Loading...
October 03, 1979 to October 24, 1979201 Upon motion made by Raymond L. Fish, seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, and passed unanimously, the Board retired into Executive Session in accordance with Section 2.1 -344 (a)(1) to discuss personnel and Section 2.1 -344 (a)(6) to discuss legal matters. BOARD WITHDRAWS FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by Will L. Owings, seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles and passed unanimously, the Board withdrew from Executive Session. BOARD RECONVENES INTO REGULAR SESSION Upon motion made by Will L. Owings, seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles • and passed unanimously, the Board reconvened into Regular Session. J. O. RENALDS, III TO REMAIN AS COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR THROUGH OCTOBER 26, 1979 Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of • Frederick, Virginia does herein approve the extension of employment of J. 0. Renalds, III, County Administrator for Frederick County through October 26, 1979, at the current salary for said position as set for Fiscal Year 1979 -1980. The above rsolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein request the Frederick County Planning Commission to continue investigation of downzoning of certain properties • in Frederick County; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board does herein further request the Planning Commission develop guidelinesTto.>be followed by the Board should this project be pursued. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED, AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN UNTIL OCTOBER 3, • s V�� vi"'Je ecreta y, Bo4ta of Supervisors 202 An Adjourned Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on October 3, 1979 at 12:15 P.M. in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: S. Roger Koontz, Chairman; Thomas B. Rosenberger, Vice- Chairman; Dr. Raymond L. Fish; Will L. Owings; R. Thomas Malcolm; and Kenneth Y. Stiles. (Mr. Malcolm and Mr. Stiles arrived late due to attendance at another meeting.) CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order. AGREEMENT WITH MUNICIPAL ADVISORS FOR EXECUTIVE SEARCH FOR NEW COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - APPROVED Mr. Thomas R. McCann, Jr., Vice President of Municipal Advisors, Incor- porated appeared before the Board and explained the process which would be followed should the Board accept their proposal for an executive search for a new county administrator. Following a brief discussion, Mr. McCann agreed that Section D, Subsection 3(d) of the agreement would be revised to set forth a flat fee of $5,000 for this service. The Board discussed the proposal at length and several members expressed concern about providing expenses for applicants to be interviewed. Mr. McCann stated that most of the final candi- dates would be from Virginia and therefore this would involve only motel room, meals and car fare expenses. Mr. Owings stated that he was not in favor of this proposal inasmuch as he felt the Board was well qualified to select a new administrator and several other studies the County has had done in the past have never been used. Mr. Renalds stated that he felt this was a very good proposal and would be most beneficial to the Board. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he too felt the Board had been most pleased with Mr. Renalds' work as County Administrator and was well qualified to select a new applicant for this position. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stile: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the following agreement with Municipal Advisors, Incorporated to conduct an executive search for a new County Administrator for Frederick County as amended: This agreement is entered into as of October 3rd, 1979 by and between the County of Frederick, Virginia (the "County ") and Municipal Advisors Incor- porated (the. "Consultant "). WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board ") received a letter of resignation from the County Administrator; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Board to fill the vacancy as soon as possible with a qualified County Administrator; and WHEREAS, it is the further desire of the Board to engage professional assistance to aid in the search and recruitment of a qualified County Admini- strator; NOW THEREFORE BE IT AGREED BY THE PARTIES HERETO: A. The County hereby appoints Municipal Advisors Incorporated to carry out the functions described herein. • • • I B. Acting in concert with the Board and appropriate members of the 2.03 J • • is • I County staff, the Consultant will undertake to conduct a program of Executive Search and Recruitment for a qualified County Administrator. Me Scope of Work will encompass the following areas, among others: 1. Develop profile of: (a) the position of County Administrator (b) the Board of Supervisors (c) the County of Frederick 2. Determine salary, fringe benefits and perquisites for the position of County Administrator. 3. Prepare and insert advertisements concerning the vacancy in selected professional publications. 4. Screen, analyze and assess the professional and personal qualifications of each applicant. 5. Recommend in writing, with justification, candidates that are best qualified for consideration by the Board. 6. Arrange for interviews of recommended candidates. 7. Notify unsuccessful candidates of the decision of the Board. C. The County will undertake the following responsibilities in connection with this agreement: 1. The Board will appoint one of its members to act as liaison between the Consultant and the Board. 2. The Board shall make available to the Consultant County files and records, reports, agreements, contracts, resolutions and all other pertinent documents that may be necessary for the fulfillment.of the terms and conditions of this Agreement. D. The general provisions of the Agreement are as follows: 1. It is expressly understood that the Consultant will have a qualified representative available to the County to such an extent and at such times as may be required under the terms of the Agreement. 2. The Consultant will initiate the search process immediately after notice to proceed. Steps 1 through 5 of Section B will be completed within approximately forty -five calendar days after such notice. 3. The fee for performance of consulting services as outlined in Section B shall be as follows: (a) The fee for the Executive Search shall be an amount equal to $5,000.00. (b) An amount equal to $4,000.00 shall become due and payable upon submission of the Recommendation Report specified in Item 5. The balance of the fee shall become due and payable upon selection by the Board of a County Admini- strator. 4. The County shall pay all expensed in connection with intervi of selected candidates incurred by the Consultant. E. Term of the Agreement It is agreed that the term of this Agreement shall be from date of execution by the County until the selection by the Board of a County Administrator. ., .-....... ?1 Upon execution of the acceptance set forth below, the Agreement will constitute a contract between the County of Frederick, Virginia and Municipal Advisors Incorporated. COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA ATTEST: Z J. 0. Renalds, III By: 41 Stanley R. Koontz MUNICIPAL ADVISORS INCORPORATED ATTEST: /f,V_ Thomas R. McCann By: 1)y/ L. B. Wales, Jr. HIM 9he above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Kenneth Y. Stiles and R. Thomas Malcolm.) Nay - Will L. Owings and Thomas B. Rosenberger. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he did not feel the last study conducted by this firm had been worhh'its-cost:,aand_..he.' €elt.athis was:just.a.:waste of $5,000. Mr. Owings stated that he was not happy about the that it appears this matter had been negotiated before today's meeting. He asked why it had not been brought to the Board's attention before this date. Mr. Renalds stated that the proposal had been received in his office yesterday and he had taken it before the Finance Committee on that date as well. W. Koontz stated that he had not negotiated with Municipal Advisors, Incorporated on this matter but rather that Mr. McCann had called him and asked if the Board would be interested in this type of proposal and that he had told Mr. McCann that he could attend this meeting to discuss it with the Board. INTEREST RATE 6.09% SCHOOL BOND ISSUE - $1,500,000 - ACCEPTED It was reported to the meeting that the best bid received by the Virginia Public School Authority for the purchase of its School Financing Bonds, Series 1979B, called for a net interest cost of 5.990318 and that the Authority has offered to purchase at a price of par and accrued interest the $1,500,000 School Bonds, Series of 1978B, of Frederick County at an interest rate of 6.098 per year, payable on each June 15 and December 15. Lpon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Will L. Owings Thereupon the following resolution was adopted by the following roll call vote, the ayes and nays being recorded in the minutes of the meeting as follows: uFuravvyRN 7 VOTE S. Roger Koontz Aye Thomas B. Rosenberger Aye Will L. Owings Aye Dr. Raymond L. Fish Aye BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF FREDERICK COUNTY, VIRGINIA, that the $1,500,000 School Bonds, Series of 1979B, of Frederick County, heretofore authorized by resolution adopted by this Board on September 12, 1979, be and the same are hereby sold to the Virginia Public School Authority at a price of par and accrued interest from the date of the bonds to the date of delivery and shall bear interest at the rate of 6.098 per year. FESOLUTION RE: OPPOSITION TO REMOVAL OF SALES TAX FROM FOOD — APPROVED There was a brief discussion regarding a public hearing to be held by a Joint Subcommittee of the General Assembly replace the lost revenue if the sales tax on eliminated. It was the general consensus of alternatives listed were acceptable and that the Board should be forwarded to be read int Hearing. to determine alternatives to food for home consumption is the Board that none of the a resolution of opposition from D the record of said Public • • • • L 205 Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stile: BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein express its opposition to the proposed removal of sales tax on food for home consumption inasmuch as there appears at this point in time to be no acceptable alternative to replace the revenue lost by this action. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - • S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. APPOINTMENT STANLEY PANGLE, INTERIM COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR - APPROVED Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Thomas B. Rosen- berger, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that Mr. • Stanley Pangle, Public Works Director for Frederick County, Virginia, be hereby appointed to the post of Interim County Administrator effective the date of employment termination of the current County Administrator; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That this appointment shall continue until such time as a permanent replacement is appointed to the post of County Administra- tor; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the compensation of the Interim County Administrator be set at $23,486 per year effective the date he assumes the duties of the post until such time as a permanent County Administrator takes office. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - 0 S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. APPOINTMENT JOHN R. RILEY, SUBDIVISION ADMINISTRATOR - APPROVED Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick; L J Virginia, does herein appoint Mr. John R. Riley, Planning and Development Director, to the position of Subdivision Administrator effective this date and does authorize him to designate such additional deputy subdivision admini strators as he feels are needed for the administration of the subdivision ordinance, said appointments shall be with the concurrence of the Board of Supervisors; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors does herein accept the resignation of J. O. Renalds, III from the position of Subdivision Administrator effective this date. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - L -1 S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. BOARD RETIRES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles, seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, and passed unanimously, the Board retired into Executive Session in accordanc 11 2®6 with Section 2.1- 344(a)(1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950, as amended to discussll personnel. BOARD WITHDRAWS FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Will L. Owings and passed unanimously, the Board withdrew from Executive Session. BOARD RECONVENES INTO REGULAR SESSION Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish, seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, and passed unanimously, the Board reconvened into Regular Session. COMPENSATION TO DAVID G. DICKSON AND DOROTHEA STEFEN FOR EXTRA SERVICES - APPROVED Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Thomas B. BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve extra compensation as set forth below to David G. Dickson and Dorothea Stefen for extra services on the dates indicated: 1. David ;G. Dickson - $1,920 for services rendered during the period August 16, 1978 through October 1, 1978, and September 14, 1978 through January 31, 1979, in the roles of Public Works Director and Parks and Recreation Director respectively for a total of 128 days of double and triple duty. 2. Dorothea Stefen - $1,074.52 for services rendered from May through August 20, 1979 as Acting Planning and Development Director, which amount represents the difference between her salary and the beginning step for Planning and Development Director for this period. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm. Nay - Dr. Raymond L. Fish and Kenneth Y. Stiles. UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN. a pli ��s Sec etary, Boar Supervisors A Special Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held at-6:00 P.M. on October 10, 1979 in the Board of Supervisors Meeting Room, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: S. Roger Koontz, Chairman, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Vice Chairman, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order. WAIVER OF NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING We, the undersigned members of the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, the Commonwealth Attorney, and the Clerk of the Board, do hereby waive Notice of Special Meeting, to be held on Wednesday, October 10, 1979, at 6:00 P.M. in the Frederick County Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia, for the following purposes: 1. Personnel - Code of Virginia Section 2.1 -344 (a)(1) 0 207 2. Legal Matters - Code of Virginia Section 2.1 -344 (a)(6) Signed and attested this 10th day of October, 1979. S. Roger Koontz S. Roger Koontz Chairman / Thomas B. Rosenberger Thomas B. Rosenberger Vice Chairman Back Creek District /� Raymond L. Fish Raymond L. Fish Gainesboro District • /c/ Will L. Owings Will L. Owings Opequon District R. Thomas Malcolm R. Thomas Malcolm Shawnee District /,�a/ Kenneth Y. Stiles Kenneth Y. Stiles Stonewall District 0 /eZL Lawrence R. Ambrogi Lawrence R. Ambrogi Commonwealth's Attorney ATTEST: /2/ J. O. Renalds, III J. O. Renalds, III Clerk of the Board of Supervisors BOARD RETIRES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles, seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and passed unanimously the Board retired into Executive Session in accordance with Section 2.1 -344 (a) (1) to discuss personnel. BOARD WITHDRAWS FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by Will L. Owings, seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm and passed unanimously, the Board withdrew from Executive Session. BOARD RECONVENES INTO REGULAR SESSION • Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm the Board reconvened into Regular Session. • UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY IT IS ORDERED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN. '�L�AA PkAt-`l Cllai m� B and f S ervis� Secre ary, Board Supervisors 1 A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on October 10, 1979, in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 9 Court Square, Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: S. Roger Koontz, Chairman; Thomas B. Rosenberger, Vice Chair- man; Dr. Raymond L. Fish; Will L. Owings; R. Thomas Malcolm; and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CALL TO ORDER The Chairman called the meeting to order. _ IS 0 INVOCATION The invocation was delivered by the Reverend Charles Leseman of the Gravel Springs Lutheran Parish. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting held on September 12, 1979 and the Special Meeting held on September 18, 1979, as submitted. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Mr. Stiles stated that it should be noted that in the minutes of the meeting of September 12, 1979, the Board had requested the Gore telephone service area be included by C. & P. Telephone Company in the Frederick County service area and that a letter had been received from the State Corporation Commission acknowledging this request. REQUEST OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY SANITATION AUTHORITY FOR FUNDS FOR SEWER T.TNF. BUILDING TO AMOCO PLANT - STONEWALL DISTRICT - REFERRED TO FIN ill l - Y7M�1 Mr. James Diehl, Chairman of the Frederick County Sanitation Authority, appeared before the Board and stated that the Sanitation Authority had receive a proposal.of approximately $34,000 to extend the sewer line to the proposed Amoco Plant. He advised that seven homes would be served along this route and taking all things into consideration, the Sanitation Authority could justil fy $15,000 for this line extension thereby leaving a shortage of approximately $20,000. He stated that although he knew this industry would be an asset to the community, but that the Sanitation Authority has a policy wherein any industry coming into the County who desires the service must pay for it. Dr. Fish asked where the line is presently located and where it will be extended and Mr. Jones, Engineer- Director of the Sanitation Authority, replied that the line starts on Route 11 at the Howard Johnson Motor Lodge and will extend south along Route 11 to its intersection with Route 839 and then down toward the interstate. He stated that Amoco would have to pick up �1 the line somewhere on Route 839 and extend it to their plant at their own expense. There followed a brief discussion regarding the possibility of the Amoco Plant purchasing water from the city and Mr. Diehl advised that this would violate the policy which has been established not to permit this and would set a precendent for the next industry that wants to locate in the County. Mr. Koontz referred this request to the Finance Committee for considera and recommendation to the Board. SITE PLAN #022 -79 - ARTHUR H. FULTON, ET UX - OPEQUON DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented the request of Arthur H. Fulton, et ux for a site plan for a trailer repair shop and stated that approval from all agencies had been received and that the Planning Commission recommends approval of said site pla n U 0 • L Mr. Fulton appeared before the Board in support of his site plan request. Mr. Stiles stated that in the Department of Inspections comments, it. states that the plan was allright as submitted and additional requirements would be noted on the plans. He added that he did not care for this type of thing; that all notations should be made when the site plan is submitted to the Board. Mr. Riley advised that he felt this referred to additional specificatio on construction plans for the issuance of a building permit. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, • BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick Virginia, does herein approve site plan #022 -79 of Arthur H. and Dorothy Fulton to construct a 70' x 75' building to be used as a trailer repair shop on their property located off Route 277 in the Opequon Magisterial District. writing. Mr. Owings stated that inasmuch as this is an industrial area he would move for the approval of this permit excluding the condition of a one year renewable permit. ' There was no opposition to the request. Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, Ir e j 0 The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas.Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. PUBLIC HEARINGS CUP #018 -79 - ARTHUR H. FULTON, ET UX - OPEQUON DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented the site plan request of Arthur H. Fulton and Doroth Fulton stating that all agency approvals have been recieved and the Planning Commission recommended approval of the request with the conditions: (1) This trailer.repair shop be limited to the repair of trailers used by their trucking business, (2) If there is outside storage of damaged trailers, they be screened, and (3) This shall be a one -year renewable permit. Mr. Fulton expressed concern regarding the one year renewable condition stating that he planned to invest a large sum of money in this business and • would certainly need to utilize it for more than one year. Mr. Stiles stated that inasmuch as the property is zoned for industrial use, he felt ' it was little much to require a conditional use permit for such use on this property. Mr. Thomas B. Rosenberger stated that the Planning Commission was con- cerned that the appearance of the property be maintained and felt this would permit some control by the Board as well as protection for the neighbors. Mr. Fulton stated that he objected to this restriction inasmuch as he would be servicing the same number of trailers he is now handling and no • additional ones will be added. Mr. Rosenberger stated that this would be more acceptable if it were in writing. Mr. Owings stated that inasmuch as this is an industrial area he would move for the approval of this permit excluding the condition of a one year renewable permit. ' There was no opposition to the request. Upon motion made by Will L. Owings and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, Ir e j 0 210 BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve Conditional Use Permit No. 018 -79 of Arthur. H. and Dorothy Fulton to operate a trailer repair shop on their property located off Route 277 in the Opequon Magisterial District with the following conditi 1. This trailer repair shop shall be limited to the repair of trailers used by the Fulton Trucking Company only. 2. If there is outside storage of damaged trailers, they shall be screened. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Nay - Thomas B. Rosenberger and R. Thomas Malcolm. REQUIREMENTS FOR CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS FOR INDUSTRIAL USES ON LAND TO BE RESEARCED AND A RECOMMENDATION MADE TO THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FOR CONSIDERATION Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to have the situation where in a conditional use permit is required for an industrial use when the property is correctly zoned industrial and then it is proposed to issue a..one -year renew- able permit for said use. Mr. Riley advised that he had looked at the ordinance and as it now stands anything in this category must have a conditonal use permit, be it a 100,000 square foot building or a pole shed. He stated that this matter is currently being studied by his department and the Planning Commission. Mr. Stiles stated that anything in M -2 must have a site plan and the Board could put restrictions on the site plan and therefore he did not-feel the conditional use permit was necessary. Mr. Koontz requested Mr. Riley and the Planning Commission to research this proposal and report their findings back to the Board. REQUEST THAT MEETING BE ADJOURNED AT 11:00 P. M. - APPROVED Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, and passed unanimously, the Board agreed to adjourn the meeting at 11:00 P.M. ZMAP #011 -79 - WINCHESTER RENDERING COMPANY - GAINESBORO DISTRICT - THIRD AND FINAL READING - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented the rezoning request of Winchester Rendering Company stating that all agency approvals have been received and the Planning Commissi recommends approval of said request. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the following rezoning request on third and fi reading: ZONING MAP AMENDMENT PETITION NO. 011 -79 OF WINCHESTER RENDERING COMPANY, INC., P. 0. BOX 2138, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, REQUESTING THAT 5.011 ACRES ON ROUTE 679 NOW ZONED AGRICULTURAL- LIMITED (A -1) BE REZONED INDUSTRIAL - GENERAL (M -2). THIS PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 41 -18 AND IS LOCATED IN THE GAINESBORO MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. n E E 1 Ll 2'11 • • 1 CUP # 019 -79 - WINCHESTER RENDERING COMPANY - GAINESBORO DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented the conditional use permit request of Winchester Rendering Company and stated that all agency approvals had been received and that the Planning Commission recommends approval as long as the property) is.owned by Winchester Rendering Company. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Thomas B. Rosenberger, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve Conditional Use Permit #019 -09 of Winchester Rendering Company to erect an 1,800 square foot office building and parking lot on their property located on the north side of Virginia Secondary Route 679 and its intersection with Rt. 608 in Gainesboro Magisterial District with the condition that this permit shall remain in effect as long as the property is owned by Winchester Rendering Company. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings,) R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CONDITIONAL USE PEE 20 -79 - ANGELO IR - STONEWALL DISTR' APPROVED Mr. Riley presented the conditional use permit of Angelo Funkhouser stating that all agency approvals had been received and the Planning Comm= ission recommends approval with the stipulation that it be renewable in two years. Dr. Fish asked if the drainfield was located near the county water line and Mr. Funkhouser replied that it is not; it is 35 feet from the water main. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Thomas B. Rosen- berger, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Freder Virginia, does herein approve Conditional Use Permit #020 -79 of Angelo Funkhouser for the placement of a mobile home on the lot located at 112 Lee Avenue, Winchester, Virginia in the Stonewall Magisterial District with the stipulation that the permit be renewable in two years. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings,) R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. PRESENTATION FREDERI TER - UPDATE OF FACILITIES PLAN FOR Mr. Koontz introduced Mr. Jack Hardesty, Chairman of the Clarke County Board of Supervisors, and Mr. P. T. McIntyre and Dr. Raleigh Watson, members of the Clarke County Board of Supervisors and welcomed them to the meeting. Mr. Wellington H. Jones, a County representative on the Frederick Winchester Service Authority, appeared before the Board and presented a slide presentation of the update of the Facilities Plan for the Service 212 Authority including a brief background of the formation of the Authority and the reasons therefor. Mr. Jones described the various treatment processes studied and the.one recommended in the plan and stated that the size of the plant was based on flow projections derived from population projections. He stated that strong letters of intent had be received from the industrial users and they would bear their proportionate share for participation in the plant. Mr. Jones then described the proposed location of the plant stating that this site had been selected because of its countours room for potenti expansion. He explained the recommendation not to utilize the existing facilities was based on many factors, some of which were (a) the County plant has a limited service area and will have to be expanded, (b) it is not cost effectiv to upgrade and expand the County plant, (c) the County plant was designed as an interim plant and would have to be upgraded to a permanent plant, (d) the County plant is located close to a potentialldcvelopment areacand within 20' years would be experiencing the same problems the City is currently having, (e) it is not cost effective to use the City plant, (f) there is not sufficien space to expand the City plant which would preclude adequate treatment of sewage during construction, and (g) at the end of the planning period, the City plant will be 50 years old. Mr. Jones then explained the cost breakdown of the proposed plant stating that the total cost would be $19,890.6 million, with federal funding of $13,375.20 million and local funding of $6,515.40 million. He stated that it is currently proposed that during the funding phase of the project, costs woul� continue to be shared equally; that at the end of the design phase and prior to construction, the Authority would float revenue bonds and repay both juris- diction funds advanced for the project. He stated that the bonds would be paid off by.the users of the system based on flow. He advised that over the 2( year period, the County would pay approximately 15% and the City would pay approximately 858. Mr. Jones stated that it is recommended that the Stephens City and the Frederick County Sanitation Authority systems be combined into one and that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority continue to operate the facility until such time as the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority is ready to assume operation of said system. He stated that the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority, in adopting plan, recommended the following to the governing bodies: (1) Approval of the facilities plan as updated; (2) that Step II funds be comitted in the amount of $122,000 for Fiscal Year 1980 -1981 and $61,000 for Fiscal Year 1981 -1982; (3) That the Authority be permitted to submit application to the State Water Control Board for Step II funding. Mr. Jones stated that the Authority re- quested that a decision be rendered at the November 14, 1979 meeting. Mr. Rosenberger asked how the city water system tied into the proposed and Mr. Jones replied that the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority was formed for three reasons; to provide water, to provide sewer service and to F J • I* • • 213 provide solid waste disposal. He advised that there are provisions where the Authority can buy the City water system should they so desire and the City must sell it; that solid waste disposal is pretty much in hand at the present time and this too will eventually be turned over to the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority. He then introduced Mr—Rattray and Mr. Kress- mann of Alexander Potter Associates and Mr. Chuck Maddox of Gilbert Clifford Associates and Mr. C. Robert Solenberger, Chairman of the Frederick - Wincheste Service Authority. Mr. Stiles asked what would be involved and how much it would cost to • convert the County plant from interim to permanent status_and.Mr. Jones. replied that it would have to be expanded, and would have to provide treat- ment for nitrogen at a cost of approximately $1.3 million dollars. There followed a brief discussion wherein Mr. Stiles asked why it would not be cost effective to upgrade the County plant and Mr. Kressmann stated that in the long run the operation and maintenance costs, plus the debt service for the County share in the regional plant is less than the operat and maintenance and debt service at the existing plant. Mr. Stiles asked what the City would do about its plant, which is curren ly causing most of the problems in the County, if the new plant will not be in operation until 1986 and Mr. Kressmann replied that under the consent order they will be permitted to operate until the new facility are ready if they meet an effluent limitation of 18/18 which they are currently achieving Mr. Stiles asked what the advantage would be to the people of Frederick F_ 1 I1 LJ County to build the proposed plant and Mr. Rattray replied that one advantag would.be cost inasmuch as overall it would cost less to build the Regional Plant than to upgrade the existing facility; that another advantage would be that the new plant and the proposed site have the flexibility to be easily upgraded if the effluent limitations become more stringent and that a third advantage would be that it would provide service to the lower reaches of Abrams Creek. Mr. James Diehl and Mr. Chuck Maddox appeared before the Board and Mr. Maddox stated that they had studied the upgrade quite carefully and had foun that the joint regional facility would be more cost effective and more feas- bile. He added that grant funds would not be available for upgrading the County plant. Mr. Maddox pointed out that the County plant is operating as an interim facility and that the permit stated that�.it' must comply with the findings of the Regional Authority. Mr. Maddox stated that they felt perhaps a substantial savings could be realized if the treatment process was changed'somewhat inasmuch as the trea ment flow coincides with the apple processing period during the winter mont when it is at its higher and therefore perhaps the degree of treatment de- signed for this plant is not necessary. He suggested that perhaps a tiered permit might be more desirable for this plant. Mr. Rattray replied that this had been discussed with the state several times but.they.have told us that we should put the plant in operation, revi the performance and stream conditions and then come back to them for further discussions. He advised that when application for a permit.-is made, we will 2'14 again state that a tiered permit would be desirable. Mr. Malcolm asked if it would take legal action to see whether or not Frederick County's plant could continue to operate as a permanent plant or is there no choice but to abandon it and Mr. Maddox stated that this had not been tested in the Courts. Dr. Fish asked how many new connections the County could expect from this regional plant in the year 2000 and Mr. Jones replied approximately 2600. Dr. Fish asked if anyone had approached the property owners on which this plant is proposed to be built and Mr. Jones replied they had not inasmuch as the plan has not yet been approved. Mr. Jack Hardesty appeared before the Board and stated that should this plant be built as the proposed site, it would mandate development in the west- ern part of Clarke County and they were most interested in preserving the quality of life and the agricultural land in Clarke County. He added that he felt it was unfair to the residents of Clarke County to build the plant in thi; location and especially the Bayliss family who will be closest to the plant. He stated that he did not believe this would be fair to the memorial to Senator Byrd in that this road has been named in his honor. He urged the Board of Supervisors to be good neighbors in making their_ decisions. Mr. Rattray stated that to move the plant further downstream would be extremely difficult and costly and we would encounter a flooding problem. He further advised that the site of the plant would not obligate Frederick County to provide services for development in Clarke County. Mr. Malcolm asked Mr. Rattray what he felt the City would do if the County elected not to participate in the plant and Mr. Rattray replied that the most economical thing for the City to do would be to proceed to build a plant on this site; that most likely if either juridsiction elected not to participate with the Regional Authority, the other jurisdiction could possibly apply for and receive grant funding and the withdrawing locality would probably not get grant funding should they apply. Mr. Malcolm stated that in effect then, if the County backs out, the City could go into the County, condemn land, construct the plant and still maintain the water treatment plant. Mr. Robert Koon, a property owner of the proposed site for the plant, ask what they should do about continuing their operation while the City and County continue battling over what they are going to do. Mr. Koontz replied that the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority has asked for a decision in November so we should know very soon what direction will be taken. Mr. Rosenberger suggested that a joint meeting be held with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority to discuss this plan before a decision is reached. Mr. Diehl suggested that perhaps one alternative which could be considered would be that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority build the Regional P1 and provide sewage treatment to the City while the City would continue to pro- r \, LJ LJ • • 215 1 • • • • r vide water service to the County. Ms. Margaret Maizel appeared before the Board and stated that according to her calculations the plant would be able to serve a population of 80,000 and Mr. Rattray replied that it would serve approximately 50,000. Ms. Maizel asked if the industrial letters of intent still stand and Mr. C. Robert Solenberger stated that they did. She asked if the Authority r considered updating the City plant without the capacity to handle the apple processers. She stated that should they decide to pull out, the sewer would be subsidized through additional growth and the domestic users would get the charges shifted to them. She added that her first concern was Clarke County and the fact that they had very little, if any, control over this project. Mr. Koontz assured Ms. Maizel that everyone is concerned and this would not be a hasty decision; that all alternatives would be considered quite carefully. A'joint meeting with the Frederick County Sanitation Authority was set for November 7, 1979 at 7:00 P.M. to discuss the Frederick- .Winchester Servi Authority Facilities Plan Update. The Board recessed for fifteen minutes. PUBLIC HEARINGS AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING TO AMEND SECTION 21 -1 - THIRD AND FINAL, READING - REFERRED BACK TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR FURTHER STUDY AND RECOMMENDATION Mr. Riley explained the proposed changes to Chapter 21 of the Zoning Ordinance stating that said changes deal with home occupations and conditi al use permits in agricultural and residential districts. There followed a brief discussion regarding uses such as antique shops within a home or other such similiar businesses and several members expres concern that these uses would be required to be operated outside the dwell even though a conditional use permit had been approved. Mr. Stiles then moved to table Section 21 -1, Subsection -Home Occupations Agricultural, for further study by the Planning Commission. This motion was seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm. Dr. Fish suggested that perhaps the entire ordinance should be withdrawn for further study. Mr. Stiles then withdrew his previous motion and Mr. Malcolm withdrew his second. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick Virginia, does herein refer the following ordinance amendment back to the Planning Commission for further consideration and recommendation to the Board of Supervisors: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING, ADOPTED JULY 12, 1978, TO AMEND SECTION 21 -1; DELETE HOME OCCUPATION ACCESSORY STRUCTURE, AMEND SECTION 21 -16 (L), DELETE SECTION 21- 16(w)(7), AMEND SECTION 21- 26(1), DELETE SECTION 21- 26(x)(19), AMEND SECTION 21 -35, AMEND SECTION 21- 36(L), DELETE SECTION 21- 36(m), AMEND SECTION 21 -43, AMEND SECTION 21- 44(c), DELETE SECTION 21 -44 (L), AMEND SECTION 21- 52(i), DELETE SECTION 21- 52(p). The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. 216 AN ORDINANCE TO AME THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAP F a� \JJ:APIeI�J 21 -1 Mr. Riley presented the proposed amendment to Chapter 21, Section 21 -1 of frontage between the edge of the right -of -way and the minimum building set the Zoning Ordinance to change the definition of frontage to establish lot back line. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stilei BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve on third and final reading the following amendment: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING ADOPTED JULY 12, 1978, TO AMEND ARTICLE I, SECTION 21 -1 DEFINITIONS. This ordinance shall be in full force and effect upon adoption by the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia. Section 21 -1 Home Occupation - Agricultural Any occupation or business use conducted entirely within a dwelling house, by members of the family residing on the premises, and is clearly incidental and secondary to the residential use of the building excluding antique shops, boarding or rooming houses, commercial, repair or storage of automobiles, or other motor vehicles, or restaurants. Home Occupation - Residential An occupation carried on within a dwelling house by the occupant of the dwelling, as an incidental secondary use in con- nection with which there is no display, and no one is employed other than mem- bers of the family residing on the premises such as professional offices (e.g. medical, dental, legal, engineering, and architectural) conducted within a dwelling house by the occupant. Section 21 -16(L) - Home Occupation - Agrucultural as defined, only with a Sec. 21 -1 Frontage The minimum width of a lot measured from one side lot line to the other along a line parallel to the street, road or right -of -way on which no point shall be farther away from the street, road or right -of -way upon which the lot fronts than the building setback line as defined and required hereiri. For purposes of determining frontage, rights -of -way shall not be construed as frontage for a deeded parcel unless such right -of -way provides the only means of access to said deeded parcel. Proposed change: Frontage The minimum width of a lot measured from one side lot line to the other along a line parallel to the street, road or right -of -way on which no point shall be farther away from the street, road or right -of -way upon which the lot fronts than the minimum building setback line as defined and required herein. -For purposes of determining frontage, rights -of -way shall not be construed as frontage for a deeded parcel unless such right -of -way provides t only means of access to said deeded parcel. NOTE: Change is in phrase "minimum building setback line ", adding the word minimum. - The_above- resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owirigs, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. U I • • 1 • conditional use permit. Section 11- 16(v) (7) - Home occupations- accessory structure: delete. Section 21 -26(L) - Home Occupation - Agricultural as defined, only with a conditional use permit. Section 21- 26(x)(19) - Home occupation- accessory structure: delete. Section 21 -35 - Home occupations are permitted with a conditional use permit. Section 21 -36(L) - Home Occupation - Residential as defined, only with a conditional use permit. Section 21 -36(m) - Home occupation- accessory structure: delete. Section 21 -43 - Home occupations are permitted with a conditional use permit. Section 21 -44(c) - Home Occupation - Residential as defined, only with a conditional use permit. Section 21 -44(L) - Home occupations- accessory structure: delete. Section 21 -52(i) - Home Occupation - Residential as defined, only with a conditional use permit. Section 21 -52(p) - Home occupations- accessory structure: delete. Sec. 21 -1 Frontage The minimum width of a lot measured from one side lot line to the other along a line parallel to the street, road or right -of -way on which no point shall be farther away from the street, road or right -of -way upon which the lot fronts than the building setback line as defined and required hereiri. For purposes of determining frontage, rights -of -way shall not be construed as frontage for a deeded parcel unless such right -of -way provides the only means of access to said deeded parcel. Proposed change: Frontage The minimum width of a lot measured from one side lot line to the other along a line parallel to the street, road or right -of -way on which no point shall be farther away from the street, road or right -of -way upon which the lot fronts than the minimum building setback line as defined and required herein. -For purposes of determining frontage, rights -of -way shall not be construed as frontage for a deeded parcel unless such right -of -way provides t only means of access to said deeded parcel. NOTE: Change is in phrase "minimum building setback line ", adding the word minimum. - The_above- resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owirigs, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. U I • • 1 • AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING TO AMEND ARTICLE II, SECTION 21 -11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - THIRD AND FINAL READING - APPROVED Mr. Riley presented the ordinance to amend Article II, Section 21 -11 of the Frederick County Code stating that this proposed amendment would establi: some guidelines for the Board and Planning Commission to follow regarding conditional use permits. Mr. Stiles asked if this amendment would provide the Board with addition- 0 al power over conditional use permits or deprive the Board of any of its power in this regard and Mr. Riley replied that it would do neither but would provide guidelines for the Board and Planning Commission and would provide the public with some idea of what might possibly be required to obtain a conditional use permit. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt the ordinance as it is now written is 1 better than this proposed amendment and inasmuch as the matter is still in the courts as to whether or not conditional use permits will have to go to public hearing, he felt this should be adopted when this decision is reached. Mr. Rosenberger replied that the Planning Commission felt that it is always better to have some written guidelines to follow. Mr. Stiles then moved to table this proposed amendment. This motion was seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and defeated by the following recorded vote: Aye - Kenneth Y. Stiles and Dr. Raymond L. Fish. Nay - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt this amendment serves no purpose. Dr. Fish stated that he was against a governmental body continually gr • ing itself more power and he felt it was an harrasment to the people to drag them through three or four processes when perhaps one would suffice. He added that he felt the Board should take a long look at this sort of thing. He stated that he was willing to advocate the power of the governing body to the Planning Commission. Mr. Owings stated that he felt this amendment would help the Planning Commission to know what guidelines the Board of Supervisors wants them to follow. Mr. Rosenberger stated that the Planning Commission felt it was necessary to have some sort of tool to work with in making recommendations to the Board Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Will L. Owings, • BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the following ordinance amendment -on third and final reading: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZONING, ADOPTED JULY 12, 1978 TO AMEND ARTICLE II, SECTION 21 -11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS Section 21 -11. Conditional Use Permits The purpose of this Section is to protect the general health and welfare of the area in which the proposed conditional-use is to be located -with • • • 1 • L 217 \J • • rJ attention being given to areas with residential growth patterns and to protect the residents of the County from the harmful results of haphazard and ill- advised growth patterns. A. The Board of Supervisors shall approve or disapprove as a legislative function with recommendation from the Planning Commission conditional use permits for uses requiring these permits as specified in this chap- ter. B. In granting a conditional use permit, the Board of Supervisors may prescribe appropriate conditions in conforming with this chapter. Violation of such conditions when made a part of the terms under which the conditional use permit is granted, shall be deemed a violation of this chapter. C. The Planning Commission and Board of Supervisors shall insure suitable regulations and safeguards with the issuance of conditional use permits by considering the following as a basis for approval. (1) The conditional use permit is consisten with the intent and standards of this chapter. (2) The conditional use permit is in conformity with portions of the adopted comprehensive plan that may apply. . (3) The conditional use permit will not, in the opinion of the Frederick - Winchester Health Department, Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation, Frederick County Department of Public Works,'and other public agencies regulating or affected by the proposed use,.substantially effect adjacent properties in regards to: runoff, traffic, land value, and air or water pollution. (4) The conditional use permit shall meet the as applicable of the Frederick - Winchester City of Winchester Utilities Department, Sanitation Authority, Virginia Department Transportation, and other public agencies affected by the proposed use. development standa Health Department, Frederick County of Highways and regulating or (5) Drainage plan showing treatment of off site drainage across the development, and the disposition of the additional runoff due to the increase in impervious area. D. Possible conditions which may be made a part of the conditional use permit may include but are not limited to: (1) Length of time of permit. (2) Periodic renewal. (3) Guarantee or bond to insure timely compliance with imposed conditions. (4) Size and location of the buildings or use or lot. (5) Character of the building or use. (6) Lighting of the site! (7) Access to the site including controlling the location and number of vehicles access points. (6) Increasing the street width. (9) Increasing the number of parking spaces. (10) Limiting the number, size, location and lighting of signs. (11) Requiring diking, fencing, screening, landscaping or other facilities to protect adjacent or near properties. (12) Limiting hours of operation. (13) Limitation to persons. (14) Preservation of trees, streams, and other natural features. E. Approved.conditional use permits must meet the minimum standards of the zoning district in which they are located. F. When application for a Conditional Use Permit is submitted the Conditio al Use Permit Policies as approved by the Commission shall apply. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. 218 AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY CODE, CHAPTER 21, ZOTLnNG TO AMEND ARTICLE II, SECTION 21 -11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS - T IRD ANTI PTNAT. PRAnTNr - APPPfIVPM M R ley presented the ordiance to amend Article-II, /Sect'on 21 -11 of the Frederi County Code stating that this proposed amendment d establish some guideline for the Board and Planning Commission to follow rding condtion - al use oerm\its. Mr. Stil \of d if this amendment would p/edto e Board with additional) power over cna use permits or deprive tof any of its power in this regard Riley replied that it woulher but would provide guidelines fBoard and Planning Commissiuld provide the public with some idhat might possibly be requi tain a conditional use permit. M r. Stiles stated that he felt the ordinance as it is now written is bette than this proposed ame ment and inasmuc as the matter is still in the courts as to whether or not con he felt this should be a Mr. Rosenberger repli p rmits will have to to to public hearing is decision is reached. Planning Commission felt that it is al- elines to follow. le this proposed amendment. This motion was and defeated by the following recorded vote: aymond L. Fish. Nay - S. Roger Koontz, Thoma B. Rosenberger, /tt ings, a \alon omas Malcolm. Mr. Stiles s he felmendment serves no purpose. Dr. Fish stae was agovernmental body continually grant- ing itself more he felt an harrassment to the people to drag them through thr procesperhaps one would suffice. He added that he felt the uld taklook at this sort of thing. He tional use ed when that ways better to have some wri ten Mr. Stiles then moved to seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fi h Aye - Kenneth Y. Stiles and r. stated that to the P1 Mr. Commissi follow. was not willing to advocate\he power of the governing body Commission. stated that he felt this amen to know what guidelines the Board t would help the Planning Supervisors want them to Mr. Rosenberger stated that the Planning Co \end.ed" felt it was necessary to ha e some sort of tool to work with in makindations to the Board. pon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger ad by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of SupervisoCounty of Frederick, V'rginia, does herein approve the fol lowing ordndment on third and inal reading: AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND THE FREDERICK COUNTY TER 21, ZONING, ADOPTED JULY 12, 1978 TO AMEND ARTITION 21 -11 CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS. • • • • 219 PLAT VACATION - EDWIN L. RHODES - GAINESBORO DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Riley stated that the request for plat vacation had been sent back 1 the Planning Commission for consideration but they could take no action inas much as the first plat was two five acre tracts over which they had no con- trol.. He advised that Mr. Rhodes is requesting vacation of this plat, dated May 10, 1978 so that he might record the plat approved by the Board on Sep- tember 12, 1979. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stile • BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the request for plat vacation of Edwin L. to vacate the plat of his property, located in Gainesboro Magisterial Distri of Route 681, dated May 10, 1978 and recorded in Deed Book 491, at Page 397. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - • S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. RESOLUTION REQUESTING ABANDONMNET OF ROUTE 805 - APPROVED Mr. Renalds presented the request for abandonment of Route 805 and stated that there had been no opposition to this proposal and that the guidelines for abandonment had been followed. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Sti WHEREAS, It appears to the Board of Supervisors of Frederick County, Virginia, that Route 805 from .059 miles east of Route 681 to .063 miles east of Route 681, serves no public necessity and is no longer necessary for public use in the Secondary System of State Highways; and, WHEREAS, Notice has been posted and published of the Board's intention • to abandon said road, pursuant to Section 33.1 -151 of the Code of Virginia as amended and no opposition has been presented regarding said action; NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein request the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation to approve the abandonment of said road. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. STATE AND LOCAL HOSPITALIZATION CONTRACT - APPROVED Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, • BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick Virginia, does herein approve the daily rate of $180.95 for the Children's Hospital National Medical Center under the State -Local Hospitalization for the fiscal year 1979 -1980. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger,•Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings,l R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CONSIDERATION OF APPOINTMENTS The Chairman announced that hopefully appointments to the Regional Library Board could be made at the meeting on October 24, 1979. He reques that nominations for these appointments be sent to the Board's representati Dr. Fish and Mr. Rosenberger. r 220 Mr: Rosenberger advised that the County would have three appointments to the Board but Dr. Racey has requested that only two be made at this time and that the third be held in abeyance until the resignation of the City member holding this position is tendered. The Board concurred. APPOINTMENT OF JOHN RILEY TO LORD FAIRFAX PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION Tnnnllxn ' Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish,l BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein appoint Mr. John R. Riley, Frederick County Planning and Development Director, to fill the unexpired term of Mr. H. Ronald Berg as a citizen member from Frederick County on the Lord Fairfax Planning District Commission, said term to expire on October 31, 1980. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. REAPPOINTMENT OF C. ROBERT SOLENBERGER TO FREDERICK- WINCHESTER SERVICE AUTHORITY - APPROVED Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish,I BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein reappoint Mr. C. Robert Solenberger to serve as the citizen member on the Frederick - Winchester Service Authority for a term of two years, said term to commence on January 1, 1980 and terminate on December 31, 1981, with the stipulation that the City of Winchester concur with this appoini ment. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. APPOINTMENTS TO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY - DISCUSSED Mr. Stiles requested that the appointments to the Frederick County Indus- trial Development Authority be tabled until November at which time he will have an appointment from Stonewall District. Mr. Malcolm stated that he would also endeavor to have an appointment from Shawnee District at that time. ENGINEERING AND CODE ENFORCEMENT COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Malcolm presented the recommendations from the Committee on Engineer and Code Enforcement and the following action was taken. CONDEMNATION OF PROPERTY FOR RADIO TRANSMITTER SITE - APPROVED Mr. Malcolm stated that for months the County has attempted to finalize purchase of a piece of property located on Great North Mountain for a radio transmitter site but said property is tied up in judgment. He advised that it is therefore recommended that the property be condemned for the above pur- pose and that proceedings be started as soon as possible in order that the sit might be constructed prior to cold weather. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt this should not be construed as a precedent for other County condemnation. Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, • • • • 221 • • • • 1 Virginia, does herein direct that the County proceed to condemn property on Great North Mountain in Shawnee -Land for use as a County radio transmitter site. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. RECOMMENDATION THAT THE COUNTY NOT CONDEMN PROPERTY FOR ACCESS ROAD TO STINE INDUSTRIAL PARK - APPROVED Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick; Virginia, does herein agree that they will not condemn property for a second access road to the Stine Industrial Park .(Fort Collier Industrial Estates). The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. APPLICATION FOR INDUSTRIAL ACCESS FUNDS STINE INDUSTRIAL PARK - DENIED Mr. Malcolm stated that the Engineering Committee felt that the Board should not recommend approval for industrial access funds for_road construc- tion to the Stine Industrial Park until Mr. Stine obtains additional access as previously stipulated by the Board. Mr. Stiles stated that this would affect Dawson Investments and Mr. Malcolm replied that the Board had granted Mr. Dawson access on Smithfield Avenue for 18 months and then had granted a 6 months extension; that this extension would expire in January and the Board must decide what:to do. He stated that Mr. Ambrogi had advised that it would appear this problem would be a civil matter between Mr. Stine and Mr. Dawson inasmuch as Mr. Dawson had purchased the property obviously thinking there was an access road. Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Thomas B. Rosenbe BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein agree that they will not approve an application for industrial access funds for road'construction for Stine Industrial Park until such time as Mr. Stine obtains additional access to the park as previously stipulated by the Board. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, and R. Thomas Malcolm. Nay - Kenneth Y. Stiles. FINANCE COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Rosenberger presented the Finance Committee recommendations and the following action was taken. COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY - LEASE- PURCHASE AGREEMENT FOR MAG CARD TYPEWRITER - APPROVED Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick; =_r, 222 Virginia, does herein approve a 48 month lease - purchase agreement for an IBM Magnetic Card typewriter for the Commonwealth's Attorney's office and does further approve a transfer from Reserve for Contingencies in the amount of $3,036 to fund the lease - purchase agreement for the remainder of Fiscal Year 1979 -1980. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. TRANSFER OF H. L. MCCANN DEFERRED ACCOUNT TO GENERAL REVENUE FUND - rnnnnxn n Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish, .. BE IT RESOLVED, By the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the account entitled H. L. McCann Deferred Account, carried on the financial records of the County in the amount 6f:,$7,5.-.38 is,herbby to'be_trans ferred into the General'Reveunue Fund. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. UEST FOR CLERK IN PUBLIC WORKS DEP �TiTuiuf0ia�T_YI • L • Mr. Rosenberger stated that the Finance Committee recommended the transferl of the CETA position of Clerk Typist II in the Public Works Department to a permanent County postion. He then moved for approval of this recommendation and the motion was seconded by Dr. Raymond L. Fish. Mr. Stiles .stated that he could recall the Board directing that no addi- tional CETA positions would be transferred to a permanent status. Mr. Rosenberger stated that this was true, but it had been done in the past. Mr. Owings asked if the proposal which he had endorsed at the Engineering Committee meeting of combining the Clerk Typist II position in the County Administrator's Office with that of the one in the Public Works Department had been considered by the Finance Committee and Mr. Rosenberger stated that it had not. • Mr. Pangle advised that after discussing this proposal, it was felt this would not be possible. Mr. Rosenberger stated that this proposal had not been discussed in the Finance Committe and he had understood that there would be no additional re- quests for help. Mr. Stiles then moved to refer this matter back to the Finance Committee for further study and recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. This motion was seconded by Will L. Owings and passed unanimously. REVISED GRIEVANCE PROCEDURE - APPROVED Mr. Renalds explained that the grievance procedure had been revised to coincide with state statutes. Mr. Stiles and Dr. Fish expressed objection to the State establishing 1 • grievance procedures for County employees. Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve the following revised grievance procedures for 223 I I I • C 1 • L the County of Frederick, Virginia Personnel Management Plan: GRIEVANCE POLICY AND PROCEDURE a. Polic It.is the policy of the Board of Supervisors to provide fair, equitable, and satisfactory working arrangements for its employees. Every effort will be made to resolve employee grievances informally with the least amount of worry and delay. However, in some cases it becomes necessary to proceed through a formal appeal and panel review to handle thoroughly a given grievance. Accordingly, the following procedures and regulations are established. b. Definition of Grievance As defined in Section 2.1- 114.5:1A of the Virginia State Code, a grievan shall be defined as "...a complaint or dispute by an employee relating to his or her employment, including but not necessarily limited to (i) disciplinary actions, including dismissals, demotions and suspension., (ii) the application, or interpretation of personnel policies, procedure rules and regulations, (iii) acts of reprisal as a result of utilization of the grievance procedure, and (iv) complaints of discrimination on the basis of race;. color, creed, political affiliation, age, handicap, national origin or sex." C. Matters Deemed Not Grievable Employees are advised that conditions of employment and law and policy established by the Board of Supervisors are not grievable. By State law, wages, salaries, and fringe benefits are likewise not grievable. In addition, it is to be understood that the establishment of this procedure shall in no way remove the right of the County to do the following, provided however, that none of these rights may be exercised in an arbitrary or capricious manner: 1. Direct the work of its employees 2. Hire, promote, transfer, and assign employees 3. Suspend, demote or dismiss employees for cause 4. Maintain the efficiency of governmental operations 5. Relieve employees from duty because of a lack of work or for other legitimate reasons 6. Take actions necessary to carry out duties of an agency in emergencies 7. Determine the methods, means and personnel necessary to carry out operations 8. Control and manage the County's property and maintain in the County's function and operations d. Determination of Grievabili If some question should exist concerning the grievability of a specific problem, and if the question cannot be resolved to the satisifaction of both the employee and his supervisor at the departmental level,. employee may make a request for a ruling of grievability from the County Administrator, who shall respond within five days. In any case, no complaint may be addressed beyond the top management level before grievability has been determined. Only after grievability has been determined shall a grievance by processes through the grievance panel stage. The decision of the County Administrator may be appealed by the 224 n grievant to the Circuit Court for a hearing de novo on the issue of grievability. Proceedings for review of the decision of the County Administrator shall be instituted by filing a notice of appeal with the County Administrator within ten (10) working days after the date of the decision and giving a copy thereof to all other parties. Within ten (10) days thereafter, the County Administrator shall transmit to the clerk of the Circuit Court: a copy of the decision of the County Admini- strator, a copy of the notice of appeal, and the exhibits. e. Grievance Procedure An employee wishing to file a grievance shall have the right to follow all the steps of this procedure as listed below with complete freedom from reprisal. This does not, however, confer the right upon anyone to make slanderous or libelous statements. Failure by the grievant to comply with all substantial procedural requirements of the grievance procedure without just cause will terminate the right to further appeal. Failure of the respondent to comply with all substantial procedural requirements of the grievance procedure without just cause will, at the option of the grievant, advance the grievant to the next step in the grievance resolution process. Failure of the respondent, without just cause, to comply with all substantial procedural requirements of the final step of the grievance procedure shall result in a decision in favor of the grievant. STEP I . An employee who has a grievance, as defined herein, shall within five (5) work days of the occurrence of the action or event causing the grievance or of the date when the employee could have reasonably been expected to have learned of the act or event, contact his immediate supervisor for a discussion of the grievance. The supervisor shall:immediately; discuss the.grievance.with_the.employee and make a careful inquiry into the facts and circumstances of the complaint. The supervisor shall give the employee a reply within six (6) work days following receipt of the complaint. STEP II . If the grievance is not resolved as a result of STEP�_I, the employee may within ten (10) work days thereafter file a written grievance with his department head. The employee must be sure that the written grievance is complete in all detail at this stage of the procedure and must specify the specific relief he expects to obtain through the use of the grievance procedure. No addition, deletions or adjustments to the original grievance will be all ed or accepted at a late point with the procedure. The department head will then make a separate inquiry into the complaint and inform the employee of his decision and the reasons therefore within five (5) calendar days following receipt of the written grievance. STEP III If the department head's response does not resolve the grievance, the employee may within ten (10) work days thereafter file a written request for a hearing with the County Administrator containing the employee's explanation of what has occurred. A copy shall also be sent to the employee's department head. Upon receipt of the written request for a hearing, and verification that STEPS I and II N_ • 1 • • 225 1 7 u • • • • 1 have been exhausted, the County Administrator shall within five (5) work days schedule the hearing requested, or decline to act and pass the request on to STEP IV. If the County Administrator grants the hearing, he may request the presence of the department head or any other County official at the hearing, and the employee may also have a representative of his choice present. The County Administrator shall give the employee a written reply within five (5) days after conclusion of the hearing. A copy of the reply shall be sent to the employee's department head. STEP IV . If the County Administrator's reply does not resolve the grievance, the employee may within ten (10) work days thereafter in writing to the County Administrator request that his grievance be submitted to a panel hearing. In submitting this written request it is not necessary that the employee again provide a written explanation of what has occurred as this was contained in his written request submitted at STEP II and III and as part of the record will be made available to the grievance panel. Within seven (7) work days after the date of the written request for a panel hearing, of after referral by the County Administrator as one of his options in STEP III, a panel shall be chosen. One member shall be chosen by the grievant, one member shall be chosen by the County Administrator and one member shall be chosen by the first two appointees. If no,agreement on a third member can be made, the selection shall be made by the Judge of the Circuit Court. Such panel shall not be composec of any persons having direct involvment with the grievance being heard by the panel. The County Administrator shall arrange an organizational meeting of the grievance panel within five (5) work days from the date of selection at which time a chairman shall be chosen and a date estab- lished for a panel hearing. This date shall be written ten (10) work days of the organizational meeting. The panel has the responsibility to interpret the application of appropriate County policies and procedures in the case. It does not have the prerogative to formulate or to change policies or procedures. The decision of the panel shall be final and binding. Its decision may be appealed to the Circuit Court. Both the grievant and the respondent may call upon appropriate witnesses and be represented by legal counsel or other representatives at the pane hearing, and such representatives may examine, cross - examine, question and present evidence in behalf of the grievant or respondent before the panel without being in violation of the provisions of Section 54 -44 of the Code of Virginia. Any expense incurred by the grievant regarding these proceedings, shall be at his or her expense. Copies of the written record in the case from STEP II and III shall be provided the panel members by the County. 226 The majority decision of the panel shall be submitted to the Board of Supervisors for review, and shall thereafter be final unless the Board of Supervisors finds that the panel exceeded its authority. The conduct of the hearing shall be as follows: 1. The panel shall limit attendance at the hearing to persons having a direct interest in the case. 2. The panel may at the beginning of the hearing ask for statements clarifying the issues involved. 3. Exhibits; when offered, may be received in evidence by the panel, and when so received shall be marked and made a part of the record. 4. The employee and supervisor, or their representative, shall then present their claim and proofs and witnesses who shall submit to questions or other examination. The panel may at its discretion vary this procedure but shall afford full and equal opportunity to all parties and witnesses for presentation of any material or relevant proofs. 5. The parties may offer evidence and shall provide such additional evidence as the panel may deem necessary to an understanding and determination of the dispute. The panel shall be the judge of relevancy and materiality of the evidence offered. All evidence shall be taken in the presence of the panel and of the parties. 6. All evidence taken by the panel shall be under oath. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm Nay - Dr. Raymond L. Fish and Kenneth Y. Stiles. ADJUSTMENT TO SALARY OF COURT SERVICES DIRECTOR - DENIED Mr. Rosenberger stated that the Finance Committee recommended that the Court Services Director's salary be adjusted to $18,407 per year effective October 1, 1979 and that the additional funding be taken from a highway safety fund grant previously approved by the Board and State. Mr. Owings stated that the grant is for one year. He asked where the money would come from next year to pay for this adjustment and Mr. Renalds replied that it would come from fees. Mr. Stiles stated that he felt this was one more example of this dep building an empire and then requiring additional funds because of the number of people employed therein. He added that when the Board approved the recent salary adjustments, it was understood that that would be it for the rest of the year. Dr. Fish stated that he felt if the Board could not pick up a CETA positior he did not feel he could justify this request. Mr. Rosenberger then moved to refer this matter back to the Finance Commit for futher consideration and recommendation to the'Board. This motion was seconded by Dr. Fish and passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. Nay - R. Thomas Malcolm. REZONING FEE REFUND - LORING NAIL - APPROVED Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Kenneth Y:-S BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein approve a refund of the rezoning fee of $100 to Mr. Loring Nail since his rezoning was not required as a result of Board determin- ation that a conditional use permit was needed instead. �e • • U 1 • 227 • � • r • 1 The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm, and Kenneth Y. Stiles. MONTHLY STAFF REPORT - ACCEPTED After review, the monthly staff report was accepted. PLAT VACATION - IRVINE CATHER, ET AL - STONEWALL DISTRICT - APPROVED Mr. Ron Brown, Attorney, appeared before the Board representing Mr. Cather and stated that the owners of the properties involved had agreed to request for plat vacation as required by statute to bring the property back into one parcel. There was no opposition. Upon motion made by Kenneth Y. Stiles and seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick Virginia, does herein approve the request for plat vacation of Irvine Cather et al to vacate that portion of the plat dated June 1946 and recorded in the County Clerk's office in Deed Book 196, Page 478, designated as Lots 1 and 2 so that said lots might be combined with Lot 3 to form one parcel of land. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Dr. Raymond L. Fish, Will L. Owings, R. Thomas Malcolm and Kenneth Y. Stiles. RESOLUTION OF APPRECIATION AND COMMEMORATION - ADMIRAL RICHARD BYRD - APPROVED Mr. Koontz presented a resolution of appreciation and commemoration in ho of the 50th Anniversay of the flight of Admiral Richard E. Byrd, Jr. over the south pole for Board consideration. Upon motion made by Dr. Raymond L. Fish and seconded by Kenneth Y. Stiles, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick Virginia, does herein adopt the following narrative of recognition and com- memoration to Admiral Richard E. Byrd, Jr.: RESOLUTION . OF APPRECIATION & COMMEMORATION AT A REGULAR MEETING OF THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, HELD ON THE 10TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 1979, IN THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS' MEETING ROOM, 9 COURT SQUARE, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, THE FOLLOWING ACTION WAS TAKEN: UPON MOTION MADE BY DR. RAYMOND L. FISH AND SECONDED BY KENNETH Y. STILES, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FREDERICK, VIRGINIA, DOES HEREIN ADOPT THE FOLLOWING NARRATIVE OF RECOGNITION AND COMMEMORATION TO ADMIRAL RICHARD E. BYRD, JR.: ON NOVEMBER 29, 1979, IT WILL BE FIFTY YEARS SINCE ONE OF OUR FELLOWTOWNSMEN FLEW OVER EARTH'S SOUTH POLE IN A FORD TRI -MOTOR MONOPLANE. THREE YEARS EARLIER, ON MAY 9, 1926, HE HAD FLOWN OVER EARTH'S NORTH POLE IN A SECONDHAND FOKKER MONOPLANE. THUS, RICHARD E. BYRD, JR. BECAME THE FIRST MAN TO FLY OVER EACH OF EARTH'S POLES AND THE FIRST TO USE AIRCRAFT AS INSTRUMENTS OF EXPLORATION AND SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH IN THE EXTREME POLAR REGIONS. 228 THE WINCHESTER - FREDERICK COUNTY HISTORICAL SOCIETY IS LEADING THIS COMMUNITY IN VARIOUS ACTIVITIES IN OBSERVANCE OF THIS FIFTIETH ANNIVERSARY. REHEARSE THOSE STIRRING INITIAL EVENTS OF ADMIRAL BYRD'S CAREER AS WELL SCHOOLS AND ORGANIZATIONS DURING THE MONTH OF NOVEMBER WILL VARIOUSLY AS THE ON -GOING EXPLORATIONS IN ANTARTICAL WHICH HE LED OR DIRECTED UNTIL HIS DEATH IN 1957. THE NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION, THE NAVY, AND MANY DISTINGUISHED INDIVID - UALS, INCLUDING SURVIVORS OF THE 1929 EXPEDITION, WILL JOIN WITH CITIZENS OF THIS COMMUNITY IN A POPULAR CIVIC CONVOCATION AT HANDLEY SCHOOL ON THURSDAY EVENING, NOVEMBER 15TH TO CELEBRATE THIS ANNIVERSARY., THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, THAT THIS BOARD OF SUPERVISORS NOTE WITH INTEREST AND PRIDE THE FIFTIETH ANNIVERSAY OF THE FIRST FLIGHT OVER THE SOUTH POLE BY ADMIRAL RICHARD E. BYRD, JR. COMMANDER, WITH BURNT BALCHEN, HAROLD JUNE, AND CAPT. ASHLEY C. MCKINLEY. WE RECALL THAT ADMIRAL BYRD'S FIRST THREE EXPEDITIONS INTO THE ARCTIC AND ANTARTIC WERE VERY PERSONAL ACHIEVEMENTS BECAUSE THEY WERE INITIATED AND LED BY HIM IN A PRIVATE CAPACITY AND WERE FINANCED THROUGH HIS OWN EFFORTS. WE TAKE PRIDE IN THE FACT THAT ADMIRAL BYRD WAS BORN IN WINCHESTER AND THAT HIS EARLY EDUCATION WAS OBTAINED HERE. BY THIS RESOLUTION WE CALL UPON OUR FELLOW CITIZENS TO JOIN US IN HONORING ADMIRAL BYRD FOR THE TOTAL ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF THIS LIFE -TIME OF IMAGINATIVE, ARDUOUS, AND DRAMATIC ACHIEVEMENTS ON THE GLOBAL STAGE. THROUGH THESE HE BECAME WINCHESTER'S MOST FAMOUS SON AND WE LIKE TO THINK OF HIM AS OUR "ADMI OF THE POLAR SKIES ". IN THIS DAY WHEN WE NEED MEN OF HEROIC STATUE AS MODELS FOR INSPIRATION AND EMULATION, WE ARE PROUD TO REMEMBER A HEROIC NATIVE SON WHOSE NAME AND ACHIEVEMENTS ARE KNOWN AND ADMIRED THROUGHOUT THE WORLD AND, TRULY AND UNIQUELS FROM POLE TO POLE. THE ABOVE RESOLUTION WAS PASSED BY THE FOLLOWING RECORDED VOTE: AYE - S. ROGER KOONTZ, THOMAS B. ROSENBERGER, DR. RAYMOND L. FISH, WILL L. OWINGS, R. THOMAS MALCOLM AND KENNETH Y. STILES. A COPY TESTE: /JZ/ S. ROGER KOONTZ S. ROGER KOONTZ, CHAIRMAN FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS CONCERNS New Regulations For Dog Pounds Referred to Law Enforcement & Courts Committee Mr. Rosenberger stated that he was opposed to the Health Department's new regulations regarding dog pounds and would therefore request that this matter be referred to the Committee on Law Enforcement and Courts for study and recommendation. The Chairman referred the matter to said Committee for consideration. Delay in Appointments to Board of Assessors - Objection Lodged Mr. Stiles stated that he would like to note his objection to the unnecessary and unfortunate delay in the appointments to the Board of Asse Il 11 1 11 • • 229 inasmuch as the State Assessors began work several months ago and the local assessors were appointed only recently. He added that he felt this was an unfortunate state of affairs. UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT IS ORDERED THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN. Cha Bo',I'rd of Sup visor S tary, Boar of Supervisor J A Regular Meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors was held on October 24, 1979, in the Board of Supervisors' Meeting Room, 9 Court Winchester, Virginia. PRESENT: S. Roger Koontz, Chairman; Thomas B. Rosenberger, Vice - Chair- man; Will L. Owings and R. Thomas Malcolm. 1 ABSENT: Dr. Raymond L. Fish and Kenneth Y. Stiles. CALL TO ORDER r 1 LJ The Chairman called the meeting to order. INVOCATION The invocation was delivered by Reverend Bill Hoffman of the Grace Lutheran Church. APPROVAL OF MINUTES Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick Virginia, does herein approve the minutes of the Regular Meeting held on September 26, 1979, and the Adjourned Meeting held on October 3, 1979, as • submitted. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm PRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF LORD FAIRFAX PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION TO MR. J. 0. RENALDS, III The Chairman presented a plaque of recognition and appreciation to Mr. J. O. Renalds, III from the Lord Fairfax Planning District Commission. Mr. Koontz commended Mr. Renalds for his service on said Commission and thanked him for serving Frederick County so well in this regard. El PRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS TO J. 0. RENALDS, III, COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR The Chairman presented a plaque to Mr. Renalds, on behalf of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, expressing their appreciation for his outstanding service as the County Administrator for Frederick County over the past six years. Mr. Renalds thanked the Board for this recognition and stated that he would also like to express his gratitude to the citizens of the County, the i JI County staff and the Constitutional Officers for their help during his tenure in Frederick County. INTRODUCTION OF BOARD OF ASSESSORS Mr. Koontz introduced the Board of Assessors - Mr. John P. Good, Mr. Harold Cooper, Mr. Malcolm Brumback, Mr. Dennis O'Neal and Claude Gore. Mr. 230 Bill Hansborough, State Appraiser was also introduced and Mr. Koontz stated tha he and Mr. Robert Hansborough, also a State Appraiser, would be working with th Board of Assessors during the reassessment of real property in Frederick County. The Chairman explained that the reassessment is necessary according to state law and the Assessors had been appointed by Judge Woltz to perform this service. 'He then explained the duties of the Assessors and expressed appreciation for their service to the County in this regard. Mr. requested that a Special Meeting be held in the very near future so that the Board of Supervisors and the Board of Assessors might discuss how the reassessment is progressing and everyone will be able to under- stand the values being placed on property in the County. The Board concurred with this request. REPORT - OPEQUON CREEK COMMITTEE The Chairman introduced Dr. Harold McMullen, Chairman of the Opequon Creek Committee, who appeared before the Board and presented the following report. He explained briefly each of the recommendations and the reasons therefor. REPORT OF THE OPEQUON CREEK COMMITTEE TO THE FREDERICK COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PART I. Formation of the Committee In response to numerous complaints and charges by several citizens regarding pollution problems in the Abrams and Opequon Creeks during the March 28, 1979 meeting of the Frederick County Board of Supervisors, at the next Board meeting on April 4, the Supervisors appointed an Opeqon Committee to address these pollution problems. The committee was requested to suggest possible directions, remedies, and guidance for the governing body of Frederick County to consider in order to alleviate the problems associated with the streams. A resolution was passed naming Dr. Harold G. McMullen as Chairman of the new committee. This report represents the findings and recommendations resulting from meetings with many local and State officials and further investigations and discussions. PART II. Summary of Committee Actions The Opequon Committee held five (5) meetings since being appointed by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors. All meetings were conducted in the Board of Supervisors' meeting room. Beginning with the organizational meeting on April 23, 1979, a series of Agenda and resulting Minutes of the Committee have been maintained under the supervision of Mr. Stan Pangle, Director of Public Works. Most meetings were also attended by one or more members of the Board of Supervisors. The Committee considered a number of actions during the course of its preliminary work. Persons interested in specific details should consult the archives.of Agenda, Minutes correspondence, papers and technical documents acquired by the Committee over the months in Mr. Pangle's office. These are maintained by the staff Some of the specific actions of the Committee include: • 1 • • • (1) the development of a system of resident reporting 231 • • • • of fish kills and other instances of stream pollution on a , 24 hour basis with ".'staff help under National Response Center and. Environmental .Protection -criteria; (2) the request, receipt, and review of State Water Control Board (SWCB) permit data on all (17) authorized dischargers; (3) an action recommendation to the Board of Supervisors urging the posting of the Abrams - Opequon as polluted streams believed to be dangerous to public health for swimming, fishing, and wading. This was referred to the Health Department for im- plementation, which is pending. (4) holding a special hearing for representatives of the SWCB, Winchester and Frederick County treatment plants, and the local health department to elicit information on stream conditions and recommendations for action in the Committee's Report to the Board of Supervisors; (5) establishment of a Report format and Committee development of the Report and Recommendations (6) and numerous invetigative activities conducted by the County staff under Mr. Pangle's direction. One severe limitation of the Committee's work.was.the lack of technical competence among the membership to assess and evaluate the stream ecosystem on an.adequate basis. Hence, with the exception of some SWCB records and expressions of staff viewpoints, a lack of competent third -party evaluation capacity was sorely felt by the Committee membership. In spite of these limitations, it is believed that the Committee's records do indicate sufficient activity to justify the following findings and recommendations in Parts III and IV of this Report. PART III. Findings of the Committee 1. The two streams, Abrams and Opequon, are polluted and void of significant aquatic life. Contributing factors to this pollution are industrial wastes, run -off from streets, parking lots, farmlands, and other surfaces contaminated with oil and other undesirable materials. The largest source of pollution is the Winchester City sewage.treatment plant. 2. There is every indication that additional.industrial plants and residential subdivisions are permitted to tie onto the city sewerage system with little, if any, consideration of the additional load being given the treatment plant. 3. Staff representatives of the State Water Control Board expressed satisfaction with the standards maintained by the Winchester sewage treatment plant and.the other industrial discharge points emptying into Abrams and Opequon streams. 4. All discharge permit holders are inspected by SWCB staff no less than one time each year and not more than three times per year. The number of inspections depends on the amount and type of discharge material. Self - reports comprise the bulk of compliance monitoring. 232 5. Comments made by various members of the SWCB staff would indicate that accidental spills are likely to continue and will create conditions which will take a considerable period of time for stream revitalization. Specific reference was made to seasonal vinegar spills from apple - processing plants. 6. The City of Winchester has recently made improvements in their sewage treatment plant'and the quality of effluent has apparently improved during the month of 'August;= 1979u 7. In August of 1979, an amonia spill created a possible fish kill which was investigated by SWCB. That same day, several thousand gallons of sludge from the City's sludge holding basin (which proved to be too small) found its way into Abrams Creek. 8. Apparently there is no explicit public interest benefit associated with any of the private discharge permits historically approved by the SWCB. 9. Stream degradation and pollution have become an institutionalized "fact of life" in Frederick County. Expressions of the acceptance of sub- standard streams are usually accompanied by some vague assumption of "inevit- ability." These pervasive belief structures seriously undermine the causes of stream management and pollution control locally. 10. The existing stream pollution presents a continuing chronic danger to the public health. 11. There is growing landowner apprehension over streamside property- value decline due to the pollution problem. PART IV. The Opeguon Committee Recommends That 1. Some form of continuing Stream Authority or Stream Management group be established. The group could include some members appointed from a coalitio: of local environmental and conservation interest groups (i.e., Izak Walton League, Winchester - Frederick County Conservation Club, Frederick County Envir- onmental Council, Audubon Society, etc.) 2. An independent person or organization be hired to monitor the streams on a continuing basis and report findings. These Persons or organizations must be by the governmental agency or court jurisdiction. 3. The established monitoring network (24 hours, 7 days per week) be continued by stream residents, and that such monitoring systems be extended to all streams in Frederick County 4. An aggressive program of EPA appeals or injunctive court actions be initiated in the interest of upgrading stream conditions in Frederick County. 5. The Board of Supervisors review Authorized Discharge Permits and applications and recommend action to the SWCB in light of the public interest being served. 6. The Board of Supervisors take action to stop building permits from being issued in Winchester /Frederick County whenever sewage treatment facil- ities cannot maintain permit standards. 7. A regional joint city /county sewage treatment facility be endorsed. • is • n U 233 8. A system of local enforcement procedures be established requiring r local industries to pre -treat their industrial waste to standard before they send it to the sewage plant. Severe penalties should be established and en- forced on any industry which accidentally or intentionally discharges material which will cause any adverse reaction in the performance of the sewage treat- ment plant. 9. A "Save Ours Streams" grass -roots network program be.established by local government, media, schools, and conservation groups. 10. A frequent and routine stream - posting system be implemented with • public health department monitoring and warning and literature dissemination. 11. A property - decline tax reduction adjustment be enacted for owners of polluted streamside property. Dr. McMullen introduced the members of the Committee and thanked them, r-, • along with the news media for their participation in this project, stating that he felt the coverage of the project and public information update of the project had been excellent. He commended Mr. Stan Pangle,':Director of Public Works and his staff for their assistance with the report and stated that a . complete archives of the minutes, records, etc. of the Committee were on file and could be reviewed in the Public Works Office in the County Administration Building. Mr. Koontz stated that the report was very thorough and thanked the Committee for their work in this regard. He stated that the Board would studyl the information in an effort to see what might be done to clean up the streams in Frederick County. 1�1IlrA TO AMEND THE F Y CODE, - TABLED The Chairman stated that Mr. Stiles had requested that this matter be • tabled due to the fact that he would be absent from the meeting and had some objections to this proposed amendment. Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger, seconded by Will L. Owings, and passed unanimously, the proposed ordinance to amend the home occupation section of the Zoning Ordinance was tabled until the November meeting of the Board of Supervisors. APPOINTEMENTS DR. FORREST RACEY AND MRS. EVELYN'GOODE APPOINTED TO REGIONAL LIBRARY BOARD • Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein appoint Dr. Forrest Racey to serve as a representative from Frederick County on the Regional Library Board for a term of three (3) years. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm. Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by.Will L. Owings, CHAPTER 21, ZONING - BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, 234 Virginia, does herein appoint Mrs. Evelyn Goode to serve as a representative from Frederick County on the Regional Library Board fora term of two (2) yearsL1 The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm. Mr. Rosenberger requested that the Board wait until January to make the o (1) year appointment to the Regional Library�Board. The Board concurred with this request. ELEANOR CASEY APPOINTED TO INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm and seconded by Thomas B. Rosenbergel BE IT RESOLVED, That the Board of Supervisors of the County of Frederick, Virginia, does herein appoint Ms. Eleanor Casey to serve as a representative on the Industrial Development Authority of Frederick County from the Shawnee Magisterial District to fill the unexpired term of Mr. William E. Bridgeforth, Jr., said term to commence this date and expire on November 10, 1981. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, add R. Thomas Malcolm. The appointment to the Industrial Development Authority from Stonewall District was carried forward. FINANCE COMMITTE RECOMMENDATIONS Mr. Rosenberger presented the Finance Committee recommendations and the following action was taken. AMOCO FOAM PRODUCTS - FUNDING OF SEWER LINE - APPROVED Mr. Rosenberger stated that after careful consideration, the Finance Committee recommended funding for a sewer line to serve the proposed Amoco Foam Products Plant. Mr. Sam Lehman, Vice President of the Frederick County Taxpayers Associa- tion, appeared before the Board and stated that the Executive Board of the Association had voted against the use of tax monies to subsidize industry in the County. He advised that they felt this type development would raise taxes and this is unfair to the taxpayers in the County. Mr. Renalds stated that based upon the best available information, the annual tax revenue which would be realized from this industry would be approx- imately $141,775. Mr. Lehman asked if the amount of tax the land is presently paying had been deducted from this amount or if the impact of additional people on our basic aid to education monies had been considered. Mr. Renalds replied that the current taxes had not been deducted from this amount and that most of the employees would be local residents so the net im- pact would be very slight. Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by Will L. Owings, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that the Frederick County Sanitation Authority is hereby authorized to disburse $19,500. towards construction of a sewer line to the Amoco Foam Products plant to be located on Route 11 North; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That said funds in the amount of $19,500.00 shall be derived and authorized to be expended from the $200.000.00 appropriated by the Frederick County Board of Supervisors for the construction of water and sewer service lines to the Crown American Shopping Mall; and, 2.3 5 BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That it is the intent of this Board to replace said funds in the amount of $19,500.00 when needed by the Frederick County Sanitation Authority to complete said line to the Crown American Shopping Mall. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm. FIRST AND SECOND READINGS Mr. Renalds read the following conditional use permits on first and second readings: • 1. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 021 -79 OF RALPH W. POE, ROUTE 4, BOX 123, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, 47.65 ACRES, ZONED AGRICULTURAL - GENERAL (A -2), REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CAMP - GROUND. THIS PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 53(A)86, 32, 81 IN BACK CREEK MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. 2. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 022 -79 OF OIL HEAT AND BURNER SERVICE, INC., 825 SMITHFIELD AVENUE, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, 3.2037 ACRES, ZONED INDUSTRIAL - GENERAL (M -2), REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A STORAGE BUILDING. THIS PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 54(A)74 AND 54(A)79 IN STONEWALL ' MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. 3. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 023 -79 OF CURTIS R. HANSEN, 687 NORTH LOUDOUN STREET, WINCHESTER, VIRGINIA, 1 ACRE, ZONED AGRICULTURAL- GENERAL (A -2), REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTOMO- TIVE REPAIR GARAGE. THIS PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS PROPERTY IDENTIFICATION NUMBER 84(A)82 IN OPEQUON MAGISTERIAL DISTRICT. CORRESPONDENCE - U. S. POSTAL SERVICE - DISCUSSED - RE: STEPHENSON POST OFFICE Mr. Renalds read a letter received from the United States Postal Service regarding alternatives under consideration to correct deficiencies in the Stephenson Post Office facility. Mr. Koontz requested that this letter be forwarded to Mr. Stiles, Supervisor for this district, for his consideration and comment. HARRINGTON SMITH ADDRESSES THE BOARD RE: OPERATIONS IN SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT • Mr. Koontz stated that Mr. Harrington Smith had requested permission to address the Board regarding a concern he had with operations in the ' Sheriff's Department. Mr. Smith appeared before the Board and stated that he was appearing strictly as a concerned citizen of Frederick County and not as a representa- tive of any political party. He stated that he felt government and all agencies thereof should be conducted as free enterprise conducts business, namely that you cannot spend more than you take in, that you must conduct the business in a reputable manner with reputable employees. Mr. Smith state • that he had not come forward sooner because he did not want to interfere with U the proceedings of the Special Grand Jury investigation of the Sheriff's Department which had recently been concluded. Mr. Smith stated that he had reason to believe that the following matters had transpired in the operation of the Sheriff's Department: (1) that a number of personal telephone calls have been made from phone numbers in the Sheriff's Department and that the ' II citizens and government have not been reimbursed for these calls; (2) that gasoline for vehicles assigned to the Sheriff's Department was purchased with 2 Exxon credit cards when it should have been gotten at the County pump at a savings to the citizens; (3) that four (4) Frederick County police cruisers were repainted when received as new vehicles and were delivered supposedly a shade off the Sheriff's colors at a cost of $1,600. He requested that he be shown information setting forth the date these cars were repainted and the number of the purchase order authorizing this work to be done. Mr. Smith stated that he had received several phone calls urging him to pursue these matters to a satisfactory conclusion while receiving very few asking him to drop the issue. He requested the Board of Supervisors to expe- dite their investigation of these matters and make their findings open to the citizens of Frederick County. Mr. Koontz referred this matter to the Committee on Engineering and Code Enforcement for study and recommendation to the Board. He stated that Mr. Smith would be permitted to appear before the Committee to discuss these issues Sheriff Carroll Mauck appeared before the Board and stated that he had appeared before the Finance Committee to answer the questions set forth in the memorandum from the County Administrator dated August 24, 1979 regarding several of the above allegations and he felt he had answered said questions to the satisfaction of the Committee. He stated that personal phone calls had never been discussed at the Finance Committee meeting. Sheriff Mauck denied that he had made the statement that the phone calls were business calls as Mr. Rosenberger claimed he had. He stated that he expected an apology from Mr. Rosenberger regarding this misstatement. Mr. Rosenberger stated that first he wanted to say to the Sheriff and to the people that his comments to the press were made entirely on his own as Chairman of the Finance Committee, without consulting Board members or any political faction in the County. He added that he told the press and he stood by his statement, that the explanations from the Sheriff did not satisfy him and that in regard to the repainting of cars, it was thoroughly understood that they did come in the brown colors and there was no discussion on repaint- ing these cars until after it had been done. Mr. Rosenberger stated that the explanation offered by the Sheriff regarding the work of an investigator doing defense work on a case being criminally tried was not satisfactory to him and he had thought the Commonwealth's Attorney would be present to address this matter inasmuch as it appears to be a legal question. Mr. Rosenberger stated that during the course of this controversy, the Sheriff has said that his (Mr. Rosenberger's) motivetwasspolitical and he woulc make one statement regarding this matter; that in this country we are privilege to live in the greatest country in the world with the right to vote: that there are certain kinds -voters,. we:.have them -in Freder ck•-County;:_'.those- wh6''= vote strictly party and those who vote for the person. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he classified himself as a voter who votes for the person and that four years ago he felt as an independent Mr. Mauck was qualified to be the Sheriff of Frederick County and he had voted for him. He added that as Chair- man of the Finance Committee, he felt the Board and the Committee had granted the Sheriff's every wish during the first two years of his administration but that after that time he could see the department going down grade and he felt the Board was being used. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he had been in favor I • L E 237 • of cutting the Sheriff's budget by $25,000 but it was cut by only $10,000. Mr. Rosenberge-r.stated'that.he wanted to - make it quite clear that regarding Mr. Mauck's statement alleging-the waste of_ money.by thei3Board, - he had not voted to expend the funds for the management study nor for the executive search for a new County Administrator. He added that he felt the Sheriff's Department had wasted a lot of money during the past two years and that there is at present a lack of leadership in the Department. Mr. Rosenberger stated that he had no apology to make to Sheriff Mauck and would stand by his state- ments inasmuch as he had made said statements as a citizen of the County and on behalf of the people in his district. Sheriff Mauck responded that he felt Mr. Rosenberger's actions were political mudslinging and this did not impress him in the least. Mr. Malcolm stated that he felt the proper course for the Board to foll in this matter was the course suggested by the Chairman, Committee study and recommendation. The Board concurred. The Board recessed for ten minutes. • REPORT CAPITAL FACILITIES COMMI Mr. R. Thomas Malcolm:, and Mr W Bayliss; Co- Chairman of the County Joint Capital Facilities Committee, appeared before the Board and presented a report from said Committee. Mr. Malcolm stated that they would not read the report inasmuch as the Board Members had had a copy in their possession for several days for review. He stated that the Committee did not expect that all their recommendations would be approved but he felt they had addressed all the questions they were asked to study and that it was not time for the results of the study to be presented to the governing bodies for consideration. Mr. Bayliss stated that he was glad to be present with Mr. Malcolm to • I present the report and although they had not always agreed, he felt they had come to a, meeting of the .minds -arrd that the .vote _of the, committee members present was unanimous on the report. He added that the Committee was proud of the work they have done on this report and that the people who served on the Committee had served very well and were to be congratulated. He advised that the report would be presented to City Council at their next meeting for consideration. Mr. Rosenberger commended the Committee for their work and stated that felt both jurisdictions had been well represented on this project. • Mr. Malcolm and -Mr. Bayliss stated that the Committee is principally interested in agreement of the basic philosophy ,c5f,the.:geport and that. addi- tional work would then have to be done regarding the location of the building the direction- it wil -1 face,. etc-. Parking facilities were discussed briefly and Mr. Malcolm advised that the consultants had stated that if a 371 space parking structure was built, this would be sufficient for a twenty year period. Mr. Lehman asked if this plan would be based upon an annexation agree- ment and Mr. Malcolm replied that the whole plan would be contingent upon a 2 3.3 satisfactory annexation agreement between the County and the City and that the County component of the Joint Capital Facilities Committee would not recommend approval of the plan until there is such an agreement. Mr. Bayliss concurred with this statement. Mr. Koontz thanked Mr. Malcolm and Mr. Bayliss for presenting the report and requested that.the Board meet on October 30, 1979 to discuss the report in detail. The Board concurred. BOARD RETIRES INTO EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger, seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, and passed unanimously the Board retired into Executive Session in accordance with Section 2.1- 344(a)(1) of the Code of Virginia, 1950 as amended to discuss personnel. BOARD WITHDRAWS FROM EXECUTIVE SESSION Upon motion made by R. Thomas Malcolm, seconded by Will L. Owings and passed unanimously, the Board withdrew from Executive Session. BOARD RECONVENES INTO REGULAR SESSION Upon motion made by Will L. Owings, seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm and passed unanimously, the Board reconvened into Regular Session. CLERK TYPIST II POSITION - PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT - APPROVED Upon motion made by Thomas B. Rosenberger and seconded by R. Thomas Malcolm, BE IT RESOLVED, By the Frederick County Board of Supervisors that a trans- fer from the General Operating Fund Reserve for Contingencies account to 10- 10AO -11OC, in the amount of $2,587.50, is hereby authorized to fund one -half of the Clerk- Typist II position in the Public Works Department for the remainde of the current fiscal year; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That a supplemental appropriation in the amount of $2,587.50 is hereby authorized to 10- 1OJO -11OI within the Frederick- Winchester Landfill Fund to fund the remaining one -half of the above re position; and, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That funding for said position shall be effective October 1, 1979. The above resolution was passed by the following recorded vote: Aye - S. Roger Koontz, Thomas B. Rosenberger, Will L. Owings, and R. Thomas Malcolm. UPON MOTION DULY MADE, SECONDED AND PASSED UNANIMOUSLY, IT IS ORDERED THAI THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS DO NOW ADJOURN TO 7:30 P.M. ON OCTOBER 30, 1979. pul�t - Secretary, Boar 1] • • r •