|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Chesterfield OfficialsBOARD OF SUPERVISORSMINUTESMarch 14, 2007
Mr. Miller called the regularly scheduled meeting to order at 3:01 p.m. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR FEBRUARY 28, 2007 On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board approved the minutes of February 28, 2007, as submitted. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 2. COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR 'S COMMENTS There were no County Administrator’s comments at this time. 3. BOARD MEMBER REPORTS There were no Board member reports at this time. 4. REQUESTS TO POSTPONE AGENDA ITEMS AND ADDITIONS, OR CHANGES IN THE ORDER OF PRESENTATION On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. King, the Board added Item 5.A., Award of Contract to Springsted, Incorporated to Provide Executive Search Services for the Position of County Administrator; deleted Item 8.C.13., Award of Contract to Replace the Existing Bullet Trap at the Public Safety Training Center at Enon to Super Trap, Incorporated and Appropriation of Funds for the Entire Project; added Item 8.C.16., Set Date for Public Hearing to Consider the Appropriation of Up to $30,000,000 in Payment to the Escrow Agent for Advance Refunding of Series 1999A, Series 2001 and Series 2002 General Obligation Bonds and Closing Costs, and Adoption of a Resolution for the Advance Refunding Due to the Market Being Favorable for Refunding; replaced Item 17.M., Public Hearing to Consider the Exercise of Eminent Domain for the Acquisition of Water and Temporary Construction Easements for the Southwest Corridor Waterline Project; and adopted the Agenda, as amended. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 5. RESOLUTIONS There were no resolutions at this time. 5.A. AWARD OF CONTRACT TO SPRINGSTED, INCORPORATED TO PROVIDE EXECUTIVE SEARCH SERVICES FOR THE POSITION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR Mr. Micas stated, after conversations with Board members, Mr. Miller asked staff to investigate the possibility of hiring an executive search firm to assist the Board in hiring a replacement for Mr. Ramsey. He further stated the Human Resource Management and Purchasing Departments interviewed various firms engaged in the executive process. He stated staff recommends contracting with Springsted, Incorporated to assist the Board in executive search services for Mr. Ramsey’s position. He further stated the firm would work with the Board and submit a list of possible candidates to the Board no later than July 1, 2007. Mr. Miller called forward Mr. John Anzivino, representing the firm of Springsted, Incorporated. Mr. Anzivino stated Chesterfield County is highly regarded throughout the country as a well-managed community, and Springsted wants to bring candidates to the Board, which will make it a difficult choice for the Board to select from the finalists. He further stated the process will involve Board members, and Springsted looks forward to working with the Board. In response to Mr. Warren’s questions, Mr. Anzivino stated the firm typically brings forward five finalists, but that depends upon the Board’s preference. He further stated information will be obtained from Board members, such as salary, benefits, knowledge, ability and personality traits, to develop a position profile. In response to Mr. Sowder’s question, Mr. Anzivino stated many of the candidates, whose positions Springsted was contracted to fill, have been in service for more than five years. He further stated the firm recognizes that this is not a process that a locality wants to embark upon every three or four years. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Anzivino stated, although it is an aggressive schedule, the firm is committed to bringing forward candidates prior to July 1, 2007. There was brief discussion relative to positions in the state that have used Springsted’s executive search services and advertising and outreach initiatives that the firm will provide for this position. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Anzivino stated the pool to be considered could include in-house candidates from Chesterfield. Mr. King commended Mr. Miller on moving forward with the search, indicating that it is in the best interest of the citizens. He stated this position should be non-political, and he does not think a business would go for any length of time without a CEO in place. On motion of Mr. Miller, seconded by Mr. King, the Board awarded a contract to Springsted, Incorporated to provide executive search services for the position of County Administrator, subject to approval as to form by the County Attorney. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 6. WORK SESSIONS 6.A. THE UPPER SWIFT CREEK RESERVOIR WATERSHED Mr. Stith provided an overview of the history of initiatives to protect the Swift Creek Reservoir Watershed. He reviewed actual in lake phosphorous data from 1992 through 2005 and stated the 0.05 phosphorous standard was not exceeded during this time. He stated, if no additional measures are taken, there will be an additional 18,000 pounds of phosphorous in the reservoir at full build-out of the Upper Swift Creek Watershed. He reviewed the first strategy to reduce the phosphorous load – reviewing and amending county ordinances to minimize impervious areas. Discussion ensued relative to the rationale behind the alternatives to encourage shared driveways, less curb-and-gutter, and minimizing rear and side entry garages. Mr. Miller stated the county has been trying to decrease the number of front entry garages and inquired why we would now want to encourage minimizing rear and side entry garages. Mr. Ramsey stated some of the future strategies will probably conflict with positions that the County has taken in the past. Mr. Stith stated the alternatives are being proposed to help reduce the phosphorous level in the river, indicating that the Board and Planning Commission will decide which ones are most appropriate. He then reviewed additional strategies to reduce the phosphorous load, including preservation and restoration; low-impact development; use of new BMP technology; and use of pro-rata fees to enhance and install new BMPs. He provided details of implementation of the strategies, including obtaining input from stakeholders; adoption of ordinance amendments; and continuing to monitor the reservoir. Discussion ensued relative to what has changed over the years to lead staff to suggest removing requirements that were designed to preserve the lake and control residential development. Mr. Ramsey stated the Corps of Engineers and other controlling agencies have been the driving force behind many of the requirements. He further stated the Corps is now requiring an alternative to building regional ponds, and staff supports strategies that would eliminate the need for large ponds. Mrs. Humphrey expressed concerns that, after everything the county has done to try to preserve the lake, we are right back to where we were many years ago in our design standards for neighborhoods. She inquired how long it will take staff to obtain input from stakeholders and bring back a recommendation to the Board. She stated the Upper Swift Creek Plan must be completed. She inquired whether the proposed strategies will be retrofitted into old zoning cases or will just be used in the future. Mr. McElfish stated staff is working with developers to have some of the low-impact development alternatives implemented. He further stated he hopes to bring recommendations to the Board before the end of 2007. He noted that each of the strategies may have 40 or more alternatives that could be used, and a combination of the alternatives in different categories will ultimately be used. Mrs. Humphrey stated the Board could adopt the Upper Swift Creek Plan , and these alternatives could later be supplemented into the Plan . Discussion ensued relative to requiring the same development strategies in other areas of the county as the Upper Swift Creek . After further discussion relative to a timetable for implementation of the proposed strategies, Mrs. Humphrey suggested that the Board be provided an update in 90 days relative to staff’s progress towards implementation. Mr. Ramsey stated staff will provide a timetable for incorporation of the strategies into the Upper Swift Creek Plan at the March 28th Board meeting. Mr. Warren stated he is pleased that both the development and environmental communities supported the ordinance amendments to require on-site storm water treatment. He stressed the fact that the reservoir contains one-third of the county’s drinking water resource and stated the Board must focus on maintaining that resource. He further stated the area that drains into the reservoir has the highest rate of commercial and residential development, and the county is considering a number of road improvements in this area. He stated it is critical that the strategies ensure that VDOT not make the same mistake they made on the portion of Route 288 that impacts the reservoir. In response to Mr. Warren’s question, Mr. Stith stated the presentation regarding initiatives for protecting the Swift Creek Reservoir Watershed would be made available to the public. Mr. Warren stressed the importance of bringing specific strategies to the Board so that the same problems do not occur as in the past with state, federal and environmental criteria. Mr. Stith stated staff will develop a sequence in which the strategies will occur. 6.B. THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR’S FY2008 PROPOSED AMENDED BUDGET INCLUDING PRESENTATIONS FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIVISIONSCHOOL BOARD Dr. Newsome provided an overview of budget highlights from the School Board’s approved FY2008 budget. He first reviewed school system and student successes. He discussed the challenges that schools face relative to narrowing achievement gaps. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Dr. Newsome stated approximately 50 teachers have been hired in the past five years, at a cost of approximately $50,000 each, as a result of instructing students whose first language is that other than English, and developing special reading programs for these students. He then discussed challenges faced by schools relative to rapid growth; school safety and health; and teacher shortages. He stated the budget is designed around the School Board’s design for excellence focusing on the goals of academic excellence for all students; safety, supportive learning environment; a knowledgeable and competent workforce; and community investment in public schools. He further stated the School Board’s financial plan totals $572.1 million, which is an increase of 10.0 percent over FY2007 and includes new resources of $51.9 million to help address challenges and move toward the School Board’s goals. He provided details of various budget initiatives related to each of the School Board’s four priority goals. Mrs. Humphrey requested a copy of the breakdown of the $51.9 million increase in School Board’s budget that she can provide to residents at her community meeting on March 19th. Discussion ensued relative to the cost of educating special needs children. Mr. King noted that families migrate to localities that provide the greatest services for disadvantaged children. After further discussion, Mr. Miller requested that the School Board provide the Board with information regarding the number of children who receive special services that do not speak English as their first language. There was brief discussion relative to the number of students who would qualify for an at-risk preschool program and to uses of the budgeted funding for security and safety nets. In response to Mr. Sowder’s question, Dr. Newsome stated approximately 70 percent of the budget is allocated for instruction, and slightly less than 3 percent is allocated for administration. In response to Mr. Warren’s question, Ms. Kitchen stated $18 million in scholarships was provided to Chesterfield County seniors last year. Mr. Warren inquired whether the school system is gaining space overall as a result of new and renovated facilities provided by the bond referendum compared to the number of new students coming into the system. Ms. Kitchen stated, as long as the school system is growing at 1100 students per year, we are not making much progress. She further stated if the growth slows down, then slow progress will be made. Discussion ensued relative to the growth of students in Falling Creek Elementary and Middle Schools. Mrs. Humphrey noted that the school system is challenged by mandated space requirements for special needs programs. She further stated trailers will always be on school grounds, indicating that they are tools to provide space and allow the schools to adjust to federal and state requirements regarding space. Dr. Newsome stated when the five schools approved in the bond referendum are opened, there will still be the same number of trailers, but no more. Discussion ensued relative to the Title 1 students that were moved from Falling Creek Middle School to Robious Middle School. Mr. Warren stated he recently visited an elementary school and witnessed the eagerness of the children in learning, no matter where they came from or how well they could speak English. He further stated our nation is built on education, and we must compete with the rest of the world in terms of education. Mr. Miller thanked Dr. Newsome for the presentation. MANAGEMENT SERVICES DIVISION Mr. Stegmaier provided an overview of the proposed FY2008 budget for the Management Services Division. He stated the total proposed Management Services budget for FY2008 is $107.4 million. He provided details of major increases in various areas of the budget. He stated Management Services’ scores on the Organizational Climate Assessment in the areas of values and ethics speak highly about the county’s leadership. He reviewed staffing ratios; support services; purchasing staff ratio; growth in total expenditures compared with full-time employees in General Accounting; ratios of square footage per maintenance and custodial workers; Accounting Department hours saved from process improvements; cost of Internal Audit functions; Purchasing Department cost avoidance totals; and monthly revenue using the License Inspector platehunter. He provided the results from various areas of Management Services that received high ratings in customer service. He stated Management Services employee scores on the Organizational Climate Assessment are very high in the area of employer of choice compared to best performing organizations in both the public and private sectors. He reviewed data relative to purchasing activity with Chesterfield, minority, and women owned businesses. He then reviewed Environmental Management milestones. He discussed challenges of the division related to technology, staffing and energy efficiency. Mr. Miller thanked Mr. Stegmaier for the presentation. 7. DEFERRED ITEMS 8. NEW BUSINESS 8.A. APPROVAL OF THE WASTEWATER SUPPLY AGREEMENT BETWEEN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY AND VIRGINIA ELECTRIC AND POWER COMPANY (DOMINION VIRGINIA POWER) Mr. Covington stated discussions began between the county’s engineers and Dominion Virginia Power’s engineers over a year ago about the feasibility of providing wastewater effluent from Proctor’s Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant to Dominion’s Dutch Gap facility for use in one of their pollution removal processes. He further stated the technical details of the agreement have now been worked out, and it has been determined that the treated effluent provides a more consistent, reliable and higher quality water than Dominion would get by taking water out of the James River and treating it for this process. He then introduced Mr. Larry Cridlin to describe benefits that Dominion sees in this arrangement. Mr. Cridlin provided details of the chemical process for which the water will be used. He stated benefits that Dominion sees include receiving a clean, reliable source of water; elimination of a substantial amount of capital investment for a filtration system to utilize James River as a source; and reduced costs by using the water in power boilers. He further stated it is noteworthy that the wastewater will be used to remove pollutants from another source to help clean up the environment. He stated Dominion looks forward to completion of the project through this agreement. Mr. Covington stated this project represents the largest wastewater reclamation and reuse project in the state. He further stated all of the nutrient values contained in the discharge that the county would have had to account for in its discharge permit and mass loading pound allotments will now be diverted to Dominion Virginia Power. He stated, as a Department of Environmental Quality’s designation as an E-3 facility, the Proctor’s Creek facility no longer has concentration base limits in their discharge permit, and this combined with the diversion of wastewater to Dominion will result in annual operating cost savings, as well as a savings in capital costs by preserving the waste load allocations. He noted that the project represents a good environmental win-win situation. Mr. King stated he is excited to have this project in the Bermuda District. Mr. Miller stated this is a great project. Mrs. Humphrey stated she is very excited about this magnificent project. On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved the Wastewater Supply Agreement between Chesterfield County and Virginia Electric and Power Company (Dominion Virginia Power), and authorized the County Administrator to execute the agreement. (It is noted a copy of the agreement is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. On motion of Mr. Sowder, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board suspended its rules at this time to allow for simultaneous nomination/appointment of a member to serve on the Community Criminal Justice Board. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. COMMUNITY CRIMINAL JUSTICE BOARD On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board simultaneously nominated/appointed Sheriff Dennis Proffitt to serve on the Community Criminal Justice Board, whose term is effective immediately and expires June 30, 2007. (It is noted Sheriff Proffitt will fill the unexpired vacant term of retired Sheriff Clarence Williams.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C. CONSENT ITEMS On motion of Mr. Sowder, seconded by Mr. Warren, the Board removed Item 8.C.6.a., Award of Construction Contract for the Southwest Corridor Water Improvements, River/Riverway Roads, Project B, from the Consent Agenda for public comment. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.1. APPROVAL OF REQUEST FOR A PERMIT TO STAGE A FIREWORKS DISPLAY AT THE SUNDAY PARK On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a permit to stage a fireworks display at the Sunday Park Peninsula at Brandermill on July 4, 2007, with a rain date of July 5, 2007. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.2. APPROVAL OF THE CHESTERFIELD COUNTY POLICE DEPARTMENT TOWING CONTRACT On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved the Police Department’s towing contract, as approved by the Towing Advisory Board. (It is noted a copy of the towing contract is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.3. STATE ROAD ACCEPTANCE On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229, Code of Virginia , and the Department’s Subdivision Street Requirements . AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Type Change to the Secondary System of State Highways: Addition Basis for Change: New subdivision street Statutory Reference: §33.1-229 l Rose Glen Drive, State Route Number: 7146 From: Old Hundred Rd., (Rt. 754) To: Rose Glen Pl., (Rt. 7147), a distance of: 0.04 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 11/9/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. l Rose Glen Place, State Route Number: 7147 From: Rose Glen Dr., (Rt. 7146) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 11/9/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. l Rose Glen Drive, State Route Number: 7146 From: Rose Glen Pl., (Rt. 7147) To: Rose Glen Tn., (Rt. 7148), a distance of: 0.07 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 11/9/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. l Rose Glen Turn, State Route Number: 7148 From: Rose Glen Dr., (Rt. 7146) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.02 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 11/9/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. l Rose Glen Drive, State Route Number: 7146 From: Rose Glen Tn., (Rt. 7148) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.07 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 11/9/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229, Code of Virginia , and the Department’s Subdivision Street Requirements . AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Project: Watermill, Section 3 Basis for Change: New subdivision street Statutory Reference: §33.1-229 l Water Race Drive, State Route Number: 7061 From: 0.02 mi. E of South Windmill Ridge Dr., (Rt. 5584) To: Water Race Ct., (Rt. 7144), a distance of: 0.02 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 2/17/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 45 feet. l Water Race Court, State Route Number: 7144 From: Water Race Dr., (Rt. 7061) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.04 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 2/17/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. l Water Race Drive, State Route Number: 7061 From: Water Race Ct., (Rt. 7144) To: Water Race Tr., (Rt. 7145), a distance of: 0.10 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 2/17/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 45 feet. l Water Race Terrace, State Route Number: 7145 From: Water Race Dr., (Rt. 7061) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.05 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 2/17/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. l Water Race Terrace, State Route Number: 7145 From: Water Race Dr., (Rt. 7061) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.12 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 2/17/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 40 feet. And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the streets described below are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk’s Office of the Circuit Court of Chesterfield County; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised this Board the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that this Board requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the streets described below to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to Section 33.1-229, Code of Virginia , and the Department’s Subdivision Street Requirements . AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage. AND, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Basis for Change: New subdivision street Statutory Reference: §33.1-229 l Gorham Lane, State Route Number: 7157 From: Coalfield Rd., (Rt. 754) To: Nailor Wy., (Rt. 7158), a distance of: 0.06 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 8/18/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 44 feet. l Nailor Way, State Route Number: 7158 From: Gorham Ln., (Rt. 7157) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.07 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 8/18/2005 in the office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 44 feet. Recordation Reference: Pb. 157 Pg. 11 l Gorham Lane, State Route Number: 7157 From: Nailor Wy., (Rt. 7158) To: Gorham Ct., (Rt. 7159), a distance of: 0.05 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 8/18/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 44 feet. l Gorham Court, State Route Number: 7159 From: Gorham Ln., (Rt. 7157) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.12 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 8/18/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 44 feet. l Gorham Lane, State Route Number: 7157 From: Gorham Ct., (Rt. 7159) To: Cul-de-sac, a distance of: 0.01 miles. Right of Way Record: Filed on 8/18/2005 in the Office of Clerk to Circuit Court, with a width of 44 feet. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.4. ADOPTION OF RESOLUTIONS 8.C.4.a. RECOGNIZING FIREFIGHTER DENNIS R. KROHN, CHESTERFIELD FIRE AND EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES DEPARTMENT, UPON HIS RETIREMENT On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn attended Recruit School #8 in 1977 and has faithfully served the county for twenty-nine years in various assignments, as a Truck Company Firefighter at the Manchester Fire and EMS Station and at the Ettrick Fire and EMS Department; as a Firefighter at the Centralia Fire and EMS Station; and as a Truck Company Firefighter at the Buford Fire and EMS Station; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn served as an acting officer, Emergency Medical Technician, Technical Rescue Team member, Level II and Truck Company Firefighter; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn was involved in many successful fire and emergency medical rescues and vehicle extrications during his years of public service; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn was always known as an effective team player who worked to “get the job done,” and during his career he has been recognized as an effective team member; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn trained many engine and truck company operators during his career, which will forever benefit our department; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn is an avid golfer, and he supported many charity golf tournaments during his career, including the Brad McNeer Memorial Golf Tournament; and WHEREAS, Firefighter Krohn touched the lives of many citizens and made many sacrifices during his career to make Chesterfield County a safer place to live and raise a family. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes the contributions of Firefighter Dennis R. Krohn, expresses the appreciation of all residents for his service to the county, and extends their appreciation for his dedicated service and their congratulations for his retirement. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.4.b. RECOGNIZING MARCH 18-24, 2007, AS “INHALANTS AND POISONS AWARENESS WEEK” IN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, there are over 1,400 products such as gasoline, propane, correction fluid, aerosols, computer dusters and nitrous oxide that are widely available, inexpensive, and can be misused by inhaling their fumes to produce a state of intoxication; and WHEREAS, recent data from the National Institute for Drug Abuse and the Partnership for a Drug-Free America has shown that more than 2 million children in the United States experiment with inhalants each year, but nine out of ten parents are unaware or deny that their children have abused inhalants; and WHEREAS, data from the 2005 Prevention Needs Assessment Survey of Chesterfield County students in grades 8, 10 and 12 revealed that one in five eighth-graders had tried an inhalant and eight percent had used an inhalant during the 30 days prior to the survey, twice the national average; and WHEREAS, a child can immediately die from Sudden Sniffing Death Syndrome the very first, or any, time he or she experiments with an inhalant or suffer damage to the brain and other organs; and WHEREAS, most parents and other adults know very little about inhalant abuse and do not realize that children can die or be severely harmed from such use; and WHEREAS, Substance Abuse Free Environment Incorporated (SAFE), Chesterfield County’s substance abuse prevention coalition, has been educating parents and others who work with children and adolescents about preventing inhalant abuse; and WHEREAS, SAFE is sponsoring a special event for parents and other adults on March 20, 2007 featuring Harvey Weiss, the executive director of the National Inhalant Prevention Coalition, to raise awareness of the dangers of inhalants; and WHEREAS, “National Inhalants and Poisons Awareness Week” is March 18-24, 2007. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors recognizes March 18-24, 2007, as “Inhalants and Poisons Awareness Week” in Chesterfield County and urge all parents to learn more about how to prevent this dangerous practice among our children. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.4.c. RECOGNIZING MARCH 2007, AS “PURCHASING MONTH” IN CHESTERFIELD COUNTY On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted the following resolution: WHEREAS, the purchasing and materials management profession has a significant role in the quality, efficiency and profitability of business and government throughout the United States; and WHEREAS, the purchasing and materials management profession works for private and public, and profit and nonprofit organizations; and WHEREAS, in addition to the purchase of goods and services, the purchasing and materials management profession engages in or has direct responsibility for functions such as executing, implementing and administering contracts; developing forecast and procurement strategies; supervising and/or monitoring the flow and storage of materials; and developing working relations with suppliers and with other departments within the organization; and WHEREAS, the purchasing and materials management profession has tremendous influence on the economic conditions in the United States, with an accumulative purchasing power running into the billions of dollars; and WHEREAS, purchasing or procurement operations range from departments of one person to several thousand; and WHEREAS, governmental purchasing and other associations around the world are sponsoring activities and special events to further educate and inform the general public on the role of purchasing within business, industry and government. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chesterfield County Board of Supervisors hereby recognizes the month of March 2007, as “Purchasing Month” in Chesterfield County and encourages all citizens to join in commemorating this observance. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.5. APPROVAL OF UTILITY CONTRACT FOR OTTERDALE ROAD PHASE 2/HARPERS MILL PARKWAY PHASE 1, CONTRACT NUMBER 06-0112 On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved the following utility contract for Otterdale Road Phase 2/Harpers Mill Parkway Phase 1, Contract Number 06-0112: Developer: Oakbridge Corporation Contractor: Piedmont Construction Company, Inc. Contract Amount: Code: (Refunds thru Connections – Oversizing) 5B-572VO-E4C District: Matoaca (It is noted a copy of the vicinity sketch is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.6. AWARD OF CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS 8.C.6.b. FOR THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR WATER IMPROVEMENTS, RIVER ROAD, PROJECT A On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board awarded a construction contract to Park Construction Corporation, in the amount of $10,113,013.13, for County Project 05-0147, Southwest Corridor Water Improvements, River Road - Project A, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents. (It is noted a copy of the vicinity sketch is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.7. CONVEYANCE OF AN EASEMENT TO COLUMBIA GAS OF VIRGINIA, INCORPORATED ACROSS COUNTY PROPERTY TO SERVE THE PROPOSED TOMAHAWK CREEK MIDDLE SCHOOL On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute an easement agreement with Columbia Gas of Virginia, Incorporated across county property to serve the Tomahawk Creek Middle School. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.8. ACCEPTANCE OF PARCELS OF LAND 8.C.8.a. ALONG THE WEST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF NORTH ARCH ROAD FROM ALLEN AND MARGARET KIDD On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.064 acres along the west right of way line of North Arch Road (State Route 672) from Allen and Margaret Kidd, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.8.b. ALONG THE EAST RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF SOUTH OLD HUNDRED ROAD FROM MAG PROPERTIES On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board accepted the conveyance of a parcel of land containing 0.015 acres along the east right of way line of South Old Hundred Road (State Route 754) from MAG Properties, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the deed. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.9. REQUEST TO QUITCLAIM A PORTION OF A SIXTEEN-FOOT WATER EASEMENT ACROSS THE PROPERTY OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, VIRGINIA STATE UNIVERSITY On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and the County Administrator to execute a quitclaim deed to vacate a portion of a 16-foot water easement across the property of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Virginia State University. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.10. REQUEST FOR PERMISSION FROM R.C. WHEELER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY TO INSTALL A PRIVATE SEWER SERVICE WITHIN A PRIVATE EASEMENT TO SERVE PROPERTY AT 2231 MCRAE ROAD On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved a request from R.C. Wheeler Construction Company for permission to install a private sewer service within a private easement to serve property at 2231 McRae Road, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the sewer connection agreement. (It is noted a copy of the plat is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.11. AUTHORIZE THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR TO APPLY FOR A HAZARD MITIGATION GRANT TO ACQUIRE PROPERTIES FLOODED BY TROPICAL STORM ERNESTO On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board authorized the County Administrator to apply for a hazard mitigation grant to acquire properties located at 14700 Harrowgate Road and 8320 Lyndale Drive which were flooded by Tropical Storm Ernesto, with a stipulation that no county funds would be expended on any of these acquisitions. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.12. RECEIPT AND APPROPRIATION OF FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION FUNDS AND VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF AVIATION FUNDS AND APPROVAL OF CHANGE ORDER NUMBER TWO TO THE CONSTRUCTION CONTRACT WITH BRANCH
HIGHWAYS, INCORPORATED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board approved the receipt and appropriation of $106,951.20 in Federal Aviation Administration funds and $3,377.40 in Virginia Department of Aviation funds, and authorized the County Administrator to execute change order number two with Branch Highways, Incorporated in the amount of $112,580.21 for the construction of the north terminal apron and t-hangar taxiway connector. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.14. APPROVAL OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH WCVE- FM RADIO On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board adopted a Memorandum of Understanding with WCVE-FM radio, which has also been adopted by Goochland, Hanover, Henrico, New Kent and Powhatan counties, providing a back-up capability for the localities to use in order to disseminate information to the public in an emergency situation. (It is noted a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 8.C.16. SET DATE FOR PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE APPROPRIATION OF UP TO $30,000,000 IN PAYMENT TO THE ESCROW AGENT FOR ADVANCE REFUNDING OF SERIES 1999A, SERIES 2001 AND SERIES 2002 GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS AND CLOSING COSTS, AND ADOPT A RESOLUTION FOR THE ADVANCE REFUNDING DUE TO THE MARKET BEING FAVORABLE FOR REFUNDING On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mrs. Humphrey, the Board set the date of March 28, 2007 at 6:30 p.m. for a public hearing for the Board to consider the appropriation of up to $30,000,000 in payment to the escrow agent for advance refunding of Series 1999A, Series 2001 and Series 2002 general obligation bonds and closing costs. And, further, the Board adopted the following resolution: A RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE ISSUANCE, SALE AND DELIVERY OF AN ISSUE OF NOT TO EXCEED THIRTY MILLION DOLLARS ($30,000,000) PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT REFUNDING BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA, FOR THE PURPOSE OF REFUNDING IN ADVANCE OF THEIR STATED MATURITIES, ALL OR A PORTION OF THE COUNTY’S OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES A OF 1999, ALL OR A PORTION OF THE COUNTY’S OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES OF 2001, ALL OR A PORTION OF THE COUNTY’S OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS, SERIES OF 2002, AND ALL OR A PORTION OF ONE OR MORE OTHER SERIES OF THE COUNTY’S OUTSTANDING GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS; FIXING THE FORM, DENOMINATION AND CERTAIN OTHER DETAILS OF SUCH BONDS; PROVIDING FOR THE SALE OF SUCH BONDS AND DELEGATING TO THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR CERTAIN POWERS WITH RESPECT THERETO; AUTHORIZING AND PROVIDING FOR THE PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT AND AN OFFICIAL STATEMENT RELATING TO SUCH BONDS; AND PROVIDING WITH RESPECT TO CERTAIN OTHER MATTERS RELATED THERETO BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF CHESTERFIELD, VIRGINIA: SECTION 1. Findings and Determination . (a) Pursuant to Chapter 5.1 of Title 15.1 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, recodified effective December 1, 1997 as Chapter 26 of Title 15.2 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, the same being the Public Finance Act of 1991 (the “Public Finance Act of 1991”), an election duly called and held in the County of Chesterfield, Virginia (the “County”) on November 5, 1996 and an Order of the Circuit Court of the County, dated January 6, 1997, and pursuant to a resolution duly adopted by this Board on December 10, 1997, there were authorized to be issued, sold and delivered the County’s $29,620,000 principal amount of General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series A of 1999, dated January 15, 1999 and maturing in varying principal amounts on January 1 in each of the years 2000 to 2019, both inclusive (the “Series A of 1999 Bonds”). (b) Pursuant to the Public Finance Act of 1991, an election duly called and held in the County on November 5, 1996 and an Order of the Circuit Court of the County, dated January 6, 1997, and pursuant to a resolution duly adopted by this Board on December 10, 1997, there were authorized to be issued, sold and delivered the County’s $60,355,000 principal amount of General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series of 2001, dated February 15, 2001 and maturing in varying amounts on January 15 in each of the years 2002 to 2021, both inclusive (the “Series of 2001 Bonds”). (c) Pursuant to the Public Finance Act of 1991, an election duly called and held in the County on November 5, 1996 and an Order of the Circuit Court of the County, dated January 6, 1997, and pursuant to a resolution duly adopted by this Board on December 10, 1997, there were authorized to be issued, sold and delivered the County’s $23,280,000 principal amount of General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series of 2002, dated January 15, 2002 and maturing in varying amounts on January 15 in each of the years 2003 to 2022, both inclusive (the “Series of 2002 Bonds”). (d) Pursuant to the Public Finance Act of 1991, the County has heretofore authorized to be issued, sold and delivered one or more series of the County’s General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds in addition to the Series A of 1999 Bonds, the Series of 2001 Bonds and the Series of 2002 Bonds. (e) Pursuant to Article 5 of the Public Finance Act of 1991 (Sections 15.2-2643 through 15.2-2649, both inclusive, of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as now in effect), the County is authorized to issue refunding bonds to refund any or all of its bonds in advance of their stated maturities. (f) This Board deems it advisable and in the interest of the County to refund in advance of their stated maturities all or a portion of one or more of the outstanding maturities of the Series A of 1999 Bonds, all or a portion of one or more of the outstanding maturities of the Series of 2001 Bonds and all or a portion of one or more of the outstanding maturities of the Series of 2002 Bonds and all or a portion of the outstanding maturities of one or more other series of the County’s general obligation public improvement bonds (the “Refunded Bonds”). (g) This Board deems it advisable and in the best interest of the County to authorize and provide for the issuance, sale and delivery pursuant to such Article 5 of the Public Finance Act of 1991 (Sections 15.2-2643 through 15.2-2649, both inclusive, of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as now in effect) of an issue of General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding Bonds for the purpose of refunding in advance of their stated maturities all or a portion of the Refunded Bonds. SECTION 2. Authorization of General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding Bonds . For the purpose of refunding in advance of their stated maturities all or a portion of the Refunded Bonds described in Section 1, there are hereby authorized to be issued, sold and delivered an issue of general obligation public improvement refunding bonds of the County in a principal amount not exceeding $30,000,000 to be designated and known as “General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding Bonds” (the “Bonds”). The Bonds are to be issued pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 26 of Title 15.2 of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as now in effect (the same being the Public Finance Act of 1991). SECTION 3. Approval of the Details and Sale of the Bonds . (a) The Bonds shall be dated such date, shall bear interest from their date payable on such date and semiannually thereafter and shall have such series designation as shall be determined by the County Administrator. The Bonds shall mature and become due and payable on such date or dates not exceeding twenty (20) years from their date and in such principal amounts on each such date as shall be determined by the County Administrator. The Bonds may be sold contemporaneously with any other bonds of the County. (b) (1) The Bonds shall be issued only in fully registered form. One Bond representing each maturity of the Bonds will be issued to and registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York (“DTC”), or in the name of such other nominee of DTC as may be requested by an authorized representative of DTC, as registered owner of the Bonds, and each such Bond shall be immobilized in the custody of DTC. DTC will act as securities depository for the Bonds. Individual purchases will be made in book-entry form only, in the principal amount of $5,000 or any integral multiple thereof. Purchasers will not receive physical delivery of certificates representing their interests in the Bonds purchased. (ii) Principal, premium, if any, and interest payments on the Bonds will be made by the County by wire transfer to DTC or its nominee, Cede & Co., or such other nominee of DTC, as registered owner of the Bonds, which will in turn remit such payments to the DTC participants for subsequent disbursal to the beneficial owners of the Bonds. Transfers of principal, premium, if any, and interest payments to DTC participants will be the responsibility of DTC. Transfers of such payments to beneficial owners of the Bonds by DTC participants will be the responsibility of such participants and other nominees of such beneficial owners. Transfers of ownership interests in the Bonds will be accomplished by book entries made by DTC and, in turn, by the DTC participants who act on behalf of the indirect participants of DTC and the beneficial owners of the Bonds. (iii) The County will not be responsible or liable for sending transaction statements or for maintaining, supervising or reviewing records maintained by DTC, its participants or persons acting through such participants or for transmitting payments to, communicating with, notifying, or otherwise dealing with any beneficial owner of the Bonds. So long as the Bonds are in book-entry only form, the County Treasurer will serve as Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bonds. The County reserves the right to designate a successor Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bonds if the Bonds at any time cease to be in book-entry only form. (c) The Bonds shall be subject to redemption at the option of the County prior to their stated maturities, in whole or in part at any time, on such dates and with such redemption premiums, if any, as shall be determined by the County Administrator. (d) In accordance with and subject to the provisions of the Detailed Notice of Sale of the Bonds, bidders may provide that all the Bonds shall be issued as serial Bonds or may provide that any two or more consecutive annual principal amounts shall be combined into one or more term Bonds. If the successful bidder designates principal amounts to be combined into one or more term Bonds, each such term Bond shall be subject to mandatory sinking fund redemption commencing on such date in the first year which has been combined to form such term Bond and continuing on such date in each year thereafter until the stated maturity date of that term Bond. The amount redeemed in any year shall be equal to the principal amount of serial Bonds that would otherwise have matured in such year. Bonds to be redeemed in any year by mandatory sinking fund redemption shall be redeemed at par and shall be selected by lot from among the Bonds then subject to redemption. The County, at its option, may credit against any mandatory sinking fund redemption requirement term Bonds of the maturity then subject to redemption which have been purchased and cancelled by the County or which have been redeemed and not theretofore applied as a credit against any mandatory sinking fund redemption requirement. (e) If any Bond (or any portion of the principal amount thereof in installments of $5,000) shall be subject to redemption and shall be called for redemption, notice of the redemption thereof, specifying the date, number and maturity of such Bond, the date and place or places fixed for its redemption, the premium, if any, payable upon such redemption and if less than the entire principal amount of such Bond is to be redeemed, that such Bond must be surrendered in exchange for the principal amount thereof to be redeemed and a new Bond or Bonds issued equaling in principal amount that portion of the principal amount thereof not to be redeemed, shall be mailed not less than thirty (30) days prior to the date fixed for redemption by first class mail, postage prepaid, to the registered owner of such Bond at his address as it appears on the books of registry kept by the Registrar for the Bonds. The Registrar shall not be required to exchange or transfer any Bond later than the close of business on the forty-fifth (45th) day next preceding the date fixed for redemption of such Bond or any portion thereof. If notice of the redemption of any Bond shall have been given as aforesaid, and payment of the principal amount of such Bond (or the portion of the principal amount thereof to be redeemed) and of the accrued interest and premium, if any, payable upon such redemption shall have been duly made or provided for, interest on such Bond shall cease to accrue from and after the date so specified for redemption thereof. So long as the Bonds of any series are in book-entry only form, any notice of redemption will be given only to DTC or its nominee. The County shall not be responsible for providing any beneficial owner of the Bonds with a notice of redemption. SECTION 4. Appointment of County Treasurer as Registrar and Paying Agent; Payment of Bonds; Books of Registry; Exchanges and Transfers of Bonds . Appointment of Registrar and Paying Agent . The County Treasurer is hereby appointed Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bonds (hereinafter referred to as the “Registrar”). (b) Payment of Bonds . (i) At any time during which the Bonds shall be in fully registered form, the interest on the Bonds shall be payable by check mailed by the Registrar to the registered owners of the Bonds at their addresses as the same appear on the books of registry as of the record date for the payment of interest on the Bonds, and the principal of and premium, if any, on the Bonds shall be payable at the office of the Registrar; provided, however, that so long as the Bonds are in book-entry only form and registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, or in the name of such other nominee of DTC as may be requested by an authorized representative of DTC, interest on the Bonds shall be paid directly to Cede & Co. or such other nominee of DTC by wire transfer . (ii) At any time during which the Bonds shall be in book-entry form, the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds shall be payable in accordance with the arrangements made with the depository for the Bonds. (iii) The principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds shall be payable in such coin or currency of the United States of America as at the respective dates of payment is legal tender for public and private debts. Interest on the Bonds shall be calculated on the basis of a 360-day year consisting of twelve 30-day months. (c) Books of Registry; Exchanges and Transfers of Bonds . (i) At all times during which any Bond remains outstanding and unpaid, the Registrar shall keep or cause to be kept at its office, books of registry for the registration, exchange and transfer of the Bonds. Upon presentation at the office of the Registrar for such purpose, the Registrar, under such reasonable regulations as it may prescribe, shall register, exchange, transfer, or cause to be registered, exchanged or transferred, on the books of registry the Bonds as herein set forth. (ii) Any Bond may be exchanged at the office of the Registrar for a like aggregate principal amount of such Bonds in other authorized principal amounts of the same interest rate and maturity. (iii) Any Bond may, in accordance with its terms, be transferred upon the books of registry by the person in whose name it is registered, in person or by his duly authorized agent, upon surrender of such Bond to the Registrar for cancellation, accompanied by a written instrument of transfer duly executed by the registered owner in person or his duly authorized agent, in form satisfactory to the Registrar. (iv) All transfers or exchanges pursuant to this Section 4(c) shall be made without expense to the registered owners of the Bonds, except as otherwise herein provided, and except that the Registrar shall require the payment by the registered owner of any Bond requesting such transfer or exchange of any tax or other governmental charges required to be paid with respect to such transfer or exchange. All Bonds surrendered pursuant to this Section 4(c) shall be cancelled. SECTION 5. Execution and Authentication of Bonds; CUSIP Identification Numbers . (a) Execution of Bonds . The Bonds shall be executed in the name of the County by the manual or facsimile signatures of the Chairman and the Clerk of this Board, and the corporate seal of this Board shall be impressed, or a facsimile thereof printed, on the Bonds. (b) Authentication of Bonds . The County Administrator shall direct the Registrar to authenticate the Bonds and no Bonds shall be valid or obligatory for any purpose unless and until the certificate of authentication endorsed on such Bond shall have been manually executed by the Registrar. Upon the authentication of any Bond the Registrar shall insert in the certificate of authentication the date as of which such Bond is authenticated as follows: (i) if the Bond is authenticated prior to the first interest payment date, the certificate shall be dated as of the date the Bonds are delivered to and paid for by the initial purchasers thereof, (ii) if the Bond is authenticated upon an interest payment date, the certificate shall be dated as of such interest payment date, (iii) if the Bond is authenticated on or after the record date for the payment of interest on the Bonds and prior to such interest payment date, the certificate shall be dated as of such interest payment date and (iv) in all other instances the certificate shall be dated the date upon which the Bond is authenticated. The execution and authentication of the Bonds in the manner above set forth is adopted as a due and sufficient authentication of the Bonds. (c) CUSIP Identification Numbers . CUSIP identification numbers may be printed on the Bonds, but neither the failure to print any such number on any Bonds, nor any error or omission with respect thereto, shall constitute cause for failure or refusal by the successful bidder for the Bonds to accept delivery of and pay for the Bonds in accordance with the terms of its bid to purchase the Bonds. No such number shall constitute or be deemed to be a part of any Bond or a part of the contract evidenced thereby and no liability shall attach to the County or any of its officers or agents because of or on account of any such number or any use made thereof. SECTION 6. Tax Covenant . The County covenants and agrees to comply with the provisions of Sections 103 and 141-150 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 and the applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder throughout the term of the Bonds. SECTION 7. Sources of Payment of Bonds . The full faith and credit of the County shall be and is hereby irrevocably pledged to the punctual payment of the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds as the same become due. In each year while the Bonds, or any of them, are outstanding and unpaid, this Board is authorized and required to levy and collect annually, at the same time and in the same manner as other taxes in the County are assessed, levied and collected, a tax upon all taxable property within the County, over and above all other taxes, authorized or limited by law and without limitation as to rate or amount, sufficient to pay when due the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available and appropriated for such purpose. SECTION 8. Form of Bonds . The Bonds shall be in substantially the form set forth in Exhibit A with such necessary or appropriate variations, omissions and insertions as are incidental to their numbers, interest rates and maturities or as are otherwise permitted or required by law or this resolution. SECTION 9. Preparation and Distribution of Preliminary Official Statement and Preparation, Execution and Delivery of Official Statement; Preliminary Official Statement “Deemed Final” for Purposes of Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 . (a) The County Administrator and other appropriate officials and employees of the County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare and distribute, or cause to be prepared and distributed, to prospective purchasers of the Bonds a Preliminary Official Statement relating to the Bonds. All actions taken by the officials, employees, agents and attorneys of the County with respect to the preparation and distribution of such Preliminary Official Statement prior to the date hereof are hereby ratified and confirmed. (b) The County Administrator and other appropriate officials and employees of the County are hereby authorized and directed to prepare, or to cause to be prepared, a final Official Statement relating to the Bonds, such final Official Statement to be in substantially the form of the Preliminary Official Statement with the completion therein of the information with respect to the interest rates to be borne by the Bonds as specified by the successful bidder for the Bonds and other definitive details of the Bonds determined upon the sale of the Bonds to the successful bidder therefor. (c) The County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute and deliver to the representative of the purchasers of the Bonds the final Official Statement relating to the Bonds in accordance with the provisions of the Detailed Notice of Sale relating to the Bonds. (d) The Preliminary Official Statement shall be “deemed final” as of its date for purposes of Rule 15c2-12 promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (“Rule 15c2-12”) except for the omission of information permitted to be omitted by Rule 15c2-12. The County Administrator is hereby authorized to execute and deliver to the representative of the purchasers of the Bonds a certificate dated the date of the Preliminary Official Statement stating that the Preliminary Official Statement is deemed final by the County for purposes of Rule 15c2-12 as of its date. SECTION 10. Sale of Bonds. (a) There is hereby delegated to the County Administrator authority, without further action by this Board, to sell the Bonds authorized for issuance under this resolution in accordance with the provisions hereof at competitive sale at such price, and on such other terms and conditions as shall be provided in the Detailed Notice of Sale relating to the Bonds. The County Administrator is hereby authorized to cause to be prepared, published and distributed a Detailed Notice of Sale of the Bonds in such form and containing such terms and conditions as he may deem advisable, subject to the provisions hereof. In lieu of publishing the full text of the Detailed Notice of Sale of the Bonds in accordance with the provisions of the immediately preceding sentence, the County Administrator is hereby authorized to cause a Summary Notice of Sale of the Bonds in such form as the County Administrator shall approve to be published in The Bond Buyer on a date selected by the County Administrator. (b) The County Administrator is hereby authorized to receive bids for the purchase of the Bonds and, without further action by this Board, to accept the bid offering to purchase the Bonds at the lowest true interest cost to the County, computed in accordance with the provisions of the Detailed Notice of Sale; provided (i) that such bid is accompanied by a surety bond meeting the conditions specified in the Detailed Notice of Sale and is otherwise in conformity with the Detailed Notice of Sale, (ii) that the true interest cost to the County as specified in such bid is not in excess of six percent (6.00%) and (iii) any premium payable upon the optional redemption of the Bonds shall not exceed two percent (2.00%). The County Administrator is hereby further authorized to determine, or to modify the provisions of this resolution with respect to, the dated date of the Bonds, the interest payment dates for the Bonds, the dates on which the Bonds shall mature and the principal amount of the Bonds maturing on each such maturity date and to fix the rates of interest to be borne by the Bonds of each maturity as specified in the bid accepted by him in accordance with the immediately preceding sentence. (c) The County Administrator is hereby further authorized to execute and deliver to the purchasers of the Bonds authorized for issuance under this resolution a Continuing Disclosure Certificate evidencing the County’s undertaking, to comply with the continuing disclosure requirements of Paragraph (b)(5) of such Rule 15c2-12 to the extent applicable to the Bonds. The County Administrator, the Director of Accounting and the County Attorney are hereby authorized to execute and deliver to the purchasers of the Bonds one or more certificates in the forms provided for in the Official Statement relating to the Bonds. SECTION 11. Authorization to Designate the Refunded Bonds for Redemption; Authorization to Select An Escrow Agent; Authorization to Enter into an Escrow Deposit Agreement; Authorization to Select a Verification Agent . Subject to the sale and receipt of the proceeds of the Bonds, the County Administrator is hereby authorized to designate the Refunded Bonds for redemption on such date or dates as the County Administrator shall determine and is hereby further authorized to request the County Treasurer, as Registrar and Paying Agent for the Refunded Bonds, to cause the notice of the redemption of the Refunded Bonds to be given in accordance with the provisions of the proceedings authorizing the issuance of the Refunded Bonds. (b) The County Administrator is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to select a bank or trust company to serve, or the County may itself serve, as Escrow Agent, if necessary, and to deliver to such Escrow Agent or applicable County officials irrevocable written instructions to give notices, or to cause such notices to be given, in the name and on behalf of the County, to the holders of the Refunded Bonds of the redemption of such Refunded Bonds on the dates fixed for the redemption thereof, such notices to be given in the manner and at the time or times provided in proceedings authorizing the issuance of the Refunded Bonds. (c) The County Administrator is hereby authorized, in his discretion, to execute and deliver an Escrow Deposit Agreement by and between the County and the Escrow Agent in such form as shall be approved by the County Administrator upon the advice of counsel (including the County Attorney or Bond Counsel), such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the execution of the Escrow Deposit Agreement by the County Administrator. (d) The County Administrator is hereby authorized to select a verification agent, if necessary, in connection with the refunding of the Refunded Bonds. SECTION 12. Authorization to Purchase Government Securities . The County Administrator or the County Treasurer is hereby authorized to execute, on behalf of the County, subscriptions for United States Treasury Obligations - State and Local Government Series, if any, to be purchased by the County in connection with the refunding of the Refunded Bonds. Such United States Treasury Obligations - State and Local Government Series, if any, so purchased shall be held by or on behalf of the County Treasurer or by the Escrow Agent under and in accordance with the provisions of any Escrow Deposit Agreement entered into in connection with the refunding of the Refunded Bonds. The County Administrator and or the County Treasurer is hereby authorized to enter into such purchase agreements, including forward supply agreements, if any, as shall be required in connection with the refunding of the Refunded Bonds providing for the purchase by or on behalf of the County in the open market of direct general obligations of, or obligations the payment of the principal of and interest on which are unconditionally guaranteed by, the United States of America. The County Administrator or the County Treasurer is hereby authorized to sell any securities held by the Escrow Agent under and in accordance with the provisions of the Escrow Deposit Agreement and to purchase securities in lieu of and in substitution therefor. SECTION 13. Filing of This Resolution . The County Attorney is hereby authorized and directed to file a copy of this resolution, certified by the Clerk of this Board to be a true and correct copy hereof, with the Circuit Court of the County of Chesterfield. SECTION 14. Invalidity of Sections, Paragraphs, Clauses or Provisions . If any section, paragraph, clause or provision of this resolution shall be held invalid or unenforceable for any reason, the invalidity or unenforceability of such section, paragraph, clause or provision shall not affect any of the remaining portions of this resolution. SECTION 15. Headings of Sections . The headings of the sections of this resolution shall be solely for convenience of reference and shall not affect the meaning, construction, interpretation or effect of such sections or of this resolution. SECTION 16. Effective Date . This resolution shall take effect upon its adoption. EXHIBIT A
REGISTERED OWNER: CEDE & CO.
CERTIFICATE OF AUTHENTICATION
the within Bond and all rights thereunder, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints ______________________, attorney, to transfer such Bond on the books kept for the registration thereof, with full power of substitution in the premises.
Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren.
The following item was removed from the Consent Agenda for Board discussion: 8.C.15. REQUEST FOR A MUSIC/ENTERTAINMENT FESTIVAL PERMIT FOR AMUSEMENT PROMOTIONS, INCORPORATED AND REITHOFFER SHOWS TO CONDUCT A CARNIVAL AT CLOVERLEAF MALL ON MARCH 28 THROUGH APRIL 8, 2007 Mr. Warren inquired whether the surrounding neighborhoods had been informed about the noise that might be generated from the proposed carnival. Mr. Stel Parthemos, Senior Assistant County Attorney stated he is not aware of any communication with the neighborhoods. He further stated the applicant has been working closely with the Police, Fire and Health Departments to meet their requirements. There was brief discussion relative to the neighborhoods that surround Cloverleaf Mall. Mr. Parthemos stated the same people who will be operating the proposed carnival have operated carnivals at Southpark Mall in Colonial Heights for the past few years. Discussion ensued relative to the use of private property in Chesterfield to benefit private inner city Catholic schools. Mr. Parthemos stated the $20,000 payment for use of the facility will be placed in the operating fund for the mall. Discussion ensued relative to the possibility of acquiring community input prior to approval of the permit. Mr. Sowder made a motion for the Board to approve the request for a music/entertainment festival permit, with the stipulation that there are no objections from the local neighborhoods. Mr. Micas stated the Board must either approve or deny the request, noting that it is not possible for the Board to approve an action, leaving it subject to someone not liking it. In response to Mrs. Humphrey’s question, Mr. Parthemos stated the applicant was made aware of today’s meeting, but has chosen not to attend. Colonel Baker came forward and assured the Board that the event will be adequately policed at no cost to the county. Mr. King stated he attended the carnival with his family at Southpark Mall, indicating that it was a very clean organization and the children enjoyed it. Mr. Sowder stated he will support the request based on clarifications by the Police Department and hopes that it will not impact any of the neighborhoods. Mr. Micas stated the Board could impose the following additional condition relative to noise control. Staff would impose any noise controls or any controls necessary to minimize any impact on surrounding neighborhoods. Mr. Sowder made a motion, seconded by Mr. Miller, for the Board to approve a request from Amusement Promotions, Incorporated and Reithoffer Shows for a music/entertainment festival permit, subject to conditions filed with the papers of this Board and the addition of the condition stated above relative to noise control, for a carnival at Cloverleaf Mall on March 28 through April 8, 2007. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King and Sowder. The following item was removed from the Consent Agenda for public comment: 8.C.6.a. FOR THE SOUTHWEST CORRIDOR WATER IMPROVEMENTS, RIVER/RIVERWAY ROADS, PROJECT B Mr. Mark Singer, Executive Director of the Richmond Area Municipal Contractors Association (RAMCA), expressed concerns that the county is about to spend $1,250,000 more than they should on this project. He stated, in his opinion, the engineer involved by the county to prepare the documentation on the project inserted one line in the specifications, which creates a requirement that is onerous, unreasonable and punitive with regard to both the county and the members of RAMCA. He further stated the specifications required that the successful contractor will have installed at least 10,000 linear feet of large diameter pipe within the last five years. He stated the low bid of a RAMCA member was rejected based on that provision. He stated apparently there was some discussion in a pre-bid conference relative to this language, but expressed concerns that the language negatively impacts the county and RAMCA members. He further stated all of the Class A contractors comply with state, federal and local regulations and are bonded. Mr. Tom Tennille stated he is not connected with this issue in any way, but is very concerned about the waste of tax dollars. He further stated he has been in construction all his life and thinks it is outrageous that this condition be placed on contractors. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Covington stated staff believes it will be in the best interest of the county to proceed with awarding the contract to S.J. Louis Construction, Incorporated. He then introduced Mr. Dave Plumb, Vice President of URS Corporation, the engineering firm used by the county on this project. Mr. Plumb stated large water mains are considered to be 36 inches or larger. In response to Mr. Miller’s questions, Mr. Plumb stated a different set of skills are required to place 36-inch pipe into trenches and connect the pipes together than for 30-inch pipe. He further stated, in his opinion, the lowest bidder has underestimated the complexity of constructing this project. Discussion ensued relative to the county’s time schedule for completion of the project and the arbitrariness of the experience required of the contractors. Mr. Plumb stated it is important to have contractors with recent experience because materials change over time, and the contractors with recent experience are familiar with required new installation techniques for large diameter pipe. Mr. Miller expressed concerns that the proposed contractor will have to become familiar with the county’s topography and geography since they have not done any previous work in the county. Mr. Covington stated, although the contractor may not be familiar with the soil along River Road, he is familiar with large diameter water projects, such as this. He further stated the non-responsive low bidder had not constructed projects with anything larger than 30-inch pipes. He stated there are significant differences in projects involving 30-inch and 42-inch pipes. He further stated similar contractor qualifications are consistently required by other jurisdictions for projects of this magnitude. He noted there are currently no utility projects that have used 42-inch pipe in the county. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Plumb stated it is essential to have this restriction to ensure that the job is properly completed. Discussion ensued relative to problems that would occur with construction bonds, if a contractor were to default on the contract. Mr. Covington stated completion of the project by the summer of 2008 is critical for the Utilities Department. He further stated water demands are increasing, with a peak of 60 million gallons last year. He stated the county’s delivery capability is currently 62 million gallons per day. He expressed concerns that additional system capability and storage is necessary if a drought were to occur. In response to Mr. Miller’s question, Mr. Covington stated the contractors’ restriction was stressed in a mandatory pre-bid conference. He expressed concerns that the low responsive bidder did not make any efforts to discuss amending this language. He stated the engineer requested additional documentation of the contractor’s work history relative to the qualifications required. He further stated the contractor was able to show that they had construction experience with 30-inch lines, but clearly did not meet the qualifications in the bid package. He stated he is unaware of any job that this contracting firm failed to complete, but they do not have the experience needed to complete a project of this magnitude. Discussion ensued relative to the range of the bids received on the project. Mr. Covington stated the lowest responsive bidder was 15 percent below the range, which indicates questions regarding the contractor’s understanding of the tasks associated with the job. Mr. Micas stated the public procurement process in Virginia is very rigid. He further stated, based on the clarity of the requirements for a qualified bidder, he does not believe the lowest responsive bidder would have any legal basis to contest the award to someone else. Mr. Covington stated the county has a risk in engaging with a contractor that has not proven himself with a track record that he can perform the requirements of the contract. He further stated the lowest responsive bidder has provided an extremely good cost for the project. He expressed concerns relative to the escalation in the cost of steel and stated he is grateful that the project is within budget. Mr. Ramsey stated if the Board is not satisfied, the only option would be to re-bid the project, which would be a six- to eight-week process. He expressed concerns relative to the risk involved with this since the market value of the project is already known. He stated staff does not like being in this position and is committed to reviewing this requirement with the contracting community to see if it is appropriate. He urged the Board to approve the award of the contract to S.J. Louis Construction because of the criticality of having the water available by the spring of 2008. Mr. Miller stated it is important to determine whether or not there is sufficient rationale for this requirement of contracting firms. Mrs. Humphrey stated she does not like the position that the county is in with this contract award and does not like to see the local business community excluded from any business opportunity through the government procurement process. She expressed concerns that the market value of the project is now known and that re-bidding the project could result in an additional burden on the taxpayers. She stated this project cannot be delayed because the county needs to get this water main in place. She further stated she is very disappointed that many contractors were not qualified because of the specified requirements and directed staff to evaluate the importance of this requirement for future bids. Mr. Miller stated he will support approval of awarding the contract to S.J. Louis Construction, but is concerned about the validity of the specified requirements. On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board awarded a construction contract to S.J. Louis Construction, Incorporated, in the amount of $8,200,000, for County Project 05-0149, Southwest Corridor Water Improvements, River/Riverway Roads - Project B, and authorized the County Administrator to execute the necessary documents. (It is noted a copy of the vicinity sketch is filed with the papers of this Board.) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 9. REPORTS 9.A. REPORT ON DEVELOPER WATER AND SEWER CONTRACTS On motion of Mrs. Humphrey, seconded by Mr. King, the Board accepted the following reports: a Report on Developer Water and Sewer Contracts; and a Report on the Status of General Fund Balance, Reserve for Future Capital Projects, District Improvement Funds and Lease Purchases. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 10. FIFTEEN-MINUTE CITIZEN COMMENT PERIOD ON UNSCHEDULED MATTERS No one had requested to address the Board at this time. 11. CLOSED SESSION PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.2-3711(A)(1), CODE OF VIRGINIA, 1950, AS AMENDED, TO DISCUSS QUALIFICATIONS OF SPECIFIC PERSONS FOR POSSIBLE APPOINTMENT TO THE COMMITTEE TO EVALUATE CANDIDATES FOR POLICE CHIEF Mr. Ramsey recommended that the Closed Session scheduled for this time be passed by until the end of the evening agenda because of the lengthiness of this afternoon’s agenda. 12. DINNER On motion of Mr. King, seconded by Mr. Miller, the Board recessed to the Administration Building, Room 502, for dinner with members of the School Board. Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 13. INVOCATION Reverend C. Sherrill Michael, Pastor of Chester Outreach Church of Nazarene, gave the invocation. Mr. Miller stated Mr. Oliver D. “Skitch” Rudy, former Commonwealth’s Attorney, passed away on March 13, 2007. He requested that others remember Mr. Rudy’s family in their thoughts and prayers and stated he will certainly be missed. 14. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Mr. John Harmon led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag of the United States of America. 15. RESOLUTIONS There were no resolutions at this time. 16. REQUESTS FOR MANUFACTURED HOME PERMITS AND REZONING
PLACED ON THE CONSENT AGENDA TO BE HEARD IN THE FOLLOWING ORDER: - WITHDRAWALS/DEFERRALS - CASES WHERE 07SN0202 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, GOOD NEWS FREE WILL BAPTIST CHURCH requests Conditional Use and amendment of zoning district map to permit a private school and child care center use in an Agricultural (A) District. The density of such amendment will be controlled by zoning conditions or Ordinance standards. The Comprehensive Plan suggests the property is appropriate for residential use of 1.0-2.5 dwelling units per acre. This request lies on 4.7 acres and is known as 5200 Courthouse Road. Tax ID 748-679-9519. Mr. Turner presented a summary of Case 07SN0202 and stated the Planning Commission and staff recommended approval subject to conditions and acceptance of the proffered conditions. Pastor Glen Johnson, representing the applicant, stated the recommendation is acceptable. Mr. Miller called for public comment. No one came forward to speak to the request. On motion of Mr. Warren, seconded by Mr. King, the Board approved Case 07SN0202, subject to the following conditions: 1. Except where the requirements of the underlying Agricultural (A) zoning are more restrictive, any new development for school and child care center use shall conform to the requirements of the Zoning Ordinance for commercial uses in Emerging Growth Areas, excluding buffer requirements. (P) 2. There shall be no active playfields, courts or similar active recreational facilities which could accommodate organized sports such as football, soccer, basketball, etc. (P) 3. Except as specified in Proffered Condition 2, any playground areas shall be located a minimum of forty (40) feet from all property lines. Within this setback, existing vegetation shall be supplemented, where necessary, with landscaping or other devices designed to achieve the buffering standards contained in Section 19-522 (a)(1) of the Zoning Ordinance. (P) 4. There shall be no direct vehicular access from the property to Genlou Road. (P) And, further, the Board accepted the following proffered conditions: 1. Prior to operation of the private school or child care center uses, a minimum six (6) foot high solid board fence shall be installed along the southern property line adjacent to property identified as Tax IDs 748-678-7484 and 749-679-0100, beginning at a point approximately 500 feet west of Courthouse Road and ending at a point approximately 400 feet westward of the beginning point. Prior to the installation of the fence a plan depicting the exact location and design of the fence shall be submitted to the Planning Department for review and approval. (P) 2. All driveways, parking areas and playgrounds shall be located a minimum of Seventy-five (75) feet from the western property line unless the fence described in Proffered Condition 1 is extended westward an equal distance to the improvements described above. (P) 3. Any childcare or private school uses shall be conducted only in association with a church use on the property. (T) 4. Direct vehicular access from the property to Courthouse Road shall be limited to the one (1) existing driveway located approximately 200 feet north of Qualla Road. This driveway shall be limited to exiting traffic only. The developer shall install signage, approved by Transportation Department, to discourage vehicles from using this driveway as an entrance. (T) 5. Prior to a cumulative enrollment of more than forty (40) students in the private school and day care, additional pavement shall be constructed along Courthouse Road to provide a southbound right turn lane at the existing access to the north that serves the property. (T) Ayes: Miller, Humphrey, King, Sowder and Warren. 07SN0211 In Clover Hill Magisterial District, KIDD AND CO., INC. requests rezoning and amendment of zoning district map from Agricultural (A) to Residential (R-12) plus Conditional Use Planned Development to permit exceptions to Ordinance requirements. Residential use of up to 3.63 units per acre is permi | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
