HomeMy Public PortalAbout1980_09_10 298 MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF LEESBURG TOWN COUNCIL, SEPTEMBER 10, 1980 .
A regular meeting of the Leesburg Town Council was held on
September 10, 1980 at 7 : 30 P.M. in the Council Chambers , 10 West
Loudoun Street, Leesburg, Virginia . The meeting was called to
order by the Mayor, with Mr. Hill giving the invocation and lead-
ing the Salute to the Flag. Present were: Mayor Kenneth B . Rollins ,
Councilmembers Charles A. Bos , Stanley D. Herrell , Jr. , G. Dewey
Hill, Jr. , Marylou Hill , John W. Tolbert, Jr. and Howard M. Willis,
Jr. ; also Town Manager John Niccolls, Assistant Manager Jeffrey H.
Minor, Director of Finance Donald O. Taylor, Chief of Police James
M. Kidwell, Jr. and Town Attorney George M. Martin.
The minutes of a special meeting of August 19 , 1980 and the
regular meeting of August 27 , 1980 were approved as written.
A letter to Mr. John W. Tolbert from Catoctin Cable Communi-
cations, expressing regret concerning the threatening telephone
call received by him prior to the last Council meeting, was read
into the record. The letter stated "that no one involved with
Catoctin Cable Communications, Inc. or our parent company,
Storer Broadcasting Company, would ever make such a threat. "
DISCUSSION CONCERNING CABLE TELEVISION :
Mayor Rollins recognized both Mr. Woodrow W. Turner, Jr. and
Mr. Robert E. Sevila, attorneys representing Matrix Enterprises,
Inc. and Mid-Atlantic Network, Inc. respectively, who read into
the record a Petition asking that Council review its August 27
vote selecting Catoctin Cable Communications, Inc . (Storer) as
the firm intended to be awarded the cablevision franchise upon
completion of all necessary documents. The Petition seeks this
review in light of the fact that Storer 's agreement with the
Loudoun Times-Mirror has now been made available to the Council
after pressure from The Monitor under the Freedom of Information
Act. Other matters of concern have been raised by the public
and should be heard by the Council. In addition, Mid-Atlantic
Network has agreed to lend its support to Matrix if and when
this matter comes back to Council for another vote, both mone-
tarily
with the purchase of stock and with an exchange in per-
sonnel to the advantage of Matrix.
Mayor Rollins called on Mr. William F. Rust of Rust Communi-
cations Group, Inc. , who had previously addressed letters to each
member of the Council on this matter. Mr. Rust said it has been
alleged that his help was solicited by some of the applicants -
that is not true - he is concerned about some of the methods being
used by the Storer subsidiary. As a member of the broadcast busi-
ness, he is concerned with the honor of this business and of our
country and our town - it is being degraded by this process of
buying local support. Mayor Rollins asked Mr. Rust what he means
by "buying support. ?" Mr. Rust said this is nothing Storer in-
vented - it' s going on all over the country with the large cable
companies . To a company like this, Leesburg is just a statistic -
it is so many people - there are so many dollars they will spend
and so many dollars they will make. They 're in a mad race to
acquire a captive audience in towns all over the country - small
and large. These companies are buying local support by selling
stock at an unreasonably low price to important people in the
community to get them to help with the local politicians . They
pretend they are local stockholders and that they will have the
main vote as to this stock. It makes no difference how many di-
rectors they have.
Mayor Rollins asked Mr. Rust about the statement in his letter
that said Storer has fixed debts of $80, 000, 000 and recently sold
50, 000, 000 shares of common stock to the general public - what are
the assets? Mr. Rust said the point is that they are madly in-
creasing their liabilities - he knew of no large nationwide cable
company that is moving as fast as Storer - they are gambling - they
know they will only win a certain percentage of these franchises .
They have something like 2500 employees, so they don 't have the
personnel nor the manpower to build all these systems - they
will build the cities and let Leesburg wait. Their current as-
sets, as of the end :of 1979 , were about $70 , 000, 000 . Current
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1980 MEETING.
liabilities are about $49 , 000 , 000 . The company sold 50, 000, 000299
0, 000, 000299
additional shares of common _stock in April to finance cable TV.
They are committed to spend more than $100, 000, 000 this year for
cable TV franchise grants . They have a total debt as of 12/30/79
of $79, 100, 000 , of which a long-term debt is $66, 400, 000; due in
five years $30 , 200, 000 - the interest on this is $4, 700 , 000 a year.
They had 10, 432, 880 shares as of the end of 1979 . He was not
suggesting that they don ' t have plenty of money, but they are very
heavily committed to bursting into cable television on a much
greater scale. Storer is about the sixth or seventh size cable
company - they did a gross business in 1979 of roughly $170, 000, 000 .
They feel cablevision has a great future and they are dropping
other things and are going into it very heavily in trying to
catch up to the other large cable companies. In the process,
they can very well get overloaded on more construction than they
can possibly do well . They have roughly half a million cable
customers - the largest company has 1 . 3 million customers.
Mayor Rollins said Council appreciates his letter.
Mr. Hill asked Mr. Rust if he sees a future for cablevision?
Mr. Rust said he certainly does. Mr. Hill referred to a recent
article written by the owner of the Dallas Cowboys on the ef-
Q) fect of cable and pay television on sports in the future. He
CD ventured to say that, if the Super Bowl had been on cable, the
N revenue from that one game could have amounted to two or three
W times the amount of money the teams get in the entire year for
television. By 1990-1995, he envisioned that the stadiums would
Q have maybe 15, 000 or 16, 000 viewing the games , and the rest of
Q the people would be watching it on cable. It would not be un-
usual for a player to earn $5, 000, 000 a year. So there is a
future for cable and pay TV - it is a pretty hot article and
is the coming thing. He asked Mr. Rust if he could see it
folding in the future? Mr. Rust said he could not see the
industry folding, but it is a question of how fast all this
happens. There will be great progress -there.ds new technology
where they can carry many, many programs around the country on
satellite. These technologies are really possible now - it is
just economics that will control it. It could have effect on
all communications - that is why it is important to get the right
company for Leesburg. He is not saying Storer is a bad company -
it is a• very good one. He felt a small community would be better
off with a semi-locally owned company that is not so big - some-
body that we could get to and that would have more interest would
be better, provided they could finance it. It is not all that
Expensiveto finance at the moment. You have to have one tele-
phone company, but you don ' t have to have one cable company.
Mr. Bos did not understand what Mr. Rust ' s reason was for
not communicating with councilmembers before the last meeting.
Mr. Rust said he is not a subscriber to the newspaper (occasionally
buys one in the grocery store) and he is away a lot.
Mr. Stephen Robin, attorney representing Pinebelt Cablevision,
said he holds no grief with Storer or with the Matrix-Mid-Atlantic
proposal . He was unhappy with the vote two weeks ago - he doesn 't
think Council chose the best applicant. Time has passed and
Councilmembers have talked to people on the streets and in the
restaurants and have had a chance to digest what happened that
night. He appealed to Council to reconsider its action - perhaps
the best decision was not made and another might be better. He,
along with Mr. Sutliff , came to Council better than a year ago
and presented this idea. They realized this would have to go out
for bid and they upheld the rules every inch of the way. They
still "have their gloves on and are in the middle of the ring. "
Mr. Sutliff has the experience, the personal integrity, the
financial backing and has shown that he has knowledge of the
technical aspects - he is the kind of person that should have
the cable franchise in Leesburg . He appealed to the Council,
individually, if they have to live with somebody to run an
important business such as this, who would you rather have?
He felt this is the "gut" issue before the Council .
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10 , 1980 MEETING.
300 Mr. Lee Ruck, general counsel for Catoctin Cable Communi-
cations and local attorney for Storer Broadcasting, said state-
ments have been made concerning the method by which Catoctin
and Storer have campaigned. There has been no action or any-
thing which in any way embarrasses their company or them as
individuals. Storer is getting the same thing for their stock
as they got 10 years ago, and there have been two previous
splits. As to the financial capability, this information has
been provided to the Manager and was presented to Council at
its hearing on August 19th. A statement was made under oath
by one of the largest financial houses in New York that, if
Storer or one of its subsidiaries were awarded every franchise
they are currently applying for, they would still have in excess
of ;•$80 , 000, 000 in terms of on hand cash readily available for
construction over and above all those franchises . Included in
their original proposal was the shareholders ' pre-incorporation
agreement for Catoctin, which included the obligation of Storer
to provide the capital funding. There is a strong possibility,
and perhaps probability, that a contract has already been awarded
to Catoctin. The RFP, under State law, was an offer and the
resolution did, in fact, state that there was an award. More
importantly, however, is the integrity of the process that has
been set up - it was the clear announced intent of a majority
of this body, laboriously reviewed and entered into by seven
votes, before there was connsus on the part of this Council .
as to how a 15-year franchise should proceed. It is inappro-
priate at this point, after a bidding cycle, after the award of
the franchise and after
the resolution Council passed, to take consideration of a last
minute effort on the part of two unsuccessful bidders to com-
bine their forces and, without any further action, to issue
such an award. It would be inappropriate for this Council to
reopen the matter but, if Council feels it is appropriate to
do so, the only thing that can be done, consistent with keep-
ing faith with the town ' s constituency and with all bidders ,
would be to reissue, relet and reconsider it, with more consul-
tant review, staff review and review by Council. There comes
a time when these issues must end - it was the specific language
in the resolution to end this debate. He requested the Council,
in exercising its wisdom and discretion, for the best interest
of the town and its constituents, to also exercise its wisdom
and discretion for the best interest of its contracting process..
Let 's get on with the business of building new and up-to-date
"state-of-the-art" cable systems.
Mr. Herrell understood there was an article in The Monitor
stating that an agreement had been reached 10 days prior to the
Council vote. He asked if this is true? Mr. Ruck said there
was an essential agreement between Catoctin, Storer and the
Loudoun Times Publishing Company sometime toward the end of
the first week in August. It was signed almost immediately by
Catoctin and the Times-Mirror, with the Storer Vice-President
signing it sometime later. It was in effect before they ap-
peared before Council. Mr. Herrell asked if and when a copy
was given to the town and why they (the Council) didn 't see a
copy of it? Mr. Niccolls said Mr. Minor asked Mr. Ottinger for
a copy of it the day of the meeting (August 27) . Mr. Ottinger
agreed to deliver it, with the understanding that it is a con-
fidential instrument between the two parties and that it not
be released to anyone other than the staff, the Mayor and coun-
cilmembers and consultant. This was a 13-page instrument with
no signatures and it was not appropriate to present it to be
digested in a few moments . Mr'. Minor had copies of it in hand
should someone raise a question concerning it but, since this
was not an issue at the meeting, he did not bring it up. It
reflects the letter of intent in the proposal : Mr. Niccolls
apologized and said he did not believe there was a request of
the staff to describe any further information. In fact, the
staff understood that, after the committee hearing on the 19th,
the matter was closed. They did not have a copy of the agreement
at that time. Mr. Ruck said this agreement was discussed at
length by him and Mr. Kelly at the August 19 meeting - it is a
pure and simple services contract for the mutual benefit of a
cable franchisee and the Times-Mirror, two businesses' acting ':
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10 , 1980 MEETING 301
at arm' s length to provide a substantial service to the town.
Mr. Herrell asked how The Monitor knew about it? Mr. Ottinger
said they didn ' t - one reason they did not want it made known
to the general public was because of the distortion of the news
media, which has been rather substantial . It could have been dis-
tributed to the Mayor and Council . Mr. Niccolls again apologized
and took responsibility for not distributing the agreement to
Council - in fact, he put it back in the envelope, resealed it
and it stayed in his office until Mr. Martin, Mr. Minor and he
discussed at length what to do with it on Friday after Council ' s
vote.
Mr. Tolbert asked why he did not know about this agreement
with the Times-Mirror? Mr. Ruck said there has been a substantial
misinterpretation and misunderstanding of the relationship of the
various kinds of communication media which will be here permanently
in Loudoun County and Leesburg. There has also been a very un-
fortunate misconception of the reason and rationale for Catoctin
and the Times-Mirror to enter into this agreement. Mr. Ottinger
and he, • along with the Times-Mirror and Storer, discussed the pub-
lic release of this document and decided that he and Mr. Kelly
could cover it fully with the town orally . The language of the
agreement was made available to Mr. Martin and Mr. Niccolls to
make sure they were not misinforming the council . They decided
at that time not to make a public disclosure of what is essentially
a private business agreement. Mr. Herrell understood that, under
the Freedom of Information Act, the agreement was public information
when it was delivered to the town. Mr. Ruck said there is a period
of time in which the Freedom of Information Act must be complied
with and they did not feel it was covered by said Act at this time.
Mr. Ottinger said Storer has a national policy - they will not
critique or criticize another company. Everything they have done
has been distorted by some of the applicants or people in the
community, and especially by one of the newspapers . He said he
has not yet read an article in the Post or the Star that has been
totally correct and only a couple in The Monitor that have been
25 percent correct. This is why they did not- release it.
Mr. Hill said this is nothing new - those that voted for it
knew this letter of intent was attached to the bid - it was a
part of the original contract. Mr. Herrell asked if this agree-
ment was a part of the bid? Mr. Ruck said it is a modification
of the relationship they thought would probably result - a much
more specific outline of that set forth in the letter of intent .
Mr. Niccolls said Council had received a full report from the
staff . This was not an appropriate time to come in with some
question about the Storer-Times-Mirror proposal. Mrs. Hill said
they (the council) did not know they had the agreement, so could
not have asked for it.
Mr. Rust said he had reported that Storer ' s stock was only
slightly higher over a 12-year period in value - that wes the
justice for the stock splits. It was, however, up 30 percent,
but this is slight when you consider that the 7 percent compounded
inflation for 12 years is 140 percent. It was the worst perform-
ance of any of the companies he had studied. Other companies
were cited as being up 100%, 140% and 80%. This was rather poor
performance and they are trying to correct that by going heavily
into the cable business .
Mayor Rollins said the article in The Monitor is written on
total false assumption and is, therefore, erroneous and incorrect.
He called Mr. Still, who wrote this article, to inform him of
this . This is a matter that impedes his credibility with the
councilmembers, and he resents it. The article says that the
arrangement (contract) between Storer and the Times-Mirror had
been mysteriously explained to the satisfaction of only one
councilmember who voted for Storer, which was him. The article
quoted him as saying "the cost of access to The Monitor or WAGE or
any other media would be very nominal, in fact, it would be prob-
ably nothing . Were the other councilmembers given access to this
agreement and is, in fact, where is the agreement? " Mayor Rollins
302 MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10 , 1980 MEETING.
explained that what he said when he voted for Storer was that it was
his understanding from people he talked with (and not just on this
occasion) "that to achieve accessibility to a given channel if they
had certain programming that they could perform, that their rights
to that channel would be nominal . " He felt that Mr. Still took that
to mean the same channel the Times-Mirror would operate. This is
not true at all . He has never seen this agreement to this day -
this article insinuated that it had been mysteriously explained to
him. He does not desire to read it because, to him, this is an
agreement totally between the Times-Mirror and Storer Broadcasting.
It certainly has not been withheld from the councilmembers at his
request. It is Council 's obligation to see that the accessibility
is available to other media on another channel, if they so desire
to have it. He understands the agreement has been released, but
not in accordance and pursuant to the statutes of the State of
Virginia insofar as the Freedom of Information Act is concerned.
He went through the file very thoroughly with the Manager and we
had no executed copy of the agreement. So long as he is Mayor,
there will be nothing withheld from the public insofar as a public
file is concerned. He did what he could, in his power, to see that
the agreement was released and he understands it has now been re-
leased. Mr. Still said he9not say the Mayor had seen it. Mayor
Rollins said it was the implication that there was some collusion
between him and Storer - this was totally false in its utmost.
Perhaps there was a misunderstanding and he wants that corrected
very forcefully. He doesn ' t take these matters lightly.
Mayor Rollins also recalled that, seven or eight years ago,
there was the "hot issue" of a cable franchise being sought by
The Times-Mirror and Transamerican Airports . He voted against
the Times-Mirror because they wanted the franchise at that time.
Now they are talking about one channel . He did not know how peo-
ple ' s minds could be so forgetful about the history of cable TV
here.
As to the issue before Council tonight, he understands that
Mr. Turner and Mr. Sevila have requested that thiskm& ter be placed
on the agenda by a member of this body. He did not?just what this
means, but he (the Chair) would rule that this body cannot recon-
sider something which has never been considered. (an application
from Matrix - Mid-Alantic combined has never been considered. )
It is impossible, under Robert ' s Rules of Order, for the governing
body to reconsider somethingafter the same Isession in which it has
already been considered - it would have to be reconsidered in the
same session in which they acted. Therefore, the Chair rules that
this matter cannot be reconsidered. Also, the proper method to
take up this matter would be to rescind the action previously taken
by the Council. Such action would have to pass by a majority vote.
Mr. Hill called a point of order - he thought a motion to re-
scind would have to be voted on at the next meeting - not tonight.
The Chair did not agree - the governing body could, at any time,
vote to rescind by a majority vote. Therefore, a motion could be
made to rescind tonight. Any member can move to over-ride the
ruling of the Chair. On motion of Mr. Hill, seconded by Mr. Her-
rell, a motion was proposed to over-ride the ruling of the Chair.
Mr. Herrell inquired if this will take a simple majority or a two-
thirds majority? Mayor Rollins explained that a vote to rescind
tonight or at a later time would take a simple majority - Mr. Hill ' s
motion is that it would take a two-thirds majority and that it
cannot be taken up tonight. Parliamentary procedure says the
body makes its own rules - the body rules, even tho you are to-
tally wrong. After more discussion, Mayor Rollins explained
that a "Yes" vote over-rides the ruling of the Chair - a "No"
vote upholds the Chair ' s ruling. A roll call vote was 5 to 2 ,
thus defeating the motion and upholding the Chair ' s ruling :
Aye : Councilmembers D. Hill and Tolbert.
Nay : Councilmembers Bos , Herrell, M. Hill, Willis and
Mayor Rollins .
Mayor Rollins said the proper procedure now would be for any member
to move to repeal the prior action of the Council and it would take
a majority vote to do so.
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10 , 1980 MEETING.
A Notice of Motion to rescind, renew, modif 303
y, amend, annul ,
ratify or reconsider the entire matter concerning the award of
the Leesburg cable television franchise was requested to be
placed on the Agenda for the next meeting of this Council by
Mr. Tolbert. It is intended that Mr. Tolbert will make such mo-
tion or motions as are necessary to reopen the debate and place
the Council in a legal and procedural position to allow the
Council either to alter or to ratify its August 27 , 1980 Reso-
lution of Intent. It is also requested that an opinion be
secured from the Town Manager and the Town Attorney concerning
the proper method and procedure to be used to assure that this
matter is handled properly, both procedurally and in the public
interest. Mr. Bos seconded such intended action, stating that
he would like to see some action to either ratify, reconsider
or whatever and, if not for another company, he was concerned
about Storer having a clearer mandate from the Council. There
has been a lot of confusion since and at the last meeting, with
everybody under a lot of pressure, and he would like to see this
matter brought up at the next meeting. His concern is that the
four original companies bidding on this franchise should each
be given an equal shot at this in an atmosphere of less pressure
than at the last meeting. Mrs. Hill asked if he feels there is
CO a need to reconsider? Mr. Bos said he does . Mayor Rollins said
CO the only thing the town can do at this point is to repeal the
CO action they have already taken. Then the question is what to
W do next - do they readvertise or what? Mr. Bos said his con-
cern is, in a procedural way, to go through the vote again under
Q less pressure. If nothing else, he would like to see the full
Q Council behind this - it is for the next 15 years. After some
little discussion, it was felt that this is not really a motion,
but it is a notice of a motion. Mr. Bos withdrew the second to
the motion . Mayor Rollins said the procedure is governed by this
body, not by the Town Manager or the Town Attorney. Mr. Tolbert
said he is requesting that it be put on the Agenda for the next
meeting. Mrs. Hill asked if there is objection to doing this to-
night? Mr. Hill objected. Mayor Rollins asked if there is another
' second to the motion. There being none, the motion was dropped.
Mayor Rollins said the prior action of the Council stands at this
time. He suggested that any other action be taken no later than
the next Council meeting. He called for a five-minute recess .
Council reconvened at 9 : 40 P .M.
On motion of Mrs . Hill, seconded by Mr. Hill, it was proposed
to rescind Council 's prior action of August 27th, which was the
intent to award the franchise to Storer. Mr . Herrell said he
could not vote on this tonight - Mr. Tolbert has asked that it
be put off until the next meeting and he would not deny this request.
Mr. Bos concurred with Mr. Herrell. Mayor Rollins said that, un-
less there is objection from some member of Council, the Chair
would rule that Mr. Tolbert be granted this privilege to con-
sider this at the next session of Council. There was no objec-
tion. The Chair also ruled that the only matter. Council can take
up concerning this is a motion to rescind the prior- action. Mr.
Hill asked if the staff will continue to pursue the work on draw-
ing up the contract with Storer? Mayor Rollins said he would hope so
and he would say to proceed on with the agreement. If the motion
to rescind passes, then the Council will have to determine what
to do - whether they readvertise the whole thing or what? He
felt this would almost have to be done. The motion was, therefore„
withdrawn. Mr. Hill thought the Committee should discuss an al-
ternative as to how to proceed should it be rescinded. Mayor
Rollins did not see how they could make an award without going
through the whole advertising process, etc . Councilmembers
discussed having a special meeting to consider this, however, .
other members felt it should be done at the next regular meeting.
Mayor Rollins said he hoped he had not been unduly rough on
the Editor of The Monitor - he feels strong in his position on
the matter, but he did not necessarily blame him - some things
happen with a misunderstanding. He hoped this had been resolved
to the satisfaction of all parties concerned.
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10 , 1980 MEETING.
304
Mayor Rollins re-emphasized that the only matter concerning
this on the next agenda will be a motion to repeal . He did not
think the Finance and Administration Committee need take any
action on this . Mr. Hill requested that the committee consider
the possibility of this appeal not carrying and to come up with
some resolution should this occur. Mr. Bos appreciated the re-
cess made available to councilmembers at the last meeting when
Mayor Rollins asked everyone if they would like to proceed with
the matter.
MANAGER'S REPORT:
Town Manager John Niccolls reported briefly on the four-page
Activity Report distributed tonight :
(1) Work required to allow pedestrian access to the Leesburg
Elementary School has been completed.
(2) Work continues slowly on East Loudoun Street. He is try-
ing to accelerate this work but, because of other public works
activity, we pull people off of this project.
(3) We are continuing with patching work preparatory to the
resurfacing work authorized at last meeting. It is expected that the
contractor will be in within the next 10 to 20 days to do the
asphaltic work.
(4) There is a high wooden concrete form on the Phase IV
project - it is not as high as the bridge is going to be - the
concrete wall is much lower than that and when they strip the forms,
you will see that it was not filled all the way up. The other end
of that bridge will be poured sometime next week and then you will
be able to see the contour of the final bridge elevation.
COUNCILMEMBER INQUIRIES AND COMMENTS :
Mr. Bos said there was a public information meeting regarding
the Emergency Youth Center last night. Three members, including
himself, of the Council were present. There is a tremendous
amount of public concern about this facility, to the point that if
the process goes through the Town ' s Planning Commission, he wants
to make sure every available opportunity is given for public input.
The public needs to be educated concerning the implications of such
a Center in Leesburg.
Mrs. Hill said she would like to hear from councilmembers con-
cerning this before it comes to the Planning Commission for a com-
mission permit. Mr. Niccolls said this will go to the Planning
Commission only unless there is an appeal - then it would go to the
governing body. State law says that, before a public facility can
be established by the local Planning Commission, it must be found
to be in conformance with the Comprehensive Plan. The governing
body can request or order a public hearing by the Planning Com-
mission or the Commission can do this on its own motion.
Mr. Hill said he views this as being akin, but not exactly,
to a rezoning. When you change the use of a piece of property
by giving a special permit, it is bound to affect the neighborhood.
He hopes the Planning Commission will take this into consideration,
as well as whether it is in compliance with the Comprehensive Plan.
Personally, he thinks they are looking for something of a perma-
nent nature and are trying to satisfy it in :a_tempararysf.ashion.
He felt it should be dealt with in a permanent way. Certainly
that area is not conducive to a permanent facility .
Mrs. Hill asked how we are getting along with the list of
artifacts requested from Potter ' s Field. Mr. Minor said we have
requested this and he is waiting for a response from Mr. Winter.
Mrs. Hill understood the Museum will store, temporarily, some of
the remains. They would like to prepare an exhibit. Mr. Niccolls
said the town 's contract with Len Winter requires them to report
on the significance of the findings - this information will be
very beneficial to them when they prepare the exhibit.
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10 , 1980 MEETING.
80-0-14 - ORDINANCE - AMENDING CHAPTER 10 OF THE TOWN CODE. 305
On motion of Mrs . Hill, seconded by Mr. Willis, the following
ordinance was proposed:
ORDAINED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
as follows :
SECTION I . Chapter 10 of the Town Code is amended by adding
a section to be numbered 10-52, to read as follows:
Sec . 10-52 . Enforcement of licensing and registration re-
quirements on private property .
The police officers or other uniformed employees of
the police department may with the consent of the land-
owner patrol the landowner ' s property to enforce the state
or town motor vehicle registration and licensing require-
ments .
Police officers may patrol streets and roads within
subdivisions of real property which are maintained by the
CD owners of the lots within any such subdivision, or any
CO association of such owners to enforce the provisions of
NChapters 1 through 4 (Sections 46 . 1-1 through 46 . 1-347
of Title 46 . 1 of the 1950 Code of Virginia, as amended,
and to the extent that said chapters have been adopted
Q as a part of this Code. (Sec. 46 . 1-6, Code of Va. )
Q
SECTION II . Section 10-164 of the Town Code is amended
to read as follows :
Sec. 10-164 . Removal and disposition of unattended ve-
hicles generallj .
(a) Whenever any motor vehicle, trailer or semi-
trailer is found on the public streets or public grounds
unattended by the owner or operator and constitutes a
hazard to traffic or is parked in such manner as to be
in violation of law or whenever any motor vehicle, trailer
or semi-trailer is left unattended for more than ten days
upon any privately owned property other than the property
of the owner of such motor vehicle, trailer or semi-trailer,
within the municipality, or is abandoned upon such privately
owned property, without the permission of the owner, lessee
or occupant thereof, any such motor vehicle, trailer or
semi-trailer may be removed for safekeeping by or under
the direction of a police officer to a storage garage or
area; provided, however, that no such vehicle shall be so
removed from privately owned premises without the written
request of the owner, lessee or occupant thereof . The per-
son at whose request such motor vehicle, trailer or semi-
trailer is removed from privately owned property shall in-
demnify the municipality against any loss or expense in-
curred by reason of removal, storage or sale thereof. It
shall be presumed that such motor vehicle, trailer or semi-
trailer, or part thereof, is abandoned if it lacks either
a current license plate, or a current county, city or town,
plate or sticker, or a valid state inspection certificate
or sticker and it has been in a specific location for ten
days without being moved. Each removal shall be reported
immediately to the police department, and notice thereof
shall be given to the owner of the motor vehicle, trailer
or semi-trailer as promptly as possible.
(b) The owner of such vehicle or trailer or semi-
trailer, before obtaining possession thereof, shall pay
to the town all reasonable costs incidental to the removal,
storage and locating the owner of such motor vehicle,
trailer or semi-trailer. Should such owner fail or refuse
to pay the cost or 'should the identity or whereabouts of
such owner be unknown or unascertainable after a diligent
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1980 MEETING.
306
search has been made, and after notice to him at his last-
known address and to the holder of any lien of record in
the office of the division of motor vehicles of this state
against the motor vehicle, trailer or semi-trailer, the
chief of police may, after holding the motor vehicle,
trailer or semi-trailer 40 days and after due notice of
sale, dispose of the same at public sale and the pro-
ceeds from the sale shall be forwarded by the chief of
police to the town director of finance; provided, that
if the value of such motor vehicle, trailer or semi-
trailer be determined by three disinterested dealers or
garagemen to be less than $150 . 00 which would be incurred
by such advertising and public sale it may be disposed of
by private sale or junked. The town director of finance
shall pay from the proceeds of sale the cost of removal,
storage, investigation as to ownership and liens and notice
of sale, and the balance of such funds shall be held by him
for the owner and paid to the owner upon satisfactory proof
of ownership.
(c) If no claim has been made by the owner for the
proceedsof such sale, after the payment of the above-men-
tioned costs, the funds may be deposited to the general
fund or any special fund of the town. Any such owner shall
be entitled to apply to the town within three years from
the date of such sale and if timely application is made
therefor, the town shall pay the same to the owner without
interest or other charges . No claim shall be made nor shall
any suit, action or proceedings be instituted for the re-
covery of such funds after three years from the date of
such sale. (Sec . 46. 1-3, Code of Va. )
SECTION III . This ordinance shall be in effect upon its
passage.
Mr. Herrell said this has nothing to do with cars on the street -
it is only on private property . Mr. Bos said he understands this
now, he was concerned about cars onpublic property. The ordinance
was unanimously adopted:
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, D. Hill, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Rollins .
Nay : None.
80-103 - RESOLUTION - MAKING A SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR THE
FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30 , 1981 .
On motion of Mrs. Hill, seconded by Mr. Herrell, the following
resolution was proposed :
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia,
as follows :
A supplemental appropriation is made from the Utility Fund
to Account No . 20600 . 801B, Facility Planning Step II , in
the amount of $8 , 000 . 00, for the fiscal year ending June
30 , 1981 .
Mr. Niccolls explained that this is for engineering services per-
formed by Betz-Converse-Murdoch for modification of STEP I Fa-
cilities Plan to conform to the recommendations that the State
Water Control Board staff gave us last January. to allow us to
expand our plant. The Plan is still in the Water Control Board,
but it is expected to be released to EPA shortly - we hope to
have that approval in December or January. This will then allow
us to get STEP II money for design. Mr. Hill said the SWCB has
relaxed a lot of its requirements for the Occoquan. This is a
step forward in trying to eliminate the cost of operating that
plant. He asked if we are getting some of the benefit of this?
Mr. Niccolls said there has been a change in policy at the State
Water Control Board level - even nationwide - that EPA is not
funding tertiary treatment unless it is fully justified and
really warranted because of water supplies or something. The
307
MINUTES OF SEPTEMBER 10, 1980 MEETING.
whole atmosphere is changing - they are pulling away from that
advanced technology . The expected approval of our STEP I plan
with only an increase in our size and minor modifications to the
process is, in fact, a reflection of that. Mr. Hill asked if
this means the Dulles Watershed requirements will also be modi-
fied? Mayor Rollins said he thought the final standards will be
what are now the interim standards . The resolution was unani-
mously adopted:
Aye : Councilmembers Bos, Herrell, D. Hill, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Rollins .
Nay: None.
80-104 - RESOLUTION - AUTHORIZING NOTICE OF PUBLICATION OF PUBLIC
HEARING ON APPLICATION #ZM-29 BY S R L
PROPERTIES, INC.
On motion of Mrs . Hill , seconded by Mr. Tolbert, the following
resolution was proposed:
RESOLVED by the Council of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia,
as follows :
A Notice of Public Hearing to consider Application Number
ZM-29 by S R L Properties, Inc . , to have rezoned from F-1
to M-1 a tract of land containing 89 , 576 square feet, lo-
cated on the north side of Catoctin Circle shall be pub-
lished in the Loudoun Times-Mirror on September 18, 1'1980
and September 25, 1980 for Public Hearing on October 8,
1980 at 7 : 30 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 10 West Loudoun
Street, Leesburg, Virginia.
Mrs . Hill understood that the proffers will actually improve the
area. Mr. C. Terry Titus , representing the applicant, said this
is correct. A berm must be put up on the east side of the Town
Branch, essentially in the right-of-way of Harrison Street. He
' explained in detail, using a plat to show just what will be done.
They are proffering that they will install it as a part of this
rezoning . The resolution was unanimously adopted :
Aye:, Councilmembers Bos , Herrell, D. Hill, M. Hill, Tolbert,
Willis and Mayor Rollins .
Nay : None .
On motion of Mr. Tolbert, seconded by Mrs . Hill, the meeting
was adjourned with unanimous consent at 10 : 10 p.m.
LL; �/�/ Mayor
Clerk of t h Council