HomeMy Public PortalAbout2019_tcmin1210
1
December 10, 2019 – Leesburg Town Council Meeting
(Note: This is a transcript prepared by a Town contractor based on the video of
the meeting. It may not be entirely accurate. For greater accuracy, we encourage
you to review the video of the meeting that is on the Town’s Web site –
www.leesburgva.gov or refer to the approved Council meeting minutes. Council
meeting videos are retained for three calendar years after a meeting per Library
of Virginia Records Retention guidelines.)
Mayor Burk: I’d like to call to order this December 10, 2019 meeting of the Leesburg
Town Council. If anyone needs hearing assistance, please see the Clerk. Council
Member Fox will give the invocation and I will give the Pledge of Allegiance. Council
Member Fox.
Council Member Fox: Thank you. As we gather today to convene our Town Council
meeting, we'd like to recognize and thank thee for the blessings that surround us. We
thank thee for a beautiful town and for those who reside within it. As we come into this
holiday and Christmas season, please continue to bless us with the ability to see one
another as brothers and sisters and to treat one another with the regard that that
relationship deserves. Please bless this Council with the gift of discernment so that
the citizens of Leesburg can count on good and righteous governance from us. We
ask these things in thy good name, amen.
Mayor Burk: All right. Please join me in the pledge.
All: I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic
for which it stands, one Nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Mayor Burk: Let the roll call reflect that all members of Council are here with the
exception of Mr. Dunn, who I believe is going to be late. We have one work session
minutes from November 25th. Do I have a motion? So moved by Vice Mayor Martinez,
seconded by Council Member Thiel. All in favor.
Council Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed. That's 6-0-1. Regular session minutes of November 26 2019.
Vice Mayor Martinez: So moved.
Mayor Burk: Moved by Vice Mayor Martinez.
Council Member Neil Steinberg: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Steinberg. All in favor?
Council Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed. That's 6-0-1. Do I have a motion to adopt the meeting agenda?
Vice Mayor Martinez: So moved.
2
Mayor Burk: So moved by Mr. Martinez. Second?
Council Member Fox: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Fox. All in favor?
Council Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: 6-0-1. We have a couple of presentations today and then we have a
report from the comprehensive financial report and we have a very long agenda. I am
going to ask petitioners and people in the public hearing that want to speak, I'm going
to ask you to limit it to three minutes if you would. The first presentation we have is
The Loudoun Sketch Club. Let me read these. These have already been approved.
It says, The Loudoun Sketch Club celebrates its 75th year. Whereas, the Loudoun
Sketch Club was founded in 1944. It was the first organization of its kind in the County
and the first to exhibit artworks throughout the County. The first to hold annual shows
open to the public and the first to advocate for art as an essential to the quality of life
in our community. Whereas, for 75 years the club has upheld the tradition of getting
together at designated locations to capture the views and the local scenes of Loudoun.
These air sessions afford participants the opportunity to enjoy companionship of other
artists, to practice their craft on beautiful scenery to show their work in an annual
exhibit organized by the club. During the winter months, the club arranges workshops
on the topics related to the practice of art. Whereas, The Loudoun Sketch Club
membership is over 160 strong, and it's open to all artists in Loudoun County and the
surrounding area. Levels of experience range from seasoned professionals to novices.
Anyone producing original works and mediums within the fine art disciplines are
welcome.
Whereas, members of the club helped to launch the Loudoun Arts Council in 1987 and
led the organization in its first year. Whereas, members of the clubs are among the
first teachers of visual arts in Loudoun County public schools. Whereas, outreach
activities have brought numbers of artists into the community, such as judging student
art show, teaching drawing to fifth grade Girl Scouts, and organizing a show to raise
funds for the Land Trust of Virginia.
Whereas, work by the club members, past and present, provide historic record of the
local building and farmlands that no longer exist. Whereas, we welcome Jessica
Wilson and the members of the Loudoun Sketch Club to receive the proclamation
recognizing their 75th anniversary. Therefore the Mayor and the Town Council of
Leesburg, Virginia, do hereby congratulate the Loudoun Sketch Club on their 75th
anniversary and will continue to support Loudoun's arts community. Proclaimed this
10th day of December, 2019.
The next one is for recognizing Loudoun County High School Marching Raiders Band
for winning another championship. Whereas, the Loudoun County High School
Marching Raiders Band won the US band class VA national championships on
Saturday, November 2nd, 2019, in Allentown, Pennsylvania. Whereas, the 2019
championship marks the seventh US band competition of the season, and the
3
Marching Raiders won first place in all seven events. Whereas, the 101 member strong
marching band competed against eight other bands in the VA class, the Marching
Raiders secured first place in the national championship with a score of 98.4. They
won the caption for best music, best percussion, best visuals, and best overall effect.
Whereas, the 2019 show of the marching band is entitled, Finding Light, Finding Life.
The music, choreography, multiple flag changes by the color guard, live singing
combined with the moving props to take the audience on to a journey out of the
darkness and into the light. Whereas, director of Loudoun County High School
Marching Raiders Band, Darron Young, is here to accept the proclamation on the
behalf of his students, leadership team, and faculty that worked hard to achieve this
accomplishment.
Whereas, the Loudoun County High School Raiders Band program has received
multiple awards at state levels, with this being the second year in a row receiving a
national honor. Therefore the Mayor and the Town Council of Leesburg, Virginia, do
hereby congratulate the Loudoun County High School Marching Raiders Band for all
their hard work and dedication to winning the national championship trophy for the
second year in a row. Proclaimed the 10th day of December, 2019.
[applause]
The next one is the proclamation for the holidays of Hanukkah, Christmas, and
Kwanzaa, which are celebrated each year in the month of December. Whereas,
Hanukkah is a Jewish festival of lights, commemorates the Maccabees victory over
the Greek Syrians, and the rededication of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem. Whereas,
Christmas is a Christian commemoration of the birth of Jesus of Nazareth and a time
of giving, hospitality, and joy. Whereas, Kwanzaa is an African American agricultural
holiday celebrating the harvest gathering, reverence and commemoration of the past,
recommitting to cultural ideas, and celebrating of the good.
Whereas, all of these holidays have a common theme of celebrating joy, faith, and
goodwill. Whereas, the Town of Leesburg is a diverse community with many residents
who celebrate these holidays, now therefore the Mayor and the Council of the Town
of Leesburg in Virginia hereby do recognize Gladys Burke, Ellen Nagel-Paris, Rabbi
David Greenspoon, who couldn't be here because he had a knee surgery, I think
somebody's here in his place, then Father Daniel Velez Rivera. All residents of the
town and representing the town's four geographical quadrants for the many
contributions each of these cultures have made to our diverse community, and wish
all of Leesburg residents a joyous holiday season. Proclaimed this 10th day of
December, 2019.
The next one is recognition of public service for Town employees retiring in the year
2019. Whereas, town employees make a significant contribution to the well-being and
quality of life for all the residents of Leesburg and whereas, dedicated town employees
endeavor to perform their jobs with professionalism and integrity to make government
more accessible and effective, whereas, from retirement marks the end of a public
service career in the beginning of a new chapter in their lives, therefore, the Mayor
and the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia hereby congratulate the following
4
2019 Town employees on their retirement and extend best wishes for all future
endeavors.
There's Herbert Gallahan- Utilities, Charlie Mumaw- Public Works, Patrick Daly-
Leesburg police, Christopher Tidmore- Leesburg police, and Thomas Brandon- Public
Works Capital Projects proclaimed this 10th day of December 2019.
That's it. We are going to go down and present these if you would join me.
[silence]
Thank you. The first one that we're going to give out is The Sketch Club. Jessica
Wilson, members of the club want to come up and receive this.
Jessica Wilson: [inaudible 00:11:30]
Mayor Burk: Of course. Get up for it. Come on up, lady. I'm going to ask you to tell us
about your club and what it does and why it's-- 75 years is a long time to be sketching.
Jessica: First of all, we are honored to receive this proclamation. When the club was
established 75 years ago, there was virtually no art in the county. With the exception
of in-people's homes, there wasn't the creation of it, there wasn't the teaching of it,
there wasn't the showing of it, and look where we are today. Our gratitude goes to
Mayor Burk and to the Town Council Members who are so tremendously supportive
of the arts and help to create a climate in which local artists and art organizations can
flourish. If our founding members were with us today, they'd be pleased at the
recognition that the visual arts have in our everyday life. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Absolutely. Thank you. Thank you for all that you do in regard to this
club. It's fabulous. Very, very grateful.
Jessica Wilson: Thank you so much.
Mayor Burk: You preserve all the history.
[applause]
Thank you. Thank you very much for coming. Appreciate it. Thank you very much.
Thank you very much for all the work you do on this. Recognizing Loudoun County
High School Marching Band. When is the national championship? Darron Young? Is
Darron here?
Aaron: He could not be here. We're in-charge.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Someone else is going to--? It's a good thing he's got a team
behind him. Would you guys like to talk about this? This is pretty momentous.
Aaron: It is.
Mayor Burk: This is a pretty-
5
Aaron: It is.
Mayor Burk: -amazing accomplishment.
Aaron: I agree. I agree. Thank you. Hello. I teach the drumline at County. My name is
Aaron Bertoglio. A lot of work goes into this program not only with the kids but their
parents. A lot of dedication, a lot of sweat, a couple of tears but good tears. I just want
to thank those kids for putting in every minute and coming back and not giving up. It
makes it worth it when they come off the field and you see it in their eyes they feel
good about what they do.
Mayor Burk: It was quite a production.
Aaron: Yes, I agree.
Mayor Burk: Would you like to say anything?
LCHS Member: I will like to thank all the 101 kids we had plus Darron Young, Kristy
Lemieux [inaudible 00:14:01]--
Mayor Burk: I think you have a very long list.
LCHS Member: Yes, I know. We thought about packing in here plus their 200 parents.
Aaron Bertoglio, Sophia Macchiarolo and Hannah Fox with the drum majors and
Amber Trinh who is our Executive officer. Thank you to all then.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Please accept this-
Aaron: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: -and share it with this. I have to tell you I live down from the high school.
[applause]
I hear them practicing August, September, October, November. They are a dedicated
group. Thank you for your leadership.
Aaron: Thank you. Appreciate it.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. [inaudible 00:14:39] [chuckles] Nice to see you. Thank you.
This is the holiday celebration. For this, I need Gladys Burke, Ellen Nagel-Paris, Father
Daniel Velez Rivera and who's taking Rabbi David Greenspoon's place?
Laurie Mangold: Laurie Mangold. Executive director of Congregation Sha’are
Shalom.
Mayor Burk: We want to thank you all very much for being willing to do this. For
representing our different communities. One of the things that we always talk about at
the Council level is we are so proud of the diversity that is with us in our community.
It's important. It brings a whole new look at things and a whole new feel and a whole
6
new ideas. We really appreciate the fact that you're leaders within the community and
we want to recognize you. Would you like to say a few words?
Father Daniel Velez Rivera: Sure. A priest always wants to say a few words. Thank
you for all who are here. It is wonderful to have the diversity of the body that is present
and to recognize the growing diversity of our community. It is what makes a community
strong. Not homogeneity but the multiplicity of it all. I'm so excited to see the people
that are here, and thank you for the recognition.
Mayor Burk: Anybody else wants to say anything?
Gladys Burke: Good evening. My name is Gladys Burke. I understand that this idea
came out of that Diversity Commission. I just want to congratulate them and I want to
say Merry Christmas to all. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you very much. Ellen, did you want to say anything?
Ellen: I want to wish all our Jewish people a happy Hanukkah when it starts around
Christmas time.
Mayor Burk: Thank you all very much. Here's your package.
Ellen: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Laurie did you want to say anything? I'm sorry.
Laurie Mangold: It's fine. We're proud to be and happy to be in such a diverse
community here. I personally-- I can't speak as a Rabbi, but I personally want to wish
everyone a joyous festive season of light and warmth and love and peace.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you, very much. I want to recognize Pamela who's
the chair, correct? Of the Diversity Commission. Thank you very much. Thank you
ladies, and gentlemen. [laughs]
All right. This is the town employees. This is sad. We're sad to lose all of these-- They
all guys.
[laughter]
We're sad to lose them. Is Herbert Gallahan here? Charles Mumaw? They decided
they were staying home. Patrick Daly? He's not here. Christopher Tidmore? And
Thomas Brandon. Okay. I mean, you guys are big holes to fill. The institution of
knowledge that's leaving this building with these men. It's just amazing. Would you like
to say a few words about your lovely experience here in the town?
Thomas Brandon: I would like to say this, [unintelligible 00:18:14]
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Do you like to say anything?
7
Christopher Tidmore: Sure. I actually just enjoyed the opportunity to work with him.
20 years lieutenant, I enjoyed it very much. I do miss the people I worked with and the
people I served, but I do at the time enjoying retirement a little bit so it's not a worry.
Mayor Burk: Thank you for all your work with the police department.
Charles Mumaw: I just want to say I'm enjoying retirement although I think my wife
wants me to get out and get a real job now. It's been great.
Mayor Burk: Thank you all gentlemen for all of your work and your dedication to the
town it doesn't happen-- You don't stay 20 years if you’re not making a calculation
making a difference. Thank you all very much. Let me give you all your-- They have
stickers on. I got to take your stickers off first. Here you go. Here you go, and then--
Oops. You want the sticker.
[applause]
Thank you. We're really going to miss you. We're going to miss you. I'm sure I'll see
you around. Okay, that's it.
There is more seats if people want to come from the hallway and sit down.
[pause 00:19:39 - 00:19:57]
Okay. All right. That takes us to any Regional Commission reports.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Presentation.
Mayor Burk: Presentation first, sorry. This is the Comprehensive Annual Financial
Report by Ann Genova. Is Ann here? That is not Ann. Is she coming? We need to get
started. Are you Ann?
Ann Genova: Yes. Hi, I'm Ann Genova [unintelligible 00:21:04] Thank you Town
Council for the opportunity to present on the audit this evening and also the opportunity
to serve the town's external auditor. I'd like to give special thanks to the finance
department especially Lisa Stillman for their cooperation and hard work in preparing
the audit. As you know, there are several components of an audit. We assist the town
in preparing the financial statements which is a report that takes the accounting
information and presents it in accessible readable format for users.
We also issue an opinion on the financial statements. I'm happy to report that we
issued an unmodified opinion on the financial statements which is the best opinion in
a locality can receive. It says that the financial statements are correct in all material
aspects. We also issue a report on internal controls which should be considered along
with the financial statements. We don't express an opinion on the internal controls but
we do describe certain deficiencies and recommend a way to improve internal
controls. We also issue a report on the town's compliance with the requirements
related to federal award programs.
What we tested this year is the town's highway planning and construction federal
program that made that major award and we're happy to report that we identified no
8
findings there. We also provide an additional report that we're calling the financial
analysis which I think is being passed around that provides a high-level summary of
financial information in a comparative graphic form. What I'd like to do tonight is look
at a few of these graphs and charts with you tonight. If you want to grab the financial
analysis and look at page four. On page four, what we're looking at here is fund
balance.
The chart on the right-hand side, months of expenditure is in general fund unassigned
balance. What that is saying is how many months of expenditures can we cover with
the unassigned fund balance? The GFOA gives a guideline that says that general-
purpose governments regardless of their size should maintain an unrestricted fund
balance in the general fund of no less than two months or regular general fund
operating expenses or operating expenditures.
The town has a little over two months of expenditures that can be covered with the
unassigned fund balance for this year and you can see last year it was a little bit higher
with a little over three months. That's what the chart on the right is showing you. It
meets GFOA guidelines.
On page seven, what this chart is looking at is the condition of the capital assets owned
by the town and being used by the town. On this chart, on page seven, it's looking at
governmental activities. It's looking at infrastructure, buildings and improvements,
furniture and vehicles related to general funds. Public works, public safety, parks and
Rec zoning. What it looks at is it says here's the cost of a capital asset and it compares
it to accumulated depreciation over time. When that percent gets close to about 10%
to 20%, then it's time for the town to consider is it time to replace, is it time to acquire
new assets? That's what this chart is telling you is what type of asset is in good shape
and what types of assets maybe they need to start looking at budgeting for
replacements.
On the next page you can see the same chart related to business-type activities. Water
and sewer plants and lines and furniture and vehicles related to the utilities of the town.
The useful life of an asset is estimated by the town following some accounting
standards and also based on the experience of using an asset. The useful life can be
longer, it can be shorter than the estimate, but it gives a good guideline and these
charts are a good indicator.
If you'd like to go to page 13. What this chart looks at is the self-sufficiency of business-
type activities. In other words, the town's utilities, the water and sewer. Are the
revenues covering the expenses that these business-type activities have? The
answer, in this case, is yes. You can see that the revenues are covering expenses
expenditures by 30% more than last year. What this says is that current year costs
can be covered by current year revenue and that the town doesn't have to rely on
subsidies and prior year reserves to operate the utilities.
If you want to go to page 15, this is getting into, and there are several of these on per
capita ratios. What it's asking here is how much do you current services in the general
fund-- Again, going back to public works, public safety, finance department, parks and
Rec. How much do these current services costs per capita in the town at least. You
can see that public works and public safety, of course, is much higher per capita than
9
some of the other departments and that's pretty typical for localities. I just wanted to
show you some highlights and things that I thought Town Council will be interested in
the financial analysis and then give a little bit of time if you'd like to ask me some
question.
Mayor Burk: All right. Thank you. Does anybody at this end want to ask a question,
Mr. Thiel?
Council Member Thiel: Yes. Thank you very much for the presentation. I hope
working with Clark was as exciting as I think it might be, which is not really. No offense.
I'm just kidding Clark. What was the, all right, here we go. You mentioned that the town
can continue for two months using the unassigned fund balance. Is that including what
we have already taken out of the on assigned fund balance, including the IT and other
things that we've taken out throughout the year.
Clark Case: Yes, that's correct. That's in effect your working capital.
Council Member Thiel: Okay, so that's continuing.
Clark Case: That's the amount of money you have that if revenue stopped tomorrow,
storm blew through a blue town hallway, you'd have two months’ worth of cash in the
bank, but you could continue to operate until you recovered.
Council Member Thiel: Is that not touchable or is that something we have access to?
Clark Case: The town has reserved funds. They're not really touchable. That's another
sound fund balance is your working capital and your reserves for unforeseen events.
Council Member Thiel: The reserve can continue for how much longer if need be?
Clark Case: Well, the reserves are set aside for specific purposes. The unassigned
you want to maintain any level of working capital because you need to make your
payrolls between inflows of personal property taxes and real estate taxes, because
they tend to come in twice a year. They come in and then you drain them down and
you work off those balances until you get the next inflow of taxes or sales taxes,
depending on what the revenue flows are. GASB recommends that you maintain at
least two months of that working capital in order to take yourself from cash flow to cash
flow. That's the best practice, we've seen that best practice amount, but not by a huge
margin.
Council Member Thiel: That two months is only the unassigned fund balance and not
the recovery fund?
Clark Case: That's correct.
Council Member Thiel: Okay, thank you.
Mayor Burk: Anyone else at this point? Mr. Campbell.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you, I appreciate all the hard work as usual. I
have a few questions and I recognize it may not be able to be answered tonight and
10
may be comments that we'll take into consideration during our budget process. The
first is about, I guess, the no comment on the internal controls and I know that's
probably management practice as auditors. At the same time, it would be nice to know
where we are deficient and where our weaknesses may be and some of that might be
SP staffing and obviously not personnel or problems, but I think it's important for us to
know that we do have an effective internal control system in process. I know Clark,
your statements will always be that we do and I recognize the reports that you've given
us are good, I'm just saying from an outside audit perspective, it'd be helpful to at least
have that comment.
The other issue is on our depreciation schedule. I've always considered deferred
maintenance a big liability. I don't know if there's a general accounting practice policy
of looking at deferred maintenance of some percentage of a budget, but I know it's
also an unfunded issue for us that at some point will become a liability. Again, I'm
making the comment that will want to look at that as I always do every year to see
what we're not funding. As we look at falling behind on some of our assets, whether
it's street or road maintenance, those things eventually have to get done and the
money has to come from somewhere. The third and final and I think you brought it up
last year, Clark, I noticed that on audit opinion but on our pension liabilities to really,
again, look at as we have an aging workforce, we have a liability that comes due.
The three gentlemen that retired this year got out in time, but it's also funded
opportunity for us to make sure that we have enough funds and reserves to pay those
obligations. Again, I appreciate all the work and numbers and I know there's more that
we may have as we go through this, but those are the three that just jumped out at
me. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Thank you. I'm looking at some of these graphs, I'll start first
with the general bonded debt per capital. That's slide 10. The first question I have is,
you said this ratio is not considered debt payable from alternative revenues. What do
you consider alternative or alternate? Sorry, alternate revenues. What classes that?
Clark Case: Well, for example, sales taxes for example, this is speaking to your ability
to pay your-- Actually, this is on slide 10, you're looking at per capita and what it's
really doing is looking at the debt burden on your citizens of the GO bonds that are
payable from property taxes only, real estate and personal property taxes. You also
have sales taxes, investment income-
Vice Mayor Martinez: And you consider that as alternate revenues.
Clark Case: Those in this context will be considered alternate revenue sources.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Would it be good to say that they are variables? In other words,
they're not fixed and they're constant?
Clark Case: That's correct.
Vice Mayor Martinez: That's why you broke them out?
11
Clark Case: That's correct. They tend to fluctuate up and down with business activity,
personal property taxes, real estate taxes tend to be much more predictable from the
time you put your budget together to the time you actually receive your revenues.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I also noticed on that same slide that our debt per capita is
going down per year, but also our population is going up per year. Is that a direct
reflection on the population increase, or a little bit of both our management of our debt
capital and population increasing but the bottom line is there's less burden say
attached to our citizens and our residents.
Clark Case: It's primarily due to the increasing population. Our debt is being retired
on a relatively aggressive scale. The town tries to amortize 60% of its debt of the first
10 years. We're reducing the debt burden but we also have a busy ambitious CIP. This
is primarily just a reflection of the growth of the town.
Vice Mayor Martinez: As we're getting those aggressive avenues are there
opportunities that we retire some long timer debt coming up. Or are we just keep
going?
Clark Case: I'm sure I didn't catch your question entirely. I couldn't hear you, Marty.
Vice Mayor Martinez: As the population increases and the revenue increases. Is
there opportunities to retire the long-time debt? Some long-time debt?
Clark Case: Well, it's less we retire the long-term debt because long-time debts are
only returnable as it’s callable.
Vice Mayor Martinez: That's what I meant callable after 10 years.
Clark Case: The answer is we're paying that off pretty aggressively. The better
approach is not to borrow money at all to fund more of your CIP with PAYGO You use
that extra revenue to pay more of it. You don't borrow it in the first place.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Now also one of the slides and I'm trying to find. You had a
depreciation schedule of sorts of depreciation. I noticed that in some of the apartments
the depreciation went down but then came back up again. Why is that? Is that because
the particular debt we've had to reborrow. We ended having more loans and so our
depreciation cost are higher?
Clark Case: Do you know which slide you're talking about Marty?
Vice Mayor Martinez: I'm trying to find it now. I think it was on page seven or eight. It
was on page seven. The one that caught my eye was the runaways was one and then
there was another one in purple. Computer equipment and software. I noticed that
their depreciation went down and then in 2018 it went up again. In 2019 it went up
again. I'm assuming that's because we're refreshing the infrastructure?
Clark Case: That's the direct result of the increased contributions to the CARP. The
capital asset replacement program. The town's put in about a million three additional
each the last two years. We've been replacing more of that equipment infrastructure
12
as a result of the CARP. It does not mean we're entirely caught up as you can tell by
this slides of the bars.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Also thought that's typical because as we're going through, we
may depreciate in capital assets but at the same time we may be adding more. The
whole depreciation now depends on where we're with our improving our town
infrastructure and to other sorts.
Clark Case: That's correct. The reason you see the bars go back up is because we've
invested more in replacing some of that equipment.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I'm always just wanted to have that explained so other people
can get it and the staff. Other than that I really want to thank you for the stuff. It's just
like you hit us with a fire hydrant hose. Now trying to swallow a little bit of this at a time.
I do appreciate it and I'm looking forward to going through it all. I know the little bit
have gone through, it's probably too much anyway. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: All right. Thank you very much. We appreciate the information and will
look forward to hearing from you again.
Clark Case: Just one final point. As you have time to go through these books, you
have any questions, the town staff and the finance department are more than happy
to meet with you one on one. Go over any questions you may have. If you may want
to email us questions, we stand ready to answer any questions you may have about
the CAFR or about any of the other documents the author has provided to you.
Please look and ask. We'll be more than happy to spend whatever time it takes to
answer your questions you or the public may have and these documents will be posted
in the town's website tomorrow.
Mayor Burk: Okay, thank you very much. We'll all be falling asleep tonight with
[laughs] the petitioner section. Oh, regional commission report. I want to do that first.
If I have regional commission report tonight. All right then petitioners. One of the first
orders of business is to hear from the public. All members of the public are welcome
to address the Council on any item matter or issue.
If you wish to speak. We ask that you sign up at the podium. We also ask if you would
identify yourself and if comfortable so give your address for the taped record. Any
public speaker will be requested to state their name and spell it for closed captioning.
In the interest of fairness, we will ask you to observe the three minute time limit. The
green light in front of you will turn yellow at the end of two minutes indicating that you
have one minute remaining. At that time we would appreciate your summing up and
yielding the floor when the bell indicates your time is expired. Under the rules of orders
adopted by this Council the five-minute time limit applies to all. First name on our
petitioner is David Culvert.
David Culbert: Good evening. I'm David Culbert, C-U-L-B-E-R-T.
Council Member Steinberg: One moment. You just said five minutes.
Mayor Burk: No, I didn't. I said three.
13
Council Member Steinberg: Okay.
Mayor Burk: Thank you, though.
David Culbert: Thank you, tonight's topic will be ultra vires. Now, I understand that
not everyone knows what that means after all it's Latin. It's like quid pro quo, it's not
always a good thing and in fact, it's not often a good thing when you have someone
who acts in an ultra vires manner. Ultra vires literally means beyond power. Someone
who is acting above and beyond the power that they actually possess. Classic
example might be a policeman who lawfully arrests someone puts them under
handcuffs does everything properly and then proceeds to pull his billy club out while
he commences aggressive interrogation techniques and goes ultra vires on the
suspect. Who thinks that's going to end well?
In that context, it doesn't always apply to the police. In fact, as Justice Brennan said
in the San Diego Gas and light case, "If a policeman must understand the constitution
then why not a planner?" From my perspective why not a Mayor, or why not Council
Members with respect to the constitution and its impact.
What we have before us and what we've been addressing hearing after hearing, is a
series of actions of undertaken by whether employees or elected officials of the Town
of Leesburg to, if you will, present the characterization of a by right contractual matter,
the utilization of existing sewer capacity by great manner and the recharacterization
of that as some type of legislative act now. Clearly, if you have a proprietary act which
is not governmental per se or does not involve the protection of governmental
immunity and you recast that proprietary act as a legislative one and invite us as the
town, invites us to voluntarily participate in a legislative act which is unnecessary.
You are setting us up for certainly a bad result and I would say from an ultra vires
perspective setting the town up for a better result. When we consider that, I had five
minutes I had, now I have three now. We are really effectively exposing the town and
exposing the individuals to liability. Not otherwise would not exist if they behave
themselves. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Culvert is there anybody in the audience that would like
to speak that is not here for the public hearing but would like to speak on any other
topic. All right, then I will close this hearing at this point and we will move to the
approval of the consent agenda. I will read each item and ask if the Council wants to
remove anything or add anything and then I for a vote. The items on the consent
agenda are 12A, approval of Route 15 South King Street widening Phase 2 project
landscaping. Authorizing the town manager to execute an agreement with the Virginia
Department of Transportation for funding and landscaping of the route 15 South King
Street widening Phase 2. Easement to Dominion Energy, Tuscarora Creek, flood
mitigation and stream restoration project authorizing the conveyance of an easement
to Dominion Energy Virginia on the town property for Tuscarora Creek flood mitigation
and restoration projects. 2019 Tree City USA application, authorization D, is for
Virginia trees for clean water grant from the Virginia Department of Forestry 2019/2020
authorizing to apply for those and I would ask if we could move Tuscarora Creek
flooding mitigation utility relocation to ease
14
Mayor Burk: on the consent agenda because it goes with the B that's already above
it. Does anybody have a problem moving it to--?
Council Member Thiel: You're referring to item 13C?
Mayor Burk: 13C, moving it up to consent.
Council Member Steinberg: I actually have a question.
Mayor Burk: You would.
Council Member Steinberg: Yes.
Mayor Burk: All right, thank you. We will keep it out then. Okay, anybody else have
anything they want removed? Okay, do I have a motion? Motion by Mr. Martinez,
seconded by Mr. Steinberg. All in favor? Opposed? That's 6-0-1.
All right, that takes us to our resolutions. The first one is a non-disclosure agreement
with Microsoft Corporation authorizing the town staff to execute a non-disclosure
agreement with Microsoft Corporation. Yes, sir?
Russell Seymour: Good evening madam Mayor, members of Council. Tab 13 on
tonight's agenda refers to a request by the Microsoft Corporation to enter into a non-
disclosure agreement with the Town of Leesburg. Given the nature of Microsoft's
proposed project within the Compass Creek development and the need to minimize
the amount of confidential information shared prior to their opening, Microsoft
Corporation has requested town staff sign a non-disclosure agreement.
This agreement will enable town staff to continue to work closely with Microsoft while
reducing the chances that otherwise confidential information be made available to
possible competitors. Microsoft has provided their standard template and town staff is
currently reviewing that template. The proposed resolution before you this evening
authorizes town staff to execute the non-disclosure agreement only after it has been
thoroughly reviewed and approved by the town attorney.
Staff recommends that the Town Council approve the signing of the non-disclosure
agreement with Microsoft Corporation regarding that their proposed data center
located within the Compass Creek development project. Both myself and Ms. Notar
are here this evening and we'll answer any questions you may have. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Campbell?
Council Member Campbell: Yes, I only have one question from a legal perspective.
Since we've been talking about a lot of confidential information, we've had closed
sessions on some of these subjects and Council has also been limited in its access to
getting some information, who is held liable for the performance of this non-disclosure?
Is it just the town staff or is Town Council also supposed to abide by the same NDA?
Barbara Notar: Everybody. If the town manager signs it upon Council approval which
he is the person to sign it, we would all be held accountable to the NDA. Council would
be able to have the information, they just couldn't share it under the NDA.
15
Council Member Campbell: Right. I only asked the question because of the way the
staff report was written. It seems like staff wanted an NDA so that they could have
access, but I'm to understand now all of Council would be held liable for their
performance under this agreement.
Barbara Notar: Yes, and all of Council always could have that information. If staff had
the information, Council could have the information. If there was any indication that
Council couldn't have information staff could, that was an error.
Council Member Campbell: Right, because it was limited access, but I don't want to
talk about that as much as this NDA. It would be important that that document comes
back before us to vote on. We're voting on authorizing the work to proceed but it's hard
to agree on a document that we haven't seen yet.
Barbara Notar: The resolution is written so that it could be approved by me. This is a
standard contract, I would go through it. If Council wanted to pass the resolution
tonight or if Council isn't comfortable with that, we can bring the document back before
you.
Council Member Campbell: My again only suggestion would be-- And others can
weigh in on it as they see fit, that I wouldn't vote to hold myself liable for performance
of a document that I haven't seen.
Mayor Burk: Mrs. Fox?
Council Member Fox: That was my point exactly since here it says, "Resolution
authorized this town staff to execute the non-disclosure as long as it's reviewed and
approved by the town attorney." I feel too that it should come before Council too before
being held to the non-disclosure agreement. That's my two cents.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg?
Council Member Steinberg: I concur with my other fellow Council Members, I'd like
to see the document also. I think it should be fairly clear to everyone sitting here there's
certainly information that's proprietary to Microsoft, but there's also information that at
some point is going to come out at open hearings relating to town business which can
also be subject to FOIA requests and so on. That type of information I'm going to
assume would absolutely not be covered in that case. No one would suffer liability at
the point when that type of information is revealed. Is that correct?
Barbara Notar: I missed it. What type of information?
Council Member Steinberg: Information for example that are specifically related to
utilities and capacity and things like that which are decidedly town decisions in terms
of our deciding to provide that kind of capacity and so on. I recognize Microsoft's need
to protect security issues and configuration within the building but things that relate
specifically to town functions at some point are going to become public and we need
not worry about those things.
Barbara Notar: That's true.
16
Council Member Steinberg: Okay.
Barbara Notar: Remember, the nondisclosure agreement is always subject to the
Freedom of Information Act. We cannot override the Freedom of Information Act.
Those are public documents and must be disclosed.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Thiel.
Council Member Thiel: That was one of my questions. Thank you for answering it.
Microsoft has come back to us and indicated that they're on a time crunch. I do agree
that I would like to see the NDA before signing it or having the town attorney or town
manager sign it. How fast do we need to get this in place before some of the
discussions we had last night take place? I know it's time.
Barbara Notar: That's why we put it on tonight. It just really just came in. Microsoft
has not contacted me recently in the last week, so I think we're okay. At first, they
wanted it done right away because this was your last meeting. That's why we put it on
the agenda, but as I said, they haven't contacted me in a few days. I'm comfortable
allowing it to go into January. [crosstalk]
Council Member Thiel: Is there any flexibility for us to read the nondisclosure as soon
as we receive it, and then move forward at that given time?
Barbara Notar: You can only act in a meeting. You couldn't approve it until January.
I could certainly send it out beforehand so you can review it before the meeting though.
Council Member Thiel: Okay, that just puts us in a pickle, if things do come before
say next week. I feel like it's putting us in a position where we need to act immediately
to make sure that we're ensuring that the town's overall plan is going to be met for the
VLA, but I just don't feel that moving forward without the NDA being read or provided
yet is the best idea. I will wait till we have it to move forward.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I, as a government contractor and consultant to several
companies have had assigned several NDAs. I'm sure there's a lot of it and our
audience know that they probably had to do the same. I don't find this to be as critical.
In other words, the kind of stuff that the town staff has to talk to Microsoft about is
pretty well known. I think it's just some numbers that they don't want out there. I don't
see it as a big deal. I'll defer to the Council that they want to wait, but if it does become
time critical, we can always call a special meeting to pass it. I'll just keep that in mind
that if Microsoft does come back and say, we want it done before the end of the year,
we can always get a special meeting called. Hopefully, we'll all be around during
Christmas to get it done. I think it's a pretty exciting time for what the potential. That's
my comments.
Mayor Burk: All right. Do you understand the marching orders? All right, thank you,
Mr. Seymour.
Russell Seymour: Thank you.
17
Mayor Burk: The next one is the board of zoning appeal appointment. It is Mr. Gregory
Gutierrez. Does anybody have a motion?
Vice Mayor Martinez: Before we go on, I want to make sure that on that resolution
we just talked about that there has been a motion differed to the next Council meeting.
But do you want that? Because if there's a motion being made, I would suggest that
it'd be made a continued business or business to the next Council meeting and or
special meeting. If the situation is going to be time-critical.
Mayor Burk: That's fine. Thank you. Okay. That was moved by Mr. Martinez seconded
by Council Member Fox, all in favor.
All: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed. 6-0-1. All right. Next one is again, the board of zoning appeal
appointment. Mr. Gregory Gutierrez has put his name forward, do I have a motion?
Vice Mayor Martinez: So moved.
Mayor Burk: So moved by Mr. Martinez, seconded by Council Member Steinberg. All
in favor. Opposed. That's 6-0-1. Tuscarora Creek flood mitigation project utility
relocation. Mr. Steinberg, you had a question on this?
Council Member Steinberg: I did.
Mayor Burk: Who answers this? I don't know. Who's is going to respond?
Vice Mayor Martinez: I move the question. I move the resolution.
Keith Markel: We have our capital project staff here, as well as our urban forester,
certainly they'll be answering.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Mr. Martinez moved it, is there a second?
Council Member Steinberg: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Steinberg. Now, any questions? Yes?
Council Member Steinberg: Am I waiting for--?
Keith Markel: You can ask the question.
Council Member Steinberg: Who is in whose right-of-way here as far as this flood
mitigation? Are we in Dominion's right-of-way or are they in ours? Why are we paying
for the relocation of the utilities? Just so I can understand.
Mayor Burk: Do you know the answer to that?
Council Member Steinberg: There we go, okay.
[silence]
18
Anne Geiger: Dominion has existing right-of-way there, and when we move their
utilities that are within an existing right-of-way we pay for it, that's the bottom line.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Okay, there's a motion by Mr. Martinez seconded by Council Member
Steinberg. All in favor. Opposed. 6-0-1. Recognizing Loudoun County High School
girl's volleyball team for winning the Virginia class for state championship.
Proclamation is sponsored by me, so I'll move it. Is there a second?
Vice Mayor Martinez: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Mr. Martinez. Any questions? All in favor. 5-0-2.
Recognizing the Inova Loudoun Nursing and Rehabilitation Center proclamation.
Again, I'll move that.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Mr. Martinez. All in favor. Opposed. That's 5-0-2. Ignite
Church International celebrating 16 years of service to the community. Proclamation
sponsored by Mr. Campbell, I assume you want to move it. Seconded by Council
Member Steinberg. All in favor. Opposed. That's 5-0-2. Town Marshall proclamation.
I'll move that one. Is there a second?
Vice Mayor Martinez: Second.
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Mr. Martinez. All in favor. Opposed. That's 5-0-2.
Public hearing. Yay, we are here. I call to order this December 10th, 2019, public
hearing of the Leesburg Town Council. This is a continuation of the public hearing that
was opened on November 12, 2019, and continued to the tonight's meeting. If you
wish to speak, we ask that you signed up on the sheet in the hallway. If you do not get
a chance to sign up, we will give you the opportunity to speak.
Also, please identify yourself and give your address for the taped record. We are
closed captions, it's a good thing to spell your name. In the interest of fairness, we ask
you to observe the three-minute time limits, the green light in front of you will turn
yellow at the end of two minutes indicating that you have one minute remaining. At
that time, we would appreciate your summing up and yielding the floor when the bell
indicates your time is expired. Under the rules of order adopted by this Council, three-
minute time applies to all citizens.
However, rather than have numerous citizens present remarks on behalf of a group,
the Council will allow spokespersons for the group a few extra minutes. In that
instance, we would ask the speakers when they sign up to indicate their status as
spokesperson. The group they represent, and their request for additional time.
Procedure will be as follows. There will be no presentation by staff or the applicant.
Members of the public who have signed up to speak will be called and given three
minutes to speak. The public hearing item on the agenda tonight is TLZM 2018 000
for West Park.
19
Our first speaker for tonight is Suzanne Smart. Jason Smart follows.
Suzanne Smart: If it's okay, I'd like to speak on a separate time slot for my husband
how could not be here tonight. Would that be okay? I have three minutes. His is, very,
very brief. He's much more succinct than I am.
Mayor Burk: Yes, we'll let it, but that's not usual what we do.
Suzanne Smart: I appreciate it, thank you. Hello, my name is Suzanne Smart. S-U-
Z-A-N-N-E S-M-A-R-T. I want to thank Mayor Burk and Town Council Members for
your service to the town and service to the residents, and for the opportunity to speak
here tonight. I live at 502 Country Club Drive my property is adjacent to the subject
property as well as an area that could be a potential access point to the proposed Park
wetlands gift. I have several concerns with this rezoning application. Due to time
constraints, I'm going to try to focus on subject matter that was not recently discussed
with the November 26th meeting.
First, the town needs more office space and more hotel space as the property is
currently zoned. I hope you'll refer to my email for more on that. Next, regarding the
gift, there are no guarantees with this gift. It is not legally binding. Any number of things
could happen that would result in this gift not going through as proposed. I hope you'll
see my email for various scenarios.
One of which being that the applicant upon receiving rezoning tonight, which hopefully
does not happen, could return and request subsequent rezoning on the property again.
Town's Council needs to be aware of the hand delivery of this four-page color
document that was received at my home on the night of December 5th. The document
purports to being a fact sheet and requests residents to come out and "voice your
support" for the rezoning here tonight of the Westpark property.
The document depicts a utopia. There is even this wonderful little dog here who is just
thrilled to be enjoying time around ducks and on this brand-new boardwalk. There are
discrepancies between the options on this document and the official document list on
the Leesburg website. There are various promises and scarce as well on this
document. The applicant who's used scare tactics in the past, when example being
that they would build "by-right" on November 26, the applicant said that that made "no
sense."
This document threatens fencing around the property. Quick calculations reveal that
this is not economically feasible and the observation can be made that, that would
make the property less enticing to prospective buyers. We have traffic woes in our
neighborhood. I'm concerned about parking and access to the park. You can see my
email for more on that. I believe now as I believe two years ago when we began this
process that the best way to preserve this property is to leave the current zoning as it
is.
For these reasons, other reasons I have not ceded here but have been brought to your
attention by other residents by the town staff and by the Planning Commission, I
respectfully request that you vote to deny this application for rezoning of the Westpark
20
property. I thank you. Those comments are my own. These are my husband's
comments. Again, he could not be here tonight. It's very brief.
This is Jason Smart, also at 502 Country Club Drive, "I'd be in favor of the proposal to
rezone if we had written legally-binding assurance that the approximately 120-acre
area, which has been promised, would indeed be converted into a public park.
Unfortunately, with the current proposal, we have no legally-binding assurance of this.
For this reason, I am opposed to the proposed rezoning."
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you, Ms. Smart.
Suzanne Smart: Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Ms. Smart is followed by Judith Lillis and Fred following her. I know you
were here. I saw you earlier. Here you are.
Fred Lillis: [unintelligible 01:02:58] not to speak.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Oh, you sure you don't want to speak?
Fred Lillis: You will be spared.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Thank you, Doctor. Terry Hale followed by Cindy Boyce.
Terry Hale: I'm Terry Hale. I live at 1222 Bradfield Drive there in just barely into the
Woodlea section. I appreciate the opportunity to speak to the Council. Not everyone
has that opportunity, but I am against the rezoning for two major reasons. The by-right
building, sounds like it would actually be better. We need a nice motel in that area.
They have the grounds that would be beautiful. They can widen the road. It would be
a gym for Leesburg. It could be a conference center.
I'm afraid that the 96 townhomes, while they would be very useful to 96 families, might
be sort of an eyesore. The noise abatement wall that was discussed in a previous
meeting definitely is not very attractive. The big reason I'm against the rezoning, it's
similar to the Council's objections to being responsible for upholding a document that
they haven't seen yet that you discussed a few minutes ago. This isn't just talking
about 96 townhomes versus building by-right houses on three-acre lots for a hotel.
This is about rezoning the entire property. Those of us who are not professional
realtors or lawyers don't really know what that would entail. I saw a previous map one
time that said that the rezoning would be from category one, I'm sorry, I don't
remember what it was called, to a different category that would, for example, have a
five-foot setback requirement. Whereas, now, it has a 10-foot setback requirement.
There's a lot to this that we don't understand. Rezoning the entire property would open
up a number of things that we have not predicted. We have no way of knowing what
that would be. We are more protected right now by the by-right building agreement
21
than we would be with rezoning. I'm not pushing this off on other people. I'm pretty
sure that we would have some of these houses behind us because we're on a high
section of Bradfield. This isn't making it someone else's problem, but still we're better
off with the present agreement. If they want to fence it, let them. It's their property and
you can deal with the HOA.
Mayor Burk: Thank you.
Terry Hale: Thank you all.
Mayor Burk: Thank you very much, Ms. Hale. Cindy Boyce followed by Bruce Boyer
or Boyce. I can't read it. I'm sorry.
Cindy Boyce: Yes, I can't read his writing either.
[laughter]
Cindy Boyce: It's Boyce, B-O-Y-C-E.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Okay.
Cindy Boyce: Madam Mayor and Council Members, first of all, thank you for your
commitment to the town and for the opportunity to talk. I am Cindy Boyce. That's Cindy,
C-I-N-D-Y, B-O-Y-C-E.
Mayor Burk: Thank you.
Cindy Boyce: I live at 127 Maryanne Avenue in country club community. I am here to
request that you abide by the town's staff and the Planning Commission with their
unanimous recommendation to deny the rezoning application. This is the only
responsible and reasonable action for a multitude of reasons that I think have been
well-stated in the past. I'll try not to regurgitate those, so bear with me as I go through
that.
I think that the proposed rezoning will have a negative fiscal impact on the town, that
the commercial properties and the original zoning will provide employment and tax
revenues versus the cost of providing infrastructure for the 96 townhomes. The
additional 96 townhomes will bring increased traffic at rush hour at an already
congested intersection. The applicant has repeatedly used smoke and mirrors and
scare tactics to try and get support from residents and town decision-makers.
Someone recently distributed flyers that were filled with half-truths and misinformation
clearly designed to scare residents into accepting what I consider to be a bad deal. I
support maintaining the green space. Let's be clear. It's not viable for the applicant to
build houses in the floodplain and in the existing homes' backyards. Accordingly, the
land, I believe, is destined to remain as green space. Wrapping up, the town staff, the
Planning Commission have both put forward suggestions that this be denied. I
encourage the Town Council to vote against the rezoning. It's not a good deal for
Leesburg. Thank you.
22
Mayor Burk: Thank you, Ms. Boyce. Bruce Boyce followed by Scott Munchel.
Bruce Boyce: I have views of my own. Bruce Boyce, B-O-Y-C-E, 127 Maryanne
Avenue, Country Club. Nice to see you all again. A couple of concerns that I have that
really aren't addressed, I do believe, is the proposal posted in the agenda package.
The proposal that the Planning Commission reviewed. If it's not, why are we here?
The proposals I've seen from the developer, in my mind, can be characterized as
immature.
They don't look at all the angles. They don't look at a mutual benefit. They don't seem
to have anything in their mind but 96 townhomes, which I believe has been their end-
game since the first. How are we protected? The Planning Commission and the staff
both recommend denial. That's part of our protection. One of the numbers used in that
paper for annual benefits to the town, 96% of it is off-site benefits.
I don't know how they came up with that number, but it's 96% of the benefit. That can't
be. The real sticking point that everybody's concerned about is that floodplain. One
way or another, somebody's going to have to be responsible for that thing. It's not
going to go away. If the town has it, then you're going to have to plan flood control and
execute them. That could cost a little bit of money.
If the developer has to do it, that can cost him a little bit of money. Depending on a
third party, an altruistic third party, you don't have any control over what that third party
does. I don't care what the paper says. You will effectively have no control about it.
Finally, I'd like to know what VDOT plans to do about the King Street Bridge eventually
because that's your choke point. That's what forces the flood because not all the water
can get out of there fast enough. That's all I got.
Mayor Burk: Well, thank you. Thank you very much. Scott Munchel followed by John
Zoller.
Scott Munchel: Good evening. My name is Scott Munchel, M-U-N-C-H-E-L. I live at
41536 Hoddesdon Court. I'm here to speak in favor of the application. I'm in a
commercial real estate brokerage business and have been active in the town for 15-
plus years. I just wanted to speak a little bit to the viability of the commercial lot that is
out there. For numerous times, I've spoken with hotel developers and other people
that come in here and potentially look at this.
It's not a spot that is highly desirable. It's seven acres that doesn't have a lot of access.
It doesn't have very good frontage. It's on a dead-end road. To me, to try to preserve
that use when right now, it's a commercial zoning, but it's only prepped in for motel
use, require somebody to come in and go through the whole zone. That's a long
arduous process, very expensive, very risky.
Trying to find somebody to take on that kind of risk is extremely difficult. To me, to
overlook the entire application because you want to save that seven acres a
commercial is probably short-sighted. You're not looking at the best benefit of the land.
There's a lot of other sites in the town that have been rezoning recently or that are in
the process of getting zoning approvals or lawsuits.
23
There are better uses as far as commercial and those uses with better access, better
visibility. I think that's where the town should focus its energy as far as development
of those types of commercial uses. The applicants offering a 130-acre park in
exchange for 96 townhomes. If otherwise, you end up with 20, 25 houses and a seven-
acre lot that you're not really sure what it turns out to be, potentially, down the road is
a motel.
To me, I'm in favor of the application because there's a lot of other uses I think with
better use of this land to develop it as residential. To put the commercial in other
places, it has a lot better visibility, a lot better access, and to take advantage of the
green spaces being offered here because there's not a lot of 120-acre lots that can be
offered to the town spots. I appreciate your time.
Mayor Burk: Thank you very much. I appreciate it. Scott is followed by John Zoller.
John is--
John Zoller: I wanted to announce that I [inaudible 01:14:58]
Mayor Burk: Okay. Matt Benson is followed by Jim Thill.
Matt Benson: Do I push the button?
Mayor Burk: Pardon?
Matt Benson: Hi, do I have to push the button to get started? Just go ahead? Okay.
Well, good evening, Madam Mayor and Council Members. My name is Matt Benson.
I live at 2016 Beacon Place. Last name is B-E-N-S-O-N.
Mayor Burk: Thank you.
Matt Benson: I follow the Westpark zoning application closely as an active member
of the real estate community and an avid golfer. Unfortunately, there have been way
too many golf courses closing in the metropolitan area. For multiple different reasons,
most of them have been financial reasons why they've closed. I feel that Westpark is
really not unique. To date, we've lost Westpark, Beacon Hill, Goose Creek, Virginia
Oaks, just to name a few.
The real question is, what comes next? You can see that Beacon Hill is now just a
mow trail. Virginia Oaks is dormant and Goose Creek is now residential homes. What
will come of Westpark? The choice is before you tonight. I'm aware that the course is
zoned R-E, which is one home per three acres. I really feel that's a total waste of land.
Alternatively, the old motel site is approved for a 247-room motel, not a hotel. That's a
big difference.
In fact, the Town Council has proven 80,000-square foot hotel, two-thirds a mile away
at Crescent Park. Why a motel and a hotel this close? Not sure. This is really a terrible
location for a motel. The Council had approved 13-and-a-half-acre commercial
property zone B3 next to Costco on Edwards Ferry last August. This is arguably a far
superior commercial property than what you have at Westpark. What did you get for?
[inaudible 01:16:57] is proposing townhomes, which are much more compatible.
24
It uses everything around this site as residential, plus it will cost for the golf course to
be re-improved into a permanent park and at zero cost. Finally, something is being
done to ensure the golf course turned into something besides homes or wasteland.
This is what you call a true definition of a win-win. While the course was fun to play
over the years, I can now enjoy this amenity forever where the golf course once was.
Please support this application. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you. Jim Thill followed by Meg "not my relative" Burk.
Jim Thill: Good evening. My name is Jim Thill, T-H-I-L-L. My wife Jean and I live at
418 Clagett Street Southwest and the house borders on the second hole of the golf
course. We've lived there for 33 years. Thus, we have witnessed the growth of
Leesburg for quite some time. For most of that time, I was not opposed to the growth.
More recently, however, the growth of residential housing, particularly high-density
housing, has become alarming.
Last week, I received along with many of my fellow citizens in the audience of this
flyer. I don't know the source of this document, but it is filled with misinformation and
threats. These tactics raise red flags for me. The most significant misleading item in
this description of the 129 acres, that would be donated as a park. This parcel will be
not anything like what a typical person would visualize as a park.
What it would be is unmaintained overgrowth. For those of us living on a golf course,
this is our biggest fear. On the south side of Country Club, it appears that there would
be some planting of small trees. No attempt would be made to further maintain the
area. On the north side, we would have the wetlands. No playgrounds, no ballparks,
just a great mosquito-breeding area.
This type of development is more suited to a sparsely-populated area, not the center
of an established residential neighborhood. Mr. Dentler recently was cited in an article,
indicating that we can expect increased taxes and increased fees for services.
Obviously, expanding the tax base via residential housing in the Town of Leesburg
does not cover the increased burden of infrastructure and services.
Mr. Campbell often asked, "What is it for the Town of Leesburg?" The answer, in this
case, is nothing. That is unless you actually want to increase noise pollution, increase
traffic, increase school congestion, increase taxes in 129 acres that the developer
wants to get rid of. Commercial property, on the other hand, is not a burden to the
town's finances. Rezoning from commercial to residential just makes no sense at all.
The flyer also states that if the rezoning is successful, the golf course will remain
closed. This also is not accurate. Apparently, there is an entity waiting for the parcel
to come back on the market again. Their intent is to reopen the course. Perhaps if this
land was available again, the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors or the Leesburg
Town Council could possibly come up with some creative and economical solution that
would save the golf course.
Like Ida Lee Park, this could be an excellent addition to the benefits of being a resident
of the Town of Leesburg. If we were to have a referendum regarding this application
for rezoning, the citizens of South Leesburg will overwhelmingly reject it. I'm asking
25
that you represent these citizens. Like the Planning Commission, unanimously reject
this application.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Thill.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: Meg Burk is followed by Jan Montgomery.
Meg Burk: I'm going to pass.
Mayor Burk: You're going to pass? Jan Montgomery followed by Matthew Mottet.
Jan Montgomery: Good evening. I'm Jan Montgomery. I live at 121 Woodberry Road,
five doors up from Mr. Steinberg. Mayor Burk, Town Council Members and town staff,
I came before you this evening to speak on behalf of this project. I've lived in Leesburg
for over 45 years. I've watched many changes, good and bad, rezoning, residential,
whatever. I know many people in the town who have used this golf course as well.
They work there and they've enjoyed walking the course, playing the course. It was a
sad day when it closed for many of these people. Unfortunately, if you look at Goose
Creek Country Club as an example, these courses are no longer financially viable.
Closing the course eliminated public access to the property at this point. I think there
are no-trespassing signs up and it's not opened for the public.
Let's take a look at the existing zoning and the allowed uses. [clears throat]. Excuse
me. Office, if you allowed office here, there's no walking capability to any stores or
restaurants or any amenities. An office would generate a larger traffic count than the
residential. Residential by-right is 20 homes spread out over the whole area. It would
have an HOA and it would have open space, but that would also belong to that HOA.
The addition of the 96 townhomes in the commercial footprint is really almost like a
logical extension of what used to be the Country Club apartments that became condos.
It would be compatible at this point with the surrounding residential area. The merits
of this proposal to me is to preserve this open space and giving the public access to
that acreage. It's not going to happen with a commercial and it wouldn't happen with
the residential use on the property.
I'd like to see that open space preserved in Leesburg as much as anybody else would.
As we all know it's becoming smaller and smaller over time. I can't think of a better
use for these 130 acres in the rear than to have a project that would offer public
access. This would be a wonderful educational opportunity for the schools, for summer
camps, for Boy Scouts, for Girl Scouts, for birders, and many other people.
The project is very lucky to have Wetlands Solutions and Mike Rolband. I wasn't at the
last hearing, so I'm not sure that he got to present everything that he does and what
he's done in the past and what he could do on this property. I'm asking you to support
and approve this project, but I think you'll probably have many questions about what
this park's going to look like before you do that? Thank you.
26
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Followed by Matthew Mottet and Phil [unintelligible
01:23:44].
Matthew Mottet: All right. Good evening. Thank you for allowing me to be here. My
name is Matthew Mottet. That's M-O-T-T-E-T. I'm at 1310 Hawling Place, which
borders the golf course as well. Most of what I understand has already been said, so
I'd like to keep it brief. Philosophically, I don't oppose the rezoning plan. Based on
what people have said, I don't know that I trust that the current proposal is wise to
accept until we have a legally-binding agreement that the 120, 130 acres can be
guaranteed to be secured as wetlands recreational area.
I don't disagree with the idea that commercial zoning may not be the best place there
anymore, that townhomes may be more appropriate. Obviously, there are concerns
that need to be mitigated such as flooding around these townhomes as well as the
noise. We don't really want to see a giant concrete wall. There are certainly
aesthetically pleasing options. I think you all have a better idea what that may look
like, so I trust your judgment. We voted you here to make decisions on our behalf. I
appreciate you stepping up. I certainly trust you and I don't envy your position. This is
very difficult for you. Thank you for being here and being in that place.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you very much for coming out tonight. Phil
[unintelligible 01:25:31].
Phil Retsch: I'm going to pass.
Mayor Burk: You're going to pass? How do you say your name since I--
Phil Retsch: Phil Retsch.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Sorry. Greg White followed by Alan Eldridge.
Greg White: Good evening. My name is Greg White, W-H-I-T-E. I live at 16561 Old
Waterford Road. I'm here tonight to talk about this rezoning simply because I think we
have something that should be very important to all of us and that's open space. I think
if we don't vote in favor tonight of this application, I think the town is really missing out
on a golden opportunity.
For myself, I exercise regularly every day within the town limits. I walk miles and miles
and miles within the town. There's nothing more I would like to see in this area, in
addition to the other areas that I think are bringing the charm to the town, be utilized
for open space, walking, enjoying wildlife, all the things that I think every person should
really want. For those reasons, I think you should support it and I hope that you listen
to my comments carefully. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. White is followed by Alan Eldridge.
Alan Eldridge: I'm going to pass.
Mayor Burk: Okay. Dan Williams followed by David James.
27
Dan Williams: Thank you. Dan Williams, W-I-L-L-I-A-M-S. I live at 1119 Bradfield
Drive here in Leesburg. I'm here representing myself. I want to echo the comments
that I made last time about the opportunity in front of the Council as far as the open
space goes. Somebody here earlier talked about the compatibility of the townhouses
rolled into the rest of the neighborhood.
I think the certainty that this application represents along with the potential-- which I
think could be covered with the binding agreement to make that land available for
Wetland Studies and Solutions, to create a facility that's available to the public is an
opportunity that Council shouldn't pass up on. I think that in the long-term if you take
the long view, you're going to be really pleased with what Wetland Studies is capable
of doing.
I happen to know that they're backed by a large green industry firm, Davey Tree. That's
about a billion-dollar company. You can ask all the tough questions of Mike. You can
find a way to do that. Don't miss this opportunity. Find a way to do it. Those were my
comments last time. I encourage you to do it again. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. David James followed by Alicia Bennett, Benedict.
David James: Hello. My name is David James, J-A-M-E-S. I live at 902 Chancellor
Street, Leesburg, which abuts the golf course. Part of my concern is based on last
week's Loudoun Now, which included the headline you can see here about a
development north of town, which turned out to be built in a floodplain that wasn't
marked as floodplain at the time of development.
The county is now talking about buying it out. I've lived at 902 Chancellor Street for 22
years. In that time, I have seen the golf course flooded up past and on to the greens
more than once. Not every year but semi-regularly. I think the town needs to look at
just how much of that could actually be built on without getting flooded out later on. I
don't know how old the current markings for the floodplain are, but I don't think they're
that recent.
The other thing that bothers me is the flyer, which was tacked under the flag on
mailboxes around the country club development which contains comments or items
[unintelligible 01:29:56]. The current owner says he will pursue all by-right
development options allowed under the existing zoning. They intend to install fencing
to prohibit public access and until sold or develop the property will not be maintained
by the current owner.
I'm not sure that the town would allow that. If the rezoning is unsuccessful, the golf
course will remain closed, public access will be prohibited, and the current owner will
explore all options to develop the entire property, including the golf course. That
doesn't read very friendly to me and I wonder about the people who wrote it. Thank
you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Alicia Bennett. Benedict.
Alicia Benedict: Good evening, Madam Mayor, Town Council, town staff that are here
present. My name is Alicia Benedict. That's A-L-I-C-I-A. Benedict, B-E-N-E-D-I-C-T. I
28
live at 1108 Janney Street, Southwest. I appreciate all of the comments that were
presented here tonight. Some of the more enlightening to me as well, both for and
against the rezoning application. I think one thing that I've heard here that the common
theme among all the comments that were both for and against is the preservation of
the open space.
My concern is that I don't want to preserve the open space at a cost that doesn't align
with our town plan or that is done in a hasty manner just to approve something or by
a developer that I don't think is really working with residents. I, like others here,
received the flyer on my mailbox. I don't appreciate the manner in which that was done.
While I do think the wetlands option could be a viable one, I am not willing to accept
that at the risk of not knowing that that's a guarantee and doing at the trade for 96
townhomes. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you.
Council Member Fox: Madam Mayor, may I ask a question really quick? Would it be
possible for the Council to see one of these flyers?
Mayor Burk: Alicia is the last speaker. Did anybody not speak up that would like to?
Please come forward and give us your name and address.
Karen Pantas: Hi, my name is Karen Pantas and I live at 1312 Hawling Place.
Mayor Burk: Karen, could you spell your name for us?
Karen Pantas: Oh, Karen with K, K-A-R-E-N like all the others and Pantas, P-A-N-T-
A-S. Pants with an extra A.
Mayor Burk: Thanks.
Karen Pantas: First of all, no matter what happens, please for the love of God, please
don't make yet another thing that looks like a bunch of gray Legos. I'm tired of that
kind of architecture, Lord. Secondly, my objection to this permit is really just to the
number of homes proposed. I would much rather this be a hotel. I love how they use
the word "motel," but I would much rather that this be a hotel or something of the like,
something commercial.
The flyer says traffic generated by the townhomes will be less than by-right motel use.
Well, I've never sat in 20 minutes of traffic trying to exit a hotel, but I have sat in 20
minutes of backups trying to get north on King Street and north on Evergreen Mill Road
already. That's without almost a hundred more families. Thirdly, for those of you that
don't know already, the source is Larry Beerman. That's who sent out this flyer. That's
his number.
Finally, I resent this flyer and its half-truths. I think we can all agree that the threat of
fencing is purely spiteful and it also disregards that these natural areas are also
byways for deer, fox, bear or one bear and, most importantly, seasonal box turtle
migration patterns and return for breeding. Please do not do that to our animals. Thank
you.
29
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Is there anyone else who wanted to speak? Yes, sir.
Chris Vaka: Hello, I'm Chris Vaka. V as in victory, A-K-A. The fourth submission
process has been very weird. It appears to be an end-run around the town's formal
zoning processes. Our stuff significant changes into the fourth submission days ahead
of the last Council meeting, thereby bypassing legitimate community review. There are
many reasons thereby tonight to deny the submission. This is another one. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Is there anyone else that wanted to speak? Yes, sir.
Matthew Theis: My name is Matthew Theis, M-A-T-T-H-E-W, T-H-E-I-S. I reside at
604 Country Club Drive adjacent to the property. One of the things that I haven't heard
discussed if you do a proffers and they go through with this wetlands park is I don't
see how adding water to a floodplain is going to help, especially after moving to our
house just a couple of years ago. Two months later, it flooded. I don't know how that
happens and that was not with that much rain. That's one of my issues.
Also, I think the last I heard of all the research I've done talks about Eastern equine
encephalitis, Zika virus, West Nile virus. If anyone have heard of those, it sounds like
a breeding ground for mosquitoes, which we already have. Do we want to add that as
a public health concern by allowing this? Also, the traffic. Where is the traffic going to
go? Where is the entrance to the park? Where is the exit to the park? Where will all
that be? There are too many questions with this rezoning application, I think. I just ask
that the Town Council consider that before voting.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there anybody else that wanted to
speak that didn't have a chance to sign up? All right, then I will close the public hearing
at this point. Council, do you have anything you want to say at this juncture? Anyone?
Well, I will say I appreciate all of you coming out. We extended the public hearing so
that we could get more input. The emails that we've been getting and the conversation
we've had tonight most certainly has been very-- there's a lot of concerns, a lot of
issues.
For me, my issue has always been, and I conveyed it to the developers, that this is a
commercial piece of property. The last thing you want to see is eight-foot walls and
flooding in that area and that sort of thing. To me, we don't have much commercial
left. Commercial doesn't cost a lot of money. It doesn't cost us a lot of taxes. Therefore,
by putting 96 townhomes in this little space, I think, disrupts the whole concept of
where that is.
Now, do we want to keep the open space? Absolutely in some form or another, but we
can't look at the open space. That's not the project. The project is the 96 townhomes.
We have to be looking at, what is the impact to the community? What is the impact to
traffic? What's the impact to the quality of life here in Leesburg? Whether we approve
this or deny it, the conversation is not over.
We will continue on. Most certainly, I think I can say all of us would very much like to
keep this property, the parkland, and see what we can do with it. That may come from
another application. There may be somebody else who wants to do something
30
different that would be better than what we're looking at now. That's where I am coming
from at this point. Ms. Fox?
Council Member Fox: I have a question. It's a legal question. The last submission
actually did happen within days. Of course, our Town Council didn't see the application
in the form it is today. This last submission came in. I don't know if it just had to do
with proffers or it had to do with anything with an application, but we as a Council
decided not to allow a submission at the last minute. Is that of proffers or is that of an
entire application?
Mayor Burk: I believe that's in your rules of procedure and that was proffers.
Council Member Fox: Just proffers?
Mayor Burk: I believe so. I can check though.
Council Member Fox: Okay. Thanks.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Campbell?
Council Member Campbell: Yes. I appreciate every voice that we probably heard
over the last two years. For, against golf courses, many people about the community
impact, I've even looked at the residential that we've already approved in other places
and the commercial development that we've turned down in other places. I think all of
them have been difficult whether we approve or turn down.
We've looked at putting forward a motion. We did put forward a motion to look at our
town comprehensive plan that is old and dated, but yet it's still the document that we
use as a guideline. It's not a Bible. The Planning Commission turned down this
particular project because of that guideline. The staff had questions about it and still
have questions that have yet to be answered for their satisfaction.
We've seen this application change and purposefully change somewhat to be better
appeasable to our community as well as having a viable project. No developer wants
to get into a project that fails and we don't want the impact on our community for our
communities to fail. I've been struggling with the question about a path forward. I'm
not opposed to housing. I don't believe that commercial in this particular area is the
salvation that we all think it should be or could be.
I've also talked to other developers, but what I don't want us to be is in this tradeoff
situation because we're not in an ultimatum situation. Do we take park, open space
over 96 townhomes? That's the wrong equation to be looking at. We have to look at
the value. My question to us all as a Council because it's in our heads at this point and
I've said this and others have heard me say this, is there enough value?
Do we have the right questions answered? It's not about whether or not we give the
developer more time as a developer willing to get more time. As a wetland property,
what does that really mean and look like? We know, legally, we can't accept proffers.
There are no ironclad guarantees. We've seen other developers walk away from
projects, stop projects. As a project in my neighborhood in Potomac Station that was
approved in 2008, that's now breaking ground.
31
We know that people don't automatically build. I've met with the developers and I've
stressed those points about what assurances, what guarantees, what commitments.
Those commitments are only in plan. We don't have a fully-realized wetlands plan
before us. If we say no to open space, we're saying no to something we don't know or
understand its particular impact on this town.
Open space is also a part of the town comprehensive plan. How do we protect it? How
do we preserve it? Well, we don't even own it. There have been other enterprises that
have tried to get this property from Dittmar for other purposes, including hotels, and
have looked at the property and have turned it down. I don't know what the answer is
about the small piece of property that we have, that zone B3 for commercial, in the
sense of who and what could be built there without some accommodation.
Somebody is going to ask for something more or something else. We'll be back here
again in a couple of years, going through the same exercise. That being said, I don't
know if this is the best deal we can get. It's a deal. Is it a viable deal? Is there things
that we can do to make it viable? We owe ourselves, I think, that opportunity to at least
ask those questions before deny. Certainly, we better know what we're doing if we
vote to approve this particular opportunity.
For all these last-minute changes that the Planning Commission has yet to see or
review, would they have changed their vote? I'm not going to get into a guessing game,
but I'd like to have an opinion. I know what staff issues are because I asked that I've
got a response from staff about what would be there issues or concerns that are still
unanswered. I think they're resolvable, but the Planning Commission and looking at
the future of this town over the next 20 years and the preservation of whatever space,
open space so we could have as an opportunity, it deserves an answer.
It deserves this particular opportunity because what's at stake and we think can simply
vote if anyone cares to put forward a motion tonight to simply deny or we can vote for
another work session to really get these questions answered. I said last two weeks
ago, when this public hearing was left open, what are we leaving it open for? Just for
comments or we're trying to get answers? What questions we want to have answered,
so we're ready to vote tonight? I'm not sure what others did or didn't do, but I know I
met with the developer and I talked with staff.
Mayor Burk: Thank you, Mr. Campbell. Mr. Dunn?
Council Member Dunn: Well, thank you. For staff, this might be [unintelligible
01:44:40] could be planning. If we were to acquire the property, what staff's plans?
With those plans, do you have an estimate of costs?
Rich Williams: Council Member Dunn, we really would not have any specific plans
because if it were to come to us as open space as a park, we would go through a
master-planning process. We'd open up to the community to get input to find out what
they would want. We have looked at some possible options for the property if it were
to be developed into what I'd refer to as a semi-passive park, which would have
pavilions, walking trails, playgrounds, and such throughout. We are estimating at
approximately one to $2 million for development and approximately $250,000 to
$300,000 annually for maintenance of that type of facility.
32
Council Member Dunn: What about flood mitigation?
Rich Williams: I have not taken that into account. Just--
Council Member Dunn: Has anyone on staff done that? It's there.
Rich Williams: Not from a parks and recreation perspective. No, sir.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. In all these two years that we've been dealing with this
as a possibility of coming to the town as a gift, nobody has considered what it would
cost to mitigate the flood which is obviously there and as a big issue?
Keith Markel: What's existing floodplain currently and without future development in
the floodplain, it could remain as existing or future mitigation could be explored, but
we have not gone down that path and spend resources on that contingency.
Council Member Dunn: I'm a little surprised by that only in that we have talked about
it's been tossed around quite a bit that it could become town property. Once it becomes
town property, the flooding would be fixed. We know that. It would have had to be
fixed. The demands by the public would have been there, "Go out there and fix your
property. It's flooding onto my property." I would guess in the multiple millions though,
to mitigate the flood in that area.
I would agree that to continue to promote wetlands, to promote other issues that you
may not necessarily want in that area, I've never been one big on trading housing for
parkland. We right now are not necessarily losing open space because we have the
open space. The current open space, by the way, also is not publicly accessible as far
as I know, unless you were planning on playing golf. Now, that's been closed off.
It's unfortunate that Council has imposed upon itself in the town by staff's
recommendation to not allow for proffer negotiations in this area instead of allowing
for proffers to be negotiated on another part of town that seemed more important to
them. It was not to me and I felt that we would have been in a better situation had we
been able to negotiate proffers on this property rather than being limited to this one
issue of take it or leave it on this gift.
This is one of those gifts. I'm sure this is that toaster oven or that hot dog machine that
you're going to get for Christmas. That's the gift that keeps on giving. That's what this
would have been. I don't think there would have been any limit to the amount of dollars
that we would have spent as a community on keeping that as a golf course. It's
unfortunate the golf courses are dying.
Richard, you can correct me if I'm wrong. We had both official and unofficial
discussions with the county about whether they would be interested in acquiring this,
whether they would be interested in keeping it as a golf course. There weren't a lot of
takers out there. Maybe there's somebody else's future down the line who would be
interested in doing that. We don't know what that is and that is a private issue. It's not
a public issue because we don't own the property.
You all have been very active in your community in dealing with this issue and I
commend you for that. There's been so many different ideas about what's been
33
wanted in there and you've heard a number of them tonight. On Council alone, there's
seven Council Members and there's 15 ideas. We've got multiple ideas of what could
happen there. I think that the important thing for me has always been that, one, I don't
negotiate housing for open space or parkland.
The housing should stand in the benefits thereof on their own. I don't see that here. I
think to drag you citizens through this for more weeks and weeks of us having work
sessions is not worthy of your time and you deserve better. We've already taken this
on for a long time and I feel that we should draw this to a close. If there's more and
better negotiations that we can do, we should do them going forward. We should work
diligently to open up our abilities.
By the way, the legal aspect of non-negotiating proffers, those are self-imposed. The
Town Council, the Town of Leesburg imposed those on ourselves. Why you asked?
We had other ideas. It's not something from the state. It's not something from the
county. We decided we would not give ourselves the ability to negotiate proffers. We
need to change that as soon as possible. Therefore, I'm going to make a motion to
deny TLZM 2018-0004 Westpark application.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I have not commented yet.
Mayor Burk: Could we postpone that so he makes his comments?
Vice Mayor Martinez: What I wanted to say was I was not happy with the density. As
everyone was talking, I was looking at my Google Earth, looking where all your
addresses were, looking at how this impacts you. I am concerned about it and I was
not happy with the density. I also know the value of open space and park property. I
am a golfer and I do love Westpark because it was a nice local, municipal or not
municipal but private course that you can go do nine holes or 18 holes on any given
morning or afternoon and still be within your community.
I really love that and I really wanted to keep that. I was really willing to knowing that
that value to the community would more than compensate for the density of the
townhomes. I'm looking at the road that goes there. There's all these apartments.
There's all these other things that can be done. I do not want a hotel-motel on those
acres because I think we can do a lot better. I thought, potentially, we had a plan.
What bothered me was the fact that the applicant changed some of the terms, some
of the stuff. My comment to them was to stick with what you said and let's move with
that. What ends up happening, we have all this debate. One of the things I wanted to
assure the residents is that we are not going to make a commitment to open space or
anything without a binding contract, without something that says, "What we can do."
My personal feeling? Now, you want to talk about visions. If we're not going to have a
golf course, I would like to see an Ida Lee self. I would like to see trails and more of
an active/passive park in certain areas where we can do things. If we can't have that
golf course, that is what I'd like to see there. That's something that we on the Council
would have to have the political will to commit resources to get that done.
34
I think the people in the Southwest have been done an injustice without having a
community center or a recreational center in that quadrant. I can remember we would
drive to Ida Lee in five, 10 minutes. Now, if you want to go in the afternoon, it takes
you 30 or more. Who wants to spend 30 minutes going from point A to point B in your
own town? Those are one of the things I'm looking forward as a vision for the town.
This makes sure that Southwest needs our address. I thought that this was probably
a potentially viable alternative. As it sits now, I don't think there's going to be enough
support on Council to pass this ordinance. I don't know if I could have. Again, I was
supportive of the townhomes because I thought the trade-offs, we can't see it right
now. I think that if we had been able to work some of my vision out that the trade-offs
would have been more than enough for the Southwest quadrant.
As it stands, I personally would love to see the applicant either go back to the Planning
Commission or withdraw it and submit it first of the year with some terms that we can
work with and be a little more consistent and address some of your concerns. One of
the things that I truly believe in the government is, yes, you elected us to take care of
all the boring, mundane things like taxes.
Do you want us to go and talk to you about all the taxes, the ordinance, the planning,
all that? No, you elected us to take care of that for you and you trust us to do that. One
of the things I think that as a Council Member, part of our job is that when there are
concerns like this is to listen to you and take your concerns as part of our reasons to
vote for or against something. I'm really in a quandary. How can we make this work?
Like I said, I don't think there's going to be enough support on Council to pass the
ordinance. What I'm hoping is that there's some deal or something we can work out
with the current applicant or [unintelligible 01:55:09] to make sure that we can use
that open space, that golf course as something that can benefit the town. Even if it
means that we have to take a political risk and buy it ourselves, which means we'd
have to use our own general fund money. That's all. Thank you all for coming out. I
really appreciate that.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg.
Council Member Steinberg: Thank you. First, I'd also like to thank members of the
public, who have come out and expressed opinions both for and against. They're very
well thought out and there are a lot of different issues on this particular project, and
they're very complicated. I'm going to take all the suspense out. I am not in favor of
this project in its basic form for a variety of reasons. A couple of them are practical.
Several of them are environmental. One very critical one, and I recognize we have
housing all over town in another areas that is hard up against highways, but it's my
opinion at some point we have to decide that putting families that close to a major
highway, and think that we're going to mitigate noise and air pollution and make it a
viable place to live, is not something I would care to do.
That is one of the strongest reasons why I am dead set against putting 96 town homes
on this particular site. That highway, you may or may not know, is being reviewed by
the County and the state, and the bypass, at some point, years down is scheduled to
become somewhere between six and eight lanes. That highway is going to move
35
closer probably to those houses that we may or may not build there in the very near
future.
The preservation of open space is very important. It's very critical. What happens on
this property, after whatever vote we decide to take, is a big question. We keep hearing
hotel, motel, I've had conversations with staff, and members of the staff are convinced
this is a viable commercial site. We're not yet sure what, but these burgers are growing
town with growing facilities, many of which have come online recently. They're going
to require certain services, and so staff seems to be convinced with negotiations that
they have had that this is indeed a viable commercial site.
We are dangerously close to full build-out of Leesburg. We don't have that many of
these sites left. Yes, granted, we have in the past converted commercial to residential.
Each situation is different, but I would say in this particular case, this site is well suited
for what it is. The golf course or the open space areas, what it is to become, again,
that's a big question. It's called floodplain for a reason. I don't know how you fix
floodplain unless you do something along the same lines of the way we have fixed the
Mississippi river. The water needs a place to go. It follows natural paths, so were this
to become a park of some sort, it at some point I would assume also continue to be a
flooded park at some point.
The floodplain in and of itself is simply not going to disappear. I would also point out
that for the same reason you can't build homes and other types of infrastructure in
floodplain, you also can't build fields and paths in floodplain. A passive park of some
kind is probably the most likely option. Properly developed, properly restored, that's a
question that still needs to be answered. This has been an over two-year process,
citizens have been very patient, we've heard a lot of information, and I think at this
point, we should make a decision here this evening. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Thiel.
Council Member Thiel: Yes. Thank you everyone for coming out both for an opposed.
Merry Christmas to all, and to all goodnight. No, I'm just kidding. I grew up playing golf
on this golf course. I actually learned how to play golf on this golf course. It is very
near and dear to my heart. This is what makes being an elected official very tough,
but I would like to say that the Southwest of a portion of Leesburg you guys like to
come out, especially when counsel asks for input, you guys are always the first to send
us thousands of emails, whether you're for or opposed to something. We greatly
appreciate that because that gives us a sense of what to expect and what to look
forward to at a public hearing. Thank you very much for being here.
I would like to agree with our Council Member Dunn, that the proper restrictions by the
town could have made this a little easier to negotiate with the applicant for the open
space. I saw a school board member-elect, Beth Barts, here. I don't believe she's here
anymore, but I would have loved to hear her input, as she is a member of that
community and represents the schools in Leesburg and how this would have impacted
them.
The theme of floodplains have always been something that causes a lot of grief. I've
seen videos in the residential community Facebook pages of the floodplain. I would
36
just like to ask one quick question to Russ, put you in the spot, trying to hide in the
corner. On economic development standpoint, moving forward, what commercial uses
could be used in this specific location besides a hotel and motel?
Russell Seymour: What I believe from [inaudible 02:01:13] because, as I
understand it right now, that's the only thing that has been approved for that site. That
would be the first step that would have to be changed on that. To add to that, though,
I will say, there's no guarantee with any site that we could do anything on it. Obviously,
we have had people that have looked at that. Hotels have been big interesting or have
had interests in our areas, including that site.
The concern that staff has had on this, moving forward, is just that, we have very little
limited space left for any type of commercial development. I'm always very concerned
about the precedents that get set. That was my philosophy behind my comments on
this, but from that standpoint, we would have to look at rezoning it or at least two taking
that constraint off of it to have something else go there.
Council Member Thiel: Perfect. Has there been any other interested parties that have
come to the town saying if this does not get approved, that they would be interested
in trying to purchase it, or we're trying to purchase it before it was even purchased by
the current applicant?
Russell Seymour: For the two years that I've been here, that site, to my knowledge,
has not been on the market. It's not been pushed the way you typically would push a
commercial viable site somebody would monitor. I will say that we had at least two
groups that have at least inquired about that site, or that area in general.
Council Member Thiel: Perfect. Thank you.
Barbara Notar: All right, we have a motion on the floor. Mr. Dunn has asked for denial.
Madam Mayor, I'm sorry to interrupt, but if that is going to be the motion, it needs to
be expanded. There's language in the staff report, Mr. Dunn? It is 14--
Council Member Dunn: 1020.
Barbara Notar: [inaudible 02:03:21].
Council Member Dunn: 14, you said 20.
Barbara Notar: It's 14.
Council Member Dunn: You don't have this year. All right. Motion to deny zoning
application TLZM 2018-0004, based on the findings for denial contained in the
December 10th, 2019 Town Council staff report. These findings include the following.
The zoning proposal is not consistent with the community office land use, designation
of the town plan, and results in additional residential development where it was not
previously envisioned. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Is there a second?
Council Member Steinberg: Second.
37
Mayor Burk: Seconded by Council Member Steinberg. You've all spoken to it. Does
anybody want anything more?
Council Member Fox: I haven't spoken to it yet.
Mayor Burk: All right. I'm sorry, go ahead.
Council Member Fox: I have not spoken to it. I wanted to keep my comments until
the motion was made. I too have some comments that I wanted to talk about. I've
heard a lot of things during Council Member comments here about this. I don't think it
matters whether we've had other inquiries. I just wanted to say that upfront, and it
doesn't pertain to this particular application. That to me is a side point. I agree with
Council Member Dunn, that the benefit should stand alone on the housing that's being
proposed and not together with a park.
I do have some concerns about the submission being within days of this meeting,
we've seen that happen before. That's happened with proffers. I've just been told it is
Proffers that matter in this situation. I also have an issue with the Planning Commission
not hearing everything that's been offered here. We don't have any mitigation of the
impacts. I think that's the biggest concern that I have. I get that Council has tied our
own hands that way. We've tried to untie those hands. It just didn't happen for this
application. Fire and Rescue, schools, road traffic, all of those things have not been
mitigated with this application. We are losing prime viable commercial land. We did
have a few folks who wrote to us saying, "Hotel doesn't work there. In 2005, it did." It
did fail before, but I would contend that at this point, with the advent of the heavy
Western Loudoun Winery tours and weddings and things like that, that a hotel in this
position at the western end of town is going to be very, very wanted because it's closer
to Western Loudoun. That's just coming from a personal perspective.
I respect what the applicant has tried to do. I don't begrudge the applicant for having
the chance to maximize their investment. I don't think this is an application that's
airtight here. I don't, and I'm not inclined to settle the town with a future expense by
taking on a park outright without knowing all of the implications, or even buying
mitigation credits to the tune of $250,000 to $500,000 a piece. I can't pass that on to
a future Council. I do believe that sometimes we have a little bit of an issue with
housing in so much as nobody wants more housing, and I get that. We have high
traffic, we have high impacts to more housing, but housing goes along with our
economic development that we pride ourselves so much on as well.
I don't think we should always say, "No more housing, no more housing." People don't
move to Leesburg for the housing. They move here for the charm and the economic
opportunities we have here and near here. That's why we have these applications
come forth. That's why these housing applications are upon us all the time, because
that's the housings actually needed.
I just wanted to offer those things. I did take a tally of all the emails, all the questions,
all the comments that everybody decided to share with us this time and a couple of
weeks ago, and we are your voice. According to my tally, it's four to one, so I would
be opposed to this application.
38
Mayor Burk: All right, Mr. Campbell.
Council Member Campbell: I just want to speak to the motion, just a couple of issues
for clarification, and we talk about proffers. A few years ago, the state made some
changes in the Proffer law. We were advised by Council of General Council Town
Council, that it was prudent for us to act differently, to protect the town and to protect
our interest. While some changes were made this past summer that we might have
acted faster on, it wasn't an easy fix, and because there are questions that have to be
answered, and us doing our due diligence, we did not act in a timely fashion to look at
this application. This was not a fault or a failure of counsel. I dispute those allegations
by my colleagues making those allegations that it is our fault. We were doing our due
diligence on that particular work.
The second thing is, is that we have looked at this property before, and we have failed
to respond. That we have as a Council, whether it's to purchase it, to look at a golf
course solution, or to look at other scenarios. To protect the town, we have to go after
the asset to protect the community. We had to go after the asset, and we were not
willing to spend the money. I've said this before, if we enter into these types of
scenarios, this is not an issue about raising taxes. It's what's our fiduciary responsibility
on taking our property and then running it responsibly, so it's a business. How do we
run it? We've asked our staff to look at plans, but we haven't pushed them. We didn't
say, "We will do this, we must do this." We didn't talk to the current property owner
[unintelligible 02:09:32], and say, "Hey, this is the kind of partnership we want to
enter into." We're here today because if we want to say not a failure to act, but the
idea that most of our land and land that's owned in this town is not owned by the town.
It's owned by developers. The only opportunity we have to do something different is to
work with the applications to get the outcomes that we want. That's not a trade-off.
This was the offer.
Now it's our job to take a look at it to see what's viable and what's responsible. I say
at this particular point, if the game change, we can do one of two things, we can just
throw it out-- oh, three things, the applicant can withdraw, or we can deny. Now, denial
doesn't necessarily mean it goes away. Denial of an application says that they can
resubmit a year later. This doesn't fix a problem, it doesn't solve a problem. It may
postpone the problem, but our best opportunity to negotiate an outcome that we want
is when an application is still alive and active. I would just only ask my colleagues to
consider, for whatever reasons that they would want to deny, that the process is yet
to be concluded. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Martinez.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Well, I also wanted to address the proffer issue. The state
passed a law a few years ago that made it impossible for us to really do any proffer
negotiation in case we develop an opportunity to agree to proffers, then sue us
because we thought the proffers weren't bad, which meant that no matter what we
negotiate, we could always be sued by them. It gave them a better opportunity to enter
the litigation against the town, so we took steps to prevent that. The state legislature
has since seen the error of their ways and have revoked most of those restrictions to
us. We're in the process of going back to our original policies and processes.
39
To sit there and say that our hands are tied because of the proffer negotiations, I think
that's a little misleading. Also, one of the points I also wanted to make on the town
plan was, the town plan is supposed to be updated every five years, but as most of
you know, especially in this type of economic environment, market changes can
happen every six months. I remember there was a time when most of the new
development was office space. Almost every single developer came back and said,
"The market for office space in Leesburg has dropped, we can no longer provide office
space." They had to change the developments to Oakland, I think was one of them, to
residential.
A lot of times, the market forces don't drive the town, they drive the developers, and
they're looking for the town to accommodate them. In some cases, we have, in some
cases, we haven't. I just wanted to say that even though we do have a town plan which
is guidance for what we want in certain areas, sometimes just because it says it's we
want to commercial, doesn't make it viable for the market. Those are things that we
have to consider in the long term. Again, our vision of what we want the town to be
and how viable it is. Again, thank you again for coming. I really appreciate you all
coming forward. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Dunn, may I offer an amendment? You read one of the reasons for
denial, but there's actually six.
Council Member Dunn: [inaudible 02:13:20]
Mayor Burk: May I add the other ones? The proposed. Okay, you're going take it as
a friendly amendment, I assume. Go ahead.
Council Member Dunn: I can just go ahead and add them to my original motion then.
They do have to be read? Okay. Number 2, the proposed residential development, the
rezone commercially planned and zoned land to residential uses and negatively
impact the town's ability to fulfill its economic development goals as expressed in the
town plan. 3, the proposed residential development is not compatible with the adjacent
highway noise. 4, the Roads and Residential Development does not adequately
mitigate impacts with respect to increased school demands. 5, the rezoning application
is anticipated to result in a negative fiscal impact on the town. 6, the rezoning
application does not adequately address active recreational requirements of the TL
[unintelligible 02:14:29] section 8.4.7 on-site and places and additional burden of
providing active recreational amenities on the town. I'm from Arkansas, so that wasn't
too bad.
Mayor Burk: Do you accept that, Mr. Steinberg? All right, we've all spoken to at this
point.
Council Member Dunn: Madam Mayor, just a final word as the maker of the motion.
I know you love that. Just a couple of quick comments.
The mentioning of doing proffers may or may not have changed this, but it would have
given us the ability to negotiate differently and to say that those who feel that way
they're making improper statements is not correct. We have difference of opinion. It's
like the Sergeant I had in the army who when talking to one of us, the person says, "It
40
wasn't me, Serge. It was somebody who looked like me, but it wasn't me." We're the
decision-makers, and then we're making the decision now.
I think that having been able to negotiate proffers, and being able to do that in the
future, would help this, and by the way, as soon as we get done with the other project
across town, we're going to open up and be able to do proffers over here on this and
other applications. It's only a time issue. As far as in [unintelligible 02:15:53], we had
public golf courses, and to help with the flood issues on the Mississippi, there were
giant zig-zagging 20-foot deep culverts that ran right through the middle of the gulf
courses. If you're good, you learned how to bank it off those edges and bounce them
off into wherever. This is where I usually ended up.
I do want to say in closing that thank you so much for citizen participation. You all have
been very active in this from the beginning, all the way up to this evening, and there is
both opinions for and against. For me, I tend to yield to the decisions of those citizens
who are going to be directly impacted and live in that area. For the most part, we had
responses that were not in favor of doing this rezoning. Therefore, those are my final
comments. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Okay, we have motion on the table to deny the TLCM 2018
004 Westpark Concept Development Plan to allow development of 96 units, single-
family attach residential development with all of the read amendments. All in favor?
Council Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? It is denied with a vote of Ms. Fox, Mr. Dunn, Ms. Burk, Mr.
Thiel, and Mr. Steinberg. Those opposed to the denial were Mr. Martinez and Mr.
Campbell. All right. It's done. Thank you all very much for coming out.
[applause]
Mayor Burk: It could be painful. We do have another public hearing. I'd close the
public hearing. I'm telling you. After they spoke, I closed it. I closed it, right? I closed
the public hearing, yes. You keep getting me in trouble.
Council Member Steinberg: No, let's do it again.
Mayor Burk: Okay. I said that. All right. I will call to order December 10, 2019, public
hearing on the Leesburg Town Council. I'm going to ask you to leave the room. We
have another public hearing. Thank you very much for coming. You can stay if you
like, if it was that much fun. That was painful. In order to call-- I call to order this
December 10th, 2019 public hearing on the Leesburg Town Council. Unless there's
an objection, I would dispense with the reading of the advertisement. If you wish to
speak, we ask that you sign up out in the hallway. If you did not get a chance to sign
up, we will give you the opportunity.
Also please identify yourself and give your address for the tape record. In the interest
of fairness, we ask that you observe the five-- no, the three-minute time limit. The
green light in front of you will turn yellow at the end of two minutes, and you will have
one minute remaining. At that time, we would appreciate your summing up and you'll
41
be in the floor when the bell indicates your time is expired. Under the rules of the
orders adopted by the Council, the three-minute time limit applies to all.
However, rather than have numerous citizens present remarks on behalf of the group,
the Council will allow a spokesperson for the group a few extra minutes. In that
instance, we would ask speakers when they sign up to indicate their status as the
spokesperson, the group they represent, and their request for additional time.
Our procedure for the public hearing is as follows. First, there's a brief presentation by
staff. Second, the members of the public that have signed up to speak will be called
and given five minutes to make their comments. The public hearing item on the agenda
tonight is a town code amendment to regulate dockless mobility operations,
businesses that operate for higher motorized skateboards, scooters, and electric
bicycles.
Barbara Notar: Good evening, madam Mayor, members of Council. Barbara Notar,
town attorney. This was initiated. These regulations, new town code ordinances, a few
weeks ago, they've been advertised, and there is a deadline. In order to regulate the
scooter services, they must be in place by the 1st of the year. Hence, that's why it's
before you tonight. There they are. Those are photographs of the items we are talking
about. We're talking about regulating businesses that distribute these in their service
areas. Those motorized skateboards-- The mostly are those electric scooters that
you've probably seen in other cities. We have not had any here. We have had no
businesses contact us. Once again, in order to regulate these services, it must be
done by the 1st of the year under the state code.
There's the code section that states that the towns may regulate. The regulations may
include licensing requirements. It does that allow a total prohibition, it does allow
prohibitions of certain areas of the town.
As Mr. Parker says, I'm not going to do a dramatic reading of this, but there is the state
code section, the enabling legislation that allows the town to regulate these e-scooters.
We call them dockless mobility devices. They're dockless because they don't have a
fixed home location, and are dropped off and picked up from arbitrary locations in the
service area. This is part of the sharing economy. As the businesses who operate
these services, they are quick, convenient, inexpensive ways to get around town.
They've also been difficult for localities to regulate because they are dropped off.
That's the nature of the business. Many times, they are dropped off all over cities in
the right way on the sidewalks. These regulations are being adopted throughout the
Commonwealth to try to control the dispersion of these items.
Here's some of the challenges. Mostly, they're parked allover cities. These regulations
define where they can be parked. Once again, or maybe I haven't said it yet, this is
the regulations before you are very basic. They're rudimentary regulations that I
tailored from Blacksburg, their ordinance, but they will do the trick if a service comes
to us because they must be permitted, and we can tweak the regulations if need be
later on.
In the agenda memo, is the ordinance that has all the regulations. Those are some of
them. Most significantly, the service provider must have a permit. That's the way we
42
will track them. These scooters must have certain regular safety equipment on them,
sorry. There are parking restrictions in the regulation as well. Bicycle helmets must be
used. I've added that with bicycles, and there's a new reckless riding provision that I
took from, I think it was Arlington, but just to be safe, I added that in case we would be
prohibited later. If that needed to be tweaked, it could as well. That is all I have.
Mayor Burk: I have to tell you, I also had a meeting with Northern Virginia Mayor the
other day, and the Mayor of Vienna started talking about the scooters and how she
hates them. The Mayor of Herndon said, "You think you hate them, they come from
your place and they drop them off in my town." They're not [unintelligible 02:24:12]
I'm sure that our friend here is more responsible than many.
[laughter]
Mayor Burk: Mr. Steinberg.
Council Member Steinberg: This is for those of us who attended the VML conference
in Roanoke. This was a big topic. There were a lot of problems brought up, including
the points of regulation. They mentioned a couple of cities, Beverly Hills, of all places,
specifically, and San Diego that are involved in lawsuits because of the operators who
just come and dump these things on sidewalks and with little regulation. Do we call
this a pilot program? If we adopt this is--
Barbara Notar: No, this is not a pilot program. These are regulations. There was an
option, you could have a pilot program. The local government attorneys discussed
that, and we took it as a pilot program, is you would actually deal with a provider and
carve out a program and work with that provider. Loudoun County, though, I just saw,
they adopted a pilot program, I think last night, instead of regulations. I took this option.
Council Member Steinberg: Do they actually have an operator with their pilot
program?
Barbara Notar: I think they do. Yes.
Council Member Steinberg: We put this in place. I know we have to do it by the 1st
of 2020, right?
Barbara Notar: Yes.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay. We put this in place, then let's say we get a
vendor who comes to us, do we develop a pilot program with this vendor using this
regulation?
Barbara Notar: No, we use the regulations. You could do either or; regulations or a
pilot program.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay. Blacksburg is a different kind of a place than
Leesburg. I don't think they even have an H1B1. Of course, they've got the drill field
and college students all over the place. How do we tailor this specifically to Leesburg,
especially the downtown with narrow sidewalks? How do we work with a vendor to
43
say, "This is where your charging stations are, your retrieval stations."? How does this
whole thing work under this particular ordinance?
Barbara Notar: There in the statute, there are places where you cannot park, and
there are places where you can park. It's listed in the statute, you can't park in
handicap parking zones. You can't park in the middle of the right away or the sidewalk.
Once again, there's a list of places where you cannot park and where you can park. I
took Blacksburg's because I thought it was the most basic and got the job done for
what we needed to do in case there was any challenge that we didn't have enough
regulation. To me, it is the cleanest, most basic ordinance to pass when we are not
yet faced with these and we don't know what they actually look like.
Council Member Steinberg: Are we obligated to allow a vendor to place units on
public property, or are they going to be obligated to work with, say, private property
owner in order to stage these things, which of course, then got left all around the place
and eventually get retrieved one way or another. How does that work?
Barbara Notar: There's a provision in here where you-- We can block off certain
areas. Private parties, they could confiscate the scooter. Private parties, they have
different rights. There is something where they cannot be-- block the driveway.
Council Member Steinberg: No, I meant, would the vendor work with a private
property owner, say, to create a staging area? Is that a possibility?
Barbara Notar: Sure. That's not dockless, then that would be dock. This whole
dockless, is they are left places so that you can pick them up with your phone.
Council Member Steinberg: Now, you say, "We can't prohibit." Can we be prohibit in
the H1B1? Which of course has--
Barbara Notar: Could we prohibit it in the H1 or B1? Possibly. I would have to look
into that.
Council Member Steinberg: Or at least the B1.
Barbara Notar: H1 or B1, I would have to look into that.
Council Member Steinberg: What about use on sidewalks and so on?
Barbara Notar: Definitely.
Council Member Steinberg: They would be sharing the roadway with the vehicles.
Okay. Can we limit the number of operators or whoever wants to come in and try and
make this work?
Barbara Notar: That is not in here, the number of operators. We can limit the number
of devices they have, but once again, I'm confident we could amend this statute. If too
many operators came in, you could change it. We just need to get something on the
books.
44
Council Member Steinberg: Okay. Well, I recognize that. It occurs to me the town is
going to be incurring, and I'm in favor of these types of things as alternatives to getting
around. These are certainly quick and easy, but the town will certainly be incurring a
certain expense in monitoring all of this. It actually might've been interesting to get
some input from Chief Brown if he's thought about this at all and how they're going to
deal with this whole situation. Perhaps, we can do that at a later time because we've
got to get this done tonight.
Barbara Notar: That's why they're not here. I have talked to the chief of police, and if
it becomes an issue, if it is an issue at all, he will step in and we can come back to
you. I guess I should've stated it this way too. If the counselor later feels these
regulations there's too much, you can repeal portions of it.
Council Member Steinberg: Then one final question, and I don't-- you may not even
have an answer for this. I recognize it can benefit the town just in terms of people
getting around. Does this have the potential for generating revenue for the town?
They're going to pay a fee for a license, but that's relatively minor.
Barbara Notar: They have to pay people that's under the staffing. It is a revenue-
generating business, it could be.
Council Member Steinberg: Okay, thank you.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Council Member Thiel.
Council Member Thiel: This, at this time, is just enacting the ordinance. We're not
picking locations or anything like that.
Barbara Notar: Correct.
Council Member Thiel: Okay. I'm fine with that.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Council Member Dunn. Did you have [unintelligible 02:30:47]
Council Member Dunn: My understanding was, this is to initiate our ability to prohibit.
Barbara Notar: You initiated the regulations a few weeks ago, and these regulations
would allow you to prohibit them from certain areas. You cannot outright prohibition of
them.
Council Member Dunn: That's what we're talking about. We're talking about this gives
us the ability to have prohibitions. If we didn't enact this by 01, we would waive our
ability to have those prohibitions.
Barbara Notar: Correct.
Council Member Dunn: Okay. Very good. Thank you. That's all I need to know.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Council Member Campbell.
45
Council Member Campbell: My question is, again, the timing of those prohibitions,
and I don't know enough work has been done reading the staff report about what
sidewalks or what ADA analysis that has to happen or take place. I'm hoping that we
have some room to really understand what we already know to be a place where one
of these devices should not be written. Do we have to have all that documentation
now? What streets, what sidewalks, what areas.
Barbara Notar: I'm sorry. Did you say, "Do we have to have-- I didn't get the question.
Council Member Campbell: Do we have to have those specifics, or do we simply say
that we can designate which sidewalks you can't ride on? Is that broad enough?
Barbara Notar: Right now it says we can designate which sidewalks.
Council Member Campbell: Right. My question is, we don't have to say which
sidewalks tonight.
Barbara Notar: Correct. Absolutely.
Council Member Campbell: Thank you.
Barbara Notar: We can come back and tailor it.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Council Member Fox.
Council Member Fox: That was my line of thinking too. I'm a little worried about the
sidewalks. We have brick sidewalks and the wear and tear on the brick sidewalks that
we are going to face from allowing motorized. Are we going to have anything on the
streets whatsoever? Is there going to be any prohibition to being on the streets, or are
we going to allow that? Do we know this?
Barbara Notar: The ordinance is written, so you can regulate that. They can ride in
the middle of the streets, and right now they can ride them on the sidewalks as well.
To prohibit them from the sidewalks, later on, you'd have to put up signs so that they
can be written in the streets or the sidewalks, but the regulations enable us to-- if, for
instance, you want to keep them off the sidewalks, certain sidewalks have to have
signs, and you could post signs, and that's the way you could keep them off the
sidewalks. They can be in the streets right now.
Council Member Fox: Later on, we're going to craft what we want. We just need to
get this done before.
Barbara Notar: Correct.
Council Member Fox: Okay. Thanks.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Thank you. I appreciate you putting this forward. Only question
I have is, I know this is a framework, and some of the things that when we start talking
about the different vehicles and stuff is-- I'm hoping that later on as this happens.
Because I know, I feel it's inevitable. There are certain composite materials made on
the tires that will tear up brick. I think those are something that as this starts coming
46
in, we need to really look at what equipment they're using and what hardware they're
using and tires. It all can really tear it up. I'll just leave it at that. Madam Mayor's
returned, it's all yours.
Mayor Burk: Everybody had a chance to speak?
Council Members: Yes.
Mayor Burk: Is there a motion? Oh, I'm sorry. Thank you. You're so good at keeping
us straight. Is there anybody in the public that would like to speak that didn't speak,
that didn't get a chance to sign up? All right, then I will close the public hearing at this
point. Is there a motion?
Vice Mayor Martinez: So moved.
Council Member Steinberg: Is there specific language?
Mayor Burk: Is there, Barbara, is there specific language?
Barbara Notar: There isn't. If you could just read the heading on the agenda.
Council Member Steinberg: The heading [unintelligible 02:35:01]
Mayor Burk: Town code, yes.
Council Member Steinberg: [inaudible 02:35:8] for building operations businesses
that operate for hired motorized, skateboards, scooters, electric bikes et cetera.
Mayor Burk: You're amending the Town Code to regulate the dockless mobility
operation.
Council Member Thiel: Second.
Mayor Burk: That's Council Member Steinberg seconded by Council Member Thiel.
We’ve talked it.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Yes.
Mayor Burk: All in favor?
Council Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed? Has Mr. Dunn left?
Barbara Notar: Yes.
Council Member Steinberg: He did.
Mayor Burk: That is 6-0-1.
Barbara Notar: Thank you.
47
Mayor Burk: All right, that takes us.
Council Member Thiel: [unintelligible 02:35:40]
Mayor Burk: There is Council Member disclosures. Mr. Steinberg.
Council Member Steinberg: Yes, I had a quick conversation with Ron Rust regarding
a potential project to build a conservatory at the Birkby House yesterday. No, that was
this morning, excuse me.
Mayor Burk: It was this morning, yes.
Council Member Steinberg: Yes it was.
Mayor Burk: All right, Mr. Thiel?
Council Member Thiel: I too had a brief discussion with Ron Rust about a
conservatory at the Birkby House. I also had a brief meeting with Larry Beerman about
the Westpark applicant yesterday, a phone call. My Council comments are, I hope
everyone has a Merry Christmas and happy holidays, and that's all.
Mayor Burk: Thank you. Mr. Martinez.
Vice Mayor Martinez: I have a disclosure. I had a telephone conversation in text with
John Foote on 12/9/19. As Councilman Thiel, I would like to wish everybody a very
Merry Christmas, happy holidays, Kwanzaa, and Hanukkah, and may you all be safe
this holiday season. Since I won't see you until after the new year, please be careful
on New Year's Eve. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: All right. Council Member Fox.
Council Member Fox: Thanks. A couple of disclosures. I have had multiple days
during this past week between email and text with Larry Beerman. I have also had a
conversation with Ron Rust about the Birkby House Conservatory. That was two days
ago. Merry Christmas.
Mayor Burk: Mr. Campbell.
Mr. Campbell: Thank you. I also want to disclose I had a meeting on 12/9 with John
Foot, Larry Beerman and a Lennar representative about the Westpark development.
Thanked the staff for the fine work on the first Fridays, and I know there's more to be
talked about in terms of a lot of comments I've heard on [unintelligible 02:37:52] but
also be helpful in participating. Thankful to Keane Enterprises in Virginia for footing
the bill for this past first Friday.
I thank the staff again on the holiday lights program, also, last Friday. The comment
is, we need more. We'll find a way, great job, great lights, nice to see some of the allies
lit up. I know there's new developments and things going on, but I'm always going to
push.
48
I also want to recognize a friend of mine who passed recently, long-time Leesburg
resident, Dave Diamond Jenkin. He was 56 years old, passed suddenly on November
22nd. He was a great community asset on the music scene, a loyal friend to many
citizens, a great family member, and I know as we went to his service last Saturday,
he will be missed by many, and I wear this button tonight that was given at his
ceremony in honor of him and bringing him to the Town Council with me one last time.
Merry Christmas to all.
Mayor Burk: All right, I would like to thank Habitat for Humanity and the wedding law
for allowing me to have office hours in their locations, that was great. Evergreen Mill's
second-grade class invited me to come and do career day, that was quite a challenge,
second graders, but we had fun. Meadow Glen Senior Retirement Home had a
Christmas party. I want to thank the staff for the wonderful tree lighting program. It was
just fabulous. Everybody did such a great job, and then it was followed by COPA
having a little reception downstairs, and that was lovely also. I want to thank Brian
Cullen for bringing Santa by helicopter to the Virginia Village Shopping Center. Morven
Park had their Christmas holiday, and to see that place decked out is quite inspiring,
it really is wonderful. I did not have any disclosures, so do I have a motion to adjourn?
Council Member Thiel: I second you.
Mayor Burk: Second? Sorry.
Keith Markel: I see how it is. It just blows right past me. The deputy gets no respect.
[laughter]
I will see you guys at the parade this Saturday at 6:00 PM. Hopefully, you'll all come
to participate in that. Then please do join us for the employee holiday launch coming
up at Ida Lee next Wednesday on the 18th. I wish you all of you a very happy holiday
season. Thank you.
Mayor Burk: Now do I have a motion.
Vice Mayor Martinez: Motion moved.
Mayor Burk: Moved by Mr. Martinez, seconded by Council Member Thiel. All in favor.
Council Members: Aye.
Mayor Burk: Opposed. That is 6-0-1.
Meeting adjourned at 9:33 p.m.