HomeMy Public PortalAbout2015_tcmin1027 COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
Council Chambers, 25 West Market Street, 7:30 p.m. Mayor Umstattd presiding.
Council Members Present: Kelly Burk, David Butler, Thomas Dunn, Suzanne Fox, Katie
Sheldon Hammler, Marty Martinez and Mayor Umstattd.
Council Members Absent: None.
Staff Present: Town Manager Kaj Dentler, Deputy Town Manager Keith Markel, Town
Attorney Barbara Notar, Deputy Director of Capital Projects Tom Brandon, Senior
Management Analyst Jason Cournoyer, Police Captain Vanessa Grigsby, and Executive
Assistant Tara Belote.
AGENDA ITEMS
1. CALL TO ORDER
2. INVOCATION: Council Member Fox
3. SALUTE TO THE FLAG: Vice Mayor Burk
4. ROLL CALL: Showing all members present.
5. MINUTES
a. Regular Session Minutes of October 13, 2015
On a motion by Council Member Butler, seconded by Vice Mayor Burk, the regular
session minutes of October 13, 2015 were approved by a vote of 7-0.
6. ADOPTING THE MEETING AGENDA
On the motion of Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler, the
meeting agenda was approved as presented by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Butler, Dunn, Fox, Hammier, Martinez, and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
7. PRESENTATIONS
a. Proclamation —Belmont Slave Cemetery
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Burk, the
following was proclaimed:
PROCLAMATION
Belmont Slave Cemetery
WHEREAS, Belmont Plantation was built by Ludwell Lee, son of Richard
Henry Lee, signer of the Declaration of Independence; and
1 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
WHEREAS, Belmont Plantation was home to many slaves who contributed
to the history of Loudoun County and were buried on the property; and
WHEREAS, through the work of Pastor Michelle Thomas of the Holy and
Whole Life Changing Ministries International Church, the history of the slave
cemetery was discovered; and
WHEREAS, A.D. Carter, an active member of the Leesburg posts of the
VFW and American Legion, is the great-great-great grandson of"Ned", one of those
buried in the cemetery; and
WHEREAS, A.D. Carter, as a young boy, used to visit the cemetery with his
mother to lay a flower at the gravesite; and
WHEREAS, the current owner of the Belmont property, Toll Brothers, has
conveyed the property to Pastor Thomas and the Loudoun Freedom Foundation to
be preserved; and
WHEREAS, the Loudoun Freedom Foundation will endeavor to tell the
stories of those buried at the slave cemetery and to celebrate their contributions to the
County.
NOW, THEREFORE PROCLAIMED that the Mayor and Council of the
Town of Leesburg in Virginia congratulate Pastor Thomas and the Loudoun
Freedom Foundation for their work in uncovering this important part of the history
of Loudoun County and support their efforts to preserve the site and educate others
about the important contributions of those who were buried there.
PROCLAIMED this 27th day of October, 2015.
b. Certificates of Recognition—Loudoun County Special Olympics Softball
Team
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Fox,
Certificates of Recognition were approved for the following members of the Special Olympics
Softball team for their participation in the National Invitational in Wichita, KS:
Randy Brawley— Coach Scott Brawley
Chau Pham— Coach Ian Pham
Emily Nails— Coach Tracey Savage—Coach/Team Manager
Ryan Savage Sam Krogh
Jenna Vandenburg Christa Bleull
Phillip Coe Matt Sixma
Bob Heslin Joey Barnett
Steven Bagot David Knight
2 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
c. Certificate of Appreciation— Sandra Kane
On a motion by Vice Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Butler, a Certificate of
Appreciation was approved for Sandra Kane for her dedicated service to the Town of Leesburg
on various Boards and Commissions.
d. Certificate of Appreciation—John Marshall Bank
On a motion by Council Member Dunn, seconded by Council Member Hammier, a
Certificate of Appreciation was approved for John Marshall Bank for their Corporate
Sponsorship of Leesburg Police Appreciation Day.
8. PETITIONERS
The Petitioner's Section was opened at 8:03 p.m.
Gwen Armstrong: "I would like to pray and bless you all. Holy God, Lord Jesus,
Holy Spirit, I invite you here. I thank you for your presence here with us and in our town. I
will start with the reading of the word, Psalm 23. The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not
want. He maketh me to lie down in green pastures. He leadth me beside the still waters.
He restoreth my soul. He leadth me in the paths of righteousness for his name sake. Yea,
though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil for though art
with me. Thy rod and thy staff, they comfort me. Thou preparest a table before me in the
presence of my enemies. Thou anointest my head with oil. My cup runneth over. Surely
goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life and I will dwell in the house of
the Lord forever. In Matthew 6:9-13, which many of us, I believe know. Our Father, which
art in heaven, hallowed be thy name. Thy kingdom come, thy will be done in Earth as it is
in Heaven. Give us this day our daily bread as we forgive our debts. As we forgive our
debtors and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil. For thine is the kingdom
and the power and the glory forever and ever, Amen. Lord, I just come before you and I lift
up our Town Council up to you. I lift our police force up to you. I lift our teachers up to
you, our school system. I lift up to you our hospital, our doctors, our lawyers. I lift up to
you our business owners. I lift up to each and every individual here in our town of
Leesburg. I love this town so much, Lord, and I ask that you pour out your spirit and bless
those who live here. I ask, Lord, that we would be kind to one another and treat one
another as we would like to be treated. I ask that you bless our Town Council with wisdom.
That they would live lives in honor and integrity and distribute justice where applicable,
Lord. I just ask, Lord, that you bless our town. I ask that you bless Leesburg, Lord. I ask
that you move upon people's hearts and just renew them and fill them with your joy. I
thank you, Lord, for our Town Council and their faithfulness to serve. I know that it takes
many hours and I thank you, Lord, that they are the voice of the people and that they lay
their lives down to serve the people of Leesburg. I just thank you for them, Lord. I ask that
you bless them, their spouses, their children and their households. I ask that you bless every
person here in Leesburg. In Jesus' name. Amen".
The Petitioners Section was closed at 8:11 p.m.
9. APPROVAL OF THE CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Vice Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Martinez, the following items
were moved for approval as the Consent Agenda:
3 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
a. Virginia Department of Transportation Fiscal Year 2017 Revenue Sharing Program
Funding
RESOLUTION 2015-120
Authorizing the town Manager to Execute the Application for the Virginia Department
of Transportation Fiscal Year 2017 Revenue Sharing Program Funding
b. Supplemental Appropriation from the Virginia Department of Transportation Primary
Route Paving Program
RESOLUTION 2015-121
Amending the Fiscal Year 2016 General Fund Budget and Making a Supplemental
Appropriation in the Amount of$407,000 from the Virginia Department of
Transportation Primary Route Paving Program
c. Virginia Department of Transportation Six Year Improvement Plan for FY 2017-2022
RESOLUTION2015-122
Requesting Virginia Department of Transportation(VDOT)Funding for Highway
Projects within the Town of Leesburg in the Virginia Department of Transportation
Six-Year Improvement Plan for Fiscal Years 2017-2022.
d. Airport Master Plan Update and Stormwater Management Plan/Drainage Study
RESOLUTION 2015-123
Approving a Task Order for the Airport Master Plan Update and Stormwater
Management Plan/Drainage Study to Talbert&Bright, Inc., in the Amount of
$391,966.50
e. Supplemental Appropriation of Virginia Municipal League Insurance Payments
RESOLUTION 2015-124
Amending the Fiscal Year 2016 General Fund Budget and Making a Supplemental
Appropriation in the Amount of$7,743.29 from Insurance Payments from the Virginia
Municipal League(VML)for Repair of Town Vehicles
f. Applicant-Initiated Town Plan Amendments
RESOLUTION 2015-125
To Update the Processing Procedures for Concurrent Submittal of Applicant-Initiated
Town Plan Amendments and Rezoning Applications
g. Fee Waiver for the First Annual VWF Volksmarch
RESOLUTION 2015-126
To Provide Veterans of Foreign Wars(VFW)Post#1177 a Fee Waiver in the Amount
of$720
4 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
h. Making an Appointment to the Economic Development Commission
RESOLUTION 2015-127
Making an Appointment to the Economic Development Commission (McQuarter)
King Street Downtown Improvement Project— Use of Parking Spaces
RESOLUTION 2015-128
Designating Two Parking Areas on King Street Between Loudoun and Market Streets
as Short Term Parking and Loading
j. Town Manager's Employment Contract
MOTION2015-016
I move to Approve the Town Manager's Employment Contract as presented.
The Consent Agenda was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Butler, Fox, Dunn, Hammler, Martinez and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None
Vote: 7-0
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
a. Battlefield Parkway—Route 15 to Dulles Greenway Project—Right of Way
Dedications and Easements
The public hearing was opened at 8:14 p.m.
Keith Wilson gave a brief presentation on this project.
Key Points:
• Fully funded capital project for the construction of Battlefield Parkway from
Rt. 15 (South King Street) and the Dulles Greenway Toll Road.
• Four lane divided roadway.
• Connection will be constructed tying Masons Lane with the eastern end of
Mason's Lane, terminating in a cul-de-sac.
• Concrete sidewalk along the south side of Battlefield Parkway and a multi-use
trail along the north side of the roadway for the entire length of the project.
• Concrete sidewalk will also be constructed along the west side of Evergreen
Mill Road from Battlefield Parkway tying into the existing concrete sidewalk
along the front of the Evergreen Mill Elementary School.
• This will complete the last remaining section of Battlefield Parkway.
• Town has been unable to reach an agreement with the landowners of three of
the properties located on the project.
Richard Maylott: Together my wife, Elsie, I own a property. One of about
just four or five properties that you are going to be working on this day and the
5 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
proposal desires to split in two our property for monstrous concrete drainage ditch
across our entire rear yard. I say monstrous because they propose a flat base of 10
feet and then tapering sides upward from the edges. Despite assurance from Mr.
Wilson that they have examined all options and this is the best one, I am not totally
convinced. Since the terminus is a series of pipes under a roadway, this seems
overkill. This property is used on occasion for horse grazing. Consequently after
meeting with us, Mr. Wilson did propose a crossover access point at one end and
fencing along the edge of the ditch on both sides. We would be willing to accept
some [inaudible] or additional run off in cases of extreme wetness if this would
enable some modification of the latest proposal. Ideally, a covered ditch would be
the best, but some compromise might be workable. We would be glad to meet
directly with the developer to discuss options if this would be possible. Certainly this
proposal is now presented as a major obstacle for effective of our land and could
impact the resale value. We understand that under such conditions, the amount
tendered for these rights could be affected. Consequently, we are meeting with an
attorney tomorrow and hope that an agreeable [inaudible] settlement will be
forthcoming.
Council Comments/Questions:
• Mayor: So, it is storm drainage piping that's...
Staff answer: Across Mr. Maylott's property, the current [inaudible] natural
drainage and it drains across this property generally in this location.
• Fox: You said you had three property owners who are okay?
Staff answer: That we have been unable to reach an agreement with, yes.
• Fox: That you have been able to?
Staff answer: No. That we have not. There is approximately 15 separate
land owners with 20-25 individual parcels we have been able to reach an
agreement with the remaining land owners.
• Burk: So, can—the gentleman who just spoke talked about the trench kind of
thing going through his yard. Is there no consideration to making it
something that is not quite so unattractive? Something that couldn't be
covered?
Staff answer: We have looked at numerous options in that area. Right now,
it is a very flat, natural drainage area where the water that comes across from
adjoining properties and it spreads out. Because of the construction of the
project, we will be constructing a stormwater management basis for the
storage and collection and release of water through this same area. Because it
is a natural drainer swale, the drainage tends to just spread, so we looked at
channelizing this to get it to the pipes that go under the English [inaudible].
We looked at it being a grass lined channel. Again, it is about 350 to 380 feet
across the property—being very flat, to channelize or to keep the water
confined in a narrow area instead of it spreading across a wider swath of the
property, doing a grass lined channel, being so flat, this tends to erode over
time and become a maintenance issue and pooling of water. If we have any
pooling of water, it tends to lead to health issues with mosquito breeding, so
again it is another maintenance issue. So to keep the water from potentially
eroding the property and pooling, the next option was to do a channelized
6 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
and in this case because it was so flat, a concrete lined channel. Mr. Maylott
explained that this channel that is designed to be constructed on the property
is 10 feet in width and slopes up in a 3:1 slope for the sides.
• Burk: And it is just concrete?
Staff answer: Yes, it is concrete. We looked at if we could pipe this. The
pipe that comes into this area is a single pipe—the oval shape—again because
there is no cover or because of it being so level, carrying this pipe onto his
property, this pipe would extend three to four feet above the natural ground
even after digging down this channel. Mr. Maylott has asked that we put
multiple smaller pipes in this area. The difficulty of putting multiple smaller
pipes is because of the long run, 350-380 feet, and they are very flat, any water
that is carrying any sediments or debris, this tends to settle out inside the pipe.
Trying to clean out a pipe for a distance of 350-380 feet, 18 inches in diameter
is impossible. So, we would have to, if it got stopped up, we would have to
go back on the property and dig the pipe up. It seems to be the less intrusive
option is to use the concrete channel and to address his concerns about having
livestock in there—getting into the channel. We agreed to fence it and create
a small area along one end where he can cross the channel from one side to
the other—have equipment, machinery, vehicles, livestock.
• Burk: Does that settle his problem?
Staff answer: No. It addresses the drainage flow by creating an adequate
outflow or outfall from our project, which we are required by legislation to do
to get it to the pipes that run underneath English [inaudible]. Mr. Maylott
would like us to pipe the entire length and again, because it is so flat and it
spreads out for a long area, any pipe that would be installed in there would
have to have cover dirt over top of it and would be creating a large mound. If
we do that, then the water that falls on to the property on either side of the
pipe has no way to drain and would pool on the property.
• Burk: Gosh, this is kind of a....
Staff answer: It is a very difficult situation.
• Burk: And I can understand the gentleman's concern about having a big
trench going through the middle of your property. It is not a problem that he
caused, it is a problem that we are creating because of our project and that just
doesn't seem like— it seems like it is kind of unfair to him. What would be
the impact to him because of this big trench in the middle of his yard.
• Butler: Is there some way to cover the trench with some sort of pervious
surface?
Staff answer: Again, any cover would require the mounding of material.
Impervious asphalt or concrete—are you talking about lining the ditch with
pervious material?
• Butler: I mean covering the ditch with something with holes in it so the rain
will go into the ditch instead of pooling on the side.
Staff answer: The span on that would be quite long. I mean this is 10 feet,
plus the side slopes. It would be 16 feet across the top. So, it would be quite a
structure to do that.
7 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
• Butler: Okay, but you are saying right now, all he would have is one place for
him and his livestock to cross the ditch?
Staff answer: Yes.
• Butler: How much does each bridge, if you will. I don't know if it is a bridge
or whatever kind of a structure it is. How much does each one of these cost?
Could we put in three or four?
Staff answer: We certainly could do something like that. We could put in
several of those. I don't have a cost for that.
• Burk: Would that take care of his need?
Staff answer: It would still leave a majority—even providing additional—it
would not cover the entire 380 feet.
• Butler: But at least—I mean if he wants to get to one end, he would have to
walk all the way up and then 380 feet down. I mean that seems to be a
burden. I would not be happy if he came onto my property. My property is
nowhere near that big, but if it were, I would not be happy with that solution.
Staff answer: If that is something the property owner asked us, we would
investigate that and that can be part of the investigations. Yes.
• Mayor: Mr. Maylott, would you like to ask that?
• Maylott: I would like some more negotiations. If we have some temporary
flooding or ponding in heavy rain situation. I could accept that. [Inaudible].
The idea of a 20 foot ditch across my property [inaudible].
• Dunn: How much more creative can we be to get what we need to get done
and have the property owner satisfied with what he feels his needs would be
met?
Staff answer: It has to be engineering feasible. Again, trying to span a 20 foot
distance would require probably some type of beams— it can't be a flat pipe
which are typically placed [inaudible] in the street for temporary work during
trenching waterlines or something—spans no more than six to eight feet, so
we are talking almost triple that distance and those are 3/4 to 1 inch plates.
Again, if you are talking about a pervious type of material, again spanning 20
feet would require probably three large beams. These beams then become
obstacles or obstructions as the water flows. Then it tends to back up water
and force it around. It could potentially float up any cover that is there
because this channel is to catch what is considered a normal flow. If we were
to have a very large event, then the water is going to come out of this channel.
It seems something that is ten feet wide with a top of 16—saying it is minimal
doesn't sound very reasonable, but this channel is to carry a normal storm
event.
• Dunn: And is it possible to have a larger pipe that allows for drainage to
come into it from the top along the length of it that has multiple areas where
water can drain into it? Holes in essence. It could be deep underground but
still have the drainage you are looking for?
Staff answer: Certainly it could be potentially— it may be easier to channelize
it along both sides— a smaller channel. But again, you are talking about a
pipe that is about four feet tall, so it would require a minimal cover over top
of that is a foot, so we are talking about mounding material about four feet
8 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
high. If you do a minimal slope of 4:1, then you are talking about a mound
that gets in a width of about 24 feet.
• Dunn: But you don't necessarily have to have a mound. If you put it
underground or just below the surface, then there is just a thin layer of turf or
whatever pervious surface you want.
Staff answer: We are limited to putting anything deeper in this area. Our
control point is the three pipes that go underneath English Yew Way—the
existing ground in that area, we cannot go any deeper than one foot in depth
or the water could not get out of this channel and cross that road.
• Dunn: Okay and again you said that we are required to manage the water
flow.
Staff answer: We are required to provide adequate outfall to a natural drain
as a part of the project.
• Dunn: And we are required to whom for that?
Staff answer: The Department of Environmental Quality.
Brandon: This particular property is outside the town limits. It is being
funded by VDOT and it is being administered by the Town. So, we are
actually bound to follow the regulations of not only DEQ, which Keith
mentioned, but also the county regulations, VDOT regulations and the town
regulations. All three of those have comparable regulations about this.
• Dunn: You answered my next question which was is there a way that we can
throw more money at it and since it is outside the town, we can get either the
county or in this case, VDOT. Are there other solutions that may be more
costly that we haven't addressed that we just may need to go to VDOT and
ask for more funds.
Brandon: Geometrically and particularly the vertical geometry of this makes
the situation extremely difficult. There may be solutions that are available,
but they would be quite expensive. We aren't talking tens of thousands of
dollars. We are talking hundreds of millions of dollars.
• Dunn: And I am sure the property owner doesn't want a bunch of standing
water on your property, correct?
• Maylott: Well, if the standing water was only during extreme rain periods,
that could be tolerated because [inaudible]. Some standing water, I could
[inaudible].
• Dunn: Unfortunately, we have got to get Mother Nature to agree to that one
and I know where you are coming from because the builder in my
neighborhood redirected a mound behind my house and then put in this big
concrete slab. Fortunately, it is now behind my neighbor's house and his
fence, but when they did that they changed the water flow, so nothing goes
into it anyway, but it does sit in my yard and then flows in to my neighbor's
yard. So, it...
• Maylott: [inaudible]
• Dunn: I guess the other question for staff is, and I know it sounds strange to
even ask this, but if a property owner is willing to have some level of standing
water, is there something—I have been asking if there is a maximum we
could do —is there a minimum that we could do that may result in standing
9 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
water—I know this is crazy to ask, that would result in standing water, but
would not be as intrusive upon his property.
• Butler: Just to add on to that, if there was "standing water", how long would
it stand? I mean would it be standing for permanently or would it be standing
for a couple of days and then eventually soak into the ground, right?
• Maylott: [inaudible] because it is very flat. In a matter of two days, it dries off.
[inaudible] additional run off from the project, I am sure it would dry off after
a while. You could cut down the 16 feet.
• Dunn: is there is a minimum? Is there a minimum on this?
• Maylott: [inaudible].
Staff answer: The size of the ditch as designed now is based on the water that
is coming from the north of his property. It currently comes from north of
Mason's Lane and will continue to come in that direction—thus coming from
our project—from our stormwater management pond. The regulations
require us to design the outfall from that project to meet that requirement so
even if we were to eliminate any water that comes from his property, we
would still have to design the ditch to be an adequate outfall for our project.
Right now, generally the same amount of water coming across his property,
but where it is coming now would not be considered an adequate outfall. It is
not designed to carry that water any distance. It spreads it out and flows
across his property. Because we have this project, we have to design it to
meet current standards.
• Butler: So, we are required to fix something that is not really considered a
problem today. I love government.
• Dunn: I'll wrap up, but you mentioned a delay in the project without an
affirmative vote today. What type of delay are we talking if Council were to
ask you to drop back on this and punt and look for some other alternatives
that may work for the property owner? How much of a delay are we really
talking about?
Staff answer: It depends on how long that delay lasts. The urgency today is
so that we can acquire the land rights we need and begin the utility work so
that we can begin construction next spring. The more we delay, the less
utility work will be done and we will delay the beginning of our project from
spring, when we want to begin the project because it starts the construction
season. We start eating into the construction season at that point.
• Dunn: For me, I would—I don't know where the rest of the Council is, but
for me I would ask that staff work with these property owners to try to find
another solution, if there is one because I am always hesitant to vote for
condemnation. I would much rather have win/win situations when it comes
to acquiring easements, but if it is outright condemnation, especially when
folks are not happy with it, I would find it difficult to vote in favor of this. So,
if we could find another solution, that is where my position would be.
• Martinez: I kind of agree with the general consensus. I think there could be
some creative solutions [inaudible] across driveways [inaudible]. I am not
going to make any real suggestions, I am just going to say. I would like to
think that I don't like the condemnation procedure, even though if that is the
10 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
last resort, that is the last resort. I would rather see staff work and try to come
up creatively with something that can help—hopefully both are willing to
work together and compromise.
• Hammier: If we have the time, I agree with that. Work towards something
that is perhaps not an over engineered solution. There may be some creative
way that you could find how other municipalities may have solved this
problem. You know, clearly for the record, I think it is remarkable that we
are actually at the point where we are finally completing the last section of
Battlefield. That is a huge accomplishment, so we look forward to getting
cooperation and working really hard to try to resolve these last issues.
• Fox: I am a great property rights proponent so I agree with Tom and with
Katie and Marty as well. Over-engineering is a good term. I am not an
engineer, but it seems like a ten foot concrete ditch through a property seems
almost like over kill so I would like to see if there is any other way this can go
about. I understand that if we figure out that it is not what is best, I
understand, but I really think we should go back and take a look.
• Mayor: I think we are going to get that from most of the Council, so Keith
and Tom, and Mr. Maylott, I don't know when you might anticipate whether
you can come up with a solution that is more palatable for Mr. Maylott,
whether it is additional bridged areas over this ditch. I don't know how many
Mr. Maylott would be comfortable with—whether you'd want two, four, I
don't know, but I don't think Council is going to vote for this tonight, so we
need you to try to work with Mr. Maylott and would you like to speak at the
mike?
Dawn Johnson: I am Mr. Maylott's neighbor and I spoke in front of Council
probably eight or nine months ago about this project coming through my yard
putting three lanes of traffic, utilities, a sidewalk and a green space in my yard under
every bedroom window in my house. Nothing became of it. I have been talking to
folks and I have listed my property and sold it—or I have a contract that settles very
soon and I have sold my property way, way under the value that I pay taxes on this
property. So, I feel that there should be a vote tonight. Those funds should be
released and it would be my only way to make up for the lost equity in my property.
No offense to Mr. Maylott, but I would hate to see this delay—you know I have
lived in this house for 15 years. The project has ruined my property value. I have
lost so much equity in my home, so if there is a delay of a month, it is going to be
quite hurtful for me as a landowner all because of this Battlefield project. You know,
I have been dealing with water issues ever since Freedom Park was built. The water
runs out of the park. There is not enough adequate drainage. It goes down Mason's
Lane, rolls into my back yard, floods my basement and then goes into Mr. Maylott's
yard. Every single time, we get more than an inch of rain an hour. So, I really want
to see this come to a vote and the funds released.
Butler: Could you using that map, point to your property?
Johnson: This right now, I think I am losing 30 some feet of a 60 foot side
yard, so these lanes are going to come—having many trees cut down and all this
11lPage
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
traffic is going to go right under the bedroom in my home. I am so fortunate that I
have a contract on this house. The people that are moving in, basically they don't
know what they are missing. They are aware of the project. They understand and
are willing to accept this. I however, am not. With it coming so close in, I just really
want this to stay the course, release the funds and let me move on.
• Butler: Question for staff. I can see that the two properties to the north, if we
don't vote on them tonight. I can see how that would delay the project. The
large property to the south, it is not clear to me how that would delay the
project if we were to delay that a little bit. It would not.
Staff answer: It would give us the ability to begin the utility relocation while
continuing to work with Mr. Maylott [inaudible]. That property is
[inaudible].
• Butler: Madam Mayor, I would be enthusiastic to vote tonight on the two
properties to the north and not the property on the south and I think that
would not only give an opportunity for staff to negotiate a different solution
and would also result in not delaying the project. It would also provide you
the money that you are looking for, so when it comes to a vote, I will make
that motion.
• Martinez: That was my same direction—can we split up the plots and—
because I don't want to delay the project. I wasn't sure about the other
residents, but since they have spoken—the one has, I am more than—that
was the direction I was going in with Dave.
• Mayor: We might have others come forward.
Michael Hummel: As you can guess, we are the third property. I have
several businesses here in the town at 204 Wirt Street, but I am speaking on behalf of
my two relatives in the back, Sherry and Carol, that own this property. Sherry lives
there. Thank you for the time tonight. Quite frankly, I am here speaking because
they are so emotional and distraught about what is going on with this, that they are
not comfortable addressing you. Sherry took a long time searching for a property in
the Leesburg area that could accommodate her special needs son with bus access and
a setting for perceived privacy, all of which will be gone with this project. We have
been meeting with the town on this acquisition for almost a year now. Sherry and
Carol completely understand the need to construct this road segment as well as the
fact that the overall design line is correct and quite frankly the only way it can align
in this area. It is just unfortunate these properties—and you see as you go further
along everything gets away from the houses, but here it is right on top of the houses.
We have found the town staff to have treated us very politely and very cordially this
entire time. Their constant message has been they want to work with us; however,
that does not ring true at all. Of all the various reasonable requests we have made,
which I will explain, nothing has been accommodated. First, the design for the road
requires the town to destroy a significant portion of our septic field, which is here in
the front yard and for them to provide a new driveway access to the property.
Obviously, a four lane road like Battlefield, you can't have driveways coming out of
it—which we understand. The first encounter with the town was when the staff said
they had to have a consultant enter the property with a backhoe to dig test pits which
12 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
we gave permission for. They tore up an area of the yard leaving several large holes
and did not reseed the yard. I placed multiple calls to the town to try to get this fixed
with minimal results finally ending in Sherry reseeding the yard herself. The town is
proposing a completely unconventional reconstruction of her drainfield, having the
drainfield lines at a right angle instead of normal straight lines. This would never be
allowed by the state or the county in any new construction. The approval of this
took the town a long time to force through the state approval process to the
disagreement at first of the Loudoun County Health Department. This drainfield
will make the resale of this property very detrimental at best. The town was forcing
Sherry to find a contractor and to oversee the contractor, which she has no
knowledge of how to do. She will have to take time off of her job, which is difficult
and she is not compensated for that. The town is handing her the money to redo the
drainfield, but making her do the work. I don't understand how that occurs. The
town made insignificant attempts to find a sanitary sewer solution to protect her
value, which would have been a much better thing than this unconventional
drainfield. The design is revising her very simple circular drive access that she has to
Mason's Lane now—currently has two entrances and now is going to be a very long,
narrow driveway, which we have been told will be maintained by the town. There is
no way that this is not devaluing this property but there is no compensation for that.
It is hard to place a value on that. This substandard access places a daily bus access
at the driveway that her son has now to go to his job in jeopardy due to the long
driveway configuration. Additionally, our attorney is concerned how the town can
maintain a road that is outside the town boundaries. The biggest issue though is due
to the poor power utility design on the project, a large swath of 30 huge, mature trees
are going to be wiped out solely for the purpose of placing overhead power lines on
her property to serve only her neighbor's house. Those lines are now located in the
right of way in front of the lot immediately adjacent to the property line. If this was
a development application before this town, those trees would be untouchable. You
really have to go see the trees or the report we provided to the town. You can see the
pictures to know what I am saying about these trees. We asked the town to spend
some time exploring with the power company how to serve this house in an
alternative way. As an example, I expressed that the power be placed in a conduit
along the front end of the property in the right of way. If that was done, all of the
trees would be saved. It is pretty obvious the town is not going to force this issue.
We were told the design was already done. In response to me asking this again
recently, the only answer that came back a couple of days ago was that the power
company said if they placed the lines underground on Sherry's property, they would
still have to take the trees down. I could have predicted that answer. That wasn't
the question about moving in the right of way between the curb and her property line
in that slope right of way. We hired a registered landscape engineer to analyze the
value of the trees using a nationwide recognized valuation system that VDOT uses in
its road acquisitions. Fairfax County also uses this same system when someone
wants an easement on county land,just like in this case. Almost predominantly
what the town is asking from Sherry is a temporary construction easement and utility
easements, a very tiny piece of dedication— 62 square feet, if you can appreciate—it
is probably the size of this table. Most of it is this power line easement. Anyway, the
study concluded the tree value of$137,000 versus the town's $2,000 offer for the
13 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
trees. At$2,000 that's $66 a tree. You can't buy any trees in a nursery for$66 let
alone a two-foot diameter one. The town has talked about placing some landscaping
later, either on the slope of the road, or under the power lines; however, nothing that
could be planted could ever provide the same sense of buffering that is there now,
because the utility companies would not allow significant trees in the easement and
also the road is now being built five to six feet higher than Mason's Lane, so it would
take huge trees, where if you put trees there now, you buffer Mason's Lane, but
when the road is six feet higher, you've got to have some pretty tall trees to have any
value to them. We made multiple requests for things to be changed over the past
year, all of which we were told can't be changed. I will give you a couple of quick
examples. We asked that some of the language in the easement deed to be changed.
One example, the town—it says in there that the town, despite it being an easement
can go anywhere outside of the easement it wants to at the town's discretion. Now
that didn't seem very fair. We asked for it to say that the town needs to stay in the
easement they are requiring. We were told the town never alters its language. Then I
asked for another provision that says anything in the temporary construction
easement— a temporary easement, becomes the property of the town. That language
is clearly intended to mean for the dedication area, but the way the deed was written,
it covers both. I asked that to be changed and again I was told the town doesn't alter
its language. In the original plan, the easement gave the right for the town to take
down a three foot diameter tree right next to the house, which construction plans
showed no need to even come close to and Keith Wilson agreed with that, that it
didn't need to be cut and said the town would not touch that tree. I asked for the
easement drawing to be changed to reflect, in case Keith isn't here or something, but
that still isn't around the tree and I have asked for that for over six months now and
continuously told that we can't change our drawings, so there is no confusion in
what is advertised, you are offering to pay her $42,000. Remember the $26,000 of
that is to pay her to force her to fix her drainfield, so for all the things I am talking
about, you are offering$16,000 for the various things that are affecting her property
value. They are not here to profit from this at all. They would actually prefer you
just leave them alone, but we know that is not the case that can happen so we are just
asking for it to be a fair compensation for what is going to happen to the value of this
lot. Finally, it is hard to understand how you conduct a public hearing by only
giving notice of this meeting five days in advance in an email to Sherry and three
days in advance by regular mail letter. We met with Mr. Wilson several weeks ago
to talk about our counter to the offer that we did receive and he responded that he
would get back to us. Well, that response only came three days before this meeting
and we want to have a hearing to act on that. It just seems very short. That really
sums up everything I have to say. I do appreciate your time and the job you have to
do.
• Fox: I really don't have anything further than what I added. This brings—I
thought maybe the two properties together, bringing that to the forefront, that
might be a great resolution to all of this. I do have some concerns with some
of the things that this gentleman has talked to us about tonight and I think we
need to take that into consideration.
14 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
• Hammier: I just very much appreciate your coming out and sharing with
Council all that you have been going through all these many months and this
is the first time we are hearing these issues so as much as I too would have
liked to have found a compromise tonight, unless anyone has any creative
solutions, I think we need to get back to the drawing board and we need to get
some answers. Certainly I do before I feel comfortable.
• Dunn: I guess I was a little confused because I thought I heard staff say when
you first presented this to us tonight that you had not been in touch with the
other two property owners. We talked about the drainage issue for the one
property, but I thought I heard you say that this is a condemnation for all
three properties, but it sounds like one you have a willing property owner that
wants us to go forward, so I am really confused about what was said because
it sounds like you've got multiple issues.
Staff answer: Each property is unique and each property has its unique
feature [inaudible] trying to settle a property and Mrs. [inaudible] and Mrs.
Butler have a utility easement issue and removal of 31 large, mature trees
along the front, and then the remaining property is the drainage issue. The
septic system has been a long, arduous task through our consultant for the
major part of a year trying to get some type of a permit from the Health
Department so that we do not have to relocate the landowners from the
property. So, for each one has had its unique challenges which we have tried
to work through, sometimes [inaudible] design options to come up with
creative solutions.
• Dunn: So, the one, Ma'am I'm sorry—your name again? Ms. Johnson. Is it
a condemnation because she would just rather not have obviously the road
going through her front window, but she would actually rather go forward, so
I'm kind of confused of why that isn't just an easement agreement versus a
condemnation or is it that ultimately she would rather not have it go through
her front yard?
Staff answer: I think it is a condemnation—it is going through a property
settlement and maybe not all parties are in agreement or did not come to a
compromise so —
Notar: Yes, I got a phone call from her attorney, if I may jump in here. He
did not get into all the details, but it is part of the settlement agreement. I
assume that they—as part of their agreement to sell their home, there is an
agreement that the condemnation matter go forward. What this is, is an
approval to file a certificate of take. Once the certificate of take is filed, that
allows the town to go onto the property and build the project; however, that
doesn't mean negotiations stop. Keep that in mind. This is the second step in
a condemnation matter. You have already approved the offers. Negotiations
continue after you approve the offers. They continue even after we file the
certificate of take. So, I would ask at the end of this, that you do split up the
public hearing and motion. We could always have a second public hearing
for the property owners who are dissatisfied. We could continue to negotiate
with them. But, you could approve Ms. Johnson's.
• Dunn: Well, that was my next question too. The—and I have to go back in
my title memory banks. But, am I under the understanding then that the
15 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
condemnation, not being satisfied is basically not allowing you to have clear
title to be able to sell?
Johnson: Well, I don't follow you. I am not worried about the title. I don't
know how to ....
• Dunn: There is an action pending on the house, so it would be much like—
almost like an additional lien that wasn't cleared in order to sell your
property. So, I was wondering if that was something that you felt was
keeping you from being able to sell when you'd like to.
Johnson: Yes, I have lost over$50,000 in property value to get this house
sold so the money that has been offered is no where near that, but I
understand that negotiations continue, as Ms. Notar said. The attorneys need
to work on this. I am never going to recoup all of my property value and I
have lost my somewhat quiet, private home [inaudible] and the home that I
have known and loved for 15 years is never going to be the same, so I am out.
I am ready to go. It is not a condition for the sale of this property. The new
owners are well aware of what is going on, and they accept it. I just feel that
the equity I have lost, I can recoup some of it. It is not a condition of the sale.
• Dunn: I would like to know more about staffs communication to the other
property owners—if the language was correct that the gentleman mentioned
that you are asking them to create a run off pond or storm management pond
and they have to manage that, can you explain that a little bit better?
Staff answer: The difficulty on Mrs. Dow and Mrs. Butler's property is the
existing private septic system—sanitary sewer system. The roadway crosses a
portion of the existing drainfield. To do that, it was needed to come up with a
design to create a new septic system that could serve the property. The septic
systems are regulated by the Loudoun County Health Department. A permit
was finally, after approximately a year of having to look at various sites on
the property the additional field could be located. Soils are not very
conducive to drainage, again as the condition with Mr. Maylott's property, it
is a relatively flat area— an area getting a lot of surface water draining across
and standing so those soils don't make it very conducive to have a [inaudible]
so the county was able to finally do an exhaustive search with their
consultant, Soil Scientists, soils engineer to come up with a system that the
County did review and ultimately they are going to [inaudible] on that
because it is my understanding that this is a unique system for this county.
The question was, again, to get a contractor to prepare an estimate that the
construction work would be done—repair work or replacement work for the
septic system. My thought on this was to give an advantage—instead of the
town picking out a contractor, having the contractor go on their property and
do the work and we did have some difficulty with the contractor that we got
to do the soils evaluation. They did go out there and dig holes. They did a
very poor job of backfilling. We contacted their design consultant on
numerous occasions requesting that they go back out there and do the repair
work. It took them a long time and that was unacceptable. It was
unacceptable to me and it should be unacceptable to the town. But again, we
tried to contact the design consultant to go out there and make these repairs.
It took a lot of work to do that. With the land owner being able to choose her
16 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
contractor, know when the contractor is going to come onto the site and do
the work and be able to have the greatest control over the requirements of her
septic system, I felt that it would be best that she have—with Mike who is
kind of into this work is very familiar and for me with the two contractors that
provided us estimates that they could get the best job instead of us having a
consultant to come in there and act as a third party. So, that is why we have
asked them to see if they would be willing to—if they are unwilling to hire the
contractor, then that is something the town could do. Again, as working with
any contractors, we are subject to their going on there and following through
with what they promised to do—with backfilling everything, seeding
everything. I mean it was difficult when they did the excavation and part of
the excavation left [inaudible] laying on the ground and it was my
understanding when I got the call from the land owner that contractor walked
away and wouldn't even rake the grass. That was a contractor that we would
pay and we will get to it and follow-up another week. We don't have
anybody to get out there. Again, if we do the septic system, we are kind of
subject to follow that same path. We could have a contractor that we hire
that just doesn't come out there and just doesn't do a very good job and that's
why I think it is best for the landowner to be able to have more control over
what is happening to their property.
• Dunn: It sounds like they need help.
• Mayor: Keith, as the gentleman said, I think it is unfair of us to throw a
citizen into that role. You know, because if we are not hiring good
contractors and we are not staying on top of them, how is she expected to do
it. She doesn't have as much knowledge as you do.
Staff answer: You are absolutely right. In this particular situation, and Mike
can address that—that is a field of expertise in my understanding that he is in.
He is very familiar—he is much more familiar with these gentlemen that do
the work than I and I felt that Mike—Mike can also—we have got an estimate
from them and again, this is a [inaudible] —it costs more because of
unforeseen circumstances, then we will obviously reimburse the landowner
for the additional costs. If he can negotiate with these contractors for a better
price, then that's to their benefit, but again I think that Mike has a much
better working, almost daily relationship with these people than I and to get a
much better product.
• Mayor: Mike, do you feel that way?
• Burk: That's not what I heard.
• Hummel: [inaudible], but I do have three businesses to run and I would
prefer not to be spending the hours that I have spent on this for the last year
and having that continue. No disrespect to my loved ones, but I would rather
be working at my job than overseeing a septic contractor. But, he is right. I
am in the home building/land development business. I do have a knowledge
of it, but I just don't understand and I never got the sense that it was our
choice. I was always—maybe I misperceived—this is how we do it and this is
how it has to be done. Maybe I misread that, but we would prefer to have the
town oversee this but also there is a level of knowing that it is going to be
done right. They are not going to respect one homeowner asking them to do
17 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
a job. But, that's the smallest of the issues—who does that compared to all of
our other issues, mainly the power lines.
• Dunn: I know this is probably—I'll throw this out as an idea. Don't jump all
over me when I say this because it is up to the homeowner and I have no idea
what the cost would be because that's why I am asking—if we provided
public sewer.
• Butler: That was on my list to ask.
• Dunn: I don't know if that is an option for them. I don't know what the cost
analysis would be.
Staff answer: We have briefly looked at that. One thing is that is outside of
our service area, so it would require you all's action for us to serve the
property. I am trying to remember, I think the closest point, is there is a small
force main line that was constructed in approximately 2000 to serve the five
homes along Evergreen Mill, so it is approximately 800 feet of line and this
would be a force main system.
• Dunn: Isn't it across the street at Heritage?
Staff answer: Yes, but we can't tie into the Heritage line because this is a
private line until it gets to Simpson Middle School for the high school because
they maintain the line from the pump station. But, along these properties
here, we do have a small force main that goes and ties into the same
[inaudible] so we would have to extend the line.
• Dunn: What about at Freedom? Is that the one that goes to Freedom also?
Freedom Park.
Staff answer: It goes past Freedom Park also. Everything ties in at the
intersection at Tolbert Lane and Evergreen Mill [inaudible].
• Dunn: Maybe we can look into what that cost is.
Staff answer: I can't remember. It has been several months ago since we...
• Dunn: And if that is even something the homeowners want to consider. If
they don't then there is no use doing it? That would be something you would
like us to look into?
• Mayor: Keith, on the issue of the tree and the statement that you were able to
reassure them the three foot diameter tree would not come down, but we
weren't going to be able to clarify that on the plans. Could you clear that up
for me?
Staff answer: Yes, we typically do —on all projects we do a tree preservation
plan. It is a separate plan—trees are identified 3 inches or greater in diameter
that are within the project area. They are identified and then done the
calculation for. We had a no net tree loss policy, so what would that take to
replace the same tree canopy there. [inaudible] was an issue with all the
landowners, no matter [inaudible] and this tree was identified in our tree
preservation plan and it was initially identified as to be removed and we went
through the plans and indicated that this tree is not to be removed. The list—
we removed the tree; however, making a small change to adjust a temporary
construction easement not only impacts the plan sheet that shows the
property, but it impacts dozens of sheets throughout the plan. Typically it
also impacts the plat. So, the plat would have to be redrawn, so instead of
18 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
doing that since this is a temporary construction easement, all throughout the
plans we note that tree should be saved; but we do not change the easement
because again, each person that we negotiated each tree [inaudible] not only
do you change it on the project plan sheet, specifically [inaudible] but it is
everywhere that property is shown—the lines are shown throughout the
plans. [inaudible] which sheet is the official sheet. It got changed on five
sheets, but it didn't get changed on 12 sheets, so which one is correct.
• Mayor: So, what I am hearing is it would be a lot of staff work to redo all
those sheets and that is what our objection is.
Staff answer: It would be a lot of work for our designer, but we have taken
care of the situation on the Tree Protection Plan, which is an [inaudible] sheet
and on that is based what the contractor—which trees are removed and which
trees are saved and on this particular sheet, this tree has been noted to be
saved.
• Butler: Could you do something else like commit to putting a sign around the
tree that says do not cut down this tree under any circumstances unless you
call Keith?
Staff answer: Yes, there is. On the erosion and sediment control plans, there
is a part of not only the silt fence that is put up to contain the run off, even
tree protection plans. There is a tree protection plan that is put up before any
trees are removed and this tree is outside the tree protection fence and so I
have agreed to the landowners that we will adjust this fence once we get out
there so it not only creates a physical barrier so the contractor knows not to
remove this tree, but it also creates a physical barrier so contract employees
do not pass this area. Do not pass this area to get onto the other property.
• Butler: Right. Now, is there no way to underground these power lines to
save the 31 mature trees?
Staff answer: Unfortunately, in talking to the utility company, the concrete
sidewalk—the five foot concrete sidewalk that runs along the entire length of
Battlefield Parkway, is located approximately 1-2 feet from their property line.
It did extend to get this barrier down to the corner of their property adjacent
to Ms. Johnson's property, but we did have to acquire a small triangle and it
is approximately 61 or 62 feet. It begins at a point, runs about 50 feet or so
and then [inaudible] about a foot and a half. The power line—there is no
space between the sidewalk other than approximately 1-2 feet to bury this
underground line. So, the utility company and the town—typically because
of maintenance issues and then if they have an issue with the line, then they
would have to go out there and tear the sidewalk up. It is very difficult to go
and find if they have an issue—so to not bury this line beneath the sidewalk, it
has to be moved back and that puts it on unfortunately the landowner's
property. The other issue is getting to the corner if it is buried, it will go
through kind of the area where the existing septic system fill bed is located
that is going to be abandoned for the new system. The utility company does
not like to for health concerns to trench through a septic field bed even though
it is no longer active, it has been used as such for a period of a number of
years.
19 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
• Butler: Are they concerned about the health of the workers that trench
through it?
Staff answer: Not only the workers, but as you are digging the trench up and
the material that comes out of it is spread on the ground.
• Mayor: Keith, since it seems like Ms. Johnson is the only person here tonight
that wants a vote tonight, which PIN is hers? Of the three you have got in
your chart, is hers the first?
Staff answer: 233-16-1536.
• Mayor: Seeing that Ms. Johnson has requested that we vote on hers and a
couple of Council members have indicated an interest in doing that, so we
might want to separate that one out. I am not sure I would be willing to go
forward with the other two tonight, but if she is comfortable with us going
forward on hers, I don't have a problem with that. Is there anyone else from
the public, because we have not closed the public hearing, so anyone else
from the public who hasn't spoke and who wants to speak on this before we
do close this public hearing?
There were no additional members of the public wishing to address this public
hearing.
The public hearing was closed at 9:18 p.m.
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Vice Mayor Burk, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION2015-129
Declaring that a Public Necessity and Use Exists and Authorizing an Offer to Acquire
Right of Way Dedication and Easements from PIN 233-16-1536-000 for the Battlefield
Parkway—Route 15 to Dulles Greenway Project and to Authorize Condemnation
Council Comments:
• Burk: I know this is a hard situation. It is difficult for everybody, but since it
has just come to our attention, it is important for us to take a little time and
see if there are some other solutions. So, for that reason, I do want to do this.
• Fox: I agree. I would be willing to go ahead with the vote the way it has
been moved.
• Hammler: I just wanted to add an apology to Ms. Johnson for all of the
trauma you have been through as someone who has loved your home for 15
years that it has come to this point. Quite frankly, on behalf of all of the
citizens of Leesburg, thank you because that extension—the final segment of
Battlefield is important for the whole region, but obviously it is affecting you
very personally and for that I do apologize on behalf of the town.
• Butler: I just want to make sure that staff is comfortable with how we would
modify the resolution in order to get just that one property.
Staff answer: Yes.
201 Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
• Dunn: And along those lines, I just want to make sure that we are modifying
that we are acquiring this by purchase and not eminent domain.
Staff answer: No, that is not the case. So, once again this is a Certificate of
Take is filed. The nickname is a Quick Take. It allows the feasible title to the
town, meaning it allows us to get on the property and then to continue to
negotiate with the landowner. It is important to know that the landowner,
once that certificate of take is filed, can motion the court to withdraw the
funds. So, while negotiations are continuing, they can get the funds—the fair
market value that we have determined and have put on deposit with the court.
They are allowed to obtain that through a court order, which doesn't take
long. I assume, and I don't know all the specifics. As I said before, I assume
in this case that the settlement agreement with the buyer of her property they
have some arrangement where probably the buyer will continue to negotiate
and Ms. Johnson will sell the property. That is what I think is happening. I
can only assume that. I don't know for sure. But, that allows Ms. Johnson to
sell her property and it allows the buyer to negotiate with the town for the
property rights. So, no. Not yet. Could the new buyer settle with the town
on payment for the land rights? By deed, yes, that could happen. That won't
happen right away.
• Dunn: I guess I am just a little concerned that we are taking property that the
homeowner wants us to take. I mean normally it is not— once there is an
agreement there is not a need for eminent domain—we come to an
agreement. Unless there is some reason you want us to condemn the
property.
Johnson: As stated earlier, we just would rather see it go away. There is a
vacant lot on the other side of Mason's Lane. If the project had been
designed differently, I would have been untouched. They would have as well.
The town already owns that lot. We are trying to make the best of a bad
situation and I came here eight months ago. Maybe it was a year ago. I am
not sure and I stood up and I was kind of disappointed that people are saying
this is the first they have heard of it. I came here. This project has been on
the books for years. This is not new. Five, ten years in the making. I am just
trying to make the best of a bad situation.
• Dunn: And I agree—at the time that the land acquisition or the agreement
with the developer was made, I know that I brought up the idea of rather than
going through the center of that property, why don't we go to I guess it would
be the west side of Mason's Lane and the developer of that side felt that it
would be too much land that he would have to give up, so I was not thrilled
with this layout either, but I don't know what is involved with changing that.
I am sure a lot more than before you can sell your property, but if I
understand correctly,just so that—because I am uneasy voting for
condemnation even though you want that. I just don't like the idea of voting
condemning somebody's property. I may abstain for that reason, but I just
want to understand that is what we are voting on. This is a condemnation of
this one parcel.
Staff answer: It is the first step in a condemnation action. Well, it is the
second step in a condemnation action. The first was when you approved the
211 Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
making of the offers. This is the second step. There is a third step, if it can't
be settled when the town files a petition in condemnation. That is the third
step after the certificate of take. That third step is when the court, either a
jury or the commissioners determine the value that is paid to the property
owner.
• Dunn: Well having heard that, I am going to abstain. I feel—if I was the
deciding vote that you needed to do this, I would reluctantly vote for the
condemnation, I just don't like the idea of voting for condemnation. It
sounds like you have enough votes to allow what you are looking for to go
forward.
• Johnson: It is going to happen inevitably.
• Fox: May I ask a question? It is more toward Barbara. As we talk about
these, we have the landowner that wants to sell. The buyer is supposedly
okay with what is going on. What if the buyer comes back and later on is not
okay with what is going on? Will we be back here doing this same—going
through another process?
Staff answer: No, I don't think. I mean, the property—I am just trying to
think through the answer. The property is still owned by Ms. Johnson. She
has the right to accept or reject our offer. Once the certificate of take is filed,
it is a somewhat—it is not the correct legal word, but let's call it a lien on the
property. That certificate of take will be on the property. She can still sell her
home—if it is recorded, that is public notice to the world that there is an
action going on with the town. So, the buyer—that's legal public notice.
Once again, I did get a phone call from an attorney in town that I know so I
believe all parties are aware of this action.
The motion was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Burk, Butler, Fox, Hammier, Martinez, and Mayor Umstattd
Nay: None.
Vote: 6-0-1 (Dunn abstaining)
Staff was directed to continue negotiations with the other two property
owners.
11. RESOLUTIONS AND MOTIONS
a. School Resource Officer for Douglass School
On a motion by Vice Mayor Burk, seconded by Council Member Martinez, the
following was proposed:
RESOLUTION
Amending the Fiscal Year 2016 General Fund Budget in Order to Authorize a Full
Time Equivalent Position and to Make a Supplemental Appropriation in the Amount
of$92,500 for a New School Resource Officer at the Douglass School During Fiscal
Year 2016
Council Comments/Questions:
22 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
• Burk: This is just a correction that we are moving forward with—getting a
resource officer at the Douglass School and the county has already agreed to
their share so let's move on.
• Hammler: Yes, I am strongly opposed. I think this is clearly the county
needs to pay 100%. We are being asked to pay for$48,500 and this gets right
back into we keep trying to make progress in terms of double taxation. This is
a school issue and I know that we have certainly communicated to the
County that there is value in our police officers being involved, but that we
would work with them to provide the funding. Douglass is a school that pulls
from kids all over the county. Ultimately the town is always accommodating
for the school system. Just look at the sheer number of schools that we
continually accept. Look at Clarke County—they have one in the entire
county. Obviously we have growth issues here. But that means we accept
not for profit land. I think we have to take a stand here and go back and
negotiate for the full amount.
• Fox: There is one question I have. I am wondering if there is some legal bar
to having the sheriff's department or sheriff's deputy to be an SRO within the
town limits. That would be the only thing I can think of that would make it
necessary for the town to take care of this. So, I have some of the same issues
that Katie has. I don't understand the principle by which some of the county
services that we get like school teachers, school buses, are provided to the
residents and paid for entirely by county tax, but SROs are not. Particularly
with this school, you know, we have the bulk of the kids are probably not
even Leesburg residents, so I kind of agree that this should be a county
expenditure.
• Butler: I would just like to clarify that this $48,500 is a one-time cost, right?
And we would be paying$13,200 a year for the personnel cost and the county
would be paying$30,800 for the personnel cost. So, we would be paying 30
percent of the ongoing cost and the county is paying 70% of the ongoing cost.
While in theory I agree that it would be nice if the county was paying for the
SROs, you know 30%, I think this has come up before that having Leesburg
officers in those positions is worth something and I think$13,200 a year is not
such a bad thing. I do wonder though out of the $48,500 we are paying the
entire shot of that and why the county isn't paying—couldn't they pay 70% of
the $48,500 as a one-time cost?
Staff answer: Jason, correct me if I am wrong, the agreement that we have is
for the county to pay 70% of the personnel and we cover the equipment that is
associated with that? Am I correct?
• Fox: Why do we have this agreement? Why is this agreement in place? I
don't understand.
Staff answer: The agreement that we have with the county at this time and
have had for years is that the town and the county split the personnel cost.
The county is 70%. We are 30%because during the summer the SROs
become regular officers, so to speak, on the street, but the town provides all
the equipment and resources associated with that officer being on duty. Am I
correct?
23 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
• Butler: Okay, so we have got to buy a tricked out car and the cool uniforms
and all that stuff which is the $48,500 and we actually have a written signed
agreement with the county on that, or is just kind of a nudge, nudge kind of
agreement.
Staff answer: We actually request a contribution from the county. For the
past three years, this has been the traditional. There is no official funding
agreement. I don't think there is because it is based on the annual
appropriation from the Board of Supervisors. It is not an agreement—would
make us obligated. It is a request for contribution every year.
• Burk: I think there is an MOU on it.
Staff answer: My assumption is there is, but I can't honestly tell you that
there is. I would have to go back and verify that for you.
• Butler: Alright, because I know we had it to do with the Board a couple of
years ago about all of this.
• Burk: Because previously, we were paying for the whole thing.
Staff answer: That is correct.
• Dunn: Just some clarification. In the paragraph on the first page under Tab
14, Fiscal Impact. I am not sure why it is written this way, but it says the
position of 92,500 of which 30,800 or 70% of the personnel costs—that isn't
30% of the personnel costs though. Oh, I'm sorry, 70% of the personnel costs
unless I am mistaken.
• Butler: It is for a partial year.
• Dunn: Oh, it is partial year. Oh, okay. This is an agreement we did have. I
think that what we have to remember, if the town weren't doing this, the
County would be paying 100% of that position. There would be no deciding
what that person did during the summer. My understanding, unless the
Captain can correct me, my understanding is that the SROs are still doing
some school related activities even during the summer time and not just going
full time covering beats.
Staff answer: Correct. We also have summer camps and we have summer
schools. Generally, the SRO assigned to whatever school the summer school
is at and then other....
• Dunn: So, they are really SROs year round.
Staff answer: Yes.
• Dunn: So, in reality the county should be covering it 100%because if we
weren't, they would be and once again here is Leesburg paying more than our
fair share for a function that is a county function, okay? And we talk about
trying to get more interdepartment communication going and I know the
explanation for this is that we feel the communication would be that the
SROs is more straight line when they are wearing a blue uniform versus a
brown uniform but I really think that if the person is in a brown uniform and
there is an issue, they are going to come to you. They are not just going to say
hey we got something on Leesburg, let's bring in the Sheriff's department. If
there is, we got bigger issues, but I would like to know if we did not pass this
tonight, what would happen? Would it mean that we are going to provide an
24 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
SRO at 100% or does it mean that the County is going to have to provide the
SRO at 100% or no SRO in the school, I guess.
Staff answer: At this point, there would be no SRO in the school unless the
county decided to pick that up.
• Dunn: And that decision is the county's decision, you know. You do not
have any say over where SROs and what school they are in.
• Fox: So you are saying, an SRO even though it is shared between right now
Heritage and Douglass, that agreement wouldn't continue? There would be
no SRO at Douglass?
Staff answer: The SRO from Heritage comes over as needed, but is not there
on a regular basis, is my understanding. Is that correct, Captain?
Grigsby: That is correct. The number of calls that we have been experiencing
at Douglass does pull that SRO from Heritage, so basically you have that
school without an SRO at times.
• Burk: Well, the history on this—the chief of police came and spoke to the
council and asked us to allow the Leesburg police to be in the schools—that it
was a benefit to the police officers to have relationships in the schools and if it
was the Sheriff's department doing it, it would be a disadvantage for the
Leesburg police to be able to develop these relationships and find out
situations and solve situations.
Grigsby: Yes, Ma'am, our preference would be having the Leesburg officer
there.
• Burk: And so the county said then if you the town—you have different
requirements for your officers, so it was a compromise for the county to put
70% of the money into it and as you said the police officers are used
elsewhere, so it was an agreement that was set up so we could get some
coverage, we could get some of our tax money back and we would still be
serving our population through our local police. I remember very distinctly
the chairman saying, if you want, we can provide SROs for all of the schools,
we will pay for it, but they will be our officers in your town. If that is what
you want, we will do that. The town was very adamant that no they didn't
want that. They wanted their own officers there. They felt it was important
and that they were willing to pay some of it but not all of it. So, we are
recouping some of our tax money on this situation. Douglass most certainly
does need to have an officer there. Not all of the students there are Leesburg
students, but they spend a great deal of time in Leesburg, so I would think
that it would benefit Leesburg police to know who these kids are, but that is
the history of why it came to that. If we don't want to pay for it, and we want
to have Sheriff's officers in the schools, then that's fine. The county most
certainly recognizes that they can do that but this was negotiated years ago to
try to make sure that we could keep our Leesburg police in the schools.
• Mayor: Another note to what Kelly just said—and the Captain will correct
me if I misstate anything, but it was my understanding that the reason the
chief expressed a strong preference to have Leesburg officers in schools that
are located in Leesburg is because things that start out in the schools often
spill over into the town and our officers are much closer to our community
than the Sheriff's Deputies could be. They would be better able to investigate
25 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
say acts of juvenile crime in a neighborhood that often gets discussed at
school. They just have an easier time solving crimes in town or dangerous
activity by kids if they were in the schools.
Grigsby: That is correct, Madam Mayor.
• Hammler: Douglass is a unique situation, though. I understand that that
presents a discussion that the chief has brought has brought forward in the
past relative to schools that are predominantly populated by Leesburg
students. In the case of Douglass and even referencing the other email from
Heritage with the current officer, it references that there are a lot of family
issues that he intervenes so by definition, it sounds like this is a really good
place to start to have the sheriff increasingly get sheriff's support for our
taxpayer's money that we pay towards our taxes that go to the county. In this
case, it would make sense for the sheriff to be the SRO given the population
that is not based in Leesburg. I certainly understand the point relative to you
know the risk that there is afterschool activities in and around Leesburg, but it
is just as a compelling argument that they need to have those relationships
based on the fact that they are dealing with family issues out in the county, so
I would ask Council to really make a stand here because we know we are
going to be working hard after the election. We have chosen from a timing
perspective to be able to look at this issue strategically after November and I
think it is important that we start now.
• Butler: How many—Douglass is an elementary school. How many
elementary schools are there in the county that have SROs.
• Mayor: This is the alternative school.
• Butler: And all the high schools have SROs in the County?
• Burk: So do most of the...
Grigsby: The middle schools and the high schools have SROs.
• Butler: Okay. Thanks.
• Dunn: I just wanted to also remind us when we had this discussion with the
county, I believe Chairman York's comment was it is actually less expensive
for us to run the SROs than it was for the county, so it means that basically
they not only have the savings here, because we are paying for a third of the
full time officer in the schools all year round, but we are doing it at less cost,
so in reality, they are not paying a percentage of our costs, but that represents
an even greater savings to them so really if they were paying 100% of this, it
may not even represent an increased cost to them and we could still have our
officers doing it and just let the county pay it so they are getting a savings—
now they are getting a double savings by doing it this way.
• Martinez: I don't disagree with a lot of the sentiment about the county
double taxation and all of that. I don't disagree with some of that sentiment,
but I think what we have to look at is if we don't do this what are we going to
miss with our kids at Douglass. I don't want to put those children at risk. If
we end up not supporting this and the county says well you know you had an
opportunity to do it. We have a memo of understanding that you were going
to provide this. They may chose not to do this. We have a need. We have
children. We have them at risk at that school and you know what? I don't
26 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
care if they are not in Leesburg. They need to be taken care of and public
safety is a big issue here. So, I would say that if we are going to continue to
push the county, let's do it at budget time. Let's set up a discussion then
about how we are going to address the SRO problem and I think right now,
we need to put the kid's safety first before we put anything else out there.
• Hammler: Marty makes a good point, but the only thing I would disagree
with is the timing and so for that reason I will make a motion to postpone this
so that we can immediately send a letter and express the sentiment that this is
a unique situation from the current understanding and that we would request
100% funding for the SRO, or in this case if they desire, sheriff given the
Douglass school population.
Council Member Hammler offered a motion, seconded by Council Member Dunn to
postpone this item until the second meeting in November and send a letter to the
County requesting 100%contribution for the Douglass School SRO.
Council Comments:
• Dunn: It isn't our decision for those kids to have their needs met or for
protection. It is the county's. This is a county function. In fact, the county is
taking from our school at Heritage to send over there but that is their decision
and it is not one that I feel a responsibility for other than I need to petition my
representative at the Board of Supervisors to get with the Sheriff's Department
to make sure that need is met.
• Butler: First of all, I question how many children attend the Douglass
School, approximately. Is it around the same size as a regular high school or
is it significantly smaller.
Staff answer: It is much smaller.
• Butler: This is difficult because I am not normally in favor of throwing police
at problems and this is a small school which I am not sure needs a full time
officer but I am not—I am happy with the town paying 30% of the ongoing
costs. I would ask maybe a friendly amendment could we delay this for the
purpose of asking the county if they could kick in 70% of the fixed costs?
• Mayor: Katie is kind of doing that with her motion to delay it until the end of
November.
• Butler: She is asking for the county to pay 100% and maybe put a sheriff
there.
• Mayor: I don't think that was part of her motion. I thought this was a
motion to postpone so we can send a letter and hear back until the second
meeting in November.
• Butler: If it is going to be kind of a generic letter to say, hey look—this is a
special case. How much more can you do for us, I am okay with that because
I don't prefer having a sheriff's deputy in there. I prefer having a Leesburg
officer. I don't mind paying the 30%but kicking in to close to $50,000 for
stuff that just bothers me. I think the county could pick up 70% of that, at
least.
27 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
The motion to postpone was approved by the following vote:
Aye: Butler, Dunn, Fox, and Hammier
Nay: Burk, Martinez, and Mayor Umstattd
Vote: 4-3
12. ORDINANCES
a. None.
13. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
a. None.
14. NEW BUSINESS
a. None.
15. COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS:
Council Member Dunn: I don't like to use Council Member Comments for carrying
on the last item, but I will this time. The other thing I would recommend is it also may be
considered drawing an officer from some other school than one here in Leesburg, might be
nearby. I think that the point was made pretty well, but just to reiterate that if the main
reason is because the information that is gathered in the school pours out onto the streets,
that those streets are in the county and that it would make more sense that an officer who
would be able to handle county issues, which we can't, that it be a county officer. Having
said that, I did want to point this out—I didn't get a chance to talk to Kaj about this and I
don't want to make this seem like it is a jab in any way, but I am grateful for the efforts by
primarily Kaj and the Chief for putting together the appreciation day. The only things that I
would— it came off as it was Council saying thank you. It was meant for the town to say
thank you. I think we missed it on the announcements of that. I don't think another person
other than 80 something officers — 90 officers and a few staff and Council knew that it was
Officer Appreciation Day. It was a little discouraging that I saw Betsy send out a press
release about a new high tower going in town, but no press release in time to get into the
paper to let citizens know that it was the town saying thanks to our officers. So, something
we can work to next year. I know that Kaj was trying to move this a little further down for
planning purposes and the chief was too. I appreciate the short time frame that you all
worked on and that was greatly appreciated and the officers seemed to definitely enjoy it
and hopefully next year we can plan on getting more corporate sponsors and make it a
bigger deal and really have the community know about it, because I think they would be
behind it if they knew and when every day you wake up and you hear about another officer
who's live was taken, it really brings it home, the need to show that appreciation. So, but I
am grateful for everyone involved and hopefully next year with some extra planning we can
really let the whole community know.
Council Member Butler: Just one disclosure. I met with the folks from Crescent
Parke again. I enjoyed the Police Appreciation Day. I was able to make all three meals. It
was great seeing everybody and I don't remember which one it was—maybe it was lunch,
maybe it was dinner where a number of officers were sitting down and had to have some
conversations and it was enjoyable so I know that the entire town appreciates the police.
When I go out and talk that is some good feedback that I almost always get. I also had fun
28 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
at the airport seeing the virtual tower. That is really slick and I think it is really great
L thinking that we could have a tower and the controllers could be in Oshkosh or anywhere
and it would work pretty much the same, so that's great stuff. I want to make sure that we
do everything that we can from a Council and staff standpoint to keep that thing here
because I think it would be great for the airport and allow it to grow and do great things.
Last, but not least, I just hope that regardless of your political affiliation, I hope everybody
votes on Tuesday. Next Tuesday. One week left. This is the year where we have by far the
most candidates on the ballot so I know there is a whole lot of candidates that are thinking
okay one week from 7 p.m. yay.
Vice Mayor Burk: I can't wait to get rid of the signs in my yard. Geez. I want to
congratulate the Economic Development Department for their virtual realty tour and panel
discussion. It was a very interesting event and the panel discussion was on arts in the town
and it was very useful and very interesting. The thing that really struck me was how many
of the people in the audience were really enthralled with the panel discussion. I really
believe that arts do make a difference in the Community. I want to thank Marshall Bank for
the sponsoring of the Police Appreciation day. That was really nice. The virtual tower
thing is just amazing. It is a unique opportunity. Correct me if I am wrong, but we are the
only airport that has it in all of the United States and Canada?
Mayor: It is the western hemisphere. We are the first and only in the entire western
hemisphere. The first one was set up in Sweden about a year ago. There is one in Australia
and there is one in Ireland.
Burk: So, what an opportunity and it will be great to see how that develops. Just go
out and vote!
Council Member Martinez: I really want to thank [inaudible]. Like I said, I even
volunteered to coach next year. I would love to do that. I really want to thank Gwen for
her prayer. I thought that was very moving and I really appreciate her caring about
community and our council. I think that was really touching. I missed the virtual tower. I
know that is my bailiwick, but unfortunately it wasn't on my calendar and I don't know
how it didn't get there, so I am sorry I missed it. I want to say yay for Dick's Sporting
Goods.
Council Member Hammier: I just want to say thanks to Tom for the great idea about
the Police Appreciation. It was a great idea and also Bruce Gemmill and John Marshall
Bank for kind of a serendipitous way that all came together, but it was very, very generous
of them and of course thanks to all of our police officers that work 24/7 to keep us safe and
everything they do for our community. I wanted to quickly say congratulations to my tech
commissioner, Eric Byrd, who was hired as the SBDC manager. Just going to be an added
value to the Tech Commission because he is also liaison to the EDC. I think that will be
great. I just wanted to also say congratulations to our Parks and Rec department because
they have received many awards, but in this case it was the international events award.
L Finally, congratulations Kaj on the vote of confidence from this council. It slipped under
the radar this evening, but I am looking forward to working with you for the next two years,
at least.
29 I Page
COUNCIL MEETING October 27, 2015
Council Member Fox: I just wanted to say for the record on the whole SRO thing, I
kind of disagree with the agreement the town has with the county. I am sorry about that. I
think it is tantamount to what if the school board came to us and said we want to charge for
transportation. I feel like it is about the same thing, so I just wanted to put that out there.
As far as police appreciation day, I was really honored to be a part of that. Still working off
the cookie that I ate from there, but it was one of the best things I have ever had. Carl
looked at me like you are not going to eat that whole thing. Yeah, I ate that whole thing.
The Virtual Tower—I have been a part of the airport commission for a while, so I have been
privy to the equipment and everything over there. I just wanted to let everybody know out
there that I appreciate—we have a great airport manager. We have a go-get'em airport
commission and I think they do a great job.
16. MAYOR'S COMMENTS
Mayor Umstattd had no comments.
17. MANAGER'S COMMENTS
I want to thank you for your support and continued confidence in me. It has been a
pleasure and honor to work with you as your manager for the first year and look forward to
continuing to do so to serve our great community and residents over the next several
months and years to come. So, thank you very much for your support.
18. ADJOURNMENT
On a motion by Council Member Martinez, seconded by Council Member Butler, the meeting
was adjourned at 9:59 p.m.
r.� ►_1P C)
Kristen C. mstattd, Mayor
Town of Leesburg
AT L S fl
Clerk of Cou
2015_tcmin1027
30 I Page