, Virginia 240'18'(54O)772-9580.FAX (540) 772-8050
O PLATTED CORNER. ]RON PIN FOUND
THE INIENT OF I}IIS PLAT IS TO SHOW IHE LOCATION OF PROPOSED POtrNONS
OF PEERY DRT\E TO BE VACAIED AND IS NOT INIENDED TO REPRESE:NT AN
ICTI.,AL FIEID SURVB/.
la
h
ats
S
E sss
H+ $$$
HQS$x
Ei ttp
lrl o ci6'^.
SNue x
S qiqi q
E cieia
ROANOKE COLLECE IRUSTEESP/o r.M. /8s-t-t
D.A. A2l, PG. J70 RKE CO.
D.B- 6At, PO- 33J RKE CO.
D.B. 8tZ Pe. tgo RKE CO.
P.B. 14, PGS. 27-29
so4'J958'.W
25.OO'
o.olt Ac. (1,770 s.F.)
PEERY DRIIE IO BE VACATM
ANO COUBINED
'YIIHr . 185-t-l
44.48'nE
o.ot t Ac. (49e s.r.)THOMPSON MEMORTAL DRIVE - 80' R/W
lFts NiL,*
D-n* -
f, aso' il*t2o\i 5
ui
L:t
6L
$* I $
:: \ IF.'uo S ls
[R n
Rs:** Sdqi $qiai *
ei
s85'2047
N,W,\
I
i\6
H";\rit
F
.s
N
P
e
9J
Qq,
*E E.r I
s Hstjaoi8\.\
,.uoti
sa
3
a<
vt
F.::
k'
ki
l'r(.)5
s
a
I
I
EXHIBIT PLAT FROM RECORDS FOR
ROANOKE COLLEGE TRUSTEES
SHOWING PORTIONS OF EXISTING
PEERY DRIVE TO BE VACATED
AND COMBINED WITH
CITY OF SALEM TAX PARCET
#8s- 1- 1 - PROPERTY OF
ROANOKE COLLEGE TRUSTEES
CIry OF SALEM, V]RGINIA
DATED JUNE 23, 2016
JOB #O5160005.0O
SCALE: 1" : 40'
tuwr ff cwtcanE T
55.21
N
t fi
OF PEERY DRDE TO BE VAA|IM
AND COTIBINA fl|H
ru. f85-t-l
RTE SI I nNrm0 40 80 120rc
SCtALE: 1- : 4O'
IELI 5+0-772-958O FAX: 540-772-8050 ffi flIII
PLANNERS ARCHITECTS ENGINEERS SURVEYORS
Bolzer & Associotes, lnc. '1208 Corporote Circle Roonoke Vo. 24018
=72-E:---ii rffi"r. "-'n n or"ta
06-25-16 2
JoHN R. MCADEN ;
No.O020O2
( e&-;
rEM(#,,aJ
)
DATE G,- a1-lb-
AN ORDINANCE enacted pursuant to the provisions of Section 15.2-2006 of the 1950 Code of
virginia, as amended, providing for vacating a portion of a street in the city of Salem, virginia.
WHEREAS, an application has been filed with the Council of the City of Salem pursuant
to the provisions ofthe aforesaid Section 15.2-2006, requesting that the following unimproved
alley be permanently vacated and discontinued: a certain unimproved undedicated right of way
ofvarying width, running from the South side of Rose Lane approximately 340 feet to North
Stonewall Street, bounded on the East by the City of Salem, city ofsalem tax map parcels 47-3-
1 (910 Rose Lane), 47-3-5 (747 Thompson Memorial Drive), and 47-3-4 (700 N. Stonewall ) and
a portion of47-3-9 (708 N. Stonewall), and bounded on the West by parcels 47-2-4 (910 Rose
Lane) and 47-2-5 (709 North Stonewall), originally shown in the B&O Land Company 1,t
Division, PB I Page 37; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 1291 adopted on rhe 23rd day of May 2016, the Council
of the City of Salem, Virginia, appointed viewers to report whether or not in their opinion any
and ifany, what, inconvenience would result from permanently vacating the aforesaid alley as
set forth in the application; and
WHEREAS, the viewers reported in writing under date of June l, 2016 that, after having
been duly swom they viewed the said street and are unanimously ofthe opinion that no
inconvenience would result to anyone from permanently vacating a certain unimproved
undedicated right ofway ofvarying width, running from the South side ofRose Lane
approximately 340 feet to North Stonewall Street, bounded on rhe East by the City of Salem,
City of Salem tax map parcels 47-3-l (910 Rose Lane), 47-3-5 (7 47 Thompson Memorial Drive),
and,47-3-4 (700 N. Stonewall ) and a portion of 47-3-9 (708 N. Stonewall), and bounded onthe
West by pwcels 47 -2-4 (910 Rose Lane) and 47 -2-5 (709 North Stonewall), originally shown in
the B&O Land Company I't Division, PB I Page 37, as provided by Section 15.2-2006 of the
Code of Virginia; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said Code Section 15.2-2006, the applicants in this proceeding
have caused a public notice to be published in the Salem Times Register, a newspaper published
and having general circulation in the City of Salem, Virginia, such publication having been made
twice, with a lease six days elapsing between the first and second publication, to wit: on April
28,2016 and May 5, 2016, and such notice specified the time and place of hearing, to wit: May
23,2016, at 7:30 p.m., in the Council Chambers of the City of Salem, at which persons affected
may appear and present their views, all of which is shown by a Certificate of Publication
executed by the Salem Times and filed with the papers in this proceeding; and
WHEREAS, proper notice has been giving to the land proprietors along the street
affected by the closing; and
WHEREAS, this Council, after considering the evidence submitted, is of the opinion that
vacating, discontinuing, and closing the aforesaid alley will not abridge or destroy any of the
rights and privileges oiany person, and that no inconvenience would result to anyone therefrom,
and it is further ofthe opinion that the request ofthe applicants should be granted;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
SALEM, VIRGINIA, a certain unimproved , be permanently vacated, discontinued, and closed
undedicated right ofway ofvarying width, running from the South side ofRose Lane
approximately 340 feet to No(h Stonewall Street, bounded on the East by the city of Salem,
city of Salem tax map parcels 47-3-1 (910 Rose Lane), 47 -3-s (7 47 Thompson Memorial Drive),
afi 47 -3-4 (700 N. Stonewall ) and a portion of 47 -3'9 (708 N. Stonewall), and bounded on the
West by parcels 47 -2-4 (910 Rose Lane) md,47-2-5 (709 North Stonewall), as provided by
Section 15.2-2006 ofthe Code of Virginia as amended to date; and in accordance with the law in
such cases made and provided, title to said vacated alley shall vest in each adjacent property
owner to the centerline ofthe vacated alley; such vacation however, shall be subject to an
easement retained by the City for public utilities.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED BY THE COLINCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA, that a certified copy of this ordinance be delivered by the city clerk to the clerk of
the Circuit Court of the City of Salem, Virginia, for recordation therein, and to the City
Engineer of the City of Salem, Virginia, and that the City Engineer of Salem, Virginia, make
appropriate notation ofthe vacation herein approved, on the maps and other documents in his
office.
All ordinances or parts of ordinances in conflict with the provisions ofthis ordinance be
and the same are herby repealed.
This ordinance shall be in full force and effect ten (10) days after its final passage.
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
James L. Chisom -
William D. Jones
Jane W. Johnson -
John C. Givens
Byron Randolph Foley -
Passed:
Effective:
lsl
Mayor
Attest:
James E. Taliafeno, II
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia
IEM#GA_
srlE t-e'l-\b
CITY OF SALEM
PLANNING COMMISSION
ITEM #1
STAFF REPORT
Prepared by: Meeting Date:
city Adminiitrative Staff
*u;;""i';,3i1?"r,
June't0,2016
RE: Hold public hearing to consider the request of Judah Land LLC, contract purchaser, and
General Electric Company, property owner, for the rezoning of eight parcels located in
the 1500 block Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 221-3-8, 9, 10, 11' 12, 13,and 14,and
222-1-1) from RB Residential Business District to HBD Highway Business District.
SIIE]HARACTERIST!CS:
Zoning: RB Residential Business District
Land Use Plan Designation: Commercial
Proposed Zoning: HBD Highway Business District
Existing Use: Vacant
Proposed Use: Assisted Care Residenc,e and Life Care Facility
BAGKGROUND INFORMATION:
The subject property consists of eight parcels of approximately 6.4 acres located on the south
side of Boulevard-Roanoke, across from General Electric. The property is currently vacant.
The applicant wishes to rezone the property in order to construct an Assisted Care Residence
and Life Care Facility for veterans on the property. The new facility would be mostly on a single
floor and would have approximately 120 beds. lt would also include associate parking, buffer
yards and landscaping, and outdoor areas.
lsE:
ln accordance with Sec. '106-400 of the Zoning Ordinance, this project will require an approved
site plan prior to any work commencing.
ALTERNATIVES:
1) Recommend approval of the rezoning request to City Council as submitted.
2) Recommend approval of the rezoning request with conditions not yet received.
3) Recommend denial of the request.
EXISTING ZONING LANO USE PLAN
IAP FEATURCS
Frnrn L.nd lrt.
G-ipd.3
! cuencrel
I oomrowrr
I ccoxdc TVELoPUENT {ie./a
I ;cusrruel
B rlsrliurloN^L
G rx@{rsc
I ruerrc peaxs aJt o REcftE-arlota
I aesoexnrt
I YR^xsrrox r-
drY
,//o
v
ar,
I)
[Do"'
Eco
or
o'n
Zonl.iCffi-.**I-.---I*.**
ga.h.h-
I**-"-*
o"
MAP FEATURES
ff-".-_*r.f,+rq4-rI*
tI
PETITION FOR ZONING AMENDMENT (REZONING)
City oJ Salem Depa me of Pbnning ond Developmenl
Mslind. J. Payna, Di,€ctoI
Eflleil: ' . !' -lt:f it'1."-. --. I
1. Legal owner(s) of ploperty tequested to be rezoned:
Judah Land LLC. contract ourchaser. and General Eloc[rc Comoanv, orooerlv o$ner
2, Locaton of Prcperty:
Addr6s: lS00blockBoulevard-Roanoke
Subdivision: P t of Faifield and Glenmore
Oflhial Tax Map Number: 221-$8. 9. 10. 1 1. 12. 13. & 14 ad 2221-l
3. Charadedstics of Propeily:
Size (Acreage):6,4 ases
Deed Resbhtions:
Present Use. Vacant
Judy Hotrgh, Planner
Emait 1-'1r'i1'': --3.1;.11-' 1"
Telephona: 540-375-3007
Bon TIlPp, Planner
Email:' !.lj_1_].'..ri,--.'--:- :'
Zonlng Clasilicalion:
Present Zoning:RB Residential Business District
Poposed bning: HBD Hhhwav Businass Disltict
Land Use Oesignatbn: Commercial
5. R.asm(s) for Rezoning Request (tncluding proposed use):
Asslsted Livino/Lono Tem Care Facilitv
6raolt6
Mailing Address:
Tolephone Number:
7. Afidavit
A. The undersigned persm cedfies [rat his petition and the foregoing answers, slatements, and otirer infomatim
herewilh suhnitled are in all respecb tue and corecl to lhe bost ol fiek knouledge and bellsf, Also, lho
pettioner mderstands that a 'l',lotke of Zonlng Requesf sign $lill be psted on tn pmperty by the Clty.
lnlercsl h Pmperty:
Mailing Addnss:Jud* tand LLC
5722 Lonorrdoe Circle, Roanoke froinia 2i1018 -
Telephora Number: 510-314-7807 Sandra Ceohas 85(H2G6i43 Shetone Csohas
6. Agen(s) or representatrve(s) of progerty owne(s): (Spscify intelsst) y1na".lj f. or.JG-
futrafi r.an^dr,Lc
57 22 lanAttidtae eiailt' lfutaruAc W@nia 2401 I
fltu@ (540) 314-7807 Eaa' (540)345'4206
May 9, 2016
Executive Seoetary
Salem Planning Commission
114 Norfi Broad Street
Salem, VA 24153
RE: Rezoning request for 1500 blk. Of Boulevard-Roanoke
Tax Map #s 221 -3-8, 9, 10, 1 1, 1 2, 13, 14 and 222-1-1
We respectfully request the rezoning of the above referenced eight parcels located in the
1500 block ol Boulevard-Roanoke, from RB Residential Business District to HBD Hlghway
Business Disbict. The re-zoning is conditional on the applicant purchasing the property and
if the sale does not proceed hen lhe re-zoning applicalion wllt be withdrawn.
Thank you for your consideration in he matter,
Sincerelv.
A^J"^U/--( iui.tr Land LLC
Contract Purchaser
Figure 2
Site Map
OE lndurtrltl Drlvo Syctomr
S.lcm, Vhglnl.
ra
J
Ll!!!d
---- Lo( 8ou.do.),
-
Prop. , Li..
I--, Fo,re, sr,!du.l
SAGLXgC, Oii.r.tip ED Id rh. Ciiy oi Sor.mVroi.io Vqch,200t
r,1 ,5 o l5O
-El
5.o1. in F..t
0006166/Ar0llo0.o3,ot-tala/00,0a.0t-yLa
/ (aN ./e .,'\ \
,./' ,, ,.'/' , N,/ ', -,, .{"-/' y!ry ,../ d. /
./ ,,, rsEr. /.
HUGHES
ASSOCIATES
&
9CHEMATI6 FROI'IT ELEr'ANON
New Facility for
Paradise of
1544 Roanol<e Blvd
Virgin
Salem,
ra
Virginia
Comm. No. 15065
June 1, 2016
gTOZ 'Z qrJey!
s909I oN ururof rW-tJ JJIOAY1 2rYr.EH29
\*"€*l-+=
'uJale
rE.{'iu
elur9J
;r' P.l.
-t:!rE
-.il
eou ?tsr,pere'd
le3 rvrap
s
A
elq.uasl
lttrj
- \i
^18o
1A
J
q)
jirffi
sirvl5b;sffit
SrH9nHEl
L
ilI t .-'^
j- i -iir_'t,.
i.i.- '- -- --
,l
i -:e-€
:
;;;;; .!!.t,!!.nr l
s!3!Nr9N3ltsl)!rHl!v, i.,-.-. -- ..;E).
_ '_'-...-l
IEHUGHESl.Il nssoctArEs
ARCHITECTS & ENGINEERS
June 15, 2016
Mr. Benjamln w. Tripp, Planner
City of Salem, PlanninB & Development
114 North Broad Street
Salem, VA 24153
Dear Mr. Tripp:
on behalf of Judah Land LLC, the contract purchaser, of the eiSht parcels Tax Map fls 221-3'8, 9, 10, lt
lZ, rg &L4 and222-1-1we voluntary offer the following proffers:
Type B, or better buffer yard b€tween the two parcelto the east, 222-l-2,1and 222-2'2,2
We llmlt to the following uses:
. Assisted Care Residence
. Life Care Faclllty
. Nursing Home
Should you have any questions, please don't hesitate to call me.
Sincerely,
tu(rt/ qfr
Mark J. Ayles, PE
Vice Presldent, Civil Engineer
656 EtM AVENUE, sw I RoANoKE, vtRGtNiA 24o16 I s40.342.40o2 I HU6HEsAE.coM
This is to certify that I mailed letters in reference to the rezoning request of Judah Land LLC,
contract purchaser, property owner, for rezoning eight parcels located in the 't 500 block of
Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 221-3-8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14 and 222-1-1) from RB Residential
Business District to HBD Highway Business District to the following property owners and adiacent
property owners on June 2, 2016, in the 2:00 p.m. mail:
PLANNING COMMISS]ON
JUNE 15, 2015
MARIAN E WHITEMAN, EXEC.
COUNSEL
GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY
3135 EASTON TPKE E1F104
FAIRFIELD CT 06828
KIDD, DANIEL S
342 CLUBHOUSE DR NE
ROANOKE, VA 24019
WELCH, SHARON S
1604 ALBERTA DR
SALEM, VA 24153
CHEYNEY, TODD R
1602 ALBERTA DR
SALEM, VA 24153
Signed
Ciry ofSalem
Commonwealth of Virginia
The forcgoing instrumeul was acknowledged before me this
Notary Public
My commission expires:
AFFADAVIT OF MAILING PURSUANT TO SI5.2-2204
CODE OF VIRGINIA
JONES, HAZEL E
1054 HIGHLAND RD
SALEM, VA 241 53
HOWELL, RACHEL RIDGEWAY
1022 HIGHLAND RD
SALEM, VA 24'153
NOLEN, EDGAR A
NOLEN, REBA S
1033 HIGHLAND RD
SALEM, VA 24153
CURET, JOSE ANGEL
15OO ALBERTA DR
SALEM, VA 24153
ITEM # 1
LAO HONG, MEI
68 YORKSHIRE CT
ROANOKE, VA 24019-8369
TILLEY, LILLIE W
1036 HIGHLAND RD
SALEM, VA 24153
WILLIAMS, SUSAN E
2403 REYNOLDS DR
WNSTON SALEM, NC 27104
SALEM MONTESSORI SCHOOL
tNc
1574 ROANOKE BLVD
SALEM, VA 24153-1213
ox.--4.6//b--
day of _,2O_,by
we the undersigned citizens of salem, Virginia oppose the re-zoning recommendation passed
by the City of Salem Planning Commission on June t5, ?OL6' Judah Land LLC' contract
purchaser, and General Electric Company, property owner, requested the re-zoning of eight
parcels located in the 1.500 block of Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 227-3-8,9, 10, LL, t2, L3 &
14 and zz2-L-tlfrom RB Residential Business District to HBD Highway Business District. while
we appreciate the commitment of Judah Land LLC to their residents and understand their
desire to reside in the salem community, we feel that the aforementioned property does not
provide the ideal setting for the proposed facility. We ask the Council of the City of Salem to
deny the request for re-zoning.w74. tOL'luow ;E-- _ '
hh,to,
15. I
rh), l(D*/,
'J0**rctl
'(ft t ,oY.h e-)
U,t;AL-/1a"", a wi \4{19.
7. ,. ()' (L(r(t a d*trUl'-,fu*fu zL. \J
hh/rtn,t h irv-twffi22
hJrl*!-+h),,
7,),b l(Jlvttt.,
23.
t
"l,,YJ, Ma"trc
24 -/l*rlw*.
72.2s'
Gt .^!LCi n^d.on.*.i\
c"{ r3*[,**^13.26.
.>-
''To,r,4-7H
ano,,a,
20l
\ (u
1.
2.
3.
we the undersigned citizens of salem, Virginia, oppose the re-zoning recommendation passed by the city
of Salem Planning Commission on June 15,201.5. Judah Land LLC, contract purchaser, and General
Electric Company, property owner, requested the re-zoning of eight parcels located in the 1500 block of
Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 221-3-8,9, 10, LL, L2, L3 &. L4 and 222-L-l) from (RB) Residential
Business District to (HBD) Highway Business District. While we appreciate the commitment of Judah Land
LLC to their residents and understand their desire to reside in the Salem community, we feel that the
aforementioned property does not provide the ideal setting for the proposed facility. We ask the Council
of the City of Salem to deny the request for re-zoning.
p/AalZl-442"'"
tilr,) {*W
4,,!Uilod(
e. \,.,1L 'ae-*.'---
r)?( tl,/,1^J, R"l
to4t+ rlSlrl*"rl t?d
lcD(t 11,5xtJ A,
Lolb sll-/ R,l
[oLq N,5\lc'"'J R)
10.
11.
L2.
13.
L4.
15.
16.
t7.
18.
19.
20.
21.
,y[
7.
8.
We the undersigned citizens of Salem, Virginia oppose the re-zoning recommendation passed
by the City of Salem Planning Commission on June L5,20L6. Judah Land LLC, contract
purchaser, and General Electric Company, property owner, requested the re-zoning of eight
parcels located in the 1500 block of Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 22L-3-8,9, LO, tL, 12, 73 &
L4 and 1ZZ-L-I1 from RB Residential Business District to HBD Highway Business District. While
we appreciate the commitment of Judah Land LLC to their residents and understand their
desire to reside in the Salem community, we feel that the aforementioned property does not
provide the ideal setting for the proposed facility. We ask the Council of the City of Salem to
deny the request for re-zoning.
frf
f/,%w\^0^,8^txl
.47v'WYjj,^-r{
" JourL b +,w
%frr,
'n\,U'9-;u6"*z
6an,D B B^;r"L
,{ ?_
13 Ax'+'r*g '{i/ ,*-fr
Orr-L,
I
We the undersigned citizens of Salem, Virginia oppose the re-zoning recommendation passed
by the City of Salem Planning Commission on June L5,2076. Judah Land LLC, contract
purchaser, and General Electric Company, property owner, requested the re-zoning of eight
parcels located in the 1500 block of Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 22L-3-8,9, LO, tL' \2' t3 &
14 and zzz-t-Ll from RB Residential Business District to HBD Highway Business District' While
we appreciate the commitment of Judah Land LLC to their residents and understand their
desire to reside in the Salem community, we feelthat the aforementioned property does not
provide the ideal setting for the proposed facility. We ask the Council of the City of Salem to
deny the request for re-zoning.
s r{tq*--
5.v!
f/-db{L.-4^or Jfi-
'-T; ilC,*u
{\
3.
c0Lc.hi
We the undersigned citizens of Salem, Virginia oppose the re-zoning recommendation passed
by the City of Salem Planning Commission on June 1,5, 2016. Judah Land LLC, contract
purchaser, and General Electric Company, property owner, requested the re-zoning of eight
parcels located in the 1500 block of Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 22L-3-8,9, tO, LL, 12, t3 &
14 and 1ZZ-L-L1 from RB Residential Business District to HBD Highway Business District. While
we appreciate the commitment of Judah Land LLC to their residents and understand their
desire to reside in the Salem community, we feel that the aforementioned property does not
provide the ideal setting for the proposed facility. We ask the Council of the City of Salem to
deny the request for re-zoning.
1.4'Lb,-&- V^,^".t''o' :7 )
,',1\ [, , 'o (
-l , f A-,t
2.
t'rru,,r.-
4a
tl
' ,/iA L<t t-fiil;;\3 iltr2*b ",/a# lLffi-
s./
h)', |.,il-n ? rr -0,,r* P L
u,',;/*/r:r,4+
6." /*/til,^'
7. t /
\/" ---,
'o h,.r,, rlr /til*;
tq11
knn/n '11 ,-,ra ^*or
2L. v
'iil//,,/ il,,,( 0r/,22.
'o LI
,W,, ,,1 I h I.l ,zr ---^
23.
.K,;X*.ruu,24.
Yf.4,i'bl \25.
1+.- _/6ed4e2a 26.
UNAPPROVED MINUTES
PLANNING COMMISSION
lune 15, 2016
A reSular meeting ofthe Planning Commission ofthe City ofSalem, VirSinia, was held in
councit chambers, city Hall, 114 North Sroad Street, at 7:OO p.m., on.June 15, 2016, there being
present all the members of said Commission, to wit: Vicki G. Daulton, Bruce N Thomasson'
Jimmy W. Robertson, Samuel R. Carter, lll, and Denise P KinS; with Vicki G Daulton, Chair,
presiding; toSether with James E. Taliaferro, ll, Assistant City Manager and Executive Secretary,
ex officio member of said Commission; Charles E. Van Allman, lr., City Engineer; Benjamin W'
Tripp, Planner; and William C. Maxwell, Assistant City Attorney; and the following business was
transacted:
The May 11, 2016, work session and regular meeting minutes were approved as written.
ln re: Hold Dublic hearinq to consider the request of Judah Land LLC. contract
Durchaser. and GeneralElectric ComDanv, DroDertv owner, for rezoning eiPht
parcels located in the 1500 block of Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map fls 221-3-
8, 9. 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14 and 222-1-1) from RB Residential Business District to
HBD Hiqhwav Business District
The Executive Secretary reported that this date and time had been set to hold a public
hearin8 to consider the request of ludah Land LLC, contract purchaser, and General Eledric
Company, property owner, for rezoning eight parcels located in the 1500 block of Boulevard-
Roanoke Avenue {Tax Mao #s 221-3-8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 & 14 and 222-7-Ll trorn RB Residential
Business Distrid to HBD Highway gusiness District; and
WHEREAS, the Executive Secretary funher reported that notice ofsuch hearing had been
published in the June 2 and 9,2016, issues of the 5a!c[I!!Ct8ggi5!gl and adjoining property
owners were notified by letter maiied lune 2,2016; and
WHEREAS, staff noted the following: the subjed property consists of eiSht parcels of
approximately 5.4 acres located on the south side of Boulevard-Roanoke, across from General
Electric; the property is currently vacant; the applicants wish to rezone the property in order to
construct an Assisted Care Residence and Life Care Facility for veterans on the property; the new
facility would be mostly on a sinBle floor and would have approximately 120 beds; it would also
include associate parking, buffer yards and landscapin& and outdoor areas; in accordance with
Sec. 106-400 ofthe Zoning Ordinance, this project will.equire an approved site plan priorto any
work commencing; and
2
WHEREAS, Sherone cephas, representing ludah Land LLC, appeared before the
Commission explainingthe rezoning request; he notedthat his parents, Oraland sandra Cephas,
are the owners ofJudah Land LLC; they currently operate two assisted living facilities, Cave creek
located in Troutville and Magnolia Ridge located in the Raleigh Court area of Roanoke; he noted
that hisfamily hasbeen inthisarea since 2OO5; his Dad isa retired Navyveteran and a physician's
assistant, and his Mother is a re8istered nurse; they have been operatingthe two locations since
they moved here; currently, they have 54 beds in Troutville and 34 beds in Roanoke and the
majority oftheir residents are veterans; he noted that he is a veteran as he just retired from the
Air Force in 2014; he will be the operations manager and the project manager for this project;
theirgoalis consolidatethetwocurrentfacilities; theyfellin lovewith this propertyand the area
with its close proximityto the Salem Veterans Hospital, which they do a lot of business with; they
believe this will be the perfect oppodunity to consolidate the two facilities into one; he noted
the proposed facility will have 120 beds and the design of the structure will be something that
will blend into the community; he noted that their facility, Magnolia Rid8e, blends into the
community very well, and most people do not know they are there; he further noted that the
proposed project will be a 59 million investment and they will employ approximately 54 full time
and part time employees so they will be creatingjobs; they want to be 8ood, quiet neighbors in
the community;they had a community meeting a couple ofweeks ago and spoke to some ofthe
neighbors; one ofthe concerns that came up atthat meetingwas thatthere was no screening or
landscapingalongthe eastern propertylineto protedthe neighbors on Alberta Drivefrom seeing
the building; he noted that the city code did not require the buffer yard on this side because the
properties a.e zoned RB Residential Business Distrid; so they took this into consideration and
asked their engineer to add a buffer yard along that side of the property up to the Montessori
School; he noted that they are a local family who live in Roanoke and they plan to stay in the
area; they work well with the State and their inspections are always good; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton noted she wanted to commend them for goin8 around and
talking to the neighbors; she thinks this is very honorable of he and his family to do this;
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked if the facility would be a CCRC (continuing care
residential community) and Mr. Cephas noted it would not be; he noted they are in the assisted
living business; they had mentioned to city officials earlier that they might possibly conven 10
units, which would be 20 beds, for a nursing home but this is some time down the road and the
reason forthis isto capture some ofthe residents thatthey might lose; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King noted city staff received a letter from their en8ineer this
afternoon with proffers for the proiect; she asked ifthey were proffering the items mentioned in
3
the letter, and Mr. Cephas noted that this was correct; Mrs. King noted the proffers were as
follows:
1) Type B or better buffer yard will be added between the two adjacent residential parcels
to the east, Tax Map # 222-7-2.1and 222-2-2.2; and
2) The use of the property will be limited to the following uses:
A. Assisted care residence
B. Life care facility
C. Nursing home
; and
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked Mr. Cephas how do they determine life care as it
seems kind of nebulous; Mr. Cephas noted they used the term that was provided to them by the
city code but in his mind, life care involves the three phases towards the end of someone's life,
independent livin& assisted living and nursing home; they are in the business of assisted living
and their care is providing and making sure the resident can still live an independent life; when
they thin k of care, they think of being there for that person; and
WHEREAS, 8en Tripp, Planner, noted that the proposed uses were determined by the
Zoning Administrator; and Vice Chair Thomasson thanked him; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Robertson noted that he mentioned they would employ
approximately 54 people at the proposed facility; he asked ifthere would be nurses included in
the group, and Mr. Cephas said they are pro.iecting to have 64 employees and yes, they will have
nurses; he noted as he stated earlier his mother is a registered nurse and his dad is a physcian's
assistant, however, they will not be hands on so they will have a registered nurse or two and a
few licensed practical nurses on shifts and then there will be med technicians and nurses'aides;
Vice Chair Thomasson asked ifthere would be certified nursing assistants (CNAS) and Mr. Cephas
noted that they do not really need CNAS in assisted living as the hean oftheir business is really
handing out medication; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton asked what are their intentions for the two current facilities if
they are planning to combine the two facilities into the new facility; Mr. Cephas noted that they
will eventually sellboth ofthe properties; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton asked what attracted them to Salem; Mr. Cephas noted that he
likes this area and he likes the business friendly atmosphere; another reason as he stated earlier
is the proximity to the Salem Veterans Hospital; and
4
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked if they would also have a relationship with the
Virginia Veterans Care Center that is located east of the VA Hospital; he noted that they have a
relationship with the social workers that manage the veterans; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Robertson asked if they are subjed to state inspections
periodically; Mr. Cephas noted that they are subjed to state inspedions, and they are well known
for having a well maintained facility; they are also subject to inspections by the Veterans
Administration; ifthey go into the nursinB home care, then they are subject to more inspections
so they are highly monitored; and
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson asked what is their business model in terms of costs;
Mr. cephas asked him if he could be more specific, and Mr. Thomasson asked how much do
residents pay to enter the facility; Oral Cephas, partner in Judah Land LLC, appeared before the
Commission and noted that the business model depends on the resident; they use the state
regulations to place the resident in different levels, i.e. assisted, intensive, etc.; this provides
them with the cosu ifthey are assisted, it starts out at 52,200 a month plus added features of a
pharmacy and transportation; ifthey are intensive, this is about S2,500 a month; of course, with
the new facility they are going to have to increase these fi8ures somewhat to cover the costs;
also, the VA actually interviews most oftheir residents and they determine what the resident can
afford to pay; commissioner Robertson asked if the VA subsidizes any part of the payment, and
Oral Cephas noted the VA does subsidize some residents; if they have a tough resident that is
very needy and they want to place them in their facility because they are good at what they do,
then the VA will find the money for the resident; this is the reason they want this facility because
they do not want to be totally dependent on the VA, they want to also bring the community in
because they know they are good at what they do; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Robertson asked if thev look for any given mix of residents,
whether they are a veteran or a local resident who needs a place; sherone cephas noted that
they just became a veterans magnet with the VA when they are looking for placement of a
veteran; they kind of cater to veterans but they are looking to expand, which is why they want
this new facility; and
WHEREAS, Amy Cheney of 1602 Alberta Drive appeared before the Commission; she
noted that she and her husband live at this address; she noted that she is a long time resident of
Salem-grew up here, wentto schoolhere,leftforjust a shon period andthen moved back here
to raise her family; she agrees that we are a friendly community and we want to continue to be
a friendly community; her purpose for coming toni8ht is to better understand the rezoning
5
request and what that rezoning could mean to her family and to their neiShborhoodi she noted
that she commend5 the Cephas family for what they are doin8, and it sounds like they have well
run facilities; her question though is this the right place for this facility or is there a better
alternative; she noted that she had done some research to better understand the rezoninB and
what it might mean, it is her understanding that the current zoning, Residential Business District,
is established to create a walkable, livable residential community with a mixture of residential
and nonresidential uses; the Highway Business District intent isfor intensive commercial services
that are typically found along maior transportation arterials that are not appropriate for
Residential Business districts; having residences all around these eiSht parcels concerns her to
redistrict it as Highway Business District for a couple of dilferent reasons; one of the reasons i5
the petitioners have not finalized the sale of the property; if we 8o through with a rezoning of
this property to Highway Business District, then this allows for a lot of permitted uses; she noted
they mentioned they are only looking to do this but what happens ifthe sale does not go through;
is there a caveat that none of the other uses could go in to these eight parcels or would it be
open foranythingto go in there; anotherconcern isthe dissimilar purposes forthetractsofland
that will share common boundaries; she happens to be one of the homes that is adjacent; she
noted that there is only about 22'from the property line to the fire lane around the proposed
buildin& which is not a lot of room; she is also concerned about this facility impading the value
ofherhome; in speakingwith a localrealtor, he indicatedthatthere could bea potentialnegative
impact having a facility such as this adjacent to their homes; she is also concerned about the
impact on the traffic in this area particularly early in the morning with the two schools and
General Electric located nearby; adding another business is going to further impact the
con8estion; the lighting required for the facility is another concern as it could create light
pollution; she also believes that there could be increased foot traffic either from people coming
from the bus stop orthe residents, and she believes that this could be verydangerous; she is also
concerned thatthe petitioners aretryinBto use every bit of space that they can and she does not
blame them; however, it certainly does not do anything to preserve the green space that is
currently there and the aesthetic views that they have; also, they have heard that the property
has contaminates in the soil, and she is not sure if this is true; she is concerned about how this
willbe contained; in addition, if they do decide to move to a nursing care facility later on, this will
increase staffwhich willcause an increase in traffic; her last concern is safety forthe residents if
they are going to have memory care; she thinks this sounds like a great facility but she just
wonders if there might be a better location, and she noted that there is land across the street
from the VA hospital; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King thanked Mrs. Cheney for her research and noted that she
is to be commended; she noted that
'he
was not sure if everyone heard when she specifically
6
asked Sherone Cephas about the letter with the proffered conditions; she noted that they are
requesting the rezoning with the proffers attached which means that there will be a buffer yard
between the two properties on Alberta Drive and they are also greatly limiting the uses; Mrs.
cheney asked if their purchase does fall through and the property is rezoned would the rezoning
come offthe table or does it open up the area for any ofthe other uses permitted in the Highway
Business District zoning; and
WHEREAS, Ben Tripp noted thatthe proffered conditions go with the zoning and run with
the Iand; if this request is approved, the proffers are like promises and are legally binding; in
addition, if the petitioners operated there for years and then closed, the proffers would still be
in effect, and ifthey sold the property, it could only be used for those specific uses outlined which
are assisted care residence, life care facility and nursing home; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton noted if the propeny is sold later on, the new owne6 would
have to come back before Planning Commission and City Council to make any changes in the
uses; and
WHEREAS, Vice Chair Thomasson noted that they are not requesting memory care as one
ofthose uses, and the petitioners indicated that this was correct; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked Mr. Tripp where the bus stop is located in relation
to the property, and Mr. Tripp noted that it is right out front across from General Electric; Mrs.
Cheney noted that it is ri8ht before the Montessori School; and
WHEREAS, Oral Cephas noted if they do decide down the road to have memory care, it
would require lock down systems so that the residents cannot get out; this comes with a lot of
security behind it; if they have a patient that has a status change, for instance Alzheimer's
disease, they will have to have rooms in a locked facility which is specifically required by the state;
and
WHEREAS, lohn Richardson of 1306 Boulevard appeared before the Commission in
opposition to the request; he thanked Sherone and Oral Cephas for their service to our country;
he understands that veterans need care and they need care badly, but he strongly opposes this
projecu he knows we need to be good stewards as Salem residents to see our city grow, prosper
and maintain, but he wants everyone to understand as a resident on the Boulevard, they already
have ten days of the Salem Fair, every ball Eame at the stadium, they have multi-family homes
on the Boulevard; a big construction projed off of Knot Break Road for chemical dependency
1
program was just approved and also more construction for the Montessori school; then we have
all the high school kids coming to the civic center to graduate; ball games and fireworks every
Friday night through the summer; as a city resident, he loves where he lives but we already have
enough; but if we continueon, we might aswellbulldoze allofthe Boulevard and let commercial
take it all; his house is his number one investment and he wo.ks hard for it and he expects allthe
others here do the same; he noted that there is property beside the Salem Mobile Home Village
for sale - 39 acres -which is closer to the Salem VA Hospital; he noted it would not be threatening
someone's property value if this project is put up there; another concern is the traffic from the
schools; he pleaded to the Commission to protect the residents; and
WHEREAS, Mary Carr appeared before the Commission; she noted that her husband is
James Carr and they reside at 1068 Highland Road; she thanked the petitioners for bringing
something forth that would benefit our veterans; she noted that her father was a veteran of
World War ll, Korea and two tours in Vietnam; so her loyalty to veterans runs very, very deep;
however, her loyalty to her community and to the city runs as deep as well; she did a little
background checking on a lot of things when the petitioners came around through the
neighborhood; one ofthe questionsthat she asked was what kind offacility isthisSoingto be, is
it goingto be a good neighbor; we are goingto put veterans inthere wasthe response, and then
tonight she hears that it is going to be more than veterans; she has concerns that we have gone
from veterans to more than veterans; she has concerns that Soing forward in the future that it
will become something other than what we are expeding tonight; because as we all know if this
facility is especially for profit, then they are going to do what they need to do make business;
we've all probably been in business and had to hit that bottom line, as she knows she has many
times; so whatever she needs to do to hit the bottom line, with in the law of course; so if they
need to put a different type of resident in the facilitythan was originally discussed, then they are
probably BoinB to do just that; so she has some concerns; she noted that sherone Cephas stated
that their audits are private, however, if you do online and look at the Department of social
Services, theirauditsare available; they are audited once a yearand overthe past yearthey have
had some violations; so she contacted Nancy Hunter, who does their audits, earlier today; she
asked her what kind of facilities are these and are they good stewards of the people they care
for; she noted that Ms. Hunter said these are good facilities and some ofthe things on the audit
are because the current facilities are old and they need to be updated; Ms. Hunter wa5 not totally
aware that they were considering doingthis new facility but it would have to be licensed through
the state; a couple of concerns that she saw was that there were a couple of incidents with
medications and with background checks not being totally up to par; she thinks that these are
things that we need to take a look at and we need to investigate and make sure it is a good fit for
this location; she had a conversation with Botetourt County law enforcement about the Cave
I
Creek location, and one of the concerns that they had wa5 that they have had some challenges
with the residents walking along Route 11; she is not totally opposed to the facility but she is
opposed to it being in the right place with the right folks and she wants to make sure that this is
what they want in their communitv; and
WHEREAS, Elizabeth and Jose Curet of 1500 Alberta Drive, directly adjacent to the
proposed facility, appeared before Commission; she noted that her neighbor, Amy Cheney, had
covered a lot oftheir concerns; they are concerned about it being so close to their property - 22'
from their property which is not even the width of the room here tonighu there will be a road
with parking and because this is the back side of the buildin8, they are kind of guessing
dumpsters, deliveries, etc.; the drawing they were shown of the building is lovely but they are
notgoingto be lookinB at the frontofthe building; theyaregoingto be havingthe road, parkin&
noise, lights, and this is a big concern; in addition, there is the concern of traffic; not only tral{ic
from the cars but from foot traffic; she noted that the Boulevard is not safe for people walking;
they feel the facility is going to be a problem; she further questioned about the landscaping
buffer, would it be a wall, a high fence, shrubs, etc.; she again noted that it is only 22'to the
proposed drive aisle; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton noted that the buffer would be trees or shrubs; Mr. Tripp noted
that Chair Daulton was correcu he stated thatwhat normally would be required is a Type B buffer
yard; there are two options: 1) an eight foot buffer yard with one row of small evergreen trees
and a row of evergreen trees; 2) a fifteen foot buffer yard with one row of small evergreen trees;
the petitioners have proffered that it will be a Type B or better; so these options would be a
minimum; Mrs. Curet noted that if it is shrubbery then it would stan out very small and she could
be dead before the buffer would block what she is looking at; Mr. Tripp noted the option with
the shrubs there would be shrubs and a row oftrees, and the other option is a row oftrees and
a little more land; he noted that the trees are often 6' arborvitae or something similar; he does
not know ifthe applicants have thought about type of trees or shrubs at this point; Chair Daulton
noted that the trees and shrubs would have to be a certain height according to the City code; and
WHEREAS, Jose Curet asked how is it that there are two residential properties on this
street in the RB Residential Business zonin$ how is it that the City of Salem allowed this; Mr.
Tripp asked ifthey built their house, and they noted that they are the original owners; he asked
when the house was built and they noted in 1996; Mr. Tripp noted he thought maybe these two
residences may have been part ofthe Montessori school property in the front on the Boulevard;
the RB zoning does include residential uses so it would have been a permitted use at the time
the houses were built; Mrs. Curet asked the Commission to give them some consideration in this
9
matter because this is a quiet little street; she noted it will be hard to give up the Sreen space
behind them; and
WHEREAS, Glenn Tilley of 1026 Highland Road appeared before the commission; he
noted that he agrees with his neighbors; he noted this pro]ect is goingto decrease their property
value; he believes what the petitioners are doin8 is a good thing, in fad he retired from the
military also; at the same time this is their property that is goinB to go down in value and like Mrs.
Cheney stated earlier there is probably other property in the area that is better suited for this
than right in the middle oftheir residentialarea; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton asked the Executive Secretary if he could explain tothe audience
the by right laws in Virginia; lay Taliaferro, Executive secretary, noted with zoning there are two
types of uses, a by right use and a use that you have to ask additional permission to do, which is
called a special exception; when we look at say Highway Business, which is the request from the
petitioner, this zoning by right allows restaurants, retail, car sales, and various uses like this; but
there are also uses that require additional permission for example to have a flea market in
Highway Business a petitioner would have to go back to Planning Commission and to City Council
and ask for a special exception even though it is zoned correctly; so once a property is rezoned
any of those uses are available to the property owner by right and they of course would have to
ask for the additional permission for the other uses; in this case, the petitioners are limitinB the
uses that are by right to three specific uses, i.e. life care facility, assisted care residence, and
nursing home; if the property is rezoned with these proffers and the property owner wants to
put a restaurant here, then they would have to go back through the same process; they would
have to request to remove those proffers; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King noted if we leave the property zoned as it currently is and
we are looking at eight lots, which could presumably be sold to eight buyers, what are the uses
that the property could be used for; Mr. Tripp noted that the uses in Residential Business District
are accessory apartment, home occupation, emergency manufactured home, residential human
care facility, single family dwelling, townhouses, administrative services, cultural services, public
parks and recreation areas, religious assembly, general offices, homestay inn, fine arts studio,
and there are a couple of miscellaneous use types that would be allowed; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton noted that Chuck Van Allman, City Engineer, had mentioned to
the Commission earlier that if these eight parcels were sold individually, there could be the
possibility of having an entrance on the Boulevard for each parcel; Mr. Van Allman noted that
there could be but the City would attempt to see if they could organize some kind of common
10
entrance; however, when you have eiSht different property owners and they are doing a use by
right, the burden is usually put on the city to prove that they cannot have an entrance because
otherwise it would be considered a taking; and
wHEREAS, Mark Ayles of Hughes Associates Architects and En8ineers, engineer for the
project, appeared before the Commissioni he noted he wanted to try to address some of the
concerns that he heard; he understands that the existing by riSht developments could be
significantly worse than what is being proposed by the petitioners; he noted that one of the
reason this site was chosen was because it has utilities, i.e. water, sewer, gas, and the storm
water is relatively accessible; he noted that storm water management is a tough one and a very
expensive one; in addition, it is so much easier to deal with the City of Salem - Salem is so
business friendly and a great location to work with; also, the citizens are very respectful and
courteous even if they do not agree with you, and he noted that he has been to some tough
meetings; with regards to the lighting, they cannot by law have li8ht spillage on any of the
ad.ioining properties so they are going to make sure the development does not spill light on the
neighbors; also with the new technology with tED lighting, the lighting is so easy to focus and
direct; we also need to remember that inside the building will be residents who will be sleeping
themselves and the light has to be directed toward this propeny; so, ifthe light is Soing to affect
the neighbors then it is going to affect the residents much worse; he noted with regards to the
terrain, it is hard to imagine but there is 30' elevation difference between the front left corner
and the back rear corner; this is going to have to be graded out a little bit so the development
will be below the neighbors in the back; when they look out onto the property unless they are
lookingdown theywillnot even see it; they willsee the tops atthey look out; the buildingwillbe
residential in nature and the owners are desiring to use brick and also stone; the building will be
attractive from the front as well as the back; further, they do not intend to hide everything in the
back with the refuse because of where the cafeteria and kitchen are located; the garbage will be
hidden up front on the side - it will be kept where it has to be maintained and cleaned or
otherwise theywillnot be ableto attract residents; with regards to any pollution on the property,
if there is a pollution issue, it will have to be mitigated by law; they cannot just iSnore a pollution
issue; they have not obtained a Phase ll environmental assessment which is required by the bank
before they transfer the ownership; they have to have a Phase I and a Phase ll which is required
by the bank before they can get financinB; they do know that some ofthe Sround water may be
contaminated buttheynot be usingBround water; theywill be using municipalwater and sewer;
in addition, they will not be putting anything in the ground or takin anything out ofthe ground;
another concern was staffing - this is highly regulated so they cannot cut back on staff just to
meet operating costs; Vice Chair Thomasson noted that the state regulates this, and Mr. Ayles
noted that the state and also the Veterans Administration will be looking at this; with re8ards to
11
the existing facility at Cave Creek, the building is attractive now, but we should have seen it when
they purchased it; one ofthe reasons they wantto move was because this building was built as
a hotel he believes, and the maintenance costs are phenomenal; so yes, they may be a little
behind in maintenance, but it ir a maintenance headache on that facility because it is so old; this
is why they want to build a state of the art facility to eliminate any concerns with maintenance;
an issue was mentioned about the residents walking along Route 11; Route 11 has a significantly
higher posted speed limit than what is posted on the Boulevard; also, the owners operate a
shuttle service so a lot of the residents will be shuttled from place to place, and one of the
beneflts ofthis property is that is it located on the bus route; he understands the City has been
working with General Eledric with regards to a bus shelter, and the goal is to have bus stop in
front of the facility ri8ht across from General Electric; with regards to the other infractions with
medication and background checks, the owners are well aware of this and have already
addressed these issues; as Sherone Cephas noted earlier, they are licensed for two years which
is not a common practice as the licenses are usually only for one year; because they do so well
on the reviews, the state feel confident to give them a two year license; and
WHEREAS, Sherone Cephas noted that Mr. Ayles had addressed most ofthe concerns but
he just wanted to put a personaltouch on some ofthe concerns; with regards to the traffic, they
are concerned about the traffic as well; their business is residential as they are taking care ofthe
elderly who want a home and needs to feel like they are at home; some of the concerns of the
neighbors is also a concern for them; they are quiet in nature and not a high traffic business; it is
sad to saythat most ofthe residents do not have a lot of family comingto visit them -if theydo
it isveryshort lived orthe familycomesto pickthem up andtakethem out; the residents moving
around especially on Route 11 is because they want to go to the convenience stores located
nearby; they are aware that they do this, and it is kind of scary, but the residents have a right to
go ouu this i5 another reason that this property on the Boulevard will be great because it is on
the bus route; they are a for profit business, and they cannot afford to have bright lights, be loud
or noisy, etc.; the residents are not dangerous and ifthey were they would not have them; as far
as the memory or lack of memory, they have procedures that are required by state to maintain
to make sure they are good neighbors and safe neighbors; with regards to residents, they pride
themselves on taking care ofveterans, and doesheseethem nottaking care ofvets in the future,
no, that is not the case; however, they do not want to tie themselves into their whole population
being 100% veterans; they still have a great relationship with the VA hospital and plan to continue
that relationship; and as a matter of fact, this is another reason why they chose this location;
theydo notwanttoturn down a residentjust becausethey are not a veteran; he isBladthat Mrs.
Carr did her research with re8ards to the violations; as far as the audits, it would be an awesome
thing to say that they had zero write-ups, but they have had a few write-ups here or there; in
t2
their opinion, some ofthose things were easily resolved, and it stillgave them overall high marks;
further, they have never had a suspension or had to have the state inspectors come back on a
violation; re8arding the maintenance issue, this is one of the reasons why they are here at this
meeting; they have two very old buildings which are becoming unattractive and they are a for
profit business; so their job is to have an attractive facility but the costs have become too high
especially at the facility in Troutville; noise and congestion - if he cannot keep the noise down,
then he i5 losing residents; as he stated earlier, they blend in with the community at Magnolia
Ridge, no one knows they are there; when they call a plumber or someone from the City, they
literally get lost; their main focus with this project is to make sure that they blend in with the
community, and they want to present their building as such; and
WHEREAS, Amy Cheney noted that should the petitioners become pan of the
neighborhood, they are neighborly and will be good neighbors; as Mr. Cephas noted they are for
profit and she is for profit, too; it really concerns her the property value of her home and the
potential to lose 7 to 12 % ofthe value of her home which could equate to more than 520,000;
so she wants to make sure it is a good marriage for everyone; her goal in coming here is to make
sure that we have somethinB that is going to benefit everyone in the community; and while she
thinks they are doing a great thing, she supports it and commends the effort they are putting
forth but she is not certain that this is the best for her being 22' from her property line; and
WHEREAS, Nathan Rigney of 1044 Highland Road appeared before the Commission; he
notedthattheyare located behind the proposed project, and itwas highlighted onthe plansthat
there will be some grading in the area; a lot of children play in their back yard and it could be
very dangerous for a lot of children to be playing close to an edge or something leading to the
back oftheir buildinB; he would hate to see a child fall and hurt themselves because ofthe grading
and the ledge; also, it would be terrible for the kids who play in that area to have to play in a
smallerarea and haveto lookatsomething like a buildingeven if it isaverygood looking buildinB,
it stillwould quarterofftheir playingarea and be dangerous forthem; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner King asked Mr. Rigney asked if his property abuts this property,
and Mr. Rigney stated he believed so; Mrs. King noted that she was looking at the plat with the
adjoining property owners and she did not see his name on the drawing; he noted that he is not
the property owner; Mrs. King asked if he knew who owns the property, and Mr. Rigney noted
that Hong Lao owns the property; and
WHEREAS, Lisa Rhudyof1076 Highland Road appeared before the Commission; she noted
that she lives at the intersection of Highland Road and Campbell Street; she noted the amount of
13
traffic that roars through their neighborhood in the morning and afternoon from people cutting
through so they do not have to go through the light at Hardees is phenomenal; she knows that
there is a guardrail at the end of Highland Road to keep people from Boing that direction; she is
concerned that this property is going to have a connedion to Highland Road so that people who
want to go the other direction do not have to worry about crossing on the Boulevard; this way
they could go up Highland and go out at the light at the bank and Hardees; she just wants to
make sure that this is a consideration as it would greatly increase the traffic on their street; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton noted that this would be something that would be addressed in
a site plan review, if the request is approved and does move forward; she further noted that the
owners cannot deviate from the site plan; and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Carter noted as far as traffic is concerned, he has a friend who
is in a similar facility and he goes to sit with him some; the facility where he goes is probably
biggerthisthisone and it is not heavily traveled; people who are there arethere allthetime, and
the visitors do not seem to come at rush hour; he feels that the neighborhood could end up with
a whole lot worse traffic problems if the property were developed for some of the other uses
mentioned than this type of facility as far as vehicle travel; Mrs. Rhudy noted there is certainly
the potential, and she just wanted to make sure that it was being considered; and
WHEREAs, Natalie Rigney of 1044 Highland Road, which belongs to mother, Hong Lao,
appeared before the Commission; she noted that she has one concern; it was noted that they
wanted to keep the area quiet, but on the weekends when there is a football or baseball game
you can hear everl^hing from that area; she thinks the noise will bother the residents in the
facility more than it bothers her; and
WHEREAS, Elizabeth Curet appeared and noted that the petitioners had told them at the
community meeting a couple of weeks ago that if the request is approved that they would not
be starting construction until 2017 or 2018 and that it would take 1to 1 % years to complete the
projecu so durinB this time they are going to be listening to noise, trucks, construction vehicles,
etc. and this is goinB to add a lot of congestion; also, there will be garbage; obviously it will take
time but they are goingto have to look at this for 1to 1],{ years; and
WHEREAS, Chair Daulton noted that the Planning Commission is a recommending body
only, and their recommendation will move forward to City Council; further, regarding the
construction, it would have to be done durin8 daylight hours and would not be a 24 hour project;
Mrs. Curet noted that it still adds to allthe noise and congestion of vehicles traveling in this area;
14
Mrs. Daulton noted that the property is currently zoned as Residential Business and there are far
worse uses that could go on the property; again, she noted that they are a recommending body
only and their recommendation will go to City Council and City Councilwill have the final vote;
and
WHEREAS, lohn Richardson appeared and noted he had a question after hearing other
people talk; with heavy equipment coming in and out hauling concrete, steel or whatever with
the currenttraffic situation and the main entrance ofGeneral Electricthere, are we goingto need
another traffic lighu we are going to need another traffic light to keep people alive; this is going
to change the traffic patterns, etc.; Chuck Van Allman, noted that it is a little early in the process
but he does not believe the warrants are there for another traffic light; the VDOT warrants are
not there; Vice Chair Thomasson asked if this is a VDOT issue, and Mr. Van Allman noted that
VDOT has criteria that they follow to determine if a light is required or recommended for an
intersection; he funher discussed the information related to the warrants for a traffic light;
ON MOTION MADE BY COMMISSIONER CARTER, SECONDED BY COMMISSIONER KING,
AND DULY CARRIED, the Planning Commission of the City of Salem doth recommend to the
Council of the City of Salem that the request of Judah Land LLC, contract purchaser, General
Electric Company, property owner, for rezoning eight parcels located in the 1500 block of
Boulevard-Roanoke (Tax Map #s 221-3-8, 9,70,11,72, L3&74 and 222-1-1)from RB Residential
Business to HBD Highway Business District be approved with the following voluntarily proffered
conditions: 1) Type B or better buffe. yard will be installed between the two adjacent residential
parcels to the east, Ta\ Map # 222-7-2.1 and 222-2-2.2 and 2) the use of the property will be
limited to the following uses: assisted care residence, life care facility and nursing home
-the roll callvote: allaye.
There being no further business to come before the Commission, the same on motion
adjourned at 8:20 p.m.
Executive Secretary
Chair
IEM *- 6D
^^,,6-a1-tbUl1tL-----
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
June 27 ,2016
Request to amend School Grant Fund budget as approved by
the School Board on May 10, 2016
Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION :
The School Grant Fund budget was amended for fiscal year 2015-2016 by the School
Board at their meeting on May 10, 2016. Budget amendments totaling $25,000 were made
to increase the revenue and expenditure budgets in the Grant Fund. The Grant Fund was
increased due to notification from Goodwill lndustries of the Valleys that the Schools were
awarded $25,000 as a sub-recipient grant from the Health Profession Opportunity Grant:
GoodCare Career Pathways Program. The attached memo details the appropriation
changes.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Appropriation changes totaling $25,000 need to be made to the School Grants Fund.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council approve the School Board's appropriation changes of
$25,000 to the Grants Fund per the attached report.
Salem City Schools
Budget Adiustrnents Report
MaY 10,2016
Summary of lssue:
At times during the year, additional funding may be received by the school division
through donation, grant, increased funding due to ADM (Average Daily Membership)
increases, or some other means. This revenue increases the budget requiring Board
approval before the funds can be utilized.
On April 14, 2016, we received official notification from Goodwill lndustries of the
Valleys that we were awarded as sub-recipient, a $25,000 grant from the Health
Profession Opportunity Grant: Goodoare Career Pathways Program. This grant will be
used to provide supportive services, education, training, and employment for Nursing,
Health lnformation, and Health Care Support occupations to serve TANF recipients and
other lo\r,/-income individuals. Salem City School will be employing tutors to work with
adults through our Adult Education program within these parameters listed above.
This grant will start in April 2016 and go through September 2016. Since it crosses
fiscal years, it is recommended that any grant funds not expended in fiscal year 2016 be
administratively appropriated in the subsequent fiScal year to be expended prior to
September 30, 2016.
Policy Reference:
DA-BR Budget Transfers
Fiscal lmpact:
The budget adjustments l,vill increase the revenue and expenditure budgets in the
School Grant Fund in total by the same amount of $ 25,000.
Recommended Action:
Move approval of the budget adjustments in the School Grant Funds as presented and
recommend that City Councilapprove the same.
lTEM
DATE
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIry OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
#-bc--
G -a.l-tb
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
June 27 .2016
Request to appropriate supplemental Children's Services Act
(CSA) revenue and expenditures
Rosemarie B. Jordan
Director of Finance
SUBMITTED BY:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The State provides funding to the City under the Children's Services Act (CSA) intended to
cover various services that are child-centered, family-focused and community-based to
address the needs of troubled and at-risk youths and their families. lf the City fully
expends the original allocation from the State for these services, a supplemental
appropriation can be requested. Due to the expenditures in this fiscal year, the City
needed to request a supplemental appropriation for CSA funds. This request has been
approved by the State.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Appropriating additionalfunds from the State allows the Cityto continue providing services
to alrisk youth. The City provides a match of approximately 35%.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends increasing the appropriation by $376,790 for CSA state revenue
(account 10-012-010048650), increasing the appropriation by $437,591 for mandated
expenditures (account 1 0-012-5350-557'10) and decreasing the appropriation by $60,80'l
for Contingency (account 10-012-91 10-59500).
WM#KD-
onrr-Q:etlb
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE: June 27,2016
AGENDA ITEM: Request appropriate proceeds from the sale ofequipment
SUBMITTED BY: Rosemarie B. Jordan
Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City sells equipment that is no longer used on Gov Deals, which is an on-line auction
established specifically for governments to use to dispose of surplus equipment. A 1987
excavator was recently sold on Gov Deals. Proceeds of $8,5'10 were received and will
be used to cover unanticipated maintenance costs at the Transfer Station.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Proceeds from the sale of equipment will be used to cover maintenance costs.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends appropriating revenue of$8,510 to account '10-0 12-0100-47050, Sale
of Equipment and increase the expenditure budget for account '10-048-4400-53320,
Maintenance of Building and Grounds by $8,510.
ti[Nl#-Qq-
oATE 6 -44-llp
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM' VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE: JUne 27,2016
AGENDA ITEM: Request to appropriate insurance proceeds to purchase
replacement dumpster truck.
SUBMITTED BY: Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City's newest front-loading dumpster truck was recenlly involved in an accident, which
totaled the vehicle. lnsurance proceeds will be received to cover the purchase of a
replacement truck. These proceeds need to be appropriated so the new truck can be
ordered.
FISCAL IMPACT:
lnsurance proceeds will allow us to purchase a replacement vehicle.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends increasing lhe revenue budget by $255,672 for account '10-012-0100-
49100, lnsurance Recovery and appropriating $255,672 for account 'l 0-01 8-4240-58004
for the purpose state above. lt is recommended that insurance proceeds not expended in
fiscal year 20'16 be administratively appropriated in the subsequent fiscal year.
ITEfu1 #loV
eals b- 21-llz
CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM,AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
VIRGINIA HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
June 27, 2016
Request to appropriate budget for the Community
Development Building lease and transfer lease payment
budget to the Debt Service Fund.
Rosemarie B. Jordan
Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
ln November 2015, the City entered into a five year lease for the property located at 21 S
Bruffey Street in Salem to be used by the Community Development department. Due to
criteria identified in the lease, it must be recorded in the general ledger as a capital lease.
Per Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, this requires several budget entries to
ensure proper reporting of the capital lease.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Approve required budget amendments so lease can be recorded in accordance with
Generally Accepted Accounting Principles. ln addition, funding of $30,152 needs to be
transferred from Conlingency to cover the cost of the lease in FY2016.
Please see attached breakdown of these budget amendments.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
City staff requests Councilto approve the attached breakdown of budget amendments to
appropriate the capital lease according to accounting standards and to transfer the
necessary lease payment budget to the debt service fund in FY2016 and FY2017.
Community Oevelopment Building Lease
lune 27 ,2OL6
FY2015
Appropriate Capital Lease:
2O-OL2-O2OO-49220 lssuance of Capital Leases - Capital Projects
20-012-0205-54408 EngineeringBuildingCapitalLease
Transfer to Debt Service for FY2016 Lease Pavments:
L0-oL8-4322-55420
10-012-9110-59500
70-oL2-9102-59420
40-012-0405-59195
40-012-0406-59295
40-012-0401-49900
FY2OL7
!o-oLg-4322-55420
to-otz-gt02-59420
40-012-0405-59195
40-012-0406-5929s
40-012-0401-49900
Transfer to Debt Service for FY2017 Lease PaVments:
Lease/Rent Of Buildings
Contingency
Transfer To Debt Service
Capital Lease Obligation Principa I
Capital Lease Obligation lnterest
Transfer From General Fund
Lease/Rent Of Buildings
Transfer To Debt Service
Capital Lease Obligation Principa I
Capital Lease Obligation lnterest
Transfer From General Fund
375,000.00
375,000.00
(11,79s.00)
(30,1s2.00)
4L,947.O0
33,825.00
8,122.OO
41,947.00
(83,894.00)
83,894.00
69,972.00
73,922.OO
83,894.00
IIEM#G-9.
pa15 G-a1-lte
ATA REGULAR I\4EETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALE[,4, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE:June 27,20'16
Request to appropriate funds to purchase software
Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
New World Systems software is used by the City for financial, utility billing and collection
and community development functions. As the City continues to move forward with
technology and streamline processes to improve customer service, two additional modules
are needed. E-permits licensing is needed for community development and integrated
credit card processing is needed in the collections area. Fundingof $30,000 is available in
the Technology Systems operating budget to cover the purchase of this software.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Funding of $30,000 is available to purchase the needed software.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends transfening $30,000 from 10-016-1251-53370, Software Maintenance
to '10-012-9100-59410, Transfer to Capital Projects. lncrease the revenue budget by
S30,000 in account 20-012-0200-49905. Transfer from General Fund and increase the
expenditure budget by $30,000 in accounl 20-012-0205-54101, ERP - New World
Systems.
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
IEM#-6H-
nrrE 6-a1-\(,
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
June 27. 2016
Request to amend School Capital Projects Fund budget as
approved by the School Board on June 14, 20'16
Rosemarie B. Jordan. Director of FinanceSUBMITTED BY:
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The School Capital Projects Fund was amended by the School Board at their meeting on
June 14, 20'16. Budget amendments totaling $'146,650 were approved as additional
appropriations. The School Board also requested to add two new capital accounts that
would be funded by budget transfers of remaining funds from projects that have been
completed. The attached memo details the appropriation and accounl changes. The new
appropriations come from capital reserve balance for the schools.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Additional appropriations totaling $146,650 need to be made.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that Council approve the School Board's appropriation of $146,650 to
the capital projects listed on the attached memo and add the new capital accounts
requested.
Budoet Adiustments for New
Total Fund Balance Funding to be Appropriated
At this time for Proi
Attachment A
Y16 funded bY FY15 Fund Balance
Account Code Proiect Descriotion Amounl
Bus Cameras $66,750
Salem Hiqh School Feasability Study $79,900
Salem Hiqh School Buildinq Proiect - Local $c
Career Tech/FACS/Elective Proqram Updates $o
$146.650
Salem city Schools
Additional CIP Funded Projects for FY 2016
June'14,2016
Summary of lssue:
This report is to request the Board to approve the proposed projects for FY 2016 from
the 6/30/15 fund balance. Weare also requesting the funding of these projects
(Attachment A). $66,750 will be used to fu nd bus cameras for 25 buses to provide
security resources forourstaffand students. Thiswill getourentire bus fleet equipped
with security cameras. $79,900wi|| be used tofund the remaining portions ofa
feasibility study at Salem High School to prepare for the future renovations desired and
presented during the A & E RFP discussions and negotiations processes.
We also request that two new accounts be added to the CIP account list that will be
funded from existing accounts. Essentially, transfers from existing accounts to new
ones that better suit division needs. The following moves are desired:. To move the balance of the South Salem Project - Local to a new account titled
SHS Building Project - Local (approximately $130,000)o The South Salem project is complete and with a High School project in the
coming years, we would like to have the funds move over to prepare for
future needs.. To combine CTE/Family Consumer Science Modules at ALMS and CTE
Software Upgrades into one account titled Career Tech/FACS/Elective Program
Updates (approximately $90,000)o As a result of staffing changes in both programs, combined with our desire
to offer additional credit opportunities at ALMS, we have decided not to
continue using the synergistic modules that are currently being used in
FACS and Tech Ed. at ALMS. We have decided to develop our own
project-based approach to address the required standards in these
courses. This approach, along with the addition ofseveralcredit bearing
courses at ALMS in CTE and art, will require hardware upgrades,
equipment, and additional supplies. These funds will be used for those
needs listed here to support the curriculum changes desired by the Board.
Background:
On October 13, 2015, the Board approved capital improvement projects in the amount
of $337,938, which left a flscal year 2015 fund balance amount of approximately
$450,000 unappropriated at that time for emergencies or future projects.
Policy Reference:
FB, Facilities Planning
Fiscal lmpact:
At this time, a portion of unallocated fund balance funding will be categorized in
Assigned Fund Balance. The total projects anticipated during the current fiscal year
from capital reserve are estimated at $146,650 per Attachment A.
Recommended Motion:
Move approval of using $66,750 from the 6/30/2015 fund balance for purchasing bus
cameras for our fleet, $79,900 to complete a feasibility study at Salem High School, and
that the two accounts listed to be added to our chart of accounts with a request that City
Council appropriate funding from the fund balance as required.
ITEIM #(2--t-
OATE b-an-\v
AT A REGULAR I\,IEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CIry OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA lTEt'r:
SUBMITTED BY:
June 27, 2016
Request to appropriate funds to pay prioryear liability for Other
Post-Employment Benefi ts (OPEB).
Rosemarie B. Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
City employees earn health insurance benefits over their years of services that are not
received until they retire. These benefits are calculated as the City's other post-
employment benefits liability (OPEB). ln accordance with Governmental Accounting
Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 45, the City's annual OPEB cost is actuarially
determined each year. The City incurred a liability for OPEB costs when GASB Statement
No. 45 was first implemented. As of June 30, 2015, the remaining OPEB liability was
$118,547. City Finance staff recommends that this prior year OPEB liability be paid in full
forFY16. Fund ing is available in the budget to make th is payment. However, the budget
needs to be adjusted between funds to accommodate each funds'share ofthe payment.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Payment of the prior year OPEB liability is recommended.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends increasing the budget by $21 ,684 for 1 0-0'12-9100-59430, Transfer to
Civic Center and $698 for '10-012-9100-59435, Transfer to Catering and decreasing the
budget by $22,382 for 10-012-9104-52850, Other Post-Employment Benefits. lntheCivic
Center and Catering funds, increase the budget for the Transfer from General Fund
revenue accounts by $21,684 and $698, respectively and increase the budget for Other
Post-Employment Benefit expense by the same amount.
rEM #-65-.-
oATE-A:a!:lb
AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE CIry COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CIry HALL
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
SUBMITTED BY:
June 27 ,2016
FiscalAgent Contracts for FiscalYear 2017
Rosemarie Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
Attached are contracts for the City to act as fiscal agent for Court-Community Corrections
RegionalAlcohol Safety Action Program Board and Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy.
The City of Salem has acted as fiscal agent for these entities for a number of years and
has experienced no difficulty in acting in this capacity.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Each ofthese agencies reimburses the City for out-of-pocket expenses, such as auditfees,
materials and supplies, and all other contractual related items. They also reimburse a
portion of salaries and fringe benefits for all departments involved in providing services to
their agency.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends the City Council authorizes the proper City officials to execute these
contracts authorizing the City to continue to act as fiscalagent for these agencies forfiscal
yeat 2017 .
CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
FISCAL AGENT CONTRACT FOR
CARDINAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this the lst day of Juty 2016 by
between the CITY OF SALEM, V|RGIN|A hereinafter referred to as the ,,City,,, and
Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy Governing Council, hereinafter referred to as
"Council".
WHEREAS, the City has been informed by the Council of the need for promoting
a law enforcemenucorrections training program in relation to public safety in the
Roanoke Valley and surrounding jurisdictions; and
WHEREAS, the City has applied for and has been approved as grantee and
fiscal agent of various State grants pursuant to the appropriate provisions of the 1950
Code of Virginia, as amended, hereinafter referred to as "Grant"; and
WHEREAS, the City contracts hereby with the Council to provide for the
administration of the Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy as provided by statute and the
terms of the prospective granls.
NOW, THEREFORE, IN CONSIDERATION OF THE MUTUAL PROMISES
herein contained; witnesseth:
(1) The Council agrees as follows:
(a) to accept the responsibility for providing a law enforcemenucorrections
training program, and other like programs, as provided by Virginia law, to the Roanoke
Valley area and surrounding jurisdictions in the manner and to the extent set out in the
provisions of the said Grants.
and
the
the
(b) to accept sole responsibility for the administration and operation of all
law enforcement and corrections training programs through the Cardinal Criminal
Justice Academy.
(c) that all purchases made with funds from said crants shall be in
compliance with State laws and purchasing regulations of the City.
(d) that the Council will abide by all the rules, regulations, guidelines, and
general and special conditions of the Grants.
(e) to provide information required by the City to the extent that the City will
be able to meet its obligations to file accurate and timely financial and narrative reports
as may be required by the said Grants, and to furnish a fidelity bond with corporate
surety in an amount not less than the full amount of the largest of said Grants during
the term of this agreemenl or the sum of $200,000.00 whichever is greater, to save
harmless the City, its offlcials, agents, or employees, from loss or liability by reason of
any determination that the City, its officials, agents, or employees, are liable to the
Commonwealth of Virginia for funds received by the City pursuant to the terms of the
said Grants, or because of any default, malfeasance in relation to the provisions of this
agreement, or the terms, conditions or provisions of the said Grants on the part of the
Council, its officers or agents in administering said Grants, said bond to remain in full
force and effect until such time as the Commonwealth of Virginia has from time to time
approved all disbursements in writing or has in writing or otherwise absolved the City,
its officials, agents or employees from responsibility for funds theretofore received
pursuant to the said Grants.
(0 to make all reports, other than financial, to State agencies, as required by
the Grants, and a copy of these reports shall be sent to the City.
(g) to reimburse the City of all expenses incurred in its capacity as fiscal
agent, to include, but not limited to (cost of personnel, fringe benefits, office supplies,
printing, accounting, auditing, processing of payroll, postage and technology); amount
to be billed on a monthly basis by the City.
(2) The City will maintain a separate agency fund in the accounting system of
the City in which will be recorded the financial transaction of the Council. The City will
keep all records of the receipts and disbursements of Grants received by the Council.
(3) All receipts from the State of Virginia, the Federal Governmenl, and fees
collected in each of the pa(icipating localities will be deposited in this agency fund.
(4) The Director of the Academy shall have printed pre-numbered receipts on
which all fees shall be recorded as collected. These fees shall be deposited daily in the
account set up for this purpose, including all gifts, donations, or other funds received.
(5) ln addition to maintaining an agency fund, the City shall maintain a complete
payroll accounting system for the employees of the Council. lnciuded in the payroll
records will be a complete reporting of all deductions from the employees' earnings
(FWI, FICA, and State Withholding Taxes, Virginia Retirement System Pension and
Life lnsurance Plans, Health lnsurance, Credit Union and other applicable deductions).
(6) The City's finance department shall maintain adequate records disclosing the
details of all receipts and all disbursements. The accounting system shall contain the
following minimum requirements:
(a) A general ledger showing an up-to_date balance of all accounts, budget
appropriations, and unexpended balance.
(b) A complete set of journals showing all receipts, disbursements and
adjustments. These journals shall clearly identify each and every transaclion.
(c) All disbursements shall be by check and approved for payment by the
Council, or its Director, and by the Finance Director of the City.
(7) Rental of Property, the Council agrees to a monthly rental fee of 91.00 for
use of the facility currently in place at 917 Central Avenue for fiscal year 2016-17, and
an annual lease payment of $14,500 for the use of the facility located at 912 Central
Avenue for flscal year 2016-17. The Council may at its option, prepay any of the
required installments. The City will provide insurance protecting the Academy from
liability and property loss.
(8) As payment for services provided by the City as Fiscal Agent, and outlined
above, the Academy agrees to reimburse the City the sum of $1,010.31 per month.
(9) Employees of the Grant shall be considered employees of the City and as
such shall have the same benefits as other City employees. Should any grievance
arise between an employee of the Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy and its Director,
or the Council, the Council shall act as the personnel board for the City, and its decision
as to any grievance shall be final.
('10) The parties hereto agree that this contract shall commence on July 1, 20'16,
and shall end on June 30, 2017, subject to the City's right to declare this contract void if
the Council violates any of the provisions of this agreement.
Entered into this the day and year first hereinabove written.
CIry OF SALEM, VIRGINIA
Mayor - Byron R. Foley
CARDINAL CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACADEMY
Chairman - Chief, Mark A. Sisson
Vice-Chairman - Chief, Gary W. Roche
ATTEST:
Kip Vickers, Director
Cardinal Criminal Justice Academy
July 1,2016
By:
By:
By:
CITY OF' SALEM, VIRGINIA
F'ISCAL AGENT CONTRACT
THIS CONTRACT, made and entered into this lst day of July, 2016 by and between the CITy OF
SALf,M, VIRGINIA, hereinafter referred to as "the City," and THE Rf,GIONAL COMMUNITY
CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD and TIIE REGIONAL ALCOHOL SAT.ETY ACTION PROGRAM
POLICY BOARD, hereinafter collectively refened to as 'lhe Board," provides as follows:
1 . To promote the common good and enhance public Mfety the goveming bodies of the counties and cities
that make up the 23'd and 256 Judicial Circuits and Districts of Virginia, acting in accordance with
enactments ofthe General Assembly of Virgini4 created the Regional Alcohol Safety Action Program
Policy Board and the Regional Community Criminal Justice Board and selected the members ofthose
boards.
2.All necessary govemmental units and agencies have authorized the City to serve the Board as its Fiscal
Agent and as the Grantee of funds that may be allocated or directed to the Board (or either of its
constifuent boards) by govemmental or private bodies, including but not limited to the Virginia
Commission on VASAP and the Virginia Department of Criminal Justice Services, which funds are for
convenience hereinafter refened to as "Grant" or "Grants."
The City hereby contracts, covenants, and agrees:
a. to serve the Board as its Fiscal Agent and the Grantee ofcrants;
b. to provide fiscal administration and management for Grants; and
c. to do so consistently with all requirements of law and of any particular Grant.
The Board hereby contracts, covenants, and agrees:
3.
4.
with the
and the
Page I of5
Consistently with the provisions of Grants, the laws of Virginia, and the directives of the
appropriate Executive and Judicial Branch officials, to provide Alcohol Safety Action Programs
and Community Corrections Programs provided by the Grants in the area served by the
programs.
To have sole responsibility for the administration and operation ofall Policy Board programs.
That all purchases made wit.lr the funds fiom said Grants will comply with federal and state laws
and tlre City's purchasing regulations.
To abide by all the rules, regulations, guidelines, and general and special conditions of any
Grant.
To provide all information that the City needs to file, accurately and timely, any financial and
narrative reports that may be required by the any Grant, or by generally accepted accounting
practices.
To fumish a fidelity bond with corporate surety in an amount not less than either (a) the full
amount of the largest Grant during the term of this agreement, or (b) $250,000 whichever is
greater, which bond will indemnifo and to save harmless the City, its ofiicials, agents, and
employees, from loss or liabili| to the Commonwealth of Virginia for funds received by the
City pursuant to the terms of a Grant, or because of any default, malfeasance, misfeasance on
the part of the Board, or on the part of any officers, agents, or employees of any Alcohol Safety
Action Program or Community Criminal Justice or Community Diversion Incentive Program,
said bond to remain in effect until such time as the Commonwealth of Virginia has approved all
disbursements in writing or has in writing otherwise absolved the City, its officials, agents and
employees llom the responsibility for funds received pursuant to any Grant.
To make all non-financial reports required by any Grant, and fumish a copy ofall reports to the
City.
2
5.
h. To reimburse the City for all expenses incuned in its capacity as fiscal agent, to include, but not
limited to the cost of personnel, fiinge benefits, office supplies, accounting/auditing services,
printing, processing of payroll, postage and technolory charges. The parties agee that, during
the term ofthis contract, this amount is $1,430.94 per month, which sum will be billed and paid
on a monthly basis.
The City's Director of Finance will serve as Program Administrator and will maintain a separate agency
fund in the City's accounting system in which will be recorded all financial transactions of the Board.
The City will keep complete and accurate records of the receipts and disbursements of Grants received
by the Boards.
All receipts from the State of Virginia, the federal govemment, local govemments, and all fees collected
will be deposited in this agency fund.
The Director of the Program shall have printed pre-numbered receipts on which all fees shall be
recorded as collected. These fees, along with all gifu, donations or other funds received, shall be
deposited daily in the agency account.
The City shall maintain a complete payroll accounting system for employees ofthe Boards. lncluded in
the payroll records will be a complete reporting of all deductions flom the employees' eamings (FWT,
FICA, W2(s) and State Withholding Taxes, Virginia Retirement System Pension and Life lnsurance
Plans, Health and Dental Plans, Credit Union deductions, and any other deductions).
The City shall maintain accurate records showing the details of all receipts and disbursements. The
accounting system shall meet at least the following minimum requirements:
a. A general ledger showing an up-to-date balance of all accounts, budget appropriations, and an
unexpended balance.
b. A complete set ofjoumals showing all receipts, disbursements and adjustments. Thesejoumals
shall clearly identi! each and every transaction.
7.
9.
3
c. All disbursements shall be by check and approved for payment by the Board, or dreir Program
Director, and by the Finance Director ofthe City.
10. Employees of the Board and its Alcohol Safety Action Program, Community Criminal Justice and
Pretrial Services program shall be considered employees of the City and as such shall have the same
benefits as other City employees.
ll. In case any grievance under the City's grievance system is filed by an employee of Regional
Community Criminal Justice Board or the Regional Alcohol Safety Action Program Policy Board,
the Board shall act as the Personnel Board for the City, and its decision as to any grievance shall be
final.
12. This contract shall commence on July l, 2014, and shall end on June 30, 2015. To the extent allowed by
federal and state law, either party shall have the right to declare this contract void if the other party
materially violates any provision ofthis agreement.
4
IN WITNESS WIIEREOF, AND WITH INTENT LEGALLY TO BE BO[II\D, TIIE PARTMS, BY
THEIR AUTHORIZ ED REPRESENTATTVE S, AFFIX THEIR SIGNATURE S :
CITY OF SALEM, \TRGINIA
By,
Byron R. Foley, Mayor
By:
Daniel R. O'Donnell
Regional Community Criminal Justice Board
By:
Thomas E. Bowers
Regional Alcohol Safety Action Program Policy Board
ATTEST:
James E. Taliafeno,II
City Clerk of Council
July 1,2016
Beth R Lipes, Director
July 1,2016
5
ttru*-bL_
MEETING DATE:
AGENDA ITEM:
olre 6-al-ltp
ATA REGULAR MEETING OF THE CIryCOUNCILOFTHE CITYOF SALEM, VIRGINIA
HELD AT CITY HALL
SUBMITTED BY:
June 27 ,2016
Approval of Cooperative Purchasing Agreement for HGACBuy
Rosemarie Jordan, Director of Finance
SUMMARY OF INFORMATION:
The City of Salem wishes to execute an "lnterlocal Contract for Cooperative Purchasing"
with HGACBUy. This is a cooperative purchasing group that was formed by the Houston-
Galveston Area Council to provide for inter-governmental contracting. They have extended
the eligibility to participate in their cooperative purchasing to other states that allow for
cooperative purchasing. ln order to participate in this program, City Council must authorize
the Cityto sign the lnterlocal Contract for Cooperative Purchasing. This agreement has
been reviewed and approved by the City Attorney, Steve Yost. Mr. Yost has also reviewed
Virginia Code 52.21304 which allows for joint cooperative purchasing by localities.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Use of cooperative purchasing is an option that potentially allows City departments to save
money on purchases.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that City Council authorizes the City Manager to execute the lnterlocal
Contract for Cooperative Purchasing.
lN IHE COUNCTL OF THE CtTy OF SALEM, VtRGtNtA, June 27, 2016, IIE M**G L-
DAIE 6-a.l-\V
RESOLUTION 1298
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 5ALEM, VIRGINIA, thAt thE fOIIOW|NS
fees and policies be reaffirmed for July 1, 2014 and established in the City of Salem effective
immediately upon passage:
Parks and Recreation Participation Fee 550.00 per sport
(Non-resident/Tuition Students only)
Parks and Recreation Sports uniform Fee 935.e9 540.00 per sport
Adult Sports Team Participation Fee 5350.00 - Softball and Basketball
5400.00 - Touch Football
Taliaferro complex Facility Fee 51.00 on tickets equal to or > 58.01
S0.50 on tickets equalto or < 58.00
State Levy Tax on all Permit Fees 2 OOo/o
(Pass through to State)
Property Maintenance code Compliance S25Sg 530'00
Re-lnspection Code Compliance 925{g 530.00
Elevator lnspection Fee $25€S s30.00
occupancy Permit 5253e 530.00
Temporary Electric lnspection Fee S45=0e 530.00
Ri8ht o, way Permit S50.0o for a 30 day permit
s100.00 for a 50 day permit
lf work started without a permit the cost is
doubled
Bad Check Charge 540.00
Toter Replacement Fee (first toter) 9+€e Sz'oo per monih-lf qualify for Tax Reliet the
fee remains at a 51.00 per month
Toter Purchase Fee (additional toters) 565.00 each
Dumpster Collection Fee 52O OO per dumpster for regularly contracted
custome15
2
S35.OO per dumpster for CALL-IN customers (No
Contrad)
No Charge for companies participating in City's
Cardboard Recycling Pro8ram
510.00 monthly fee per dumpster for a Lease
5950.00 for purchase of a dumPster
Penalty for Late Payment 5139 S10.OO per service if residential or 5% of bill
if commercial or industrial
Reconnect Fee for Non-Payment 525.00 for Residential or Small General Service
S75.oo for Residential or Small General Service if
done after hours or on weekends
All other customers: the cost of making the
reconnection, with a minimum of 5250.00
Customers where service has been disconnected
for traudulent use oI electricity or where accessto
the meter has been denied will be actual cost of
making the reconnection, with a minimum of
s2s0.00.
Approved in Eledric Book of Rates.
Meter Check for Accu racy-Electric S5O.OO (Dep€s+ payment of fee is req uired for this
service and will be refunded if the degree of error
is greaterthan 2%)
+/€t€F€he€l++€++€€u @
wate+-m€ter
Meter Re-reads S1o.o0 for a second trip
Utility Turn on Fees for Electric/water S4se 510.00 per service
Bulk Water Charge S5O OO plus 55.00 per 1000 gallons
Locate Lateral in Existing Sewer 5250.00 plus 5100 per hour
Sewer Backup Complaint (lf not found
in City System) 5200 00
Sewer Cleanout lnstallation Contact Sewer Department for a 50/50 contract
Low Pressure Complaint (lf not within
City System) S100.00
3
t€€at€Je|e+8lr€kaSe-
{ei++iya+e++ep€4y) S'2se4o+lus+leo€ofeF
Shut Off Water Service at Meter after hrs. S100.00
Refund of Building Permit Retain 530.00 or 25% of the permit, whichever is
hither
Commencing Work without a Building
Permit Char8e double ofthe permit up to 5250.00
Demolition Permit Use the Uniform statewide Buildint Code table
and is based on cost of demolition
Library Fines and Fees:
Fines: Adult material except
hot items: video's and games 20c per day; 55.00 max
Children's ir#+A material except
hot items: video's and games 20c per day; S1.00 max
Vid€€s'DvDs+#l+)
All Hot items: video's and Sames S1.00 per day; 55.00 max
Fees: Replacement Library Card 51-00
Temporary Library Card
(Non-resident) No charge
Out-of-state Library Card 515.00 per year
ProcessinB fee for lost items-
Except paperbacks 55.00
Processing fee for lost paperbacks S1.0o
Replacement €issette or CD Audio
Book 55.00
tostisdiot€p€-€a5e-$ Damaged or
missing CD or DVD case 51.00
Missing barcode 25c
Lost ltem Charges:@
LostlD€5t+€Y€#dBlt+€o& items $ee4o Retail cost plus processing fee of 55'00
Lostlg€stFeye+€hildref :JA.geek
books on CD-Adult or Children S453o Retail cost plus processing fee of 55'00
Lost Music Retail cost plus processint fee of s5'00
to5*lD€5trey€d+d+lt+
8eef4g,€FBeg&-ee55ette+ 945Je
k*aHd+eF-5-af,d+A-b€a*
+ep€-eFe6ao $25-0e
4
fos+€hild+€i+++aya +45-00
!ost+4{5i€4ass€+ t $20Je
Lostll;)€5M Video's or DVD'S S2SH-+*e-€Fl€55di5l(5
€€5t-€fev*-+++e€s
r€+e+h3a-**e d.i5ks Retail cost plus processing fee of 55.00
Other fees:
Photocopies anrl-€€Fput€F
P+intects 40 20C per page
Pi€*€€€ei€s+r€s+€+e+
M€t€rial Uf+9+5+ep{€5+ree
Faxes Services S3.OO for the first pase, 51.00 per additional page
Printing Services Black/white is.20 per page, Color is .50 per page
Notary Fee 55.00 Per notary
lnterlibrary Loan Fee 54.00 per item
East Hill CemeterY fees:
Single space for burial S8oo.OO (no charge for Salem residents ages 0 to
77)
Open/close for full burial 5800 00
open/close for cremains 5450.00
Open/close for children no charge (salem residents ages 0 to 17)
Firework Permit S100'00 Per event
Fire/EMS lncident reports 510'00 per request
Police lncident reports 510.00 per request
Police Fingerprints S10'00
FOIA Fees {Freedom of lnformation Act):
Staff member search time, charged
at an estimated rate of 55.00 per quanet hour
Computer search time, requests
for materials which exist
electronically, or transmission of
electronic files are charges at the
rate of 58'00 Per quarter hour
Attorney fees
Large format printing
Charged at current rate
Actual cost for larte Print Plus
staff time rate estimated at
5
55.00 Per quarter houl
Electronic recordings Actual cost for electronic recordings
plus staff time rate estimated at
S5.00 per quarter hour
Computer print outs S.10 per page
Photocipies (including those
necessary to perform redadions) S.10 per page
lncidental out-of-Pocket costs
necessary to ass€mble the
records (ex: Phone, postaSe or
courie, charges) Willbe itemized
lf the requester has asked for an advanced determination of the €ost, or if the cost
exceed S2O0.OO, the requester shall be notified in advance' The City Manager may,
before continuing to process the request, require the tequester to agree to payment
of a deposit not to exceed the amount ofthe advance determination.
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
lames L. Chisom -
William D.lones -
lane W. Johnson -
John C. Givens -
Byron Randolph Foley -
ATTEST:
lames E. Taliaferro, ll
clerk of council
City of Salem, Virginia
rEM# thA-
DATE 6-al-l1p
IN THE COUNCIL
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE
the following fee schedule
effective JuIY 1-, 2015:
zoning Permit
Re zoning
Special ExcePtion Permit
use Not Provided
OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, JUNC 27, 201.6:
RESOLUTION 1299
A RESOLUTION ESTABLISHING MISCELLANEOUS FEES '
COI]NCIL OF THE CITY OF SAI'EM, VIRGINIA' thAI
was est.ablished July l, 2Or4 be adopted
Planning Unit
(a)
Deve lopment. s
Review and
$3
$-?€o--+-+251e€+e
>--€n€-.+€.l€
$?40 + $25laere
>--€s€-e€+e
$?40 + $25laere
>--€n€--e€E
$-?o4
$2s0
$4
$25€--+-+:sl+€+e
>....€+}€--+€.€
AMENDED FEE
July 1, 2 014
$20
$200 + $25/acre
> one acre PIl.rB
petitioner PaYg
fuI1 adverti6e-
ment coats
$200 + 25/acre
> one acre PluEpetitioner PaYB
fuI1 advertiEe-
ment coat
$200 + $21/acre
> one acre Plua
petitioner PaYs
fuII advertise-
ment coBt
$200 PluEpetitioner PaYg
fuI1 advertise-
ment coats
$2s0
$200
$500 +
> one
525 / acre
acre
PRESENT
March 24
FEE
2005
(PUD)
Approval
Variances (Board of zoning Appeals)
(a)Variance
Appeaf to Uniform SEatewide BuiJ-ding
Code
Storm Water APPeal
Site PIan APProval
Subdivl s ions
(a) Minor (s or less lots) $1oo $100
(b) Major (6 or more lots or any $22o + $45/Iot l22o + $45/1oE
subdivision involving the
creation of publ j-c righEs
of way)
Boundary Line Adjustment or
VacaEion of lnterior Lot Lines $75 $75
Building PLan Review
Commercial Constsruction 10? of permit. 10? of permit
(New or Expansion) fee fee
Residential $g S3o
Plan Review with a
stormwater Plan $s $250 for under
an acre
Re-Review $75 $75
zoning cert.ification Lettser $54 $100
(Charge for background investi-gation
for zoning & building comPliance,
not just zoning designation)
Home occupat.ion Fee +25 $30
Erosion and Sediment Control $100 + $SO/acre $100 + $SO/acre
> one acre > one acre
Agreements in Lieu of Plan $50 $50
r,lnd disturbing fee $2s $30
CerEificatse of occupancy $25 $30
Temporary $25 $30
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote' tshe same stood as foll-ows:
,fames L. Chisom -
william D. Jones -
,fane W. ,Johnson -
John C. Givens -
BYron RandolPh Foley -
ATTEST:
,fames E. Tali-af erro, II
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virgi-nia
IIEM #.GN
DATE 6-a1-lr'"
IN THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA, JUne 27.2016
RESOLUTION 13OO
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM, VIRGINIA,
that the following fee schedule for the Solid Waste Transfer Station (tipping fees)
established July 1,2014 be adopted and effective upon passage:
Tipping Fee at Solid Waste Transfer Station
Local Area Governments $48.40
Private Non-Profit lnstitutions $48.40
Business and Commercial Haulers $50=50 $50.75 per ton
lvlinimum for any load $29.00
Salem citizens - private
Automobiles and pickup trucks No charge
Scale Use $5.00
Administrative Fee for Regulated
M€dical Waste (RMW) dropped off $200.00
Special Waste (requiring specialhandling) Actual Cost PIus10%
Special Load Fees:
Regular Commercial Fee 950.75
Unloading Trucks $25.00 minimum, 1-hour labor per employee
plus $25.00 minimum, 1-hour equipment use
per equipment used
Upon a call for an aye and a nay vote, the same stood as follows:
James L. Chisom -
William D. Jones -
Jane W. Johnson -
John C. Givens -
Byron Randolph Foley -
ATTEST:
James E. Taliaferro, ll
Clerk of Council
City of Salem, Virginia