Special Joint Meeting of City Council November 8, 2012

Transcription

1 Special Joint Meeting of City Council November 8, 2012 A Special Joint Meeting of the Chesapeake City Council and Chesapeake Legislative Delegation Members was called to order by Interim City Manager Amar Dwarkanath on November 8, 2012 at 7:40 a.m., at the Chesapeake Conference Center, 900 Greenbrier Circle Chesapeake, VA. The purpose of the meeting was to review the City s 2013 Legislative Package with the City s Legislative Delegation Members. Present: Mayor Alan P. Krasnoff (arrived at 7:55 a.m.) Council Member Lonnie E. Craig Council Member Robert C. Ike Council Member Suzy H. Kelly Council Member Scott W. Matheson Council Member S. Z. Debbie Ritter Council Member Ella P. Ward Council Member Richard W. Rick West Absent: Vice Mayor John M. de Triquet (excused) Present from Administration: Interim City Manager Amar Dwarkanath, City Attorney Ronald Hallman, Deputy City Manager Wanda Barnard-Bailey, Deputy City Attorney Jan Proctor, City Clerk Dolores Moore, Assistant to the City Manager Mary Ann Saunders, and Assistant to the City Manager Anna D Antonio, Also Present: Senator Kenneth Alexander, Delegate S. Chris Jones, Delegate Barry Knight, Delegate Lionell Spruill, Sr., Delegate Ronald Villanueva, Legislative Assistant to Delegate John Cosgrove The Honorable Christy Craig. Others Present: Sheriff James O Sullivan, Superintendent of Chesapeake Public Schools Dr. James Roberts and Clerk to the School Board Dr. Jean Infantino. In the absence of Mayor Krasnoff, Interim City Manager Amar Dwarkanath called the meeting to order and deferred to Council Member Ritter. Mrs. Ritter welcomed everyone and thanked them for attending. A roundtable of introductions of those present took place. Interim City Manager Dwarkanath called on Assistant to the City Manager Anna D Antonio to review the City s 2013 Legislative Package. Mrs. D Antonio advised that she would be reviewing specific topics in the Legislative Package rather than going over each item. She started with the Legislative Initiative on Temporary Jail Auxiliary Housing Units, noting the current overcrowding in the Chesapeake City Jail.

2 Mrs. D Antonio stated that the City and the Chesapeake Sheriff s Office would be working with the State Department of Corrections to use the Auxiliary Housing Units constructed beside the jail to house community based and re-entry prisoners. The City was requesting that the State Board of Corrections approve the temporary jail facilities once the facilities were in compliance with the Statewide Building and Fire Prevention Codes. Mayor Krasnoff arrived at 7:55 a.m. Mrs. D Antonio next reviewed several of the Policy Positions contained in the 2013 Legislative Package including Impact Fees/Conditional Zoning/Recordation Fees, Land Use, Revitalization/Redevelopment, State Aid to Localities, Mandates, and Uranium Mining opposition. Council Member Ritter called on Chesapeake Public Schools Superintendent Dr. James Roberts. Dr. Roberts noted that the School Board and Administration had a joint meeting scheduled on December 11 th with the Chesapeake Delegation Members; the School Board Members and Administration were looking forward to the meeting. He added that representatives of the Schools would also be in Richmond during the upcoming General Assembly Session to lobby for the needs of the Schools. The Honorable Christie Craig, Legislative Aid to Delegate Cosgrove stated that Delegate Cosgrove had submitted legislation on the City s Auxiliary Jail Housing Initiative. The legislation would be similar to that submitted last Session on behalf of the City but would include language to make the City responsible and liable for the facility and its operation. Delegate Jones stated that the issues on the Auxiliary Housing for the General Assembly were the City not seeking approval from the State Board of Corrections prior to the building of the facilities since they were not permanent housing, and the liability issue. He added that if the language in the bill was not to the General Assembly s satisfaction, the legislation would likely not be approved. Council Member Ritter inquired about the liability issue. Delegate Jones responded that the facilities were not fire retardant. He added that the process had not been done properly in the beginning and the General Assembly was not going to approve the legislation if the facilities were not in compliance for overnight use. Council Member Ritter asked if that meant the facilities also needed to meet the Statewide Building codes and Fire codes. Delegate Jones confirmed that the facilities must meet both the Statewide Building and Fire codes, and reiterated that the State would not accept liability for a facility used as overnight housing that did not meet those requirements. City Attorney Hallman advised that the City would carry insurance on the facilities to cover potential issues. Delegate Spruill asked for an explanation of the facilities as temporary housing. Sheriff O Sullivan responded that the buildings were a stop gap usage until permanent housing could be built

3 He noted that the State Board of Corrections would not consider approving the use without assurances that a permanent structure would be built. Sheriff O Sullivan added that there was some concern by the Board of Corrections that other localities would see the structures as an answer to overcrowding in other local jails. Delegate Spruill inquired about the use of the auxiliary housing once a permanent structure was opened. Sheriff O Sullivan advised that the structures could be relocated. Mayor Krasnoff asked staff for an update on the auxiliary housing. City Attorney Hallman responded, noting that the lease for the facilities was held by the bank and the City would have to decide whether or not to purchase the buildings in Delegate Jones advised that some consideration was being given at the State level to reopen a closed State Correctional facility to help alleviate overcrowded jail populations in local facilities, but was meeting opposition from Sheriffs around the State who did not want to lose the per diem funding being received for State inmates. Sheriff O Sullivan stated that the Chesapeake Jail had over 200 State inmates that had already been sentenced; the paperwork had been sent to Richmond within 30 days of the sentencing but the inmates were still in the local facility more than 90 days after the time they should have been transferred to State Correctional facilities. Delegate Knight advised that he had contacted the State s Commonwealth s Attorney when the issue first came up; the upcoming legislation should have a better chance of being adopted. Delegate Jones suggested to Sheriff O Sullivan that a combined and unified effort on the part of Virginia s Sheriffs on the jail overcrowding issue could result in a better chance of relief from the issue. Council Member Craig asked Delegate Jones if it would require new legislation to have other localities keep their State prisoners but allow Chesapeake relief from overcrowding. Discussion ensued on funding required for reopening a closed State Correctional facility. Council Member West asked Sheriff O Sullivan if the City would still face an overcrowding issue should the State remove the State prisoners. Sheriff O Sullivan confirmed that the City Jail would still be overcrowded and the City would still need to look at a permanent facility for relief. Council Member West inquired about funding for a permanent facility. Sheriff O Sullivan advised that the State would partly fund a permanent facility but there would still be local funding involved. Council Member Ritter stated that providing the temporary facilities would obligate the City to do a permanent facility. Assistant to the City Manager Mary Ann Saunders provided a review of the jail process for those present

4 Discussion ensued between City Council Members and City staff on the costs of a permanent facility, the required Planning Study for a permanent facility which would be presented to City Council during the December 11, 2012 Work Session, the need for complete information on the City s obligation with both temporary and permanent facilities including expectations and requirements, the timeframe required to build a permanent facility, and the needs for a permanent facility that had been discussed during the September 2012 Work Session. Mayor Krasnoff advised that he was introducing a new Initiative for Council to include in the 2013 Legislative Package on Funding for Environmental Study for I- 64 High Rise Bridge Replacement. He noted that a study had been done 10 years ago for a four to six lane replacement for the bridge, which would now require eight new lanes. The current cost estimates for the replacement project was $500 million which was the most affordable transportation project needed in Hampton Roads. Dr. Krasnoff stated that the current High Rise Bridge already impacted every Hampton Roads locality. Delegate Villanueva asked if the Hampton Roads Transportation Planning Organization (TPO) had reviewed the project. Mayor Krasnoff responded that the TPO had not looked at the project because funding was not available and it had not been included in the 2034 Transportation Plan. He added that an Environmental Impact Study (EIS) had to be done and that was what the Initiative was requesting. Delegate Jones concurred with the need for the Environmental Impact Study, stating that he did not know why the State was spending $1.2 billion on the Route 460 project instead of focusing on the High Rise Bridge project. Delegate Jones recommended that the EIS be placed in the State s Six-Year plan, and stated that he was willing to work with the City s Legislative Delegation to get the Study funded and started. Mayor Krasnoff noted that an EIS would take five years to be completed and he was not sure if any information from the previous study could be used; he stated that he believed the Virginia Department of Transportation would not likely use any of the data. Dr. Krasnoff added that Chesapeake had the funding in place for its side of the Portsmouth Boulevard widening project and it still took two years to get VDOT moving on the project. He suggested that condensing the process of transportation projects with VDOT and the regulatory agencies would save the State hundreds of millions of dollars that could be used for other projects. Discussion ensued between City Council and Legislative Delegation Members on proffers and impact fees. It was noted that there were many reported abuses of proffers and that any legislation in the 2013 General Assembly Session would not be looked at favorably. Mayor Krasnoff noted that Delegate Cosgrove had already put a bill in for the City. There was additional discussion on expanding the use of collected proffer monies

5 Mayor Krasnoff thanked Delegate Jones for his service to Chesapeake in the General Assembly. Delegate Jones stated that the Commonwealth s bond rating was tied to the Federal Government s bond rating and should the Federal rating be downgraded, the rating agencies had said that Virginia s rating would also be downgraded. That action would affect the State Budget when the General Assembly convened in January. He noted that there was a lot of anxiety about the Markets and what the Federal Government would be doing in the coming months. Delegate Jones added that his focus would be to try to see that the budget would do no harm to local governments and that he would make every effort to see there was a balanced, fair budget based on what the Federal Government did. Mayor Krasnoff thanked Delegate Spruill for being a tremendous advocate for the City and for his 20 years of service. Delegate Spruill advised that he would be working to have both sides come together during the Session. Mayor Krasnoff welcomed Senator Alexander to Chesapeake stating that everyone looked forward to working with him in the future. Senator Alexander stated that he was looking forward to working with the City in the coming years. Mayor Krasnoff thanked Delegate Knight and the other members of the City s Legislative Delegation for working on the Dominion Boulevard project. Dr. Krasnoff stated that working with Delegate Villanueva had been great and thanked him for attending the breakfast even though he had only one precinct in Chesapeake. Delegate Villanueva responded that is was good to see the involvement of the local officials and the concise Legislative Package of items. Mrs. Craig, Legislative Aid to Delegate Cosgrove, stated that the Delegate he was attending another meeting but had already submitted legislation on the City s Auxiliary Jail Housing issue. Mayor Krasnoff thanked Superintendent Roberts and Clerk to the School Board Jean Infantino for accepting his invitation to attend the meeting. Dr. Krasnoff added that Chesapeake Public Schools and Administration were doing an incredible job and for the sixth year in a row had the lowest dropout rate in the State. Dr. Roberts stated his thanks for the invitation to the meeting and that he looked forward to working with everyone. Mayor Krasnoff extended his appreciation to Sheriff O Sullivan for attending the meeting, and adjourned the meeting at 8:57 a.m. /dam ATTEST: Mayor City Clerk - 5 -