HomeMy Public PortalAbout2007_03_13
COUNCIL MEETING
March 13, 2007
7:00 p.m.
Presentation of County Office Proposal - Keane Enterprises -
Andy Shuckra
Mr. Shuckra gave a presentation on the Loudoun County Government Center
proposal for the Oaklawn property. He stated the zoning fits the density and use of
developing the government center in Land Bays A and B.
He discussed the phasing of both Land Bay A and B which would consist of
500,000 Square Feet of building spaces total in Phase I. Phase 2 would add an
additional 800,000 Square Feet.
The positive impact on Leesburg is (1) Harrison Street and Shenandoah
Building potentially would come back on the property tax roles; (2) the key
component of Leesburg's identity would be retained; (3) the southeast sector of
Leesburg would be energized by accelerating a new growth area; and no rezoning
would be required.
The transportation advantages are (1) Battlefield/Greenway interchange will
not be tolled; (2) excellent access to primary road arteries in Loudoun, Route 15,
Route 7, and Route 28; (3) links to local and regional bus transit, and future metro.
Oaklawn is close to the proposed Park and Ride on Sycolin Road; and 913 of the
1159 County employees come from Leesburg or points north or west.
Additional benefits include the continuity of the County Seat remaining in
Leesburg; constituents to the west would be disenfranchised with additional distance,
fuel and tolls with an eastward location; the public at large is familiar with the
convenience and affordability of Leesburg as the location for government services;
and a location in Oaklawn would provide minimal disruption.
Mr. Shuckra stated the site would be on a gateway location with superior
visibility. A thoughtful design and materials can make an architectural statement at
a prestigious site.
Further, the site plan is ready as no rezoning is necessary and the uses and
densities exactly match zoning in these land bays. It complies with Regional Office
in the Town Plan and the onsite infrastructure is approved, bonded and under
construction .
He explained the infrastructure of Phase 1 and 2.
In conclusion, he stated that through superior transportation infrastructure,
fiscal responsibility, an active mixed use environment, and affordable access,
Oaklawn offers the best solution for the Town, County and citizens.
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Umstattd presiding.
Councilmembers Present: Kelly Burk, Kathryn Sheldon Hammier, Susan Horne,
Marty Martinez, Ken Reid, Kevin Wright, and Mayor Kristen Umstattd.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 2
Councilmembers Absent:
Staff Present: Town Manager John Wells, Assistant to the Town Manager Nicole
Ard, Assistant to the Town Manager Kathy Leidich, Director of Engineering and Public
Works Tom Mason, Chief of Police Joe Price, Director of Planning, Zoning and
Development Susan Swift, Director of Capital Projects Management Nagi Elsewaissi,
Director of Finance Norm Butts, Director of Utilities Randy Shoemaker, Airport
Director Tim Deike, Capital Projects Engineer Ann Geiger, Planner Wade Burkholder
and Chris Murphy, Zoning Administrator Brian Boucher, Comprehensive Planner Scott
Parker, Chief of Engineering Bill Ackman, Comprehensive Planner David Fuller,
Management Specialist Tami Watkins and Clerk of Council Judy Ahalt.
AGENDA
ITEMS
A. Invocation by Mayor Umstattd
B. Salute to the Flag was led by Council Member Reid
C. RolI Call Mayor Umstattd announced Council Members Hammier and Martinez
will be arriving late. Martinez arrived at 7:53 p.m. and Hammier at 8:55 p.m.
D. Minutes
a. Work Session Minutes of November 28, 2006
On a motion by Vice Mayor Horne, seconded by Council Member
Wright, the minutes of November 28, 2006 were approved as amended by a
5-0-2 Vote (Hammier and Martinez absent).
E. Presentations
No presentations
F. Petitioners
The petitioner's section opened at 7:36 p.m.
Frank Holtz, 103 Bridgette Place, addressed Council as Chairman of the
Loudoun County Community Justice Board. He commended Leesburg Police Officers
Hall and Bolden for their efforts in detaining two individuals at the intersection of Rt.
7 and Cardinal Park Drive. He stated a traffic stop discovered these two individuals
in the possession of hand guns. The investigation is on going.
Further, he stated Leesburg has good police officers.
The petitioner's section c10sed at 7:40 p.m.
G. Public Hearings
a. Water and Sewer Rate Structure
The public hearing opened at 7:44 p.m.
John Wells stated the Town Council established tonight's hearing to
receive the public's thoughts regarding the water and sewer rates.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 3
On December, 2005 the Town Council adopted by ordinance a multi-
year plan for water and sewer rates. Action on these water and sewer rates
was a resuit of a rate study presented to Town Council by the Municipal &
Financial Services Group on October 24, 2005. Their study indicated the
Town's Utility Fund was operating at a deficit and had been doing so for two
years. The water and sewer rates per thousand gallons had at that time not
changed for 13 years.
Counciloriginally considered an increase in the combined water and
sewer rates and no proposed change in the surcharge levels for the in-Town
and out-of- Town customers by the following percentage: Fiscal Year ending
2006 - 10%; FY 2007 and FY 2008 9 V2% each year, FY 2009 6% and FY
2010 - 3%. Upon additional consideration and discussion Council examined
options to increase the out-of-Town surcharge set at that time at 50%. The
Council considered a range of options up to 100%. In final deliberations and
actions af ter the public hearing Council adopted a surcharge for out-of- Town
customers at 100% on December 13, 2005.
This resulted in a typical in-Town and out-of-Town combined water
and sewer increase by the follow amounts: in-Town residents for FY 2006
3%, 8% each year in 2007-08, 6% in 2009 and 3% in 2010. For out-of-Town
residents the combined bill would increase 36% in FY 2006, similar increases
would follow for in-Town residents of 8% for 2007 and 2008, FY 2009 - 6%
and FY 2010 - 3%. Mr. Wells stated out-of-Town customers have filed a
lawsuit challenging the surcharge levied on their water and sewer bills in
October 2006.
Since then Council has considered a number of options publicly that
would change the level of surcharge on out-of-Town customers. Those
options have included reductions in the surcharge to 75% and 50%
implemented over a five-to-ten year period. Council also has asked that the
rate study be updated to reflect the current economic trends. A surcharge
change could resuit for increased rates for in-Town customers. Council has
taken no action on rates or made specific recommendations on rates or
surcharge levels at this time. Before any public hearing is advertised with
specific rates, the Council asked that this forum be advertised to allow the
public to be heard on the topic of rate structure and the implications of
changes to rates or surcharges for in-Town and out-of- Town customers.
Council Member Wright c1arified for purposes of the record the water
rates had not changed since 1992. Is that true for both in-and out-of-Town?
Mr. Wells stated the surcharge changed for out-of- Town customers in
1998.
Town Attorney Barbara Beach stated the surcharge reached 50% with
three changes.
Council Member Wright verified the out-of- Town area in question has
been the Town's planned service area since 1986.
Council Member Wright also verified that none of his tax bill to the
Town goes to operation of the Utility Fund.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 4
Council Member Reid asked if there had been a recommendation by
the Utilities Department or prior Town Managers between 1992 and 2005 to
raise utility rates.
Mr. Wells stated a series of increases for users were identified and
recommended to Council in the early 1990's and ultimately the Town Council
did not enact those even though they were identified for future increases.
They were either rescinded or not enacted at that time.
Council Member Reid asked the vote on those recommended
increases.
Council Member Reid stated Council Member Wright has done a lot of
research on availability fees which we calculate on anticipated usage. He
added in the past he has brought up the issue of reducing those fees as an
incentive to attract restaurants, wet labs, etc. and he was told that would
increase residential customer rates. He asked if availability fees have been
high in order to minimize the rates for homeowners.
Town Attorney Beach stated the availability fees go to build the
infrastructure and the water rate fees go to the operation of the system.
Ms. Beach stated the Utility Fund at the end of the year has to even
out. The monies that go in the fund come from several sources, one being
the availability fees and the fees for water service. Although they are looked
at separately, it is true that at the end of the year it should cover its own
costs.
Mayor Umstattd stated in 2006 the Town floated a $55.6 million bond
for the expansion of our utility plants and that is what we call a double barrel
bond. If at any time Utility rates are inadequate to fund the debt service on
that bond, the General Fund which is comprised of Town taxpayer money
will cover the debt service.
Steve Axeman, 221 Rosemeade Place, SW, addressed Council asking
to keep the water rates surcharge at 100%. He stated an estimated 79% of
the utility debt load can be attributed to the out-of- Town residents. That
would mean the $55 million dollars that we have in debt service is borne by
the Leesburg users. Therefore 22% is not too much to ask for from Town
residents. The availability fees were not paid in fair share by the out-of- Town
users.
He reminded Council they represent the residents of Leesburg. It is
important to be fair to the out-of- Town citizens, and I think you have done
that. The Town has do ne their research and the surcharge is fair. He stated
17 years ago when he lived in Fayette County, Georgia he paid $150 a month
for water and sewer. He stated the surcharge is still cheap by a lot of
standards.
He stated the County should not give the Town a 90-day limit to make
a decision on the water rates before they move forward on Crosstrail.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 5
In closing he asked Council keep the same rates and thanked the
Mayor for keeping senior rates down.
Brian Shifflett, 18578 Merion Court, addressed the Council as follows:
"The primary reason we are here tonight is to provide input on how to
develop rates that keep the Utility Fund financially sound. One of the major
elements of the Utility Fund's budget is debt service, as the Utility Fund has
approximately $70 million of outstanding debt issued to finance utility system
improvements. I have heard comments to the effect that a portion of
Leesburg's local tax revenues pay for the Water and Sewer Utility, which is
untrue. Perhaps those comments were made because there is some
confusion about the monies used for debt service payments on the Utility
bonds.
From 1992 untillast year, it was Leesburg's practice to issue revenue
bonds for utility system improvements. Revenue bonds rely on the stream of
revenue produced by the Utility system to repay the debt. The Town has also
used general obligation bonds for pre-1992 Utility Fund debt, which are
backed by the full faith and credit of the Town. As a matter of practice, the
Town pays the debt service on the general obligation bonds pre-1992 Utility
Fund debt which is backed by the full faith and credit of the Town. As a
matter of practice, the Town pays the debt service on the general obligation
bonds allocated to the Utility Fund from revenues of the system.
The Town has never defaulted in the payment of either principal or
interest on any debt obligation. Nor have I found any example of a municipal
water utility in the Commonwealth of Virginia that defaulted on their bonds.
It would be prudent to note that when the Town Council considered
the proposed utility rate structure in October and November, 2005, the rate
base assumed that the Town would continue issuing revenue bonds." Double-
barrel bonds are generally obligation public utility bonds and primarily rely of
the streak of revenues produced by the utility system to repay the debt, but
they also use the full faith and credit of the Town as an additional payment
guarantee. The Town's Bond Consultant, Courtney Rogers of Davenport &
Co., told Town Council at their meeting on January 24, 2006, that:
· "Town General Obligation Ratings in the "AA" range will produce
approximately 10-15 basis points interest rate advantage versus Pure
Revenue Bonds."
· "..the bonds will be primarily backed by the Enterprise Fund; however,
the addition of General Fund backing will save the Town $50,000 by
using general obligation bonds. Further,... this will not impact the
credit rating or debt capacity of the General Fund."
One should note that saving $50,000 annually on the pre-determined
rate base should cause rates to go down, not go up, unless you are in a
deficit situation. As an out-of- Town customer, it is my opinion that about
20% of the $50,000 annual savings applies to debt used to improve the
system to serve the out-of- Town customers that is probably a point that we
differ, the whole 79% of debt going to out-of- Town customers is debatable.
Town Council Minutes for meetina of March 13. 2007
Page 6
We have 2,800 out-of-Town customers and that number is not growing
.......(inaudible) the basis for the increase in 2005 from 1998.
Basically, the Town had 4,800 utility customers in 1992 and ended up
with (inaudibie) in 2005. 2,700 of those were out-of-Town and 6,500 were
new customers were in Town, 79% is absolutely wrong. So, $50,000 or
$10,000 savings could be a cost differential between the rates you set for in-
Town vs. out-of- Town.
He added your debt covenants require you to collect revenue to pay
for the system operations, the debt service, and reserve fund requirements.
He added Council's review should be sure the Utility Fund is financially
sound and you need to consider that the revenues of the utility system
customers, all of us, pay that service. That obligation should be spread
proportionally across all users."
Melanie Fondaco, 18896 Goose Club Court, stated the Utility Fund is
an enterprise fund and pays for itself. It is completely independent of the
General Fund. No tax money goes to water and sewer and the fact that out-
of-Town users don't pay tax has nothing to do with setting rates for water and
sewer.
She stated the utility rates have become a political issue. The Town of
Leesburg has an obligation to represent Town taxes payers as it relates to the
General Fund. The Town fought for the right to be our provider and they
should have fair and reasonable rates as required by Virginia Code for all
customers. The Utility Fund is not regulated nor is there an advisory board.
Management and rate making decisions should be taken out of the hands of
Town Council which would resuit in a much more balanced approach. Town
residents have had extremely low rates for a long time and any decision
should be business based and not politically motivated.
John Caron, 18999 Rock Creek Drive, addressed Council with the
following remarks for Town residents as follows: "In 1986 the Town fought for
the right to serve the out-of-Town area primarily based upon the argument
that the Town could provide the services at a lower cost than the County thus
an out of court agreement was reached with the County for the Town to be
the sole provider of water and sewer to these customers; during the early
90's developments plans and water permits were agreed to and developers
paid for the infrastructure and expanded capacity through availability and
pro-rata fees and proffered land for water plant expansion; in 1993 to 1995
the Town rescinded planned water rate increases; in 1998 the Town
implemented a 50% surcharge phased in over three years for out-of-Town
customers without any justification provided and no increase to in-Town
residents.
In the fall of 2005 the Town conducted an independent rate study
which showed a large operational shortfall and the study suggested 30%
increase for all users to be phased in over three years. The Town Council
believed the in-Town users could not bear the cost increase and directed the
consultant to shift the vast majority of the increase to 20% of the customers,
i.e. those out-of- Town. On January 1, 2006 the Town increased the surcharge
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Paae 7
to 100%, no phasing. The in-Town rates still remained at the 1992 levels.
No increases in 14 yrs. That is an effective rate decrease of 47% for an
inflation adjusted basis. The actual cost of service for out-of- Town service is
equal or lower than for in-Town service.
Some of the facilities that provide this service are located in the out-
of-Town areas. Other Town's do have a 100% surcharge, many of those are
in remote areas; some towns have no surcharge, another town with a
surcharge is Vienna, VA. Their surcharge is 11 %, but in all cases Virginia law
requires the rates to be fair and reasonable and based on supportabie rate
setting practices.
He clarified the out-of- Town residents have not demanded elimination
of the surcharge, they want our rates to be fair and reasonable as required by
code. So our rates are 121% higher than LCSA and in-Town rates 21%
higher than LCSA.
Three points: (1) the Town did not live up to their promise of 1986 for
competitive water rates; (2) serious cost issues have been massed by the
surcharge; (3) the major concern, independent of the surcharge, is that water
and sewer simply costs too much in Leesburg.
Ann Jansen. 105 Balch Springs Circle, asked that Council keep the
existing surcharge in place. As a governing body representing the citizens of
Leesburg, I appreciate your efforts to act on our behalf and in our best
interest. She stated she respectfully request that the Town should remain
firm in their decision to enact the 100% surcharge. She stated she realizes
the Council has received a great deal of pressure regarding this issue. Af ter
reviewing the analysis, I would say that the outcome was a fair and equitable
decision. I do respect and value the out-of-Town customer comments. People
need to understand the reasoning behind the decision of the 100% surcharge.
At minimum, it needs to be communicated in a way that makes sense and
given facts supporting the decision.
Perhaps the real problem is not the rate of the surcharge, but the
public perception that this decision was made in an arbitrary or capricious
manner. The remedy is not necessarily backing down; it is really expressing
to people how this decision was founded. If people could see that it would
demonstrate the decision was supported by the evidence.
She added this is not an isolated decision, it has been implemented in
numerous jurisdictions throughout Virginia for the very reason that Town's do
actually shoulder the burden of fiscal responsibility of their water and sewer
utilities. The cost included maintenance and future expansion, increased plant
capability and additional standards to meet stringent environmental
standards.
Timotha Rainey. 502 Balls Bluff Road, asked that Council keep the
existing surcharge in place as they are the governing body that represents
Leesburg residents and taxpayers. She stated there is already astrong
precedent in Virginia to charge a 100% surcharge such as: Appomattox,
AltaVista, Covington, Galax, Front Royal, Harrisonburg, Glasgow, Marion,
Orange, Petersburg, Purcellville, Rock Mount, South Boston, South Hili,
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 8
Whitesville, and the Stony Creek Sanitary District. Richmond, Warrenton,
Winchester and Vienna charge a significant surcharge; and even LCSA
charges higher rates for certain parts of the County.
She added the out-of- Town customers had the opportunity to become
part of the Town by annexation. These residents don't want to assume the
responsibility of the $56 million bond and pay Town taxes.
Further, Ms. Rainey stated Council will be held accountable to the
Town residents whom they are elected to serve.
Loudoun County Supervisor Sally Kurtz read the following into the
record:
"I will begin my request to you all tonight by first reading parts of the
address I sent to you (Council) in November of 2005 because fundamentally I
think you face the same issues tonight that you faced then.
'I have read your consultant's, Municipal and Financial Services Group,
power point presentation to you on October 24, 2005 and their final Report of
November 7, 2005. I can certainly support their findings that additional
investment to the Utility needs to occur to assure stability and financial
health. I agree with Town policies that both water and sewer systems must
be self-supporting and that they need to be run as a business.
I do represent citizens both inside the Town Iimits and outside the
Town Iimits. It is my considered opinion that all are equal shareholders in
this utility, equally invested. As customers, as shareholders they are all
equally dependant on the utility, its proper functioning and fiscal viability.'
In 1986 an agreement between the Town and County allowed the
Town to be exclusive provider of water service to this out-of- Town area
because the Town could provide service cheaper than the County and shortly
thereafter the existing Town surcharge was removed. Up until 1998 all utility
rate adjustments by the Town Council supported those policies. In 1998 a
Leesburg Town Council set a policy for a new 50% surtax on out-of-Town
customers - without justification. I think that initial surcharge violated long
held policy understandings between the Town and County. You all have been
on the other si de of what I consider as the County violating its long-held
planning policies with the Town. I would hope that you would be particularly
sensitive to the issue.
I've been trying to imagine myself in front of two families, one on the
left Iives in the Town limits and one on the right Iives outside the Town Iimits.
Both families hold two jobs, both have children to educate, and a mortgage to
pay, both sit in the gridlock we all share.
Both assume a tax burden to pay for the local services government
delivers, but the difference in the tax burden between inside Town and
outside Town has nothing to do with Leesburg's utility rates. No money from
Leesburg's General Fund supports this utility. Both families pay for a product
produced for their consumption. Both are shareholders in the utility business.
Town Council Minutes for meetina of March 13. 2007
Page 9
In reality, if this Utility goes belly-up, both my families on the left in
Town and my family on the right out-of-Town will pay increased rates to bring
back solvency.
I'd like to look both these families in the face and explain in cold fact a
justification for both rates, those in Town and those out-of- Town. I think this
Town Council inherited the 50% surcharge from 1998 and you now have an
opportunity to begin a correction reflecting long-held policies and reflecting
sound policies for a cost-based enterprise fund.
As I said in November of 2005, I know you all to be thoughtful, willing
to listen and consider the issues presented to you from the public. Tonight I
ask you to establish an equitable and reasoned rate structure reflecting true
costs and accountability for all Leesburg's utility consumers."
David D'Onofrio. 42821 Forest Glen Dr. addressed Council with a
reminder that five communities are impacted by the water and sewer rates,
Spring Lakes, River Creek, Potomac Station, West Goose Creek Lansdowne
and Lakes at Red Rock. He stated the issue is about the rising cost of water
and sewer and how it is going to impact all of us. He stated if the out-of- Town
rates stay the same; in-Town rates will still increase 56% over the next nine-
years.
Fund.
Mr. D'Onofrio called for improved management practices for the Utility
Further, he stated out-of- Town Leesburg customers pay more than
any other in the metro area. He added the issue is about the rising cost of
expenditures and the users should share equally as customers.
Ann Jones. 207 Prince Street, addressed Council asking for the
continuation of the 100% surcharge. She stated the in-Town residents are the
ones responsible for the bonds. She also expressed her concern with the
pressure the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors in putting on the Town.
Stu Curley, addressed Council saying the Town fought to service their
area which consists of five communities and 2,800 customers. He stated the
County and Town entered into an agreement to provide service to their
communities and water permits were issued with no surcharge in place.
Further, the infrastructure was paid for by $36 million in availability fee, the
developer paid the pro rata fees and the agreement with the County has not
been honored.
Further, a 100% surcharge is not normal in the metro area. Some
rural areas have a high surcharge, but they are based on higher costs. He
stated if the surcharge was reduced by 50% it would only be about a 5-7%
increase for in-Town customers.
In closing, he stated the Utility Fund needs to be scrutinized.
GiGi Robinson. 207 Prince Street, addressed Council stating water
users should be treated equally, it should not be phased in and made effective
by the end of this quarter. She stated it is the right thing to do. She stated
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 10
that in the past Council may have acted irresponsibility as politicians. They
did not fully forecast the down markets and therefore did not raise the rates
in a steady manner.
Then in December 2005, Council abruptly raised the rates. That was
not a bad thing; the increased rates were needed. Water will become
increasing scarce to us as a planet and paying more to make this resource
available to us makes sense. Any excess money should be put in a fund to
address stricter regulations for water distribution and waste disposable.
However, the majority of the increase was imposed on out-of- Town users.
This decision was not supported by solid figures or reasoning. The accounting
mess seemed to be deliberately confusing and made the issue extra
complicated.
She stated the out-of- Town residents are not hard strapped, they want
to pay their bilis. Further, we all need to face up to the cost of clean water
and efficient sewer; and 100% roll back should take place immediately
without phasing.
David Winaate. Ashtown Downs Homeowners Association, presented a
resolution from the Ashton Downers Homeowners Association Board of
Directors which opposed the reduction of the out-of- Town water and sewer
rates. They expressed their support for the 2005 Town Council decision and
the position of the present Mayor. He stated there association consists of 127
homes.
Further, they asked Council to stay focused on their responsibilities as
elected representatives of our Town and please do not be swayed by the
threats coming from the Loudoun County Board of Supervisors or out-of- Town
communities.
Sandy Kane. 815 Kenneth Place SW, addressed Council echoing the
comments of Ann Jansen.
Jim Haynes asked why the Town is in the water and sewer business.
He stated things are very different than they were in 1968. Further, Council
is acting as a board of directors running a high-tech business. This business
is not running very weil and the rates have not been raised since 1992.
He suggested a multi-jurisdictional sewer authority be considered.
Tom Marshall stated he was impressed by caliber of both sides'
comments. As a Town resident, he pays full Loudoun County and Town
taxes. He stated Ida Lee Park is used by Town and County residents; we
have a police department although his County taxes help support the Loudoun
County Sheriff's Office. He suggested a fair compromise would be 20%.
John Drury stated the surcharge is an important component of the
budget and an insurance policy to ensure the system works. He suggested
possible solutions such as have the County take over water and sewer or the
Town selling water and sewer capacity.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 11
Nan Moore, 43241 Overview Place, addressed Council stating she lives
in the community of Lansdowne in West Goose Creek. She stated her actual
one month bill was $800; and she and her husband work hard for that money
and do not want to pay the high bills.
Enrico Gonzalez. 404 Wingate Place, stated the most of us live in very
comfortable homes, but Leesburg has a larger population of people who don't.
The 60% proposed increase for those Leesburg residents could be
devastating.
Steve Axeman, 221 Rosemeade Place, provided additional information
on a surcharge imposed in 1962 stating the area which is now Country Club
was developed with a 50% surcharge.
Mayor Umstattd stated we have received 31 emails and with the
exception of one was in support of the continued rate structure.
She read an email from Noah and Patricia Kraus who live in at 137
Davis Avenue, SW Leesburg as follows:
"We are Leesburg Town residents and property owners. We oppose
the increase of "in-Town" water rates.
As residents of the Town of Leesburg we pay both Town and County
real estate and personal property taxes. The out-of- Town customers pay only
County taxes.
When the out-of- Town customers first had the opportunity to be part
of the Town of Leesburg, they declined because they couldn't see how paying
the extra Town taxes would benefit them. However, the Town residents
eventually received a benefit, in the form of lower in-Town water rates.
There is a simple solution for the out-of- Town customers. Petition to
become part of the Town. The Town will be happy to have the extra tax
revenue and, as new in-Town customers, they will benefit from the lower in-
Town water rates. "
Following a response to the email from another Council Member, the
Kraus family replied as follows:
"I agree there is bad planning, but ultimately everyone needs to pay
their fair share. I pay Town and County taxes, the out-of- Town customers
pay only County taxes. Members of any organization usually pay less than
non-members. As a Town resident I should receive the benefit of a lower
water rate. I find it interesting that during this entire controversy nothing has
been said of the substantial monetary benefit that many of the out-of- Town
customers have received from the Town of Leesburg. As you know it's the
Town's practice to reduce the sewerage usage cost for newly built homes
using Town water. In other words, the Town subsidizes the establishment of
new lawns. The question is where are most of the new developments built;
answer where the land is available, outside the Town limits. This costly
monetary perk is passed on to all existing customers. This is my
understanding on how it works. If a homeowner of a newly built house uses
Town Council Minutes for meetina of March 13. 2007
Page 12
150,000 gallons of water a quarter, the owner will only be billed for a
maximum of 26,000 gallons of sewage until the winter quarter usage is
established. Once the winter quarter usage is established, if the homeowner
uses 150,000 gallons of water, the sewer is for a like amount. Based on this
example, on figures provided by a Town employee, an in-Town customer
would save $448 that quarter and out-of-Town would save $894 that quarter.
Solution, remove this costly and unnecessary perk and reduce everyone's bill.
Several years ago, my two teenage step-sons came to visit for the summer
and after they left I got hit with an exorbinate water and sewer bill because
we exceed the winter quarterly usage. I paid the surcharge for every single
drop of water, not just the excess over the winter quarter. Solution,
surcharge rates should only apply to excess amounts of water over the winter
quarter usage. Did I complain, you better believe it? I paid the bill and
learned to conserve water. How did I do this, I stopped watering my lawn.
Patricia Kraus, 137 Davis Avenue, Leesburg."
The Mayor asked that all other email's on this issue be included as part
ofthe record. (On file in the C1erk's Office).
John Wells stated the budget public hearing will be March 27 and the
public hearing on water rates will be set close to the same time, pending
direction from Council.
Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Horne, made a
motion to close the public hearing.
Council Member Wright c1arified there will be ongoing discussion on the
water rates.
The motion to close the public hearing was approved by the following
vote:
Aye: Burk, Horne, Hammier, Martinez, Reid, and Wright
Nay: Mayor Umstattd
Vote: 6-1
The public hearing c10sed at 9: 12 p.m.
Council took a five (5) minute recess.
b. Town Plan Amendment - Airport Service Plan
The public hearing opened at 9: 18 p.m.
Scott Parker addressed Council regarding this Town Plan Amendment.
He stated an ordinance is proposed to amend the Town Plan, creating
references to the Leesburg Executive Airport service plan and amending the
Land Use Policy Map and Airport Land Use Policy Map.
He stated these changes are for consistency with the Town Plan to
allow airport uses and for sign-off by the Federal Aviation Administration.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Paqe 13
He reported the area of amendment represented within the Land Use
Policy Map and the Area Land Use Policy Map relates to an area of
approximately 141 acres that varies from approximately 800 to 1200 feet
west of the centerline of the southern end of the runway. Since the service
plan shows airport uses in this area, the two policy maps have been amended
from Regional Office to Community Office/Light Industrial. The reason for
this change is to accommodate airport related uses in this area, per the
service plan, which are not allowed under the current Regional Office
designation. He noted this entire area is outside the Town Iimits, under the
jurisdiction of the County of Loudoun.
He reported the Planning Commission has recommended approval of
TLTA 2006-0001 and the accompanying ordinance.
There were no petitioners at this public hearing.
Mayor Umstattd stated Steve Axeman is concerned that grading on the
Crosstrail property may have an impact on the ILS system at the airport.
The public hearing c10sed at 9:29 p.m.
On a motion by Council Member Wright, seconded by Council Member
Burk, the following motion was proposed:
2007-0-08
ORDINANCE
Amending and reordaining the Town Plan of Leesburg, Virginia, 2005, as
amended, by amending Section B (Town Plan Elements), (Land Use), (Sector
Objectives), (Southeast Sector Objectives), by adding a new objective 4 (A),
and by amending the following subsections of Section B (Town Plan
Elements); (Land Use), (Airport Area Land Use Policy Map), (Paragraph 2);
(Transportation), (Objectives), (Objective 6.a.), and by adopting a new land
use policy map in place of Section C (Policy Maps), (Land Use Policy Map) and
a new Airport Area Land Use Policy Map in place of Section C (Policy Maps),
(Airport Area Land Use Policy Map).
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Horne, Hammier, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
c. Airport Service Plan
Adoption of Leesburg Executive Airport Master Plan (Service
Plan) Update
The public hearing opened at 9:30 p.m.
There were no petitioners.
The public hearing c10sed at 9:31 p.m.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Paae 14
On a motion by Vice Mayor Horne, seconded by Council Member
Martinez, the following motion was proposed:
2006-38
RESOLUTION
Adoption of the Leesburg Executive Airport Master Plan (Service Plan)
Update)
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Hammier, Horne, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
U mstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
d. Oaklawn Child Care Center - TLSE-2006-0003
The public hearing opened at 9:33 p.m.
Wade Burkholder stated the applicants request to expand the child
care center use with in Land Bay MUC5 from 7,500 square feet to 10,000
square feet. He stated the applicant is in compliance with the special use
standards for a child care center.
Mr. Burkholder stated the plat provides for 54 parking spaces with 10
spaces designated as arrival and departure zone. The perimeter and interior
parking lot landscaping meets the Zoning Ordinance and the buffers are
approved per the Concept Plan. In addition, the Board of Architectural Review
reviewed the special exception plat.
He stated the application is not in compliance with the Town Plan
regarding pedestrian accessibility with regard to Battlefield Parkway and
having a more street oriented building. The F.A.R. approved for the concept
plan is .4; the Town Plan proposes .6 and the applicant proposes .11. For
these reasons of Town Plan non-conformance, staff recommends denial.
The Planning Commission recommended approval with conditions of
this application by a 4-2-1 vote. The conditions cited for approval refer to:
(1) substantial conformance with the current special exception, (2) approval
of the special exception does not express or imply any waiver or
modifications, (3) sight triangle landscape clearance, (4) landscape plan may
require relocation of some materials within the land bay, (5) sidewalk width
increased to six feet in front of the child care center, (6) active outdoor
recreation area must be relocated outside the area along Battiefield Parkway
anticipated to be used for required landscape screen, (7) site lighting
designed in accordance with Design and Construction Standards Manual and
the Zoning Ordinance, (8) signage to designate spaces for child pick up and
drop off only, (9) one way internal vehicular circulation and (10) installation
of a minimum four foot black metal fence treated to withstand oxidation.
Council Member Burk asked why the applicant is proposing a F.A.R. of
.11 when the Town Plan sa ys F.A.R. of .6. Mr. Burkholder stated the
applicant would have to answer that question.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Paqe 15
Vice Mayor Horne verified the Zoning Ordinance requires a minimum of
four feet fencing in the recreation area. She added that good, safe daycare is
a huge concern of parents in Leesburg.
Council Member Hammier asked why the increased square footage to
10,000.
Mr. Burkholder stated the original 2003 concept plan granted a 7,500
square foot structure and any increase in square feet requires a special
exception per the Zoning Ordinance.
Colleen Snow, Cooley, Goddard & Cornish, on beha lf of Keane
Enterprises for Oaklawn thanked Mr. Burkholder, staff and the Planning
Commission for working with them on this Special Exception.
She stated the special exception request is needed because they are
expanding the size for this use. She added this use is important because it
will help support surrounding residents and hopefully the County Government
Center.
She added the 10 conditions do not related to the expanded size of the
facility. Further the .11 F.A.R. is just for the daycare center and will go up
when other areas are developed.
She stated the minimum four foot fence is a requirement of the Zoning
Ordinance and they will comply with the state Iicensing agency.
In conclusion, she asked for approval of TLSE-2006-0003 Oaklawn Day
Care Center.
Council Member Wright stated he recalls from a Planning Commission
discussion that land features are a factor in the lower F.A.R.
Andy Shuckra stated the site has two access points, one from
Battlefield Parkway and the other Miller Drive. One allows for thru traffic from
the other use on the south side. The other access had to be put to the north
because there was concern by the owner. The Zoning Ordinance requires
separating the playground from the parking lot and the overland relief
required a water flow path through the parking lot.
Council Member Reid verified the buffer material is tree and shrubs.
The public hearing c10sed at 9: 55 p.m.
On a motion by Vice Mayor Horne, seconded by Council Member
Wright, the following motion was proposed:
2006-39
RESOLUTION
Approving TLSE-2006-0003, Oaklawn child care center, permitting a $10,000
square foot child care center use in Land Bay MUC 5 at Oaklawn at Stratford
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Paae 16
Aye:
Burk, Hammier, Horne, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
None
7-0
Nay:
Vote:
e. Virginia Commerce Bank drive-thru
The public hearing opened at 9:57 p.m.
Planner Chris Murphy stated the site proposed for the bank is the
former Knossos Restaurant site (341 East Market St.).
He stated the Zoning Ordinance requires a special exception approval
for a bank with a drive-thru facility in the B-2 Zoning District.
He added staff is recommending conditional approval of this
application. Conditions include: (1) substantial compliance with Special
Exception Plat, (2) approval does not express or imply any waiver or
modification of requirements set forth in the Subdivision and Land
Development Regulations, the Zoning Ordinance, or the Design and Construct
Standards Manual (DCSM) except as approved by Council on the Special
Exception plat, (3) speaker volume for the drive-thru shall not emit sound
levels in excess of maximums established in the Zoning Ordinance, and (4)
miscellaneous site conditions.
The application has been approved by the Planning Commission and
the Board of Architectural Review.
Council Member Hammier asked if there is an economic development
report on the economic impact to the Town for converting a restaurant use to
a bank.
Mr. Murphy stated the Economic Development Director did provide a
memorandum in support of this application.
Mr. Wells stated banks pay a franchise tax which is a measure of the
bank's assets. In general, banks are a via bie economic impact for the Town.
Council Member Wright c1arified a drive-thru bank use could not be
converted to a restaurant drive-thru use with out a special exception.
Mr. Murphy c1arified that a drive thru lane shall be a minimum of 10
feet and the pass thru lane a minimum of 12 feet. Also, the applicant is given
credit for using the existing building.
Council Member Reid asked if there was an effort to keep Knossos or
to find them another site. Also, he asked the traffic impact of this use.
Mr. Murphy stated there is not a negative impact on traffic.
Mark Nelis, attorney for the applicant, stated the property has been
properly posted and certified letters sent. He stated Virginia Commerce Bank
has 19 branches and have obtained a long-term lease on the property.
Additionally, the drive-thru is a very important element for them.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 17
He stated he supports staff's report and agrees to the conditions. He
added the use will comply with the Zoning Ordinance and Town Plan and
traffic generated will be less than the prior use.
Finally, they have requested three modifications based on existing
conditions at the site.
Vice Mayor Horne stated Virginia Commerce Bank has proven
themselves to be astrong corporate entity.
Council Member Martinez stated he has no problems with this
application but in future redevelopment we should bring the building closer to
the curb with parking in the rear.
Council Member Hammier c1arified the bank has sig ned a long term
lease without approval of this application. She also stated the need to move
buiidings c10ser to the street when redeveloping, but we are not actively
doing so.
Council Member Wright verified the pedestrian circulation on this site is
adequate. He stated a bank is successful if it can capture 1/10 of 1 % of the
market.
He verified a bank will provide a better appearance than the previous
use.
Council Member Reid clarified the location of the drive-thru and the
walk up ATM is on the same side.
Council Member Wright questioned the safety of the walk up ATM.
Mr. Murphy stated the police department had no problem with the ATM
location.
Warren Stanley, River Creek, addressed Council concerning his
difficulty in obtaining a restaurant site for casual dining.
Mayor Umstattd stated we do not regulate what type of building goes
on the site and this building has not had a tenant in quite some time.
Vice Mayor Horne suggested Mr. Stanley talk with the Economic
Development Department.
Council Member Reid stated it is becoming extremely congested on
East Market Street and expressed the need to start towing the line and
demand the building on the street if the Crescent District is to go forward.
Therefore he will vote against this application.
Council Member Hammier requested Council delay a vote on this
application until an economic development impact statement and more
information for the best and highest use for this site is provided.
Town Council Minutes for meetina of March 13. 2007
Page 18
The public hearing c10sed at 10:34 p.m.
Vice Mayor Horne, seconded by Council Member Burk, made a motion
for approval.
Council Member Hammier, seconded by Council Member Reid, made a
motion to table.
The motion to table failed by the following vote:
Aye: Hammier and Reid
Nay: Burk, Horne, Martinez, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Vote: 2-5
The original motion was made by Vice Mayor Horne, seconded by
Council Member Burk, as follows:
2007-40
RESOLUTION
Approving Special Exception TLSE-2006-0005, Virginia Commerce Bank, to
permit a single lane bank drive-through at 341 East Market Street.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Horne, Martinez, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Hammier and Reid
Vote: 5-2
f. Amendments to the Subdivision and Land Developments
Regulations
The public hearing opened at 10:41 p.m.
Lee Phillips stated planning, engineering, utilities and legal staff have
met to discuss the draft amendments. He stated a number of inconsistencies
with the State Law were noted and amendments were drafted to eliminate the
i nconsistencies.
He noted the major improvements include: (1) elimination of the
preliminary site plan, (2) new minor site plan, (3) new site plan waiver, and
(4) new bonding thresholds.
Further, the development industry has been given a chance to review
the proposed draft. Only five people attended and no significant problems
were raised.
Mr. Phillips stated there are also changes to the Review Fee Schedule
related to the changes in the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations
Council Member Hammier thanked staff for the hard work and effort.
Council Member Wright thanked staff for the change in the Boundary
Line Adjustment vacation.
The public hearing c10sed at 10:45 p.m.
Town Council Minutes for meetina of March 13. 2007
Paae 19
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor
Horne, the following motion was proposed:
2007-0-09
ORDINANCE
To amend and reordain Section 14.51 (Regulations Adopted) of Article IV
(Subdivision and Land Development) of Chapter 13 (Planning and
Development) of the Code of the Town of Leesburg, Virginia, 1976, as
amended, the regulations adopted and incorporated therein and the
Subdivision and Land Development Applications Section of the Review and
Inspection Free Schedule.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Hammier, Horne, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
H. Legislation
I
None
ORDINANCES
CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Horne, the
following consent motion was proposed:
2007-41
RESOLUTION
Accepting the public improvement, releasing the performance guarantees, and
approving maintenance guarantees for Potomac Crossing Sections 8 and 9.
2007-42
RESOLUTION
Authorizing time extensions for completion of public improvements and approving
performance guarantees for Potomac Station Sections 1B, 1C, 3C and 6EFG.
2007-43
RESOLUTION
Awarding contracts for medical, dental and vision care insurance.
REGULAR AGENDA
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Horne, the
following was proposed:
2007-44
RESOLUTION
Establishing a storm drainage Pro-Rata Share District for the Fort Evans Road storm
drainage improvements project.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Hammier, Horne, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 20
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
On a motion by Vice Mayor Horne, seconded by Council Member Burk, the
following motion was proposed:
2007-45
RESOLUTION
Making an appointment to the Environmental Advisory Commission - Neely Law
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Hammier, Horne, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
I. Boards and Commissions
a. Airport Commission
Vice Mayor Horne stated the South Apron expansion is on hold
pending FAA review of the ILS constraints with the road network.
b. Thomas Balch Library Commission
No comment
c. Board of Architectural Review
Council Member Reid stated the community meeting for the new
fire department building on Loudoun St reet has been deferred.
d. Cable Television Advisory Commission
Council Member Hammier stated the Cable Commission will have a
special speaker discussing technology innovations with emergency
management that will take place on April 3 at 7:00 p.m. at the Leesburg
Police Department.
e. Commission on Public Art
No comment
f. Information Technology Commission
No comment
g. Economic Development Commission
Council Member Martinez stated the Commission had a strategy
meeting and will soon be making a presentation to Council. He added
they are looking forward to having a joint meeting with Council.
h. Environmental Advisory Commission
The Mayor reported meeting Paul Ferguson of the Arlington County
Board of Supervisors and he would be happy to brief our Commissions on
the Green Buiidings in Arlington County.
i. Parks and Recreation Commission
Council Member Wright stated the Commission is working on the
Dog Park Agreement.
Town Council Minutes for meetinq of March 13. 2007
Page 21
j. Planning Commission
Council Member Wright stated the Commission is not thrilled about
the scheduling of a joint public hearing with Council.
k. Tree Commission
Council Member Reid stated an Urban Forester has been hired.
I. Standing Residential Traffic Committee
Council Member Reid stated a citizen on Dry Mill Road has brought
forward an issue of traffic calming.
J. Old Business
K. New business
a. RESOLUTION
Encouraging gubernatorial and General Assembly revision of
Transportation Bill HB 3202
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council
Member Burk, the following motion was made:
RESOLUTION
Encouraging gubernatorial and general assembly version of Transportation Bill
HB 3202the above motion was tabled by the following vote:
Council Member Wright, seconded by Council Member Reid, made a
motion to table.
The motion to table was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Hammier, Horne, Reid and Wright
Nay: Burk, Martinez and Mayor Umstattd
Vote: 4-3
b. Union Cemetery
On a motion by Council Member Burk, seconded by Vice Mayor Horne,
the following motion was proposed:
2007-46
RESOLUTION
Declaring that public necessity exists and authorizing staff to acquire a
permanent easement necessary to construct the North King Street Storm
Drainage improvements project through the Union Cemetery
Mr. Raymond Kirkpatrick, Cemetery Board member, was present and
agreed to the conditions of proposed easement acquisition.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Hammier, Horne, Martinez, Reid, Wright and Mayor
Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 22
L. Council Comments
Council Member Burk stated she participated in the Rehau Scavenger Hunt to
benefit non-profit groups. She and Lisa Capraro were part of the winning Crossroads
team.
She recognized Pastor Robinson for being appointed as an Associate at the
Providence Baptist Church.
Vice Mayor Horne mentioned the issue of traffic calming on Dry Mill Road in
the vicinity of Wage and Anne Streets and asked the Standing Residential Traffic
Committee to look at traffic calming.
She reminded everyone that April 14 is the Keep Leesburg Beautiful Kickoff
and Tammy Watkins will be the point of contact.
She shared a letter from Delegate Marshall of Danville, Virginia. He stated
Delegate Joe May deserves the credit for facilitating passage of the Town's Charter
Bill. He stated our area is very fortunate to have such an astute and respected
member of the House of Delegates. Further, he has the citizens at heart.
Vice Mayor Horne stated our role as Council Members is to represent the
Leesburg taxpayers. We answer to the people who put us there. There is a need to
look at annexation with due diligence.
Council Member Martinez suggested that when we have a presentation, such
as the green building one, it should be sponsored by a board or commission.
He reported attending the Black History Month celebration at Mt. Olive Baptist
Church.
He disclosed a meeting with Christine
Station application.
regarding the Potomac
He reminded all that he is putting together a team for Relay for Life.
He asked that Joel Hanna be recognized for receiving his Eagle Scout Award
at the next Council meeting.
Council Member Martinez stated he attended Mrs. Tate's Cookies ribbon
cutting.
Council Member Hammier apologized for being late. She stated she has read
all of the emails concerning the water rates. The water debate is extremely serious
and it can be in our best interest to compromise to maximize the long term interest
and providing water and sewer to the Crosstrail Property. Ultimately aligning greater
community interest relative to what is best for all of us and she looks forward to a
very productive dialog. We need to be very specific and not mix up the surcharge
issue with rates. She stated she will continue to do research on her own relative to
how we do an audit to our overall costs.
Another key point is that Council has not looked at rates on an annual basis.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 23
She reported a meeting on the April 20 with Walsh, Collucci and Clark
regarding Potomac Station.
She reported a meeting with Rod Heubbers and Ron Williams to get an update
on the Cornwall Campus. Ken Werner joined her at that meeting. She asked if
they had a comprehensive master plan for Cornwall and might they have a role to
house a downtown hospital location innovation home for worldwide medical
automation institute as weil as an incubator. They are very open to this idea to
become a biotech research partner.
She reported Bob Skunda is coming on March 21 for a meeting with the
Economic Development Commission.
She disclosed a discussion on March 6 with Mike Banzhaf on Ridgewater and
Hobie Mitchell on the March 7 and did attend the Science Cabinet Meeting on March 9
and has set up a meeting with Dr. Robin Felder to meet with Sally Kurtz and Scott
York on March 20.
Council Member Wright thanked the public for speaking on water rates. He
stated it is the Council's duty to protect the Town's interest. He stated there are a lot
of questions that need to be answered about the condition of the Utility Fund. He
stated the need to have a yearly analysis of the fund.
The Utility Fund is an Enterprise Fund and is self-sufficient and the revenues
cannot be moved to another fund.
Back in the 80's when the Town successfully fought to maintain the out-of-
Town service area, but we elected not to annex them. Later, when they were
approached about annexation they did not want to be part of the Town as they were
not sure it would be tax positive. Thus the Town removed them from the scope of
the proposed annexation. If we bring those residents in, the surcharge discussion
will happen again.
He stated there are several issues that are driving rates, slower growth,
continuing litigation, and the continuing threat from the County to reduce our service
area (changes go bevond the JLMA).
In representing our Town residents there are several issues to keep in mind.
Another thing is to keep in mind is the controls and views to better manage the fund.
We need to adopt fiscal management policies, annual reviews, and an advisory board
to justify fair and reasonable rates.
Council Member Reid stated his appreciation for Council Member Wright's
work on the water and sewer rate issue. He suggested starting a cursory study into
what it would cost to bring the affected area into the Town.
He thanked Vice Mayor Horne for reminding Council Members they work for
Leesburg residents and taxpayers and the Mayor for notifying citizens to attend this
meeting to express their opinion about the water rate issue.
He expressed his concern that the Board of Supervisors is holding the
Crosstrail Development and the Boundary Line Adjustment over our heads.
Town Council Minutes for meeting of March 13. 2007
Page 24
Council Member Reid suggested we move forward with the annual review of
water rates and thanked citizens for speaking out tonight.
He stated there was a Dulles Greenway toll increase hearing today by the
State Corporation Commission. They have accumulated bad debt through poor
management and the motorists are going to have to pay to remedy this situation.
Finally, his children will be going to the Odyssey of the Mind State
Championship on April 21.
M. Mayor's Comments
Mayor Umstattd disclosed a meeting with Colleen Snow regarding Oaklawn.
She encouraged everyone to go visit Mrs. Tate's Tea Room.
She stated March 21 will be Suzuki Dealership Ribbon Cutting at 11 :00 a.m.
adding a member of the Suzuki family will be present.
The Mayor stated our obligation is to protect the citizens of the Town with
regard to water rates. She stated her disagreement that an analysis was not do ne
before the i ncreases were done for the out-of- Town users. The 2005 decision of
Council was fair and prudent. She added this Council is in a different situation than
previous ones and the increases are warranted.
She reminded everyone the Board of Supervisors opposed the last proposed
annexation and hired an attorney to oppose the Town's request.
The Mayor stated people value Leesburg's small town charm.
Further, two recent projects that had been zoned and planned for commercial
have been rezoned by a previous Council into projects totaling nearly 1,000 new
homes. The Town got 700 homes with the KSI project but were able to get
transportation proffers.
She added if we are serious about annexation to broaden our commercial
base, we cannot keep rezoning properties.
N. Town Manager Comments
John Wells stated the budget work session on Thursday of this week will focus
on the Capital Improvements program.
He highlighted two things Council did tonight that tie into the strategic goals
of Council. One was the Subdivision and Land Development Regulations
amendments which tie into the impact on the improvement of the development
process. Secondly, the proposed meeting between the Council and Economic
Development Commission will provide a foundation step for the strategic goals for
economic development.
o. Adiournment
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Horne, the
meeting adjourned at 11:33 p.m. on a 7-0 vote.
Town Council Minutes for meetina of March 13. 2007
ATTEST:
~tJÙ ~
lerk of counCif(J" - - .
2007 _tcmin0313
Paae 25
C. U stattd, Mayor
Town of Leesburg