HomeMy Public PortalAbout2012_tcmin0124COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Umstattd presiding.
Council Members Present: David Butler, Thomas Dunn, II, Katie Sheldon Hammler,
Fernando "Marty" Martinez, C. Terry Titus, Kevin Wright and Mayor Umstattd.
Council Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Town Manager John Wells, Deputy Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Town
Attorney Jeanette Irby, Deputy Director of Utilities Aref Etemadi, and Clerk of Council
Lee Ann Green
AGENDA ITEMS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION: Council Member Dunn
3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: Council Member Hammler
4. ROLL CALL: Showing all members present.
5. MINUTES
a. Special Session Minutes of January 4 2012
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member
Butler, the minutes of the January 4, 2012 special session were approved 6 -0 -1
pending correction of the vote on Mr. Titus' appointment (Titus abstaining).
b. Work Session Minutes of January 9 2012
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member
Butler, the minutes of the January 9, 2012 work session were approved 7 -0.
6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA
On the motion of Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler, the
meeting agenda was approved after moving item 9G from Consent. The motion was approved by
the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
7. PRESENTATIONS
a. Proclamation - War of 1812: Never Forget
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Wright, the
following proclamation was approved unanimously.
1 Pa,,c
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
PROC"NAT /ON
Bicentennial of the War of 1812• Never Forget
WHEREAS, there was tension between Britain and America after the American
Revolution that continued to grow; and
WHEREAS, Britain worked with native Americans in Canada and the Northwest
territories to hinder U.S. expansion; and
WHEREAS, under the treaty ending the Revolutionary War and the Jay Treaty of
1794, the British were to withdraw soldiers from U.S. territories but they did not withdraw;
and
WHEREAS, even though the United States was neutral in the Napoleonic Wars,
our shipping industry suffered greatly from being in the middle of the blockades between
the British and the French and the British seized our ships forcing 10,000 American
citizens to serve on their ships; and
WHEREAS, President Thomas Jefferson and the Congress, desiring peace, passed
an Embargo Act to stop British and French attacks on U.S. shipping, resulting in economic
disaster for American merchants as they depended on trade with Europe; and
WHEREAS, with the seizure of American ships and British aid to native
Americans to fight our Northwest Territory expansion, Americans began to adopt the
sentiments of John Clopton of Virginia: "...the outrages in impressing American seamen
exceed all manner of description. Indeed, the whole system of aggression now is such that
the real question between Great Britain and the United States has ceased to be a question
merely relating to certain rights of commerce ... it is now clearly and positively and directly
a question of independence, that is to say, whether the United States are really an
independent nation; and
WHEREAS, with the end of the war of 1812 came an "Era of Good Feelings"
which opened a long period of peaceful relations between the United States and Britain
that continues today.
THEREFORE PROCLAEMED, by the Mayor and Council of the Town of
Leesburg in Virginia that as we commemorate the Bicentennial of the War of 1812, we
must remember that no war for American independence, sovereignty, and free trade
should ever be forgotten and our citizens have the duty to recognize and appreciate that
during the War of 1812, our National Anthem, "The Star Spangled Banner" was written.
This banner became an important symbol of the American ideal of freedom, equality, life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Our national pride was restored and strengthened.
PROCLAIMED this 24' day of January 2012.
b. INOVA 100 Years
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Wright, the
following proclamation was approved unanimously.
2 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
PROCL NABON
Inova Loudoun Hospital's 100 Year Anniversary
1912 to 2012
WHEREAS, 2012 marks the 100' Anniversary of Inova Loudoun Hospital, which
first opened as Leesburg Hospital June 5, 1912 in a rented house on Market Street in
Leesburg due to the efforts and vision of Mr. P. Howell Lightfoot, Dr. William C. Orr, Dr.
John A. Gibson and Mr. Horace Littlejohn; and
WHEREAS, in 1916 thirteen acres along Cornwall Street in Leesburg were
purchased from the Harrison family for the new Loudoun Hospital which opened in April
1918; and
WHEREAS, in response to the rapid growth in Loudoun County, in 1997
Loudoun Hospital expanded its services and moved to the current Lansdowne campus
location; and
WHEREAS, in 2003 Loudoun Hospital continued its commitment to Leesburg
with the opening of the Cornwall Emergency Department; and
WHEREAS, Inova Loudoun Hospital is now a 183 -bed, advanced acute -care
hospital offering a full complement of health services in a variety of specialties on two
campuses employing over 1,500 people; and
WHEREAS, in 2010, Inova Loudoun Hospital provided services for 10,816
inpatients, 63,677 emergency room visits, 2,705 births and a vast range of outpatient
ambulatory services to our community; and
WHEREAS, a two year $32 million redevelopment project for the Inova Loudoun
Leesburg Campus resulting in major upgrades in patient convenience, access to technology
and building design began with a groundbreaking in July 2011 and is expected to be
completed in 2013; and
WHEREAS, Inova Loudoun Hospital continues give back to the community
though their various initiatives, wellness programs and support of charitable organizations;
and
WHEREAS, Inova Loudoun Hospital is committed to serving our diverse
community by not only expanding their services to meet the growing needs of the
population, but also by expanding their locations to help break down access to healthcare
barriers.
THEREFORE, the Mayor and Council of the Town of Leesburg in Virginia
hereby congratulate Inova Loudoun Hospital on the occasion of their 100 year anniversary
and urge the citizens of the Town of Leesburg to join in the celebration of Inova Loudoun
Hospital's 100 years of service to the community.
PROCLAMIED this 24' day of January 2012.
3 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
8. PETITIONERS
The petitioner's section was opened at 7:44 p.m.
Dwight Dopilka, 210 Foxborough Drive. I wanted to let you all know that I was
recently nominated to be the Leesburg Executive Airport Commission liaison between
the Leesburg Executive Airport Commission and the Loudoun County Board of
Supervisors, so that is a position I have been nominated to and look forward to working
on behalf of the commission and the airport.
Milt Herd, 303 Riding Trail Court. I just wanted to offer a couple of observations on the
economic development promotional film that Marantha unveiled at your business
meeting a couple of weeks ago. Two things struck me. One, of course is that it was
wonderful job. Really excellent effort and I commend her and her team for putting that
together. The second thing that struck me was that with the exception of one brief
image of the airport and one of the hospital, every single visual image of a street or
image in that film was of the historic area of town even though that area only constitutes
about 2% of our land area. What that tells me is that the economic development people
in attempting to put the best foot forward of Leesburg are showing the town to be that
collection of pedestrian friendly, human scale streetscapes that we all like so much and
they used those images to represent the entire town. What that tells me is that good
urban design, human scale streetscapes are a fundamental economic development
resource. They are not an aesthetic luxury. They are an economic necessity in this
service economy of Northern Virginia where we are competing against our neighbors to
attract employers and employees who want to live in a good place. They go together.
Employers attract employees; employees attract employers. I just hope that you all
would recognize that and I think you did when you saw it. I think it struck you too.
Keep that in mind in all of your policy making as you go forward. Good urban design,
human scale streetscapes are what will help us maintain our competiveness
economically. It will help grow our economic base and our tax base and make
governing for you easier. So, just a couple of comments. I saw it the other day and then
I went back on the web and looked at it a few more times and it really is a nice product.
You should all be proud of it.
The petitioner's section was closed at 7:49 p.m.
9. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler, the
following items were moved for approval as part of the Consent Agenda:
a. Awarding the Construction Contract - Lower Sycolin Creek Sewage
Conveyance System
RESOLUTION 2012 -007
Awarding the Construction Contract for the Lower Sycolin Creek Sewage
Conveyance System to Bay Country Enterprises, Inc., in the amount of
$4,376,230
4 1 pa e
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
b. Amending the Design Contract — Lower Sycolin Sewage Conveyance
System
RESOLUTION 2012 -008
Approving Addendum No. 4 in the Amount of $211,426 to the
Engineering Services Contract with Dewberry and Davis, LLC to Provide
Construction Phase Services for the Construction of Lower Sycolin
Sewage Conveyance System Project
C. Design Contract Change Order — Battlefield Parkway — Route 15 to the
Dulles Greenway
RESOLUTION 2012 -009
Approving Change Order No. 3 for Design and Engineering Services on
the Battlefield Parkway — Route 15 to Dulles Greenway Project in the
Amount of $239,624 and Authorizing the Town Manager to Execute
Change Order No. 3
d. Amending the Parks and Recreation FY 2012 Budget and Making a
Supplemental Appropriation for the Raflo Park Bike Depot from
Donations from Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority and the
Friends of the Washington and Old Dominion Trail
RESOLUTION 2012 -010
Approving a Supplemental Appropriation of Donations Totaling
$6,000.00 from the Northern Virginia Regional Park Authority and the
Friends of the W &OD Trail
e. Authorizing an Amendment to the Town Manager's Contract Dated
January 11, 2012
RESOLUTION 2012 -011
Authorizing an Amendment to the Employment Contract Between the
Leesburg Town Council and Town Manager John A. Wells
Making an Appointment to the Utility Rate Advisory Committee (Butler)
RESOLUTION 2012 -012
Making an Appointment to the Utility Rate Advisory Committee
(Robinson)
The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
5 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Amending the Town Code — Deleting Reference to the Airport Fund
The public hearing was called to order at 8:01 p.m.
Wells: Very briefly, Madam Mayor and Council Members, just to reiterate a few high
points from last evening. Back in 1965, the town established by ordinance an airport
enterprise fund, which is a separate and distinct set of books that are kept, but still part of
the overall general governmental funds. That fund has been in operation since that time
and as I indicated last evening, while there were probably very good motivations for the
establishment of that fund at that point in time, over the past several years, it has become
evident that the operation of the enterprise fund isn't meeting whatever goals might have
been established at that point, since as we sit today rules and regulations have changed
in terms of how accounting works for enterprise funds, specifically as relates to
intergovernmental transfers and as we have noted... as I noted last evening some of the
difficulties in terms of how we reference the enterprise fund in terms of its successful
operation or not, has been the subject of a lot of discussion. I know the airport
commission over the past couple of years has made several presentations to Council as
we have attempted to get a good understanding of what the various bottom lines mean
in the enterprise fund. As a result, my recommendation to you all based on a
conversation that started last year when the auditors made some representations of
changes we needed to make was that we would look in working with the airport
commission of the possibility of eliminating the airport fund. Based on review with the
state aviation administration, the FAA, our financial advisors, auditors and the
endorsement of the airport commission, I am recommending to you that we would pass
an ordinance that would eliminate that fund. I think the key points that we highlighted
last evening was the elimination of that fund will not in any way take away from the
visibility of how we can report expenditures and revenues. They will still be highlighted
as a separate department in the budget and any level of reporting we wish to provide to
the council and as we report quarterly now to the airport commission on the status of
operations, I think everybody would find that reporting is complete, transparent and
allows us to get to a bottom line without necessarily being encumbered by the
establishment of an enterprise fund. That has been the main point that I tried to reflect
last evening is while we are not trying to take away from that reporting, the key take
away that we do have is in the establishment of the fund. It doesn't affect the town's tax
rate, but it does allow for the elimination of a $3 million reservation on general fund
balance that allows for those funds to be applied in such a way that I will be
recommending and have a positive impact on the bottom line of the overall town budget
as we look forward toward our long range pro forma of 2017. I think I will stop there at
this point and answer questions. I know we went over this for some time last night and
again I think those are the key points is from a financial perspective it doesn't change the
town's operating position. It provides for a $3 million use of fund balance that will no
longer be restricted and financial reporting, while not in the form of an enterprise fund is
still complete and has all the information that you currently see today.
There were no members of the public wishing to speak to this public hearing.
The public hearing was closed at 8:05 p.m.
6 11a,,
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Dunn: John, what is the debt that is at the airport currently that we are having to hold
these funds in reserve for? What is the amount?
Wells: These funds are not being held in reserve for debt service.
Dunn: Oh, they are not?
Wells: No, this has to do with basic operations over time.
Dunn: And you having to hold these in reserve just because it is being called an
enterprise fund, even if we are operating in the black?
Wells: Even if you are operating in black, based on prior performance and based upon
the ... if you recall the flyer I passed out to Council called the new fund balance. This is
part of the regulations that change how the designations of undesignated funds or
designated funds occur and how those relate to transfers between funds. It's a
stimulating read, but this was not something that was in existence three years ago.
Dunn: What was the purpose for them creating this new regulation?
Wells: I can't comment politely in public as to why GASB set this up. There are a
number of GASB regulations, and I am not being flippant. I don't believe this is a
meaningful accounting change. From time to time, the governmental accounting
standards board will put out regulations that we are required to follow and Council
knows of several others that I have commented on over time. There is probably a good
reason from an accounting standpoint that people feel this is necessary, but from what I
have read and what I have looked at, as I have mentioned last evening, if I am asked by
the public why that's here, the conditions that the town was in three years ago or two
years ago, compared where they were at four or five years ago are no different, so
because of an accounting change the town was required to indicate a reservation of $3
million in funds that was not required before because of how the books need to be
maintained in the refinement of accounting regulations. I am not an accountant.
Dunn: You mentioned it has something to do with past performance. Is there
something that if we were to keep it in its current situation that we could do differently
to improve the performance that would eliminate this $3 million hold?
Wells: In the short term, no. I think the key is what we talked about last evening is
making sure that the airport operates in the black. Actually, the number that is being
reserved this year is less than the number reserved last year because we did have positive
performance in the operating fund. So, in short, yes you can work your way out of this,
but it is not a practical application of those funds because you are holding them over
time. You have already paid the monies and when you combine the funds, you are in
no different position than you would be ... you are paying yourself back. In my opinion,
it's a disservice to the taxpayers of the town.
7 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Dunn: Where would you... do you have an idea of where this $3 million would go?
Wells: I am putting together a specific recommendation for a presentation on the
budget. It will follow the fiscal policies. In general, it will apply toward capital or debt
costs so that it will affect, in a positive way, the long term debt picture of the town. As
you know, our pro forma looks toward 2017 when we have that ... tax rate is flat for a
couple of years, then it goes up a penny for two years and then it goes up 3 cents in 2017
based on that long range plan. What we have committed is any decisions we can make
to try to work those numbers down, we will do that. This presents an
opportunity... these are one time funds, they are non - recurring so we would not use these
to reduce operating costs, but they can be legitimately used to pay for capital projects
that were already planned that have debt on them, or we could put them on the debt
reserve fund which we established when we talked with the financial advisors as we
worked toward that 2017 number. I don't have a specific recommendation other than to
tell you that it will work toward that tax rate reduction long term.
Dunn: There is no way of still considering the airport an enterprise without this fund?
Wells: That's correct. What we can do though, and what I have certainly committed to
Council and the Airport Commission is to bring a business like set of numbers to the
airport commission on a regular basis. In reality, the way I present the
information... perhaps I should say the way Mr. Berkey presents the information for us,
we don't present it in the form of an enterprise fund and that has been the key point that
we have worked with the commission for the past year. If you take that away, the things
that the commission can control, more importantly, the things the council can control in
terms of those items that affect the bottom line are what we manage and look at closely.
We make business decisions in terms of the overall capital expenditures and again as we
talked last evening making sure there is a good return in terms of how quickly those
dollars can be paid back. Long story short, we can maintain the level of reporting
without encumbering the $3 million and the enterprise fund provides no added value
because we would never be issuing debt out of the airport enterprise fund.
Dunn: So, the funds that are still owed by the airport for capital improvements, that is
basically going to be absorbed...
Wells: The council already did that as part of the adoption of the budget in the current
year.
Dunn: I just had a couple of comments. One, that I fully support the airport. This for
me is a philosophical issue. Because to me, I'd rather see more things in government
operate on an enterprise level. That it is responsible for, is an activity, is able to support
itself and move forward as much as possible. Obviously there are some things that we
just can't do that. It's tough for me to say yes, let's make this change because again I
would rather see more of it, rather than less. It is often said government is not a
business. Business is here for making money. The only thing government can do is
make people pay more money. I would rather not see that happen either. Through
lumping this in and then not seeing that it is going to go into poor management. I don't
8 1 Pa C
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
think that is going to happen. I think we have got a great commission that is going to
make sure it doesn't happen. But again for me, this is a philosophical issue that I just
don't like the idea of taking out enterprises that we have created. I would rather see us
actually create more enterprises in town rather than reducing them. I think what it does,
is it is about accountability. It is about accountability in government. It is a system
whereby we are saying this is important enough for us that we would like to go ahead
and go forward with an entity and we would like to be able to stand on it's own. I
would like to see more of that. So, I fully support the airport. I just don't see where this
is needed and I think that the importance that the state has placed on it saying that you
have to hold these funds to the side because they also think that having an enterprise
zone is worth ... if you are going to manage it well enough, as you said, those funds can
be reduced. It may take a little time, but it makes us be accountable to the citizens about
the tax dollars and not just saying well lets create more activities, more entities in town
and we will just absorb them into the General Fund and it's tougher to keep track of
them. I think it give special attention to the, in this case, the airport that it deserves and
it gives us something to work towards as a future goal. So, it's tough for me to say let's
get rid of this enterprise fund.
Titus: I have some of the same reservations that Tom has. I won't elaborate more than
what he has already done except to say I support the financial situation that John ... the
resolution that John has advocated but I philosophically, I don't support him doing this.
Wright: For simplicity's sake, I am going to go ahead and put a motion on the table, so
we don't have to debate it twice.
On a motion by Vice Mayor Wright, seconded by Council Member Butler, the
following was proposed.•
ORDINANCE 2012 -0 -002
To Repeal an Ordinance Adopted by the Town Council on June 21, 1965
Establishing the Airport Fund; to Amend the Town Code Chapter 6 (Aviation),
Article 11 (Leesburg Executive Airport), Section 6- 22(a)(Fixed Base Operator
License Fee) to state that Fixed Base Operator License Fees are to be Deposited in
the General Fund and to State the Correct Section of the Rules and Regulations
Applicable to Fixed Based Operator License Fees; and to Authorize Accounting
Changes for Appropriations Made and Revenue Collected for the Leesburg
Executive Airport and Airport Capital Projects
Wright: As we talked about last, the Enterprise Fund, there are two things, the airport
operating as an enterprise and then there is the accounting procedure that creates the
enterprise fund. In my mind, those are two separate and distinct things. The accounting
procedure that operates as that enterprise fund does not have anything to do with the
daily operations of the airport and in fact generates more confusion. I know when I first
started looking at the budget many years before coming onto Council, it took me a while
as a normal citizen to figure out what's up with the transfers, what's up with the
depreciation, why is there this huge number of depreciation when I could never find that
the town spent this much money on anything because 95% of the capital costs were
9 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
borne by the federal and /or state government, yet we are depreciating for more than we
spent. That kind of segways into the items we talked about last night. By taking some
of the unnecessary enterprise accounting procedures that are not relevant to the airport
fund, continuing to operate it as a department, giving its individual reporting so we still
maintain that visibility, we as a council and we as a government and Joe and Jane
Citizen are going to get more accurate reporting of the town's financial position with the
airport. We are going to be better able to manage that fund as well as other funds that
won't be unnecessarily encumbered, we are going to reduce the overhead expenses
because we won't be managing a broader or separate accounting procedure that's not
needed and for all of that, we are going to be able to maintain the visibility of the
operating costs out of the airport and that includes the reporting of its revenue. I am
confident that we are still going to be able to have that visibility and accountability of the
airport to the town government, to the town citizens, to the taxpayers and reap the
benefits. So, that's why I am supporting it.
Butler: I think we really want to do this. I understand the potential concern about
transparency and accountability, but as we have all stated on a number of occasions, we
trust John and he is managing the town well and I expect that he will continue to do that
and I expect that we will continue to ask him for the same level of transparency and
accountability for the airport. The bottom line in layman's terms is we have $3 million
sitting in a bank account doing nothing and it will continue to stay in the bank account
doing nothing as long as the airport is an enterprise fund. If it is not an enterprise fund,
then we can take that $3 million of taxpayer money and do something useful with it. So,
I fully support this motion.
Hammler: I wanted to thank everyone involved for bringing this forward to Council.
Everyone on the Commission, the Chair and all the leadership we have here this
evening, Kaj and John. I thought last night was an excellent discussion of Council. I
will be supporting it. I appreciated the fact that we highlighted some of the key points
that we as a Council are going to continue to look at because as Kevin has already
mentioned, we will have plenty of oversight and visibility based on looking at the airport
fund in the general fund and for me that's critical and we are going to zero in on that 5%
where taxpayers are involved. Certainly the debt on the terminal coming up with some
creative ways to generate more revenue if possible with that building. We will look
forward to working cooperatively with the County. We talked a lot last night about the
significant economic impact that the airport has regionally to the tune of $70 million and
we are very happy that the entire county is the beneficiary of that, but we certainly look
forward, Dwight, to getting you involved to make sure that the board might be able to
convert some of that economic bottom line back toward helping to support directly
things that happen at the airport. We will look forward to those further discussions. I,
too, agree with the basic point that we are getting down to what's best for the taxpayers?
Tying up $3 million when we could be paying down debt instead of paying on that debt.
To me it is critical that we take this step forward. So, with that, I will be supporting it
and I appreciate everybody's involvement getting us to this point.
Martinez: The only comment that I have is that I echo what Kevin and other's have
said about it. I support John fully on this and I will be supporting it.
10 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Dunn: Is there a way of the $3 million going towards paying off what's owed at the
airport once it becomes part of the general fund.
Wells: The liability goes away automatically with the elimination of the fund. So, in
essence, you are paying the fund back because now you have the ability to spend the
dollars. There is not another way to do that. I would have already done that.
Dunn: Just fishing. Again, we talk about all departments, the reporting of the airport
fund will be there in the operations. We do that with every department. It's not like we
are creating something new here that I can see. Every department is already doing
individual reporting and how it operates in the fund.
Wells: If I may, I think the airport commission sees a different level of detail at their
commission meetings. They have asked... because this was a more challenging question
a few years ago and it gets back to can I explain the fund, when it was an enterprise
fund, I think we spent our first couple of years working together trying to sort out what
was the bottom line, how to understand what we had there. We have worked on a set of
reports and refined those that now go to the airport commission on a regular basis.
Those are derivatives of what we see in the budget. We already do produce something
more than what other departments create and that goes to the airport commission and I
meet with them on a quarterly basis personally to go over that information along with
Mr. Berkey and Mr. Dentler. We already have a higher level. That will continue.
Again, that's why we don't have to create anything new. We are already doing an
enhanced level of reporting. We are just freeing up those tax dollars to help the residents
of the town.
Dunn: In closing, I hate to have the expectation for success of any department or entity
having be reduced to an accounting issue. That's what I feel like we are at here. What I
am going to do in showing my support for the ... and I think the airport commission is
one of our strongest commissions. I think they do a great job. In showing my support
for the airport but my lack of support for this being an enterprise being taken out, I will
go ahead and abstain on this, so you won't have a no vote, but I still wish we could find
some way to keep this as an enterprise officially and work around it, but the rules is the
rules, I guess.
Wells: It is reduced to an accounting issue.
Mayor: I will be supporting this. I think this is beneficial to the taxpayers. I am very
supportive of the idea of taking those $3 million and using them to reduce our debt load
in the town with the hopes that we won't have to raise taxes in the future. I think the
budget is very transparent for all our departments. This will be treated, I assume, as
another department with all disclosures of expenditures and revenues, so I think
transparency will certainly be as good as it presently is, if not better, as Kevin alluded to.
So, I don't have a problem supporting this, but I do sympathize with Terry's concerns
and some of the things Tom has mentioned, but I think in the long run this is the best
thing for the taxpayers, so I will support it.
11 Paz,c
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Hammler, Martinez, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Titus
Vote: 5-1-1 (Dunn abstaining)
11. RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS
a. Amending Resolution 2010 -087 Making Councilmanic Appointments
On a motion by Vice Mayor Wright, seconded by Council Member Martinez, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION2012 -013
Amending Council Resolution 2010 -087 Making Councilmanic Appointments to
Fill Appointments Held by Mr. Kenneth Reid as Follows: Dulles Area
Transportation Association (DATA) Representative, Northern Virginia Regional
Commission (NVRC) Representative, Virginia Municipal League (VML)
Transportation Committee Representative, and to Add Appointment of an
Alternative Representative to NVRC
Hammler: I would be very happy to support Council Member Martinez because I was
not aware until last night that he was very interested in filling that post. I believe that
Council Member Titus, in fact, would prefer because he is only here for a short period of
time not to fill the Thomas Balch Library liaison role, so I am happy to continue to serve
as required unless someone else would like to do that. I just wanted to make note on the
NVRC. The rest, I think he will have to comment on relative to whether he is able and
willing to drive to wherever the meetings are.
Mayor: Katie, you are very gracious. Thank you very much. So, Katie is willing to
continue with Balch. Marty will do NVRC. Then we have DATA, Dulles Area
Transportation Association and VML's transportation committee and an alternate to
VML ... an alternate to NVRC.
Katie: Do they have to be official alternates, or can Marty for instance in the case of
NVRC, just ask a councilmember if someone could fill in at that particular time?
Mayor: I guess the last time we did this, we officially voted on an alternate as well.
Butler: Well someone is currently an alternate then, since Ken was not ... so whoever is
currently the alternate should stay the alternate.
Mayor: Unless Katie wants it. Does anybody want to be alternate? NVRC meets, I
think it's the fourth Thursday of every month at 8 or 7 ... it's at 7. The meetings usually
last about 2 hours. They are down near the intersection of the beltway and Route 50. It
takes an hour and 15 minutes to drive down there at that time and about 45 minutes to
drive back. Is anyone interested in being an alternate. I think it's heroic that Katie and
Marty were willing to step up to the plate and be the primary.
12 1 Pa —e
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Hammler: I'm sure Marty will be attending the meetings, but I would be happy to be
the official alternate as required assuming there isn't someone who already is the
alternate to Council Member Butler's point, but nobody is stepping forward to say who
he or she is.
Mayor: Alright, then we will have Marty in as the primary and Katie in as the alternate
for NVRC. Is anyone interested in the Dulles Area Transportation Association?
Titus: When do they meet?
Mayor: They usually meet in the mornings and I don't know where they are meeting
now. It is generally in the Dulles area. Sometimes it's EIT, but sometimes at Dulles
Airport, but I am not sure. We would have to find out. Alright, Terry will do that for
the short term for DATA. Then we have got VML, the transportation committee.
Butler: Without objection from the council, I wouldn't mind doing that.
Martinez: I was going to volunteer because I didn't think anybody was going to ask for
it, but since Dave has picked it up, that's fine.
Butler: Sounds like Marty would love to be the alternate.
Martinez: Yes, I will be the alternate.
Butler: Is it okay that we add the liaison to the URAC committee? I would like to
nominate Terry, per our conversation last night.
Mayor: So, Terry is nominated as liaison to URAC.
Dunn: (inaudible).
Mayor: So, we have got Tom in for DATA and Terry as liaison for URAC. I think we
have sorted everything out.
Dunn: Could I ask to divide the URAC question?
Mayor: Sure, we will vote on URAC separately.
The motion to amend Resolution 2010 -087 was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
b. Appointing a Councilmanic Liaison to the Utility Rate Advisory
Committee
On a motion by Vice Mayor Wright, seconded by Council Member Martinez, the
following was proposed.•
13 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
MOTION2012 -002
I move to appoint C. Terry Titus as Councilmanic Representative to the
Utility Rate Advisory Committee
Dunn: This has nothing to do with Terry. I hope you do a great job there. One, I just
didn't think that we needed a liaison to a committee versus a commission. Secondly, I
would rather again that we were focusing on the Council being out of the utility business
and send it to an authority, so it's hard for me to then say I want to have Council
representation on the URAC. I have to oppose the position, not the man.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Dunn
Vote: 6 -1
C. Legislative Agenda
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler,
the following was proposed.•
MOTION2012 -003
I move that the following item be added to the Town's 2012 Legislative Positions
Statement:
Identification of Candidates by Political Party on Local Election Ballots.
The Town Council opposes legislation that would require candidates in local
elections to be identified on the ballot by political party. Local issues are best
addressed in a cooperative, non-partisan manner. The Town Council believes that
nothing is gained by making local elections partisan.
Butler: I think that requiring local elections to be partisan is absolutely the wrong
direction for not only local government but for the state and the country. I think we
need to be focused on being less partisan, not more partisan so I would hope that the
General Assembly would see reason and at worst case, make it optional.
Hammler: I would like to make a friendly amendment to simply call out that this
proposed legislation would negatively impact citizens who work full time for federal
agencies due to the Hatch Act.
Wright: I wholeheartedly agree with this position as a willful, bullheaded independent.
I don't see any value into making the local elections partisan and with our recent efforts
through our charter amendment to make sure that we maintain the nonpartisan nature
of our local elections, I don't think we want to revert against that.
Dunn: I am not sure why we even have this motion. I thought we already adopted this
in our legislative agenda. No? I thought we did. But my view is that I am going to go
14 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
ahead and support it because I believe this is the true position, but frankly the partisan
ship is kind of like religion. It is with each one of us at a measured level. Unfortunately,
or fortunately, however you may take it, partisan ship does exist in local elections.
There is partisan... there are council members sitting right here that have sought party
endorsement and it is out there. Unfortunately I feel that it is a veil that many of us
hide behind being able to go out to the public and say we are nonpartisan when oh yes,
Virginia, there is a Santa Claus and oh yes, Virginia there is partisanship. I will support
it as a token gesture, but partisanship is alive and well in the Town Council.
Martinez: I am really tempted to make some closing comments, but I think I will go for
the vote instead.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7 -0
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler,
the following was proposed:
MOTION 2012 -004
I move that the following item be added to the Town's 2012 Legislative Positions
Statement:
Equalizing City and County Taxing Authority
The Town Council supports legislation that would grant counties the same taxing
authority as cities. Granting Loudoun County the authority to enact a meals tax
or a cigarette tax could reduce the burden on residential real estate taxes, which are
paid by Town residents who are also county residents, as well as County residents.
Martinez: One comment that I wanted to make on the motion ... I don't know where it
fits in protocol, but the last line where we say paid by town residents, maybe put in
paratheses "who are also county residents" to show we are both.
Butler: I accept that. I just think that the board of supervisors has voted twice on this
and I think they had it right the first time. This can actually ... it is additional tools in the
toolbox that would allow Loudoun County to actually reduce the total taxation on its
residents, not increase it. This would be a good thing and eliminate our competitive
disadvantage in the couple of areas.
Wright: The only other comment I would add, again to build on what Dave said, this
does give Loudoun County another tool in the toolbox. I think it helps level the playing
field for them. A lot of folks point to the referendums that have previously failed on the
meals tax. Both of those referendums had strings attached as far as where those dollars
would be spent. I know I personally had an objection that I don't want them spent to
that string, I want them to go to the General Fund to reduce the overall tax liability. I
think this is something, if nothing else, to give the county the same ... to treat everybody
151 Pa)c
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
differently doesn't make sense. To give the county the authority. They are accountable
to their voters ... their residents and I don't see a harm in equalizing this. I think it
creates a fair discussion and level the revenue. All you have to do is look at the county
budget and the percentage of the budget that comes solely from real property tax and
that is whatever the market happens to have been that year. That tax hits you much
harder than the meals tax would hit you. The other thing is, just to use a single
example, the food courts at Dulles Airport are in Loudoun County.
Titus: I support this. I was just wondering last night, what is the reverse of this. What
taxes does the county have that we don't have? Is there any difference? This ought to be
a two way street, in my opinion. If they have taxes that we can't use, then maybe we
ought to bargain for that.
Wells: Not in terms of general taxation. The town has always had, similar to cities,
with the enactment of the meals tax and the tobacco tax. Those are two taxes that the
county does not have. The only thing that the county has that the town doesn't have
from a taxing authority is unique to having the court system and the clerk's office
because you have recordation taxes. We don't have a function that fits in, but in terms
of general taxation, we have the same real and personal property taxes, sales tax. Now
the formula between the county and town is different on how we get sales tax and we
would definitely be in favor of point of sale, but that's a different battle for a different
time. Right now, we have more authority than the county does.
Titus: I don't want to get in a big battle, but if we could take a lick of that recording tax,
that would be a big number.
Wells: We don't have a recording function. But we could ask for a cut of it.
Titus: That's what I'm saying.
Wells: That's a different motion.
Dunn: I asked Jeanette for clarification. I thought it was, but it is creating the ability for
the county to have a new tax. I guess I am on my philosophical soap box tonight, but I
really can't support... one, I'll leave it to the county to do the county's business. I really
can't support another tax going forward, so I'll have to pass on this one.
Mayor: I'll be supporting this. One of the media outlets pointed out the degree to which
the various towns in Loudoun would have to raise their real property tax rate if we
didn't have meals tax and it would be significant for all the towns. I do believe that
having a meals tax or cigarette tax in Loudoun County would allow the Board of
Supervisors to reduce the real property tax and I think that's a goal that most of us can
support. I will be voting for this tonight.
Martinez: One, I am not in favor of taxes, but when I look at equity, I think this
provides more equity to town and county. What comes to mind, when I was reading
this was when I first came on Council, we were talking about raising the meals tax and
161 P a ; e
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
we got a lot of opposition and I didn't quite understand it until I was talking to a caterer
who said that if we raise the meals tax, he is at a competitive disadvantage because then
people who would normally come into the town would nudge them over enough that his
customers would go to the county because they didn't have a meals tax and the savings
would overcome whatever logistics the customers have, so when I thought about that
and when I was looking at this, one of the things that came to mind is that the current
situation puts our town businesses at a disadvantage with county businesses, but also
this is more of a fair tax in that a lot of revenue will not come from actual county or
town residents, but from people who come to the county that uses, for example, a great
point is the Wegman's. I mean they come to the town ... it would also be as Kevin
mentioned and I was going to bring it up ... Dulles Airport. There is a lot of revenue
going through there that could be generated. What I am looking at is how does this
improve our town's competitive advantage or at least puts it on par with the county, but
also how the county can use this additional revenue to lower our county taxes. One of
the things that you and I and other members of this council have always been cognizant
of is that our town even though we have a fantastic town and our services are top of the
line, we still pay county taxes along with the town taxes and we would like to see a fairer
way of distribution of those tax dollars. What I would hope this does is give the County
Board of Supervisors reinforcement and they go back to their original position in
supporting this.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye.- Butler, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: Dunn
Vote: 6 -1
On a motion by Council Member Butler, seconded by Council Member Martinez,
the following was proposed.•
MOTION2012 -005
I move that the following item be added to the Town's 2012 Legislative Positions
Statement:
SB 316 — Distance Based Tolling on the Dulles Greenway
The Town Council opposes legislation that would require the Dulles Greenway to
implement distance based tolling.
Butler: You may be able to look at Loudoun County as a whole and say okay it may or
may not be a good thing, that's debatable. But it would definitely be a bad thing for
Leesburg because if you make the shorter routes less costly, then to make the whole
thing revenue neutral, which the bill would allow the SCC to do, then the long distances
would become more expensive and that would affect everybody in Leesburg and all
points west, everybody who gets on the Greenway at the beginning would end up paying
even higher tolls. As much as I am friendly to people who live in Ashburn, I am getting
paid by the Town of Leesburg, so I think we need to oppose this so the Dulles Greenway
does not get even more outrageous than it is.
17 1 P
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Mayor: I personally agree with your position and would take that but I need to ask
Jeannette whether this is something that would require a suspension of the rules,
whether it is simply an amendment to a legislative agenda that was already on the
agenda tonight or if this is a new item. I did not expect to be voting on this tonight, but I
would like your take on it.
Irby: I believe it is up to the chair. I could see either way. If Madam Chair wants to
allow it.
Butler: I might suggest that the way this is worded in the agenda, it implies that there
was a single motion on the legislative position statement.
Mayor: I will accept it as an amendment. Council Members who disagree with that are
welcome to make a motion to overrule the chair's ruling.
Hammler: I appreciate Dave bringing this forward. The thing that occurred to me as
another negative impact for Leesburg is with the tolls being so high here, I can see where
our secondary roads would have even greater congestion with everyone trying to take as
many other roads as possible to get to a cheaper place to get down the toll road. In other
words, all of our residential streets would bear the burden of this.
Wright: In general, I have shied away from getting too involved with the Greenway, but
I think Dave brings up a very good point. The way this is worded, I can immediately
see either the unintended or unrealized consequence of if you want distanced based
pricing, fine. It's 50 cents at the start and six bucks at the end. So, I think they need to
look at a broader, more comprehensive way of approaching it, but not allowing
billboards on the Greenway either. We went through a lot of effort to get rid of them.
Dunn: I would have rather this been discussed last night. These things come up at our
meeting without a whole lot of discussion or information. I really wish we had more
information on it before voting on it tonight. It seems like in the past when certain
members bring something up on the dais the night of the meeting, it gets shot down and
when other members bring it up the night of the meeting, it gets accepted. I am going to
abstain on this, because I wish we had actually discussed it so we could get some more
information on it.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Hammler, Martinez, Titus, Wright and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 6-0-1 (Dunn abstaining
12. ORDINANCES
a. None.
13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. None.
18 Pad
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
14. NEW BUSINESS
a. None.
15. COUNCIL COMMENTS
Council Member Dunn: The only thing I would mention is that in referencing
the County taxes, the citizens of Leesburg are paying more in taxes, not because of what
the County is doing, but because of what we are doing. We are the ones that are
charging our citizens more in taxes. By allowing the county to raise taxes up to our
level, I don't think is putting Leesburg in a more competitive light. We should be
considering how we can lower our taxes down to help our citizens. By the way, if some
people are staying away or chose not to eat meals in Leesburg because of the meals tax,
and there may be some people out there doing that. Anyway, it's us who are charging
the additional taxes, not the county.
Council Member Titus: The only comment I had is I read an interesting article
on Dr. Littlejohn and his pharmacy, etc. in Leesburg Today and I noticed tonight they
mentioned Dr. John Gibson, both of which are people that I knew as a little boy. It's so
heartening to look at the town today as it looked 70 years ago or 50 years ago or 100
years ago and see that it hasn't changed a great deal. I feel very strongly about that.
Vice Mayor Wright: No additional comments.
Council Member Martinez: I hope everybody has a great Superbowl Sunday.
Council Member Hammler: A couple of very quick things. As I was reflecting
on 100 years of INOVA being here, I was thinking about how wonderful it was to give
birth to my two children. With that, the thought that our children couldn't be from
Leesburg unless there were a hospital in Leesburg. I am just very happy that they are
here and they have done so much in their wonderful partnership with us. I just want to
mention that I did ping our Board of Supervisor Representative, Ken Reid, specifically
about the fact that apparently the Sheriff will not put resources out by the Park and Ride.
There is so much traffic at some key times that it is dramatically impacting businesses up
and down Sycolin let alone folks that live in residential neighborhoods trying to get onto
Sycolin and simply aren't able to do it and it is going to take us a while to get that light.
Trying to get some pressure to get some Sheriff resources to at least moderate that traffic
flow and provide some relief. One key thing that was on our agenda is Mr. Wells'
contract extension. I would be remiss if I didn't say thank you, John, for your
willingness to continue your excellent level of service to the town, so thank you.
Finally, just a minor point, but every time I go past the entry way signs that welcome
everyone to Leesburg and the one most recently has mentioned please come see our
historic downtown. I keep saying to myself, I wish it said shop. I wish it had a more
active verb. Not just drive by and don't stop. It's just four letters. Hopefully it fits.
Council Member Butler: Just a couple of quick things. One is that a couple of
weeks ago, earlier this month, Mary Harris passed away. The Harris family has been
here a long time and Mary was a great lady and had a very interesting life. I found out,
so I would just like to express my condolences to the family and remember her. There
19 1 Page
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
was an article in Time a couple of weeks ago about comparison of inequality within a
community or within a state and how well their economy does and the conclusion based
on the data was the more equal citizens were on average, that the better the economy
does. I am happy to say while we certainly have what some would call significant
inequality in Leesburg and Loudoun County, it is significantly below average. In fact,
among some of the lowest in the country is the whole belt between us and around
Washington and down to Richmond. Probably related to US Government jobs and I
think that is reflected in the relatively low unemployment rate that we also have in the
area. Virginia as a whole seems to be near the middle. That's some good news for
where we live. Last, but not least, the members of the Public Art Commission are down
in Richmond encouraging our legislators to fund the arts.
15. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
I don't have any comments.
16. MANAGER'S COMMENTS
There were some emails over the past two weeks regarding two areas in town.
One was on Liberty Street here near Town Hall. The other was in some neighborhoods
in Valley View. Just to be sure we got the same information out to everybody and where
we are at with those projects. Liberty Street, we did inspect that street. I walked it with
Staff myself in terms of looking at some of the trip hazards as one of the residents had
indicated that was becoming fairly dangerous. Given the weather conditions, we are not
able to do a regular maintenance project out there, but we were able to patch the trip
hazards with some cold patch and those are ... I can attest personally they are in a safe
condition right now. When the spring weather comes, we will do a more thorough
sidewalk repair project that is warranted in that area. Expect to see that in the spring,
but from a safety perspective, we are in good shape right now. The second was at Valley
View. We will be looking at that a little bit deeper. The challenge at Valley View is the
town doesn't control any of the pieces of ground that connect all the parts of the
sidewalk that don't come together. Right now, you have got a lot of things pointing
toward each other, but not connecting logically. We will be looking at that. Our goal is
to try to make that a maintenance project. I think it makes a lot sense to do that. There
are some illogical signs that need to be cleared up. We will take care of that along with
some other things out there that are supposed to be there to help, but I am not sure they
help as much as they are designed to. So, we will clean that up, but the main thing we
are going to focus on are trying to nail down the easements that are needed out there.
That will determine whether this needs to be a Capital Project or a maintenance project.
Hopefully we can keep it as a maintenance effort. We will need to get an agreement
with the regional park authority and we will be able to give you a report back on that
after we do a little bit of work with Staff and run down the ownership issues with the
ground. It should not be an excessively large project so we will take a look at that.
Titus: Where is that, John?
Wells: I don't have the exact street numbers. I can get those to you tomorrow, Terry.
20 1 Pa - e
COUNCIL MEETING January 24, 2012
Titus: It's not the one up by Catoctin Circle, is it? It's the one down near the railroad
track? I mean the trail.
Wells: I wanted to highlight for Council that the budget presentation for this coming
year will be on Monday, February 13. The next work session, we will get the budget
presented to us. We do have an extra week. Don't come in two weeks, come in three
because nobody will be here two weeks out. We do have the extra week built in. So,
February 13 we will be doing the budget presentation that evening. I wanted to also
invite any Council Members. The Chamber of Commerce is having their annual lunch
this Thursday. When last I checked, Congressman Wolf had indicated he would be
speaking. I want to confirm that. The Town did not reserve a table, as we noted for
budgetary reasons. For some of the reasons, we have just reserved seats. If anybody is
interested, and I'll confirm in an email who the speaker for the luncheon is. That's this
Thursday and I will be driving down if anybody wants to carpool. The Mayor has
indicated she will be there. If anybody else would like to come, let me know. Finally,
we have been mentioning the request of the county to establish some type of courts
committee. That hasn't come officially as a full county request. It was indicated as
something that came up from Judge Horne and certainly emphasized by Chairman
York. I think that the appropriate thing to do at this point would be to ask for the
county to send us something in writing from the entire board of supervisors indicating
that is a direction they would like to pursue. If Council is amenable, if that is a topic
you would like to include in your joint meeting lunch. If they want to present
information, they can. Maybe we should just see the letter first, before we add it to the
agenda. Unfortunately, we don't meet again until that February 13 meeting, so I will
use my judgment and see what we get back.
17. CLOSED SESSION
None.
18. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler, the
meeting was adjourned at 8:52 p.m.
Kristen C. TJmstattd, Mayor
Town of Leesburg
•r
t
2012 tcmin0124
21 1 Page