Loading...
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