MARCH 23, 1993 MINUTES"WORLD'S LARGEST RESORT CITY"
CITY COUNCIL
MAYOR MEYERA E OBERNDORF, At-Large
VICE MAYOR gVILLIAM D SESSOMS JR, At-Large
JOHN A BAUM, Bla~kwater Borough
IdNWOOD 0 BRANCH III, V~rgm~a Beach Borough
JAMES W BRAZIER, JR, Lynnhaven Borough
ROBERT W CLYBURN, Kempsv, lle Borough
ROBERT K DEAN, Pnncess Anne Borough
LOUIS R JONES, Bays~d~ Borough
PAUL ] LANTEIGNE, Pungo Bevough
JOHN D MOSS, At Large
NANCY K PARKER, At-Large
]AMES K SPORE, C~t7 Manager
LESLIE L LILLEY, C~ty Attorney
RUTH HODGES SMITH, CMC / AAE, C~ty Clerk
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
OUR N~-'~
281 CITY HALL BUILDING
~UNICIPAL CEN'I ER
VIRGINIA BEACH VIRGINIA 23456 9005
1804~ 427 4303
MARCH 23, 1993
I. CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFINGS
- Council Chamber - 3:00 PM
A,
Bo
C,
Do
PARENT-CHILD EDUCATION PROGRAM (PCEP)- an AVANCE-Styled Pre-School Program
Norris Phillips, Administrator, Pendleton Child Service Center
ADULT HEALTH CARE
Daniel J. Dickinson, M.D., Director, Health Department
ANNUAL REPORT VIDEOTAPE
Gwen Cowart, Director, Video Services
VIDEO SERVICES REPORT
Gwen Cowart, Director, Video Services
II.
INFORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber -
3:45 PM
A.
S.
C.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION
III. FORMAL SESSION
- Council Chamber - 6:00 PM
A.
B.
C,
D.
E.
F.
CALL TO ORDER - Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
INVOCATION: Reverend Harold E. Burchett
Virginia Beach Community Chapel
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
ELECTRONIC ROLL CALL OF CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION
MINUTES
1. INFORMAL & FORMAL SESSIONS - March 9, 1993
G. PRESENTATION
.
1993 SPRING/SUMMER ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN /YEAR-END TOURISM REPORT
James B. Ricketts, Director, Convention and Visitor Development
H. CONSENT AGENDA
All matters listed under the Consent Agenda are considered in the ordinary course of business
by City Council and will be enacted by one motion in the form listed. If an item is removed from
the Consent Agenda, it will be discussed and voted upon separately.
le
.
Resolutions requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation to reclassify, correct the
inventory and accept additional streets for urban maintenance payments:
a.
45.52 additional lane miles of local/collector streets with $250,588 additional
revenue; and, 23.85 lane miles of arterial streets with $223,618 additional revenue.
b.
3.76 lane miles of corrections/deletions to the local/collector streets inventory with
a reduction of $20,699 in revenue; and, 3.48 lane miles of corrections/deletions to
the urban streets inventory with a reduction of $32,628 in revenue.
Resolutions re issuance of General Obligation Public Improvements Bonds, Series of
1993, in the approximate amount of $160,000,000:
a.
Appointing , Senior Underwriting
Manager; and, authorizing the City Manager and the Department of Finance to
appoint, as Co-Managers or as a selling group, additional underwriters, including,
but not limited to
.
.
.
.
b.
Authorizing the City Manager, in cooperation with the City Attorney, the City's
financial advisors and Bond Counsel, to prepare and distribute the Preliminary
Official Statement.
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Chapter 23 of the Code of the City of Virginia
Beach by ADDING Section 23-46.2 re hazardous materials cost recovery.
Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE the $36,000 Coast Resources Management
Grant from the Council on the Environment; and, TRANSFER $28,500 from the Fiscal
Year 1992-1993 Reserve for Contingencies to provide the required cash match and an
in-kind match of $7,500 re completion of the Phase IV of the Natural Areas Inventory;
and, that estimated revenues from the Commonwealth be increased by $36,000.
Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $7,000 from the Virginia Beach Library Gift Fund to the
General Fund re purchase of library books and materials; and, that the estimated
revenues to the General Fund be increased by $7,000.
Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $15,000 Grant from the Virginia
Department of Motor Vehicles to the Public Works Department re regional training
in traffic engineering; and, that estimated revenues be increased by the amount of the
grant.
Ordinance granting a franchise to operate an open air caf~ on public property in the
Resort Area to Kitchin Corporation, t/a Seahawk Motel/Kitchin's Kitchen Caf~ at 26th
Street and Atlantic Avenue (VIRGINIA BEACH BOROUGH).
8. Ordinance authorizing License Refunds in the amount of $3,002.95.
I. PUBUC HEARING
1. PLANNING
a~
Application of ROBERT E. LEE for a Conditional Use Permit for a single-family
dwelling in the AG-2 Agricultural District on the Southwest side of Princess Anne
Road, 1750 feet more or less Northwest of Fitztown Road (537 Princess Anne
Road), containing 7.96 acres (PUNGO BOROUGH).
Recommendation: APPROVAL
b.
Application of KEMPSVILLE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH for a Conditional Use
Permit for a church (addition) at the Southwest corner of Kempsville Road and
Locke Lane (805 Kempsville Road), containing 8.8 acres (KEMPSVILLE
BOROUGH).
Recommendation: APPROVAL
C.
Application of SALEM CONGREGATION OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES for a
Conditional Use Permit for a church at the Southeast corner of Salem Road and
Elbow Road, containing 2.8 acres (KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH).
Recommendation: APPROVAL
d.
Application of CH & B for an AMENDMENT to the Brenneman Farm Land Use
Plan to delete the previously designated excess public school site and redistribute
residential density on the East and West sides of South Plaza Trail, North of
Princess Anne Road and South of Independence Boulevard, containing 243 acres
(KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH);
AND,
Application of DRAGAS COMPANIES for a Change of Zoning District
Classification from R-7.5 Residential District to PD-H1 Planned Unit Develo.oment
District on the following parcels, containing 1.58 acres (KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH):
Parcel 1' At the Northwest intersection of Princess Anne Road and
Providence Road.
Parcel 2: On the West side of Princess Anne Road beginning at a
point 850 feet more or less North of Providence Road.
Recommendation: APPROVAL FOR BOTH APPLICATIONS
e.
Resolution to AMEND and REORDAIN Section 105 of the City Zoning Ordinance
re conversions of nonconforming uses.
Recommendation: APPROVAL
J. APPOINTMENTS
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FRANCIS LAND HOUSE BOARD OF GOVERNORS
K. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
L. NEW BUSINESS
1. COUNCIL-SPONSORED ITEMS:
ao
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Article II of Chapter 4 of the Code of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by AMENDING Section 4-16, 4-17, 4-19, 4-32,
4-33, 4-34, 4-35 and 4-37; and, by ADDING Sections 4-18, 4-20, 4-21, 4-38,
4-39 and 4-40 re public dance halls and teenage nightclubs. (Sponsored by
Councilman Linwood O. Branch III)
bi
Resolution directing the Planning Commission study and forward its
recommendation to the City Council re City's current parking requirements for
restaurants in the Resort Tourist Districts. (Sponsored by Councilman Linwood
O. Branch III)
M. ADJOURNMENT
CITY COUNCIL RESCHEDULED
April 6, 1993, Formal Session to April 20, 1993, at 2:00 PM
SCHEDULE
FY 1993-1994 OPERATING BUDGET
TUESDAY, MARCH 30, 1993
(City Council Special Session)
Council Chamber
12:00 NOON
THURSDAY, APRIL 15, 1993
**PUBUC HEARING**
Green Run High School
7:00 PM
THURSDAY, MAY 4, 1993
**PUBUC HEARING**
Council Chamber
7:00 PM
If you are physically disabled, hearing or visually impaired
and need assistance at this meeting,
please call the CITY CLERK'S OFFICE at 427-4305 VOICE OR TDD by MONDAY 9:00 AM
3/4/93mira
AGENDA\3-9-93.PLN
MINUTES
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Virginia Beach, Virginia
March 23, 1993
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf called to order the CITY MANAGERS BRIEFINGS of the VIRGINIA
BEACH CITY COUNCIL in the Council Chamber, City Hall Building, on Tuesday, March 23, 1993, at
3:00 P.M.
Council Members Present:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W..
Clyburn, Robert K~ Dean, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D. Moss, Mayor
Meyera E. Oberndorf and Nancy I~ Parker
Council Members Absent:
Louis R. Jones (ENTERED: 3:18 P.M.)
Vice Mayor William D. Sessorns, Jr. (ENTERED: 3:10 P.M.)
-2-
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
PARENT-CHILD EDUCATION PROGRAM (PCEF)
3:00 P.M.
ITEM # 36610
Mr. Daniel Stone, Director of Social Services, presented aspects of the PARENT-CHILD EDUCATION
PROGRAM in the absence of Norris Phillips, Administrator, who was ill. Mr. Stone advised, in 1988,
Council lardy Parker expressed interest in replicating this program after she had the opportunity of
visiting a model of this program in San Antonio Texas. Consequently, as a result of that, two of the City's
representatives from the School system and Social Services visited San Antonio and observed the program.
AVANCE, taken from both the French and Spanish languages meaning "forward", was founded in 1873
as a private non-profit community base organization serving predominately low income families living
in and near Federal housing projects in San Antonio. The primary goal of this program was to increase
parental knowledge, attitudes, skills, growth and development and to enhance family support systems so
parents can provide support guidance, nurture and discipline which leads to a positive self image in
values and behavior. A proposal to implement an AVANCE model in the City was drafted shortly after
the trip to San Antonio in 1989. However, budgetary considerations up to this point in time preempted
implementation in Virginia Beach. The City has been funded by the State to implement an AVANCE
model; however, slightly modified. An Ordinance was ADOPTED in October 1992 creating a Community
Policy and Management Team to implement a State program, entitled the Comprehensive Services Act.
This Act created a Trust Fund to be utilized in the development of innovative programs. Virginia Beach
was one of 23 agencies statewide funded for this purpose. Their proposal, developed by all participating
Human Services Agencies in the City, is composed of two parts. The first part of the program is an Early
Intervention Parent-Child Education Project to be operated by the Pendleton Child Services Center. The
second portion will be an intensive in-home services program operated by the Department of Mental
Health, Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse. The total amount of the grant award possible was
$350,000 from the State. The City was proud to receive $340,000 for their two part program. The EARLY
INTERVENTION PARENT-CHILD PROGRAM, modeled after the AVANCE model, is to receive
approximately $103,000 over the next 18 month period. After the initial 18-month period, if the project
is deemed successful by evaluation, the program can be continued out of resources from the local pool
of monies, which have been earmarked by the State as "At-Risk" money. However, a local match to
continue the project will be required in 1995. The City's Early Intervention program will target the "high
risk" community and will begin with fifteen (15) families. These fifteen families could translate into 45,
50 or 60 depending upon the number of children in a given family served by the program. The program
is strictly voluntary for parents and their children, but referrals will be taken from members of the
Department mandated as members of the Community Policy and Management Team. Each family is
required to attend sessions once per week for a period of nine months. Free day care will be provided
while parents participate in these sessions. The curriculum provides a range of practical subjects in
addition to topics related specifically to child development. Parents will be involved in the creation of
educational toys that are appropriate for the developmental levels of their children. Parents will be
individually coached through at least two home visits per month. The staff at Pendleton is currently
making decisions concerning hiring temporary part time personnel and investigating TARGET areas within
the City appropriate for the first phase of this project. It is hoped that this program can be replicated
throughout parts of the City.
Mayor Oberndorf referenced a similar program financed by a Japanese industry in Richmond. The young
women would come to school with their children to learn basic skills in parenting and complete their
education.
Mr. Stone advised a similar effort within the City where some of the students who have given birth to a
child may continue in school. This started in Thalia Baptist Church and now has moved into the School
system, which essentially works with parents and gives them the opportunity to care for their children
while completing requirements for their diploma.
March 23, 1993
-3-
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
ADULT HEALTH CARE
3:10 P.M.
ITEM # 36611
Dr. Daniel J. Dickinson, Director - Virginia Beach Health Department, provided information relative
Health Care for the Medically Indigent through the utilization of slides.
Medially indigent persons will be described as persons who:
Do not have health insurance (private, Medicare or Medicaid)
Are poor or near poor (income less than 200% federal poverty)
Poverty level
Annual Income (1 person)
200% 13,620
100% 6,810
Health Insurance for Persons More Than 65 Years Old
United States
PI. e4N
Private Insurance
BC/BS
HMO's
CHAMPUS
Medicare
Medicaid
HEAL TH STATUS
CRITERIA
Varies
Renal failure
Blind
Disabled
Child (< 6 yo)
Child (6-13 yo)
Pregnant women
Anyone
MONTHLY INCOME
CRITERIA(S)
Employer or individual must
make monthly payments
< 1,302
< 1,019
< 766
< 755
< 250
In genera~ i.f a Virginia resident does not have insurance through work, does not qualify for Medicaid,
and is not pregnant or less than 13 years of age, the resident must make less than $250 per month to
qualify for Medicaid. Since many poor residents do not meet these qualifications, as few as 33% of
Virginia residents living at < 100% Federal poverty are enrolled in Medicaid.
In 1990, Virginia Beach had 393,000 residents, with 22,000 poor residents (living at less than 100%
federal poverty) and 63,000 near-poor residents (living at 100-200% federal poverty). Norfolk had a
population of 227,000, with 101,000 poor or near-poor residents. Portsmouth had a population of
IOl, O00 persons, with 38,000 poor or near poor residents.
32% of the City's poor residents have no health insurance, 20% of the near-poor residents have no
health insurance and 11% of residents over 20% federal poverty have no health insurance. There are
52,000 Virginia Beach residents who do not have health insurance, of which 20,000 are poor or near-
poor. Dr. Dickinson's report refers to those 20,000 persons who are poor or near-poor and do not have
health insurance.
Most medically indigent live in households with one adult employed full or part time. Most working
medically indigent are employed by businesses with more than 25 employees and largely work in the
following industries: Retai~ Construction, Agriculture, Fishing, Service sector.
March 23, 1993
-4-
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
ADULT HEALTH CARE
ITEM # 36611 (Continued)
At the Medical College of Hampton Roads teaching hospitals, an increasing proportion of hospital
services are being utilized by either charity patients or patients with insurance plans which reimburse
at less than the cost of service (i.e. Medicaid). In 1991, charges to charity or Medicaid patients totaled
$93-MILLION, this accounted for 9.5% of the $984-MILLION in total charges for all hospital services.
In 1988 a study was performed to assess the amount of charity care provided by physicians. 147 group
practices in Wisconsin were examined:
COST OF SERVICES PROVIDED PER PHYSICIAN PER YEAR
Charity Care $ 4,300
Bad Debt 9,100
Discounted care 7,500
TOTAL $20,900
In 1992, the Commonwealth spent 2% of its total budget on public health and 6% on Medicaid. To
increase funds for health care for the medically indigent, funds have to be taken away from other
programs (education, transportation, etc.) or taxes must be increased. At present, Medicaid spending
statewide increases annually, and Medicaid spending in Virginia Beach has soared in the past 5 years.
Since 1987, the cost of Medicaid for Virginia Beach residents has increased 3-4 roM.
Virginia Beach receives a disproportionately low share of the funding allocated to local health
departments. In 1990, Norfolk received nearly three times as much money per capita through their
state/local cooperative budget than Virginia Beach. On a per capita basis, our health department is one
of the poorest funded in the state. The funding formula was crafted in 1957; changes to the formula have
been proposed; however, funding to Virginia Beach could only be increased by taking away funding from
other cities.
Concerning health services in Virginia Beach, if there are 20,000 medically indigent residents, it is
estimated 4.1 visits per person per year would be required for a total of 82,000 visits per year.
Currently 53,000 visits are provided with 29,000 additional visits needed.
Dr. Dickinson cited the options available to expand availability of medical care to the medically indigent
residents.
Increase Health Department
services
Await federal reform
Community Health Center
Primary care network using
private physicians.
Expand primary care services
Provide MD reimbursement.
Provide universal access.
Expand primary care services
Expand primary and specialty
care services.
DEFICIENCIES
State unlikely to fund
Low payments
When will it occur?
Requires large dollar outlay.
Creates two-tiered system
Requires dollar outlay for
tests and medications.
March 23, 1993
-5-
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
ADULT HEAL TH CARE
ITEM # 36611 (Continued)
There are currently 417 l~srginia Beach physicians providing outpatient medical care. 190 physicians
responded to a survey requesting information on their specialty, office visits by persons without insurance
and participation in a health care system for Mentally Indigent, in which indigent residents would be
referred to physicians on a rotating basis for free medical care.
Of the 171 physicians who responded definitely regarding their participation in an indigent health care
system, 145 offered to participate. An additional three physicians were already volunteering at the Beach
Health Clinic and could do no more. Only 23 (19%) physicians declined to participate. Despite providing
a significant amount of uncompensated care already, local physicians are willing to participate in an
organized system to care for the medically indigent.
$70,000 has been received to implement a system for the City's own adult medical clinic. To expand this
community-wide will require much effort.
Surveys are being conducted among the schools to survey dental needs to estimate the need. Requests will
be made to the dentists in the community requestYng their participation.
Dr. Dickinson will provide the total funds necessary to fund a Community Health Center. Dr. Dickinson
estimated the amount of funds necessary for tests and medications utilizing the Primary Care Network
with private physicians would entail over SI-MILLION.
March 23, 1993
-6-
CITY MANAGER'S BRIEFING
VIDEO SERVICES ANNU,~ REPORT
3:50 P~I.
ITEM # 36612
Gwen Cowart, Director - Video Services, advised the department is trying to keep their resources focused
on City and School priorities. On the City side, the Council policy targets are being utilized as the
direction and on the School side, direction is received from the School Superintendent and the School
Board.
Since July Firs6 seventy-four (74) programs have been completed and they are currently worla'ng on an
additional fifty-two (52) that are produced solely inhouse. Forty (40) live meetings have been covered.
News coverage, involving both City and School issues and activities, is produced Approximately ninety-
two stories have been addressed through news coverage. On July First, the alignment of Channels 28 and
29 was changed. Teleconferences for the School system as well as training of specific merit are
conducted.
Other new initiatives undertaken have been surveying audiences. Two primary vehicles have been utilized
to date. As part of Cox Cable's annual survey to determine if customers are satisfied with Cox Cable as
a service provider, they also have to include questions that deal with the access programming for the
School system. The first one was completed in late November. This was the first time the City had the
opportunity to ascertain the opinion of the subscribership at large. In addition, once a month a telephone
survey is conducted. This will be a method to target the program schedules to meet the needs of the
audience.
A student internship has been added as another new feature. The school system operates a curriculum
to teach video production. Students spend one of their class periods each day in Video Services worla'ng
as if they were out in the community in a business. /1 paid internship is also available for students
worla'ng after hours.
Since July Firsg Video Services has offered, for the first time, the ability for the public to secure
duplications of the programming at a nominal charge, basically what it cost Video Services to provide
the materials. A viewing station has been established for the citizens to view public meetings and copy
same if they have not had the opportunity to view same as it was broadcast../1 client survey will be
developed.
I~uleo Services will continue to develop a format for the news programming that will be more timely and
responsive. At the present time, the news broadcasts are once every three weeks, the Department will
attempt to develop a vehicle more responsive. Interactive response systems for television will be
investigated. The channels need to be actively promoted. V~uteo Services is going to be pursuing
sponsorships throughout the community. As a result of the American Disabilities Act, V'uteo Services is
diligently pursing closed caption accessibility for their programming.
The City's Annual Report in video was presented, a team effort directed by Linda Roe.
March 23, 1993
-7-
ITEM # 36613
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf called to order the INFORMAL SESSION of the FIRGINIA BEACH CITY
COUNCIL in the Council Chamber, City Hall Building, on Tuesday, March 23, 1993, at 4:20 P.M.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert K. Dean, Louis P~ Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndoff, Nancy K. Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
-8-
ITEM # 36614
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf entertained a motion to permit City Council to conduct its EXECUTIVE
SESSION, pursuant to Section 2.1-344, Code of Virginia, as amended, for the following purposes:
PERSONNEL MATTERS; Discussion or consideration of or interviews
of prospective candidates for employment, assignment, appointment,
promotion, performance, demotion, salaries, disciplining, or resignation
of specific public officers, appointees, or employees pursuant to Section
2.1-344 (A) (1).
To-Wit: Appointments - Boards and Commissions:
Development Authority
Francis Land House
Performance Evaluations - Council Appointees
PUBLICLY-HELD pROPERTY: Discussion or consideration of the
condition, acquisition, or use of real property for public purpose, or of
the disposition of publicly-held property pursuant to Section 2.1-
344(A)(3).
To-Wit: Acquisition and Disposition of Publicly-Held Property -
Virginia Beach Borough
LEGAL MATTERS: Consultation with legal counsel or briefings by staff
members, consultants, or attorneys pertaining to actual or probable
litigation, or other specific legal matters requesting the provisions of
legal advice by counsel pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A)(7).
Reapportionment
Elected School Boards
Personnel Policies
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessorns, seconded by Councilman Clyburn, City Council voted to proceed
into EXECUTIVE SESSION.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baurn, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert K. Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Nancy I~ Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
-9-
FORMAL SESION
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
March 23, 1993
6:00 P.M.
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf called to order the FORMAL SESSION of the VIRGINIA BEACH CITY
COUNCIL in the Council Chamber, City Hall Building, on Tuesday, March 23, 1993, at 6:00 P.M.
Council Members Present:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert K. Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf,, Nancy K, Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Absent:
None
INVOCATION:
Reverend Harold E. Burchett
Virginia Beach Community Chapel
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
March 23, 1993
- 10 -
Item III-E. 1.
CERTIFIC,4TION OF
EXECUTIVE SESSION
ITEM # 36615
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Council Lady Parker, City Council CERTIFIED THE
EXECUTIVE SESSION TO BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE MOTION TO RECESS.
Only public business matters lawfully exempted from Open Meeting
requirements by Virginia law were discussed in Executive Session to
which this certification resolution applies;
AND,
Only such public business matters as were identified in the motion
convening the Executive Session were heard, discussed or considered by
Virginia Beach City Council.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis IL Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndoff, Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE SESSION
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
WHEREAS: The Virginia Beach City Council convened into EXECUTIVE SESSION,
pursuant to the affirmative vote recorded in ITEM # 36614, Page No. 8, and in accordance with
the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of Information Act; and,
WHEREAS: Section 2.1-344. of the Code of Virginia requires a certification by the
governing body that such Executive Session was conducted in conformity with Virginia law.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That the Virginia Beach City Council
hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's knowledge, (a) only public business matters
lawfully exempted fa'om Open Meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in Executive
Session to which this certification resolution applies; and, (b) only such public business matters
as were identified in the motion convening this Executive Session were heard, discussed or
considered by Virginia Beach City Council.
Rfith Hodges Smith, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
March 23, 1993
- 11 -
Item III- F. 1.
MINUTES
ITEM # 36616
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Council Lady Parker, City Council APPROVED the
Minutes of the INFORMAL AND FORMAL SESSIONS of March 9, 1993.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting .dye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf,, Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
- 12 -
Item Ill-G.I.
PRESENTATIONS
ITEM # 36617
Mayor Oberndorf introduced the following Scouts in attendance to earn their merit badges:
BOY SCOUT
Troop 401
Billy Herold
Mark Messersmith
Scoutmasters
Paden /Blankenship
March 23, 1993
- 13 -
Item III-~.2.
ADD-ON
RESOLUTIONS
ITEM # 36618
Upon motion by Councilman Lanteigne, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessoms, City Council AGREED TO
ADD-ON TO THE AGENDA:
Resolution urging the Federal Government not to close the Naval
Aviation Depot in Norfolk, Virginia.
Voting: 10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert IF.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, Mayor
Meyera E. Oberndorf,, Nancy K. Parker and Vice Mayor William D.
Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members l/oting Nay:
None
Council Members Abstaining:
John D. Moss
Council Members Absent:
None
Councilman Moss ABSTAINED as he is an employee with the United States Navy and was a participant
in the analysis of this process.
March 23, 1993
- 14 -
Item III-G. 3.
ADD -ON
RESOLUTIONS
ITEM # 36619
James E. Munford, Jr., 5516 Shadowwood Drive, Phone: 460-2104, Industrial Specialist at NADEP
Carroll Ward, 809 Seawinds Lane, Phone: 428-7346, fifteen year employee of NADEP
David A. Jones, 3800 Iola Court, Phone: 471-0553, employee of NADEP
Brace Maccubbin, 2762 Ocean Shore Avenue, Phone: 496-3727, registered but WAIVED right to spealc
Upon motion by Councilman Lanteigne, seconded by Council Lady Parker, City Council ADOPTED:
Resolution urging the Federal Government not to close the Naval
Aviation Depot in Norfolk, Virginia.
Voting: 10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, Mayor
Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor William D.
Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Abstaining:
John D. Moss
Council Members Absent:
None
Councilman Moss ABSTAINED as he is an employee with the Untied States Navy and was a participant
in the analysis of this process.
March 23, 1993
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Requested by Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf
A RESOLUTION URGING THE FEDERAL
GOVERNMENT NOT TO CLOSE THE NAVAL
AVIATION DEPOT IN NORFOLK, VIRGINIA
WHEREAS, the federal government is engaged in the process of
eliminating military installations deemed unnecessary or redundant
in consideration of current budget restraints and national defense
needs;
WHEREAS, the Naval Aviation Depot (NADEP), Norfolk, Virginia
is being considered for closure under this program;
WHEREAS, Hampton Roads is host to the largest and most varied
assembly of naval activities in the eastern United States,
including two major naval air stations, a massive presence of
surface ships of all types and major support activities;
WHEREAS, NADEP is efficiently operated, is strategically
located, and singularly capable of providing vital industrial
assistance to meet the needs of naval flight operations and, on a
regular and frequent basis, the Naval Supply Center, Norfolk Naval
Shipyard, and operating fleet units; and
WHEREAS, closing of NADEP would result in no overall savings
to the defense establishment, but would deprive the Navy of a
crucial military industrial facility.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the Council recognizes the unique and irreplaceable
contribution of the Norfolk Naval Aviation Depot, and strongly
urges that the Base Closure and Realignment Commission not include
this command in their list of activities recommended for closure.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
23 March
Virginia, on the day of , 1993.
30
31
32
33
CA-5070
ORDIN \NONCODE \NADEP. RES
R-3
PREPARED: MARCH 22, 1993
- 15 -
Item III-G. 4.
ADD -ON
RESOLUTIONS
ITEM # 36620
Upon motion by Councilman Dean, seconded by Councilman Moss, City Council AGREED TO ADD-ON
TO THE AGENDA:
Resolution to recognize the selection of John B. Dey Elementary School
as one of "America's Best Elementary Schools ".
AND,
Resolution to recognize the selection of Strawbridge Elementary School
as one of "America's Best Elementary Schools ".
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert K. Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndoff, Nancy K, Parker and Vice Mayor
W~lliam D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
- 16 -
Item III-G. 5.
ADD -ON
RESOLUTIONS
ITEM # 36621
Upon motion by Councilman Dean, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessoms, City Council ADOPTED:
Resolution to recognize the selection of Stra~bridge Elementary School
as one of "America's Best Elementary Schools ".
Dr. Sidney Faucette, Division Superintendent - Virginia Beach City Public Schools and Joe
Damos, Assistant Principal accepted on behalf of Strawbridge.
REDBOOK MAGAZINE's blue ribbon panel of education experts judged Strawbridge Elementary School
to be among America's top public elementary schools. Only 177 schools were chosen.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessorns, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Requested by Councilmember Robert K. Dean
A RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE THE
SELECTION OF STRAWBRIDGE ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL AS ONE OF "AMERICA'S BEST
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS"
WHEREAS, REDBOOK magazine, on an annual basis, conducts a
search to identify outstanding public elementary schools throughout
the United States;
WHEREAS, in the current school year more than 550 schools were
nominated for this distinction by state and national education
leaders, members of the U. S. House of Representatives, and
education reporters;
WHEREAS, a panel of education experts, after evaluating each
nominee on the basis of classroom innovation, parent/community
involvement, extracurricular activities, special-needs programs,
significant improvement and overall excellence, selected those
elementary schools which were truly outstanding;
WHEREAS, Strawbridge Elementary School in Virginia Beach was
selected as one of "America's Best Elementary Schools," one of only
177 schools so recognized in the entire country;
WHEREAS, this achievement reflects dedication, superior
teaching skills, industry and leadership on the part of
Strawbridge Elementary School's principal, faculty and staff, a
commitment to excellence manifested by the student body, and
significant sacrifice on the part of dedicated parents who shared
many hours of their time and skills in volunteer work.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the City Council congratulates the principal, faculty,
staff, student body, and parents of Strawbridge Elementary School
for their school's selection as one of "America's Best Elementary
Schools," and expresses pride in this achievement which reflects
great credit upon the Virginia Beach Public Schools and the City of
Virginia Beach.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, on the 23 day of
CA-5067
ORDIN\NONCODE\ SCHOOLS. RES
R-2
PREPARED: MARCH 18, 1993
March
, 1993.
-17-
Item 111-(3.6
ADD -ON
RESOLUTIONS
ITEM # 36622
Upon motion by Councilman Brazier, seconded by Council Lady Parker, City Council ADOPTED:
Resolution to recognize the selection of John B. Dey Elementary School
as one of "America's Best Elementary Schools ".
Dr. Sidney Faucette, Division Superintendent - Virginia Beach City Public Schools and Lois Whaley,
Principal, accepted on behalf of John B. Dey.
John B. Dey was selected on behalf of their extracurricular activities. John B. Dey provides after-school
activities offering challenging and mind-expanding activities to enrich students' lives.
Yoting : 11-0
Council Members Voting ,dye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert 32 Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy 32 Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessorns, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Requested by Councilmember Robert K. Dean
A RESOLUTION TO RECOGNIZE
THE SELECTION OF JOHN B.
DEY ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AS
ONE OF "AMERICA'S BEST
ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS"
WHEREAS, REDBOOK magazine, on an annual basis, conducts a
search to identify outstanding public elementary schools throughout
the United States;
WHEREAS, in the current school year more than 550 schools were
nominated for this distinction by state and national education
leaders, members of the U. S. House of Representatives, and
education reporters;
WHEREAS, a panel of education experts, after evaluating each
nominee on the basis of classroom innovation, parent/community
involvement, extracurricular activities, special-needs programs,
significant improvement and overall excellence, selected those
elementary schools which were truly outstanding;
WHEREAS, John B. Dey Elementary School in Virginia Beach was
selected as one of "America's Best Elementary Schools," one of only
177 schools so recognized in the entire country;
WHEREAS, this achievement reflects dedication, superior
teaching skills, industry and leadership on the part of John B. Dey
Elementary School's principal, faculty and staff, a commitment to
excellence manifested by the student body, and significant
sacrifice on the part of dedicated parents who shared many hours of
their time and skills in volunteer work.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the City Council congratulates the principal, faculty,
staff, student body, and parents of John B. Dey Elementary School
for their school's selection as one of "America's Best Elementary
Schools," and expresses pride in this achievement which reflects
great credit upon the Virginia Beach Public Schools and the City of
Virginia Beach.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, on the 23 day of
CA-5068
ORDIN\NONCODE\JOHN-DEY.RES
R-1
PREPARED: MARCH 19, 1993
March
, 1993.
- 19 -
[tern III-G. 7.
PRESENTATIONS
ITEM # 36623 (Continued)
1993 SPRING/SUMMER ADVERTISING CAMP.~GN/YEAR-END
The key age category of the visitor is 25-44. The City is essentially spending $21.00 to secure a visitor
who is in turn spending approximately $900. Focus group and mall intercepts research was conducted
in Washington, D.C. and malls between Washington and New York. The purpose was to determine the
effect and appeal of Labor Day packages and measure impact of coupon book on conversions. The
coupon hook has appeal and would increase conversion by 10% or $4.3 million in gross revenue,
$173,000 in net tax revenue.
Pete Leddy, Account Supervisor, advised 1993 STRATEGIES:
Position Virginia Beach as a superior value.
Feature Vacation Guide, 1-800 VA BEACH and Coupon
Book
Increase conversions with Guide and Coupon Book
Use events to attract visitors/extend stay
Maximize ROI by focusing on major spending markets
with new visitors
NEWSPAPER
Newspaper is primary medium
60 Newspapers
424 Ads
10.50" ad size (2 columns x 5.25")
MAGAZINE
For additional reach and inquiries
21 magazines
1/3 Page, four color
William Campbell, Partner, advised the CREATIVE ELEMENTS.
Newspaper
Magazine
Magazine Brochure Listings
State of Virginia
Per inquiry Television Co-op
Per Inquiry Television
Events Radio
Mr. Campbell advised new this year is the Virginia Beach coupon books, "$200 Off Virginia Beach ",
which will be introduced via newspaper ads and will be mailed out with fulfillment packages. In 1993
Virginia Beach advertising will continue to feature the 16-page, full color Virginia Beach Vacation
Guide using 1-800-VA BEACH as the logo. When readers call the 800 number they are mailed the
Vacation Guide and multiple inserts, including the 1993 Dining and Accommodations Guides, the Golf
Guide (if requested) and the new Virginia Beach Coupon Book. Mr. Campbell displayed both the 30 and
60 second television advertisement.
March 23, 1993
- 18 -
Item Ill-Ca. 7.
PRESENTATIONS
ITEM # 36623
1993 SPRING/SUMMER ADVERTISING CAMPAIGN/YEAR-END
James B. Ricketts, Director, Convention and Visitor Developmeng advised the 1992 results of the
SPRING/S UMMER AD VER TISING CAMPAIGN~ YEAR -END:
Inquiries jumped from 192,000 to 250,000, a 24% increase.
Annual hotel, restaurant, amusement and retail sales receipts reached
record levels.
Summer visitation surpassed all previous years.
Innkeepers experienced difficulty with bottom line.
While year 'round oceanfront occupancy was up, rate structures were
#at.
Annual, city-wide occupancy was stable.
Tourism industry has not been able to raise prices.
Oceanfront retailers indicated business was down.
Annual Hotel sales increased 1.9%, with restaurant receipts increasing 5.1%, amusement sales 8.2%,
and Retail Sales (city-wide) increased 3.2%. In terms of occupancy, Summer occupancy reached 85%
(highest in six years). Annual citywide occupancy remained at 61%.
ANTICIPATED ISSUES FOR 1993
Modest but uneven economic
growth
Continued pressure to add value
Emerging destinations
Potomac Mills
Branson, Missouri
Mall of the Americas
Changing consumer bases
Aging Population - Single
Parents
Mr. Ricketts introduced Dr. Gil Yochum, Old Dominion University, Co-ordinator of Market Research for
the past ten years. Dr. Yokum advised the 1992 year, in terms of visitors, was the most successful
recorded. The 1990 dip was temporary rather than a permanent decline. The future market is strong.
Rates will rise especially with the stabilization in the number of hotel rooms. The average vtsitor income
has increased 34% since 1988.
A. Palmer Farley, Partner, Barker Campbell & Farley, advised the 1993 Marketing Objectives:
Produce a 60% annual occupancy
Maintain/expand 81% summer occupancy
Improve the quality of the visitor
Expand the shoulder season
Extend the stay beyond 4.7 nights.
March 23, 1993
- 20 -
Item III-H.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36624
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council APPROVED in
ONE MOTION Items 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the CONSENT AGENDA.
Items 2a./b and 4 were pulled for a separate vote.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W..
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy IC Parker* and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
Relative Item III-H. 7, Council Lady Parker DISCLOSED pursuant to Section 2.1-639.14(E), Code of
Virginia, she and her husband are owners of Parker Pools, Inc., and Parker Pools, Inc. has a contract
with Kitchin Corporation for the maintenance of the pool at Seahawk Motel. Although the City Attorney
has advised this interest does not meet the criteria of a personal interest in the transaction under the
Conflict of Interests Act, she wishes to disclose this interest and abstain from participating in this
transaction.
March 23, 1993
- 21 -
Item III-H. 1.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36625
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council ADOPTED:
Resolutions requesting the Virginia Department of Transportation
reclassify, correct the inventory and accept additional streets for urban
maintenance payments:
45.52 additional lane miles of local/collector streets with
$250,588 additional revenue; and, 23.85 lane miles of arterial
streets with $223,618 additional revenue.
3.76 lane miles of corrections/deletions to the local/collector
streets inventory with a reduction of $20,699 in revenue; and,
3.48 lane miles of corrections/deletions to the urban streets
inventory with a reduction of $32,628 in revenue. Ordinance to
authorize acquisition of temporary and perpetual easements of
right-of-way for Salem Canal Improvements Project (CIP 2-
823), either by agreement or condemnation.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf,, Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation
requires a council resolution prior to accepting additional
streets for urban maintenance payments; and
WHEREAS, the attached streets have been constructed
in accordance with standards established by the Virginia
Department of Transportation; and
WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach has accepted
these streets and has agreed to maintain these streets, and
WHEREAS, a representative from the Virginia
Department of Transportation has inspected and approved these
streets; now
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia does hereby request the
Virginia Department of Transportation to accept these streets
and to begin paying urban maintenance payments to the City of
Virginia Beach based on the established rate.
Adopted this 23 day of M.reh
, 1993
ATTEST
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
THE CITY MANAGER
RUTH HODGES SMITH, CMC/AAE
CLERK OF COUNCIL
APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS
SIGNATURE
^F?ROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICIEN ND FORM
CITY ATTORNEY
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Virginia Department of Transportation
requires a council resolution prior to accepting
corrections/deletions to the revised road inventory for urban
maintenance payments; and
WHEREAS, city personnel have reviewed the revised
road inventory prepared by the Virginia Department of
Transportation and have determined that some inaccuracies
exist; and
WHEREAS, a representative from the Virginia
Department of Transportation has inspected and approved these
corrections to the revised road inventory; now
THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the Council of the
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia does hereby request the
Virginia Department of Transportation to accept these
corrections and to begin paying urban maintenance payments to
the City of Virginia Beach based on the established rate.
Adopted this 23 day of March
, 1993
ATTEST
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
R{fTH HODGE~ SMITH, CMC/AAE
CLERK OF COUNCIL
APPROVED AS TO CONTENTS
SIGNATURE
DEPARTMENT
AP?ROVED AS TO LEGAL
SUFFICI -~~~N?~ORM
CITY ATTORNEY
E03
E03
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page I of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) VDOT
REOUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.I-41.1
URBAN PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL Code of Virginia
OELETIONS/TO BE REPLACED
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/U PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
UIDTH UIDTH LINE OF NILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
ONLY)
~ FROM TO
SNORE DR NORTHAMPTON BLVO .19NE NORTHAMPTON BLBO VAR 7~. -0.19 & '0.76
SHORE OR .19NE NORTHAMPTON BLVO 41ME NORTHAMPTON BLVD VAR 58. -0.22 & -0.88
E03
E03
E03
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 1 of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) rOOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADOITIONS OR OELET[ONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
URBAN PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL Code of Virginia
ADDiTiONS/REPLACE DELETIONS
MUNiCiPALiTY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NA~E TERMINI R/V PAVEMENT CENTER- laJMBER LANE FUNC.
UIDTN UIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
* FROM TO
SHORE DR OSME NORTHAMPTON BLVO .3ME NORTHAMPTON BL90 VAR 55. 0.25 5 1.25
SHORE DR NORTHAMPTON BLVO 05ME NORTHAMPTON BLVO VAR 72. 0.05 4 O.Z
SHORE DR 3ME NORTHAMPTON BLVD 41ME NORTtIANPTON BLVO VAR 58 0 11 & 0.44
KIO
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 1 of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) VOOT
REOUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-&1.1
URBAN PRINCIPAL ARTERIAL Code of V~rginte
ADDITIONS
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/~ PAVENE#T CENTER- NUMBER LANE
- UIOTH WlOT# LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
* FROM TO
DAM NECK RD CORPORATE LANDING PKWY HOLLAND RD 100 ~8. 3.99 & 15.96
i'
FO9
FO9
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION
(Rev. 1-1-87) 900T
REOUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section ]3.1-41.1
URBAN MINOR ARTERIAL Code of Virginia
DELETIONS/TO BE REPLACEO
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
Page 1 oF 1
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
* FRUM TO
PRINCESS ANNE RD THORNHILL PL SALEM RD VAR 61. -0.18 5 -0.9
PRINCESS ANNE RD .12MW LYNNHAVEN PIG~Y TNORNHILL PL VAR 22. -0.35 2 -0.7
I PRINCESS ANNE RD LYNNHAVEN PICKY 12M~ LYNNHAVEN PKWY VAR
FIO
FIO
FIO
FIO
FIO
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 1 of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET AOOITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-&1.1
URBAN MINOR ARTERZAL Code of Vlrgm~a
ADOITIONS/REPLACE DELETIONS
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
ONLY)
* FRCM TO
PRINCESS ANNE RD LYNNNAVEN PKVY 08~,/ LYNNHAVEN PK~Y VAR 88. 0.08 8 0.6~
PRINCESS ANNE RD .08~ LYNNHAVEN PKWY 26HW LYNNHAVEN PKVY VAR 110. 0.18 10 1.8
PRINCESS ANNE RD 26MV LYNNHAVEN PKVY 41MW LYNNHAVEN PKWY VAR 99. 0.15 9 1.35
PRINCESS ANNE RO &1MU LYNNHAVEN PKWY SALEM RO VAR 4&. 0.24 4 0.96
FIO
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 1 of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) 91)0T
REQUEST FOR STREET AOO[TIONS OR OELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
URBAN MINOR ARTERIAL Code of Virginia
ADDITIONS .
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CEqTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
VIDTH WIDTH LINE OF NILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
ONLY)
* FRUM TO
FERRELL PKVY PRINCESS ANNE RD SALEM RD OVERPASS VAR 55. 0.25 S 1.25
Form U-1 - URBA# DIVISION Page 1 of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) VOOT
REOUEST FOR STREET AOOITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR HUflICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
LOCAL Code of Virginia
DELETIONS/TO BE REPLACED
HUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/U PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF NILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) NILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
* FROM TO
GLENvIE~ DR GLENVIEW DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. -0.03 2 -0.06
GLENVIEW DR .02MW MANASAS RUN 02NS MANASAS RUN 60. 30. -0.3 2 -0.6
GRAVENHURST DR SAGAMORE CT SAGAMORE CT 50. 36. -0.22 2 -0.44
CASTLEFIELD RD CUL-DE-SAC CASTLEFIELD RD 50. 30. -0.31 2 -0.62
RIVER ROCK ARCH ROCK LAKE LOOP .19ME DIAMOND LA 50. 30. -0.4 2 -0.8
PRITCHARO RD LYNNNAVEN RD S CUL-OE-SAC SO. 30. -0.3 2 -0.6
RENAISSANCE WAY CUL-DE-SAC ESPLANADE DR 50. 30. -0.22 Z -0.44
CULVER LA 30ME ASHMORE DR 22ME OF PUMP STATION 60. 48. -0.1 2 -0.2
811
010
EIO
GlO
010
HO7
J13
Lll
Lll
Fom U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 1 of 1
(Rev. 1-1-87) VOOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
LOCAL Code of Virginia
ADDITIONS/REPLACE DELETIONS
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET HAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUWIBER LANE FUNC.
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
* FROR TO
GLENVIEW DR LYNNHAVEN PKWY CUL-DE-SAC100 80. 0 3 2 0.6
GRAVENHURST DR DIGHTON CT .OSMS CHESTERBROOK OR 60. 36. 0 21 2 0.42
CASTLEFIELD RO CUL-DE-SAC CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.3 2 0.6
i
RIVER ROCK ARCH DIAMOND LA ROCK LAKE LOOP-~EST INTER SO. 30. 0.2 2 0.4
RIVER ROCK ARCH ROCK LAKE LOOP-EAST INTER DIAMONO LA 50. 30. 0 32 2 0.64
PRITCNARD RD S LYNNHAVEN RD CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0 42 2 0.8/,
RENAISSANCE WAY ESPLANADE DR S CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.24 2 0.~8
CULVER LA 30ME ASHMORE LA SCARLOTTI CT 60. 48. 0 47 4 1.88
CULVER LA SCARLOTTI CT CHIG~ELL RD 60. 36. 0.54 2 1.08
Form U-1 URBAN OIVISION
(Rev. 1-1-87) VOOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
LOCAL Code of Vtrglma
AOOITIONS
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACN
Page 1 of 13
STREET NAME TERMINI R/U PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
UIDTH U[DTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
t FRUM TO
ARCHIVES CT GLENVIEU OR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. O.O& 2 0.08
UYNDHAH CT GLENVIEU DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.01 2 0.02
CABIN JOHN OR GLENV[EU DR SENATORS CT 50. 30. 0.08 2 0.16
CABIN JOHN DR 528~S POPES HEAD ARCH GLENVIEW OR 50. 30. 0.11 2 0.22
GLENVIEW DR NANASSA RUN LYNNHAVEN PKUY 60. 36. 0.72 2 1.&&
SENATORS CT CUL-OE-SAC CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.11 2 0.22
CHAIN BRIDGE RD GLENVIEW DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.11 ~ 0.22
GADSAY CT GLENV[EW DR CUL-OE-SAC 100 76. 0.02 2 0.04
RAMSAY CT GLENVIEW OR CUL-OE-SAC 100 76. 0.02 2 0.04
BRANCHUCX~ WAY WHITEHURST LANOING ROAO CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0 13 2 0 26
GOLDLEAF CT BRANCHI~ UAY CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.13 2 0.26
BRENOLE CT CANTERFORO LA CUL-OE-SAC 100 30. 0.06 2 0.12
:BRENLAND CIR CANTERFORO LA CUL-OE-SAC 100 30. 0.06 2 0.12
CANTERFORO CT CANTERFORO LA CUL-OE-SAC 100 30. 0.06 2 0.12
CANTERFORO LA KEMPSVILLE RO 02MS BRENOLE CT 100 30. 0.28 2 0.56
UINDING BANK RD COURSE VIEU CIR SMITH COVE CIR 45. 30. 0.2 2 0.4
HEATflERTON CT GOOSE CREEK DR CUL-DE-SAC50. 30 0.11 2 0.22
SUEETUATER CT GOOSE CREEK RD CUL-DE-SAC50. 30. 0.15 2 0.3
CONNIE UAY CONNIE LA PROSPECT LA 50. 30. b.ll 2 0.22
GOOSE CREEK RO LYNNBROOK LNOG PROSPECT LA 50. 30. 0.18 2 0.36
PROSPECT LA PROSPECT CT LAURENCE OR 50. 30. 0 06 2 0.12
CLEVELAND ST CLEARFIELD AVE CUL-OE-SAC60. 38. 0 08 3 0.24
CABRIOLE MEWS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-OE-SAC 40. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
CAUSSOME MEWS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC &O. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
Form U- 1
(Rev. 1 - 1
URBAN DIVISION
VDOT
Page
3 of
_
LOCAL
ADDITIONS
REOUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Sectfon 53.1-41.1
Code of Vlrgmta
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/g PAVEMENT CENTER- IRMDER LANE FUNC.
UIDTH gIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUt4BER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPO USE
* FROM TO ONLY)
_
CAVERSHAH MEgS CHURCH POIHT PL C1JL-DE-SAC 40. &O. 0 O& 2 0.08
CHURCH POINT RD FIRST COURT RD CHURCH POINT PL 80. 51. 0 OS 4 0.2
,. .
OALI~ MEgS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC ~0. 30. O.OS 2 0.1
FLETCHER MEVS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-OE-SAC 40. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
HEPPLEUHITE MEgS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC 40. 30. 0.06 2 0.12
HOSSKINE MEWS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC 40 30. 0 03 ~ 0.06
LADYSMITH MEWS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC 40. 30. 0.0? 2 0.14
LANcKFIELD MEgS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC 40. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
MAZE HILL MEgS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC 40. 30. 0.06 2 0.12
. . ,
PILGRIMS MEWS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-DE-SAC 40. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
STONE CHURCH MEgS CHURCH POINT PL CUL-OE-SAC 40. 30. 0.06 2 0.12
,
CAVERSHAM MEWS 1ST COURT RD CHURCH POINT PL 60. 37. 0.04 2 0.08
MERL CIRCLE NORTH GREEHI~ELL RO CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.03 ~ 0.06
·
CHURCH POINT PL CHURCH POINT RO CAVERSNAM MEgS 50. 30. 0.3? 2 0.?4
CHURCH POINT PL CAVERSHAM MEWS CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.34 2 0.68
KINGS WAY DR 174'E OF BATTLE ROYAL CIR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0.17 2 0.34
glSHART LAKE KINGS gAY DR UISHART POINT RO 50. 30. 0.11 2 0.22
ARAGONA BLVO CLEVELAND ST CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.07 2 0.14
ARDMORE LA OEVON ~Y 12M~ DEVON gAY 70- 30. 0.48 2 0.96
FALL MEADO~ CT AROMORE LA CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.07 2 0.14
GROVE HILL CT DEVON gY CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.06 2 0.12
FAHI~-OCO CT BOXFORD ROAD CUL-DE-SAC 70. 50. 0 ~3 2 0.06
ROUNDTABLE CT CREEKMORE CT CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0.09 2 0.18
ItUNGER PARISH CT CHURCH POINT RD CUL-DE-SAC 50. 32. 0.11 2 0.22
EO$
E07
210
210
210
210
211
FO3
*COUNCIL ~ESOLUTIOH & MAP ATTACHED
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 5 of 13
CRev. 1-1-87) VDOT
REGUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR MUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYHENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
LOCAL Code of V|rgtnia
ADDITIONS
HUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/U PAVEMENT CENTER- lAMBER LANE FUNC.
UIDTH UIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NIJI, qBER (FEET) (FEET) NILES LANES (TPO USE
ONLY)
* FRC~ TO
NERCHANTS NOPE CT CHURCH PT RD N CUL-DE-SAC50. 31. O.OS 2 0.1
UEST VIRGINIA AVE INVERNESS RD OSMS INVERNESS RO 50. 30. 0.05 2 0.1
LINK CT SAMPSON LA CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
iCHESNIRE FOREST CT CUL-DE-SAC CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.16 2 0.32
UEATHERSTONE DR SALEM RD CHESHIRE FOREST CT 50. 30. 0.07 2 0.14
BIG OAK CT ROCK LAKE LOOP CUL-DE-SACSO. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
ANTELOPE PL SALEM LAKES BLVO 100" N STARUO00 ARCH 50. 30. 0.12 2 0.24
MiLL POINT LA SALEM LAKES BLVO MORNING VIEU DR 50. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
ANTELOPE CT ANTELOPE PL CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
LA,HC~ELLE CT LAMORELLE LA CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.15 2 0.3
SEHTERA UAY ROSEMONT RD SPRUCE ST 60. 3?. 0.39 2 0.78
LAPIS LA ROCK LAKE LOOP .03ME ROCK LAKE LOOP 50. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
LAPIS LA ROCK LAKE LOOP VHITE WATER DR 50. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
STONE GAP DR CUL-DE-SAC CUL-DE-SAC 50 30. 0.1 2 0.2
UNITE WATER OR CUL-OE-SAC CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.11 2 0.22
BIG BOULDER DR ROCK LAKE LOOP-EAST INTER ROCK LAKE LOOP-UEST INTER50. 30. 0.29 2 0.58
URCHIN RD SHORE DR .04MS SHORE DR 80. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
LYNNHAVEN DR N GREAT NECK RD CUL-DE-SAC 60. 36. 0.14 2 0.28
,.
LYNNHAVEN DR GREAT NECK RD g GREAT NECK RD N, 60. 36. 0.15 2 0.3
BANDER CT LYNNOALE RD CUL-DE-SAC 50 30. 0.2 2 0.4
NAPON CT LYNNDALE RD CUL-DE-SAC50. 30. 0.05 2 0.1
:SARASAN CT LYNNOALE RD CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.05 2 0.1
HALL HAVEN DR SPIGEL DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.05 2 0.1
BELDOVER CT BELOOVER LA CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30 0.07 2 0.1&
*COUNCIL ~ESOLUTION & MAP ATTACHED
Form U-1 URBAN OIVISION Page 9 of 13
(Rev. 1-1-873 VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADOITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR HUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33.1-41.1
LOCAL Code of Virginia
ADDITIONS
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/W PAVEMENT CENTER- NUNBER LANE FUNC.
WIDTH WIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
~ FROM TO ONLY)
SO;lC OR LONDON BRIDGE RD CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.18 2 0.36
BUYRN CT SUYRN CIR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
UYRN CIR BUYRN FARM RD (UEST) BUYRN FARM RD 50. 30. O.&8 2 0.96
BUYRN FARM RD HOLLANO RO BUYRN CIRCLE 60. 35. 0.04 2 0.08
~ALN ~ LA BUYRN CIR CUL-DE-SAC ~0. 30. 0.07 2 0.1&
WELL VATER LA SMOKEflOUSE ROAO CUL-DE-SAC $0. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
,
NAVARRE WAY RENAISSANCE UAY W. CUL-DE-SAC100 80. 0.03 2 0.06
,
RENAISSANCE WAY ESPLANADE DR N. CUL-DE-SAC 100 80. 0.03 2 0.06
HENRI Pt BERNADOTTE ST CUL-DE-SAC100 80. 0.02 2 0.04
BLOSSOM MILL CT PRINCESS ANNE RD CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.14 2 0.28
· .. .
PRINCESS ANNE CT PRINCESS ANNE RD CUL-DE-SAC $0. 30. 0.1 2 0.2
.
NE~STEAD DR PRINCESS ANNE RD .02MS WARNER HALL OR 60. 36. 0.39 2 0.78
GALVANI OR W DUYER RD E OWYER RD 50.
RUNNING CREEK CT EASTBORNE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
,
MAYI~T CT MORGAN MILL WY CUL-OE-SAC 50. 30. 0.19 2 0.38
WES~NA/q UOOD CT EDGENILL AVE CUL-DE.SAC 50. 30. 0.09 2 0.18 "
' .
MILLNAVEN CT RAVENCROFT LA CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.06 2 0.12
.
OUAIL flOLLOld CT OUAIL NOLLOU PL CUL-OE-SAC SO. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
OUAIL HOLLOU PL RAVENCROFT LA CUL-OE-SAC SO. 30. 0.13 2 0.26
,.,
RAVENCROFT CT RAVENCROFT LA CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
RAVENCROFT LA PAINTERS LA TOUNFIELD LA 50. 30. 0 33 2 0.66
TOUNFIELD LA 02MS EDGEHILL AVE 02MN ELSON GREEN 60. 36. 0.39 2 0.78
,.
LANARK CT TO~NFIELD LA CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.09 2 0.18
EDGEflILL AVE TUFTON CT CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.55 2 1.1
*COUNCIL RESOLUTION & MAP ATTACHED
SIGNED SIGNED
MUNICIPAL OFFICIAL OATE RESIDENT ENGINEER OATE
Form U-1 URBAN DIVISION Page 7 of 13
(Rev. 1-1-87) VDOT
REQUEST FOR STREET ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS
FOR HUNICIPAL ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS
Section 33 1-41.1
LOCAL Code of Vtrglnte
ADDITIONS
MUNICIPALITY CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
STREET NAME TERMINI R/U PAVEMENT CENTER- NUMBER LANE FUNC.
UIDTH UIDTH LINE OF MILES CLASS
ROUTE NUMBER (FEET) (FEET) MILES LANES (TPD USE
ONLY)
~ FROM TO
BALSAM PINE CT GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
BIRCH BARK DR GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.17 2 0.34
ELM TREE CT GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
GOLDEN HAPLE CT GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
GOLDEN MAPLE OR CUL-DE-SAC CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 1.07 2 2.14
HORNBEAM CT HORNBEAH DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. O.OS 2 0.1
HORNBEAM DR BIRCH BARK DR SILVER MAPLE DR SO. 30. 0.1 2 0.2
LINEBERRY RD GOLDEN MAPLE DR .02MS GOLDEN MAPLE DR SO. 30. 0.02 2
PERSIMMON CT GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. O.OS 2 0.1
RED BUD CT GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
RED MAPLE LA GOLDEN HAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.11 2 0.22
SCARLET OAK CT SCARLET OAK DR CUL-DE-SACSO. 30. O.OS 2 0.1
SCARLET OAK DR S LYNNHAVEN RD GOLDEN MAPLE DR 60. 36. 0.2 2 0.4
SILVER HAPLE CT SILVER MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.03 2 0.06
SILVER MAPLE DR GOLDEN MAPLE DR PRITCHARO RD SO. 30. 0.0~ 2 0.08
SILVER HAPLE DR GOLDEN MAPLE DR GOLDEN MAPLE DR SO. 30. 0.31 2 0.62
SUEET CHERRY C[R GOLDEN MAPLE DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.02 2 O.O&
DUNNEBROOK CT UARUICK DR CUL-DE-SAC 50. 30. 0.04 2 0.08
OLD CLUBHOUSE RD 01MU UARUICK DR 12ME UARUICK DR 60. 36. 0.12 2 0.24
CREEKSIDE DR OLD CLUBHOUSE RD ' CUL-DE-SAC 50 30. 0.12 2 0.24
SCARBOROUGH UAY OLD CLUBHOUSE RD CUL-DE-SAC SO. 30. 0.21 2 0.42
SCABOROUGH CT SCARBOROUGH ~AY CUL-OE-SAC 120 95. 0.03 2 0.06
,CREEKSIOE CT CREEKSIOE DR CUL-OE-SAC SO. 30. 0.02 2 0.04
OLO CLUBHOUSE RO MANOR GLEN CT 01MU UARWlCK OR 50. 30. 0.13 2 0.26
~COUNCIL RESOLUTION & MAP ATTACHED
SIGNED
SIGNED
RESIDENT ENGINEER DATE
A RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL
OF UNDERWRITERS
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the "City"),
has debt outstanding;
WHEREAS, the City, in conjunction with its financial advisors,
has determined that it is in the best interest of the City to
refund all or portions of the following bonds:
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1991C, maturing on August 1, 2008
through 2011, in the aggregate principal
amount of $9,850,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1991A, maturing on March 1, 2006
through 2011, in the aggregate principal
amount of $11,940,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1990A, maturing on June 1, 2004
through 2010, in the aggregate principal
amount of $14,350,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1989A, maturing on October 1, 2000
through 2009, in the aggregate principal
amount of $20,100,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1988A, maturing on May 1, 1999
through 2008, in the aggregate principal
amount of $20,960,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1987, maturing on May 1, 1998
through 2000, in the aggregate principal
amount of $7,230,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement
Refunding Bonds, Series of 1986, maturing on
July 15, 1998 through 2000, and July 15, 2003
and 2004, in the aggregate principal amount of
$14,700,000;
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1986, maturing on May 1, 1997
through 2006, in the aggregate principal
amount of $24,390,000;
General Obligation Water and Sewer Refunding
Bonds, Series of 1986, maturing on July 15,
1999 through 2004, in the aggregate principal
amount of $4,335,000;
General Obligation Water and Sewer Bonds,
Series of 1986, maturing on May 1, 1997
through 2006, in the aggregate principal
amount of $3,940,000; and
49
5O
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
General Obligation Public Improvement
Refunding Bonds, Series of 1985, maturing on
December 1, 1996 and 1997, in the aggregate
principal amount of $6,930,000.
WHEREAS, the City also proposes to issue approximately
$20,000,000 General Obligation Bonds for public improvements
(together with the Refunding Bonds, the "Bonds"); and
WHEREAS, after soliciting and reviewing applications of
investment banking firms and interviewing certain firms, the city
staff, upon consultation with representatives of Government Finance
Associates, Inc. and Government Finance Group, Inc. the "Financial
Advisors" of the City, have recommended a managing underwriting
team for such issuance of refunding bonds.
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
1. Goldman, Sachs & Co. is hereby appointed as the senior
underwriting manager for the planned issuance of Refunding Bonds in
the approximate amount of $160,000,000.00 and General Obligation
Public Improvement Bonds in the approximate amount of
$20,000,000.00.
2. The City Manager and staff of the Department of Finance
are hereby authorized to appoint, as co-managers or as a selling
group, additional underwriters, including, but not limited to
PaineWebber Incorporated, Lehman Brothers, Wheat, First Securities,
Inc., Scott & Stringfellow, Inc., Davenport & Company of Virginia,
Inc. and Craigie Incorporated.
3. This resolution shall take effect immediately.
76
77
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
23 March
Virginia, on the day of , 1993.
78
79
80
81
CA-5059
ORDIN \NONCODE \REFUNDING . RES
R-4
PREPARED: March 23, 1993
AP~VED AS TO .CONTENTS
- "si~N^ru-E "- 7'
DEPP RT/~'
AFPROVED AS TO LEGAL
! SUFFICIENCY AND FORM
CITY ATTORNEY
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
to serve as
SENIOR MANAGING UNDERWRITER
for
ADVANCE REFUNDING BONDS
Proposals Due: 3:00 PM, (EST) March 16, 1993
SECTION I
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this Request for Proposals CRFP~) is to select a Senior Managing Underwriter for the
City of Vir~nla Beach's planned issuance of tax-exempt bonds to obtain annual debt service savings by
defeasing outstanding debt through an advance refunding. A complete list of the City's outstanding
bonds by maturity and coupon rate is included in the City's Annual Long Term Debt Report. Also
attached is a description of the City's most recent general obligation issuance of October 1992 as well
as other obligations of the City. Only certain series of the City's outstanding general obligation debt
are eligible for this financing as specified herein.
Thc firm(s) selected must have demonstrable experience in the structuring and sale of general
obligation refunding bonds. The selected firm(s) will work with representatives of the City, its financial
advisors (Government Finance Associates, Inc. and Government Finance Group, Inc.) and bond
counsel (Hunton & Williams) to ensure that the financing is completed in a timely manner and that thc
securities are well received by the market. A selection committee consisting of representatives from
the City and its financial advisors will review the proposals and present a recommendation to the
Virginia Beach City Council (the ~Council~).
Contact during the RFP process regarding the selection of underwriters with any public officials of the Cgy,
except as expressly provided for herein, is prohibited. The City reserves the right to reject the proposal of
any firrn engaged in such contact.
The City shall not be liable for any expenses incurred by proposers in their preparation and
presentation of the proposals. The City reserves the right to reject all proposals. All proposals
submitted to the City pursuant to this RFP will become the property of the City. Firms responding to
this RFP must express their willingness to work on a contingency basis. The City will not be
responsible for any expenses nor will it pay any fees to the firm(s) selected in the event the financing is
not completed, including but not limited to a refusal by the State Council on Local Debt to approve the
issuance of such bonds. The City has already submitted its application to the State Council.
The City reserves the right to waive any informalities in any proposal. Where there is a discrepancy
between numeral and written text, the written text shall be considered binding.
The City reserves the right to designate one or more co-managers for the financing. Joint proposals
shall not be accepted.
SECTION II
PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS
Instruction to Proposers
Questions concerning this RFP should be directed in writing via mail or fax to Patrida A. Phillips, City
of Virginia Beach Finance Department no later than March 11, 1993. Written responses to all
questions received will be distributed to each firm to which the RFP hz been sent. Failure of the City
to respond to written questions or failure of any individual to receive written responses shall not affect
the validity of the RFP.
General Proposal Requirements
RFP Response: To be considered responsive, please send the original and four (4) copies of your
proposal to Ms. Patricia A. Phillips at the address cited below by 3:00 p.m. (EST) on Tuesday, March
16, 1993. Proposals shall be placed in a separate envelope or package and identified with the name and
address of the Offeror. Additionally, proposers are required to send two (2) copies of their proposal to
each of the City's financial advisors, Ms. Kimberly K. Edwards and Mr. Michael P. Grifferty, at the
addresses provided below. Late proposals will not b~ considered. Proposals received by telephone,
telegraph, or facsimile shall not be accepted.
Patricia A. Phillips
Director of Finance
City of Vir~nia Beach
Municipal Center
City HalL, Room 220
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
(804) 427-4681
Fax: (804) 427-4135
Kimberly IL Edwards
Government Finance Group, Inc.
4350 North Fairfax Drive, Suite 760
Arlington, VA 22203
(703) 528-5785
Michael P. Grifferty
Government Finance Associates, Inc.
71 Broadway, Suite 1301
New York, NY 10006
(212) 809-5700
-2-
Proposal Preparation
Proposal should be signed by an authorized representative of the proposer. All information requested
must be submitted. Failure to submit all information requested may result in a proposal being
considered 'non-responsive' and therefore rejected. Excluding tabular material and schedules
requested in this RFP, the textual presentation should not be longer than sixteen (16) pages, singled
spaced.
Proposals should be prepared simply and economically, providing straightforward, concise responses to
satisfy RFP requirements. No printed brochures or materials other than written responses to the
specific requirements should be provided. Each copy of the proposal should be bound in a single
volume. All documentation submitted with the proposals should be bound in that single volume.
Offerors are advised that Chapter 7 of Title 11 (specifically Section 11-52) of the Code of Vir~nia --
i.e., the Virginia Public Procurement Act -- shall govern public inspection of all records submitted by
the Offeror.
Specific Proposal Requirements and Response Format
In order to provide for a uniform review process and to obtain comparability, proposals must be
organi?ed as described below. Failure to follow this format may be cause for rejection of your
proposal. Adherence to this format is critical for the City's evaluation process.
a. Title Page
The title page should reflect the RFP subject, name of the Itu'm, address, telephone number,
contact person and date of preparation.
b. Table of Contents
Indicate the materials included by section and page number. The table of contents should
mirror the format described in this section of the RFP, including items c - g as described
herein.
c. Letter of Transmittal
Each proposal should be accompanied by a letter of transmittal not ~xceeding two pages which
summarizes the key points of the proposal and which is signed by an officer of the firm who is
responsible for committing the t'Lrm's resources.
d. Firm Qualifications
Please describe your firm's experience as a senior manager or co-manager for tax-exempt
refunding bonds that have been sold since January 1, 1991. The list should highlight bond
issues for the Commonwealth of Virginia, its agencies and authorities, and municipal
governments within the state. Specify the bond issues for which you served as senior manager
and identify the par amount, true interest cost, credit rating, final maturity, dollar amount of
total and present value savings, and savings ratios (present value savings as a percentage of
refunded and refunding bonds) for those issues. If the refunding was undertaken by the state
or local government for reasons other than debt service savings, the rationale for the refunding
should be stated clearly. Some of the information may be provided in tabular form at the
respondent's option. Provide totals for the dollar amount and number of refunding issues for
which you have served as senior manager nationally and in Virginia.
-3-
From thk~ list of refunding bond issues, please provide three references, including a contact
person's name, title, address and phone number.
Please provide the names and brief resumes of the public finance professionals assigned to this
financing.
Proposed Refunding Structure
The City requests that proposers structure a refunding bond issue to defease a portion of the
City's outstanding general obligation bonds. Respondents must structure their financing plan
using series included in the application submitted to the State Council on Local Debt as set
out in the list below. Any or all refundable maturities may be selected from these series.
Series not appearing below are not eligible for the proposed f'mancing.
Series
1985 General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding Bonds
1986 General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
1986 General Obligation Water & Sewer Bonds
1986 General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding Bonds
1986 General Obligation Water & Sewer Refunding Bonds
1987 General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
1988-A General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
1989-A General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
1990-A GGeneral Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
1991-A General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
1991-C General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds
The refunding issue must comply with the State Council on Local Debt, Guidelines for
Approval of Refunding Bonds, dated November 20, 1991 ('the guidelines') and should qualify
as Type A refundings, as defined under Sections 2.1 through 2.2 of the guidelines. The
refunding issue must not increase the average life of the City's outstanding debt nor may it
postpone the tmal maturity of the refunded bonds into a later fiscal year. The City seeks to
obtain approximately level savings in fiscal year as a result of the refunding. The City prefers
to schedule interest payments on any date from July 15 through September 1 and January 15
through March 1. Assume a dated date of May 1 and a delivery date of May 13, 1993.
Please provide the following schedules to illustrate the refunding:
Present Value Savings Report, using the TIC on the refunding bonds (calculated as
defined in the State Council on Local Debt guidelines) as the discount rate
Sources and Uses of Funds Schedule for the Refunding Bonds
Debt Service of Refunding Bonds - including proof of TIC and interest rate scale
Escrow Sizing Report with proof of Escrow Yield and Arbitrage Yield Limit
Called Bonds Report - Debt Service Schedule or called maturities, indicating
principal amounts, coupons, call dates and call premiums
Financing assumptions for the Refunding Bonds, including interest compounding
intervals and payment dates, principal payment dates, interest rate assumptions,
escrow assumptions, including investment yield and escrow requirements, and, if
necessary, cash contributions by City.
-4-
I
Note:
ge
If more than one series of bonds are being refunded to produce a?~egate savings, then attach
items i and iv for each issue.
Include and explain in full any cash contributions to the escrow or costs of issuance. At the
beginning of each fiscal year, the City deposits in the debt service funds for each bond issue
the amount of debt service due in that fiscal year. After debt service payments have been
made, these funds are not replenished until the beginning of the following fiscal year.
Respondents may provide refunding plans for other outstanding Vir~nla Beach obligations,
such as for water and sewer revenue bonds or certificates for participation. However, because
of differing security pledges such obligations will not be refunded with the general obligation
bonds. Certain information concerning these obligations is included along with the City's Long
Term Debt Report. Additional information may be obtained from Nationally Recognized
Municipal Securities Repositories, where copies of the official statements are on f'de. Finns
that do not respond to this portion of the RFP will not be penalized in the review process.
Marketing Plan
The refunding plan should identify the category of investor that will be targeted (i.e., Property
and Casualty, Bank Trust, Mutual Fund, Individual Retail) and the marketing strategy to be
employed. The City reserves the right to direct the managing underwriter to establish a
priority of orders at pricing that favors individual retail investors.
Costs
The relationship between the takedowus and the coupon rates obtained on the securities is
well understood. The City's goal is to obtain the highest level of savings at the lowest possible
cost. The refunding plan therefore must be accompanied by a principal maturity schedule that
lists the coupon rates and takedown (sales commission) for each maturity of the refunding
bonds. The information should be set forth in the format illustrated in Exhibit 1. The coupon
rates and takedowns should be based .upon market conditions on March 9, 1993.
The firm's ability to sell its bonds aggressively at a reasonable takedown will constitute an
important criterion for selection. The firm selected to underwrite the bonds will be held
accountable for its proposal. Although unexpected and demonstrable changes in market
conditions can result in a change in the pricing structure, the selected firm will be required to
justify any change through a detailed market analysis. Therefore, unreasonably low estimates
will be counterproductive and viewed negatively.
The proposal also should include a firm indication of the total spread (in dollars/S1,000) which
would be required if your firm is selected as the underwriter for the tax-exempt issue. Please
complete the pricing form provided as Exhibit 2. The underwriting fee, if any, should be set
forth on a 'not-to-exceed' basis. The management fee and expense components of the spread
will be considered as fh'm bids. In proposing your management fee, be advised that the City's
f'mancial advisors will retain general oversight responsibilities for the preparation of the official
statement and rating agency communications.
-5-
SECTION III
EVALUATION AND AWARD CRITERIA
The City shall apply two principal criteria in its evaluation of proposals from investment banking fa-ms
seeking a position as senior mana~ng underwriter of the refunding bonds. The two criteria are set
forth below.
1. Experience since January 1, 1991 of thc firm and individuals assigned in thc following areas:
a. the sale of refunding bonds.
be
the sale of refunding bonds in the Commonwealth of Vir~nia~ its agencies, and
municipal governments within the Commonwealth.
c. Experience with underwriting issues in excess of $100 million (principal par amount).
2. Ability of the f'u'm to underwrite and aggressively market the City's bonds.
.
Ability to achieve the highest level of savings at the lowest possible cost to the City. The City
will assess the firm's ability to meet this criterion by evaluating the factors set forth below.
Demonstrated ability to structure general obligation refunding bonds to achieve the
maximum level of annual debt service savings, based on responsiveness to the specific
requirements and format of this RFP.
bo
Cost, as defined by the proposed underwriting spread and the coupon rates [true
interest cost] proposed for the refunding bond issue. Cost will be evaluated according
to the information provided on Exhibits 1 and 2. Respondents are reminded that
unrealistic spreads and yields will be viewed negatively.
-6-
EXHIBIT 1
YIELDS AND TAKEDOWNS
Year of
Maturity
Principal
Amount Coupon Yield
Takedown
Use additional pages if necessary.
-7-
EXItlBIT 2
COST COMPONENT
G. O. REFUNDING BOND ISSUE
Total Spread (in dollars ~r thousand):
(i.) Average Takedown $.
(ii.) Management Fee $
(iii.) Underwriters' Expenses $.
(iv.) Underwriting Fee (Risk) $.
Total Spread $
* Breakdown of Und¢rwriler'$ Expenses (octual dollar amounO:
(i.) Underwriters' Counsel (t) $
(ii.) Travel $
(iii.) Fed Funds (tt) $
(iv.) Document Printing (ttt) $
(v.) Overnight Delivery $.
(vi.) Other (specify) $
Total $
Submitted By:..
Firm Name:
Telephone:
(t)
(tt)
(ttt)
Assume separate underwriter's counsel, provide fee on a 'not-to-exceed" basis.
Assume a dosing with same-day funds.
Excludes POS/OS printing; the f'mancial advisor will oversee preparation of the Official
Statement.
-8-
- 23 -
Item III-H.Z b.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36627
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Moss, City Council ADOPTED:
Resolution re issuance of General Obligation Public Improvements
Bonds, Series of 1993, in the approximate amount of $160,000,000:
Authorizing the City Manager, in cooperation with the City
Attorney, the City's financial advisors and Bond Counsel, to
prepare and distribute the Preliminary Official Statement.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert lC. Dean, Louis t~ Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf,, Nancy lC. Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessorns, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE DISTRIBUTION
OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN
CONNECTION WITH THE ISSUANCE BY THE
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, OF ITS
GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT
BONDS, SERIES OF 1993
WHEREAS, the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia (the
"City"), proposes to issue its General Obligation Refunding Bonds,
Series of 1993 (the "Refunding Bonds"), in the approximate amount
of $160,000,000 to refund all or a portion of the following
maturities of bond issues of the City:
(a) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1991C, maturing on August 1, 2008 through 2011, in the aggregate
principal amount of $9,850,000;
(b) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1991A, maturing on March 1, 2006 through 2011, in the aggregate
principal amount of $11,940,000;
(c) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1990A, maturing on June 1, 2004 through 2010, in the aggregate
principal amount of $14,350,000;
(d) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1989A, maturing on October 1, 2000 through 2009, in the
aggregate principal amount of $20,100,000;
(e) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1988A, maturing on May 1, 1999 through 2008, in the aggregate
principal amount of $20,960,000;
(f) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1987, maturing on May 1, 1998 through 2000, in the aggregate
principal amount of $7,230,000;
(g) General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding
Bonds, Series of 1986, maturing on July 15, 1998 through 2000, and
July 15, 2003 and 2004, in the aggregate principal amount of
$14,700,000;
(h) General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series
of 1986, maturing on May 1, 1997 through 2006, in the aggregate
principal amount of $24,390,000;
(i) General Obligation Water and Sewer Refunding Bonds,
Series of 1986, maturing on July 15, 1999 through 2004, in the
aggregate principal amount of $4,335,000;
(j) General Obligation Water and Sewer Bonds, Series of
1986, maturing on May 1, 1997 through 2006, in the aggregate
principal amount of $3,940,000; and
(k) General Obligation Public Improvement Refunding
Bonds, Series of 1985, maturing on December 1, 1996 and 1997, in
the aggregate principal amount of $6,930,000.
WHEREAS, the City also proposes to issue approximately
$20,000,000 General Obligation Bonds for public improvements
(together with the Refunding Bonds, the "Bonds"); and
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
WHEREAS, the City proposes to distribute a preliminary
official statement with respect to the offering of the Refunding
Bonds (the "Preliminary Official Statement") substantially in the
form of the preliminary official statements of the City issued in
connection with the City's $50,000,000 General Obligation Bonds,
Series of 1992 (the "1992 Preliminary Official Statement").
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. The City authorizes the City Manager, in cooperation
with the City Attorney, the City's financial advisors, and the
City's bond counsel, to prepare a Preliminary Official Statement
for the Bonds in substantially the form of the 1992 Preliminary
Official Statement. The City authorizes the distribution of the
Preliminary Official Statement to prospective purchasers of the
Bonds and all other interested parties.
2. The City authorizes and directs the City Manager, in
collaboration with the City's financial advisors, to deem the
Preliminary Official Statement final on behalf of the City as of
its date within the meaning of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and
Exchange Commission, except for the omission of certain pricing and
other information permitted to be omitted pursuant to such Rule
15c2-12. The distribution of the Preliminary Official Statement to
prospective purchasers of the Bonds shall be conclusive evidence
that it has been deemed final as of its date by the City, except
for the omission of such pricing and other information permitted to
be omitted pursuant to Rule 15c2-12.
75
This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
76
77
78
79
8O
81
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, on the 23 day of March , 1993.
CA-5060
ORDIN\NONCODE\POS . RES
R-3
PREPARED: 03 / 18 / 93
Item III-H.$.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36628
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Chapter 23 of the Code of the
City of Virginia Beach by ~DING Section 23-46.2 re hazardous
materials cost recovery.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert I~ Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndoff, Nancy K. Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
~10RDIN~ICE TO ~MEND ~ID ~EO~DAIN CH~PTE~ 23
02' TttE CODE 02' THE CITY 02' VIRGINIA BEACH BY
THE ADDITION OF A NEW SECTION 23-46 · 2,
PERTAINING TO RELEASES OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That Chapter 23 of the Code of the City of Virginia Beach be,
and hereby is, amended and reordained by the addition of a new
Section 23-46.2, which shall read as follows:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Bec. 23-46.2. Releases of hazar4ous substances.
(a) Any hazardous substance which is released or allowed to
accumulate or remain upon any property within the City, except as
prescribed or permitted by governmental law or regulation, is
hereby declared to constitute a public nuisance subject to the
provisions of Section 23-46.
(b) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in the event
of a response by the Hazardous Materials Team of the Virginia Beach
Fire Department to a release or accumulation of a hazardous
substance in which such Team undertakes measures to contain such
20 substance or to abate or otherwise mitigate the effects thereof
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3O
31
32
upon health or the environment, the responsible party shall be
liable to the City for all costs of such response; provided,
however, that in the event the City shall be eligible for
reimbursement by the Commonwealth or the United States, or an
agency thereof, the responsible party shall be liable to the City
only to the extent such response costs are not so reimbursable.
(c) Monies recovered from responsible parties pursuant to
subsection (b) shall be placed in an account separate from the
General Fund, and shall be used for the purpose of necessary
replacement, purchase or upgrade of equipment used to contain,
abate or otherwise mitigate releases of hazardous substances.
(d) As used in this section:
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
5O
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
(1) "Responsible party" includes:
(a) the owner of such substance or his aqent;
(b) the person transporting such substance at the
time of its release;
(c) any person whose acts or omissions cause the
release or accumulation of a hazardous
substance in violation of the provisions of
this section; and
(d) in the event the identity or whereabouts of
another responsible party cannot be determined
despite the exercise of due diligence, the
owner or occupant of the premises upon which a
release or accumulation of a hazardous
substance occurs; provided, however, that an
owner or occupant of such premises who
knowingly or neqligently permits the release
of a hazardous substance on such premises
shall be deemed a responsible party
notwithstanding the failure to determine the
identity or whereabouts of any other
responsible party.
(2) "Hazardous substance" means any material or
substance, which now or hereafter is designated,
defined or characterized as hazardous by law or
regulation of the Commonwealth or the United
States.
(3) "Release" means spilling, leaking, emitting,
discharging, leaching, disposing or otherwise
escaping from a container approved by the United
States Department of Transportation.
(e) Costs recoverable by the City in connection with a
response for which recovery is sought pursuant to this section
shall be limited to the following:
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
(1) Disposable materials and supplies acquired,
consumed and expended specifically for the purpose
of the response;
¢2) Compensation of employees for the time and efforts
devoted specifically to the response not otherwise
provided for in the operating budget;
Rental or leasinq of equipment, such as protective
equipment or clothing and scientific or technical
equipment used specifically for the response;
(4) Replacement costs for equipment which is
contaminated beyond reuse or repair durinq, and as
a result of, the response;
Decontamination of equipment contaminated durinq
the response;
(6) Special technical services specifically required
for the response, such as costs associated with the
time and efforts of technical experts and
specialists not otherwise provided for by the City:
(7) Other special services specifically required for
the response, such as the relocation of utilities;
(8) Laboratory costs for purposes of analyzing samples
taken during the response; and
(9) Costs associated with the services, supplies and
equipment procured for a specific evacuation.
Cf) Nothinq in this section shall be construed to impair,
limit or otherwise alter the right of any responsible party to
indemnity or contribution.
93
94
95
96
97
98
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach on the
~23rd day of March , 1993.
CA-92-4676
\proposed\23-46-2.pro
R-3
2-8-93
Item III-H. 4.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36629
Thomas L. Smith, Division Director, Department of Conservation and Recreation, Division of Natural
Heritage, advised twenty-three natural areas have been identified in the City, approximately one-half
of those are on public land and one-half are on private land. The Department is looking at acquiring
an additional 50 acres adjacent to the North Landing River Natural Area Preserve, which would provide
public access into the site.
Upon motion by Councilman Bautn, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessorns, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE the $36,000 Coast
Resources Management Grant from the Council on the Environment;
and, TRANSFER $28,500 from the Fiscal Year 1992-1993 Reserve for
Contingencies to provide the required cash match and an in-kind match
of $7,500 re completion of the Phase IV of the Natural Areas Inventory;
and, that estimated revenues from the Commonwealth be increased by
$36,0O0.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R~ Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessotns, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
2O
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
3O
31
32
33
34
35
36
AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE A $36,000 GRANT FROM THE
COUNCIL ON THE ENVIRONMENT AND TO TP. ANSFER $28,500 FOR WITHIN THE
FISCAL YE/%R 1992-1993 RESERVE FOR CONTINGENCIES TO PROVIDE THE
REQUIRED GI~ANT CASH MATCH
WHEREAS, in FY 1989-1990 the City Council accepted a Coastal
Resources Management Grant from the Council on the Environment to
conduct an inventory of the natural resources and areas within the
city boundaries;
WHEREAS, this inventory was divided into four phases: the
first phase included aerial reconnaissance, rare species field
survey, ground truthing, and data processing; the second phase
included a detailed inventory of rare plants and animal species;
the third phase included data analysis and a final report
describing the natural communities; and the fourth phase will
include conservation planning for identified natural communities,
geographic information system data retrieval design, evaluation of
protection strategies, and public education regarding the natural
communities;
WHEREAS, the city has received a $36,000 Coastal Resources
Management Grant for the fourth phase of the Natural Areas
Inventory;
WHEREAS, this grant requires a city cash match of $28,500 and
an in-kind match of $7,500;
WHEREAS, funding is available in the Fiscal Year 1992-1993
Reserve for Contingencies to provide this cash match.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA that the $36,000 Coastal Resources
Management Grant be accepted and appropriated for the purposes of
completing the fourth phase of the Natural Areas Inventory and that
the required cash match of $28,500 be transferred from the Fiscal
37 Year 1992-1993 Reserve for Contingencies.
38
4O
4~
4Z
43
44
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that estimated revenues from the
Commonwealth be increased by $36,000 as a result of a grant from
the Council on the Environment.
Adopted by the City Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia on the 23 day of March , 1993.
APPROVED AS TO CONTE~TT
~emen! a,,d Buooef
- 26 -
Item III-H. 5.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36630
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branctg City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance to APPROPRIATE $7,000 from the Virginia Beach Library
Gift Fund to the General Fund re purchase of library books and
materials; and, that the estimated revenues to the General Fund be
increased by $7,000.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baurn, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R~ Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy I~ Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
AN ORDINANCE TO APPROPRIATE $7,000
FROM THE VIRGINIA BEACH LIBRARY GIFT FUND TO THE
GENERAL FUND FOR THE PURCHASE OF LIBRARY BOOKS AND MATERIALS
WHEREAS, the Virginia Beach Public Library has received cash donations of $7,000
5 from citizens over the past two (2) years. These donations were established in the Virginia
6 Beach Library Gift Fund;
WHEREAS, these funds were donated specifically for library books and materials or
8 were donated for unspecified purchases;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
10 VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA that funds in the amount of $7,000 be appropriated from the
11 Virginia Beach Library Gift Fund to the General Fund for the purchase of library books and
12 materials;
13
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that estimated revenue to the General Fund be increased
14 by $7,000.
15
This ordinance shah be effective from the date of its adoption.
16 Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the 23
March
,1993.
17 day of
- 27 -
Item III-H. 6.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36631
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance to ACCEPT and APPROPRIATE a $15,000 Grant from the
Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles (VDOT) to the Public Works
Department re regional training in traffic engineering; ana~ that
estimated revenues be increased by the amount of the grant.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting .dye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis tZ Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndoff, Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members .dbsent:
None
March 23, 1993
AN ORDINANCE TO ACCEPT AND APPROPRIATE A GRANT IN THE AMOUNT OF $15,000
FROM THE VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES TO THE PUBLIC WORKS
DEPARTMENT TO BE USED FOR REGIONAL TRAINING IN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING
WHEREAS, the State Department of Motor Vehicles has awarded
$15,000 in Highway Safety Funds, to the Virginia Beach Traffic Engineering
Division, for the purpose of providing regional training in traffic
engineering, and
WHEREAS, this training will extend the knowledge of traffic
engineering in Hampton Roads and improve the quality of traffic flow and
address safety issues within the region, and
match.
WHEREAS, this funding is a one time grant requiring no city
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA, that a grant in the amount of $15,000 be
accepted from the Virginia Department of Motor Vehicles and appropriated
to the Department of Public Works for the purpose of providing regional
traffic engineering training to the Traffic Engineering personnel in
Hampton Roads region.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that estimated revenues be increased
by the amount of the grant.
THIS ORDINANCE SHALL BE EFFECTIVE FROM THE DATE OF ITS ADOPTION.
ADOPTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA ON 23rd DAY OF Hatch 1993.
Walter C. Krae133e~, Jl,.
Dept of Managern~n~ ahd Bud~
APPROVED
DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
SAFETY PROJECT AGREEMENT
TSA, 12 (REV 6/89)
Virginia Beach
NAMB POLITICAL SUBDIVISION
Regional Training in Traffic Engineering
HD93-13-59813
TRANSPORTATION SAFETY PROJECT NUMBER
$15,000.00
PROJECT TITLE OBLIGATION
I understand that the project for funding which I am Project Director and/or Authorizing Official is one
that:
(1) Requires compliance with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1974.
(2)
Involves the administration of funds that are expended as approved line items and the submiss-
ion of a reimbursement voucher to the Department of Motor Vehicles, Transportation Safety
Administration, for reimbursement as soon as the monies have been expended, requesting the
percentage of reimbursement as specified in Form TSA 10.
(3) Provides reimbursement for those items specified in the project application cost breakdown.
(Copy of the reimbursement voucher and instructions attached to the approved project).
(4) Denies reimbursement for expenditures made prior to the date of approval of the project by
The Department of Motor Vehicles or after expiration of project period.
(5)
Requires all procurement transactions, regardless of whether negotiated or advertised and
without regard to dollar value, to be conducted in a manner that provides maximum open and
free competition. Reimbursement will be based upon Iow bid or the amount obligated under
the project, whichever is less.
(6)
Requires proper accounting records to be kept and made available for audit. All records regard-
ing Transportation Safety Federal projects will be kept and maintained for a period of three (3)
years after the termination of the project. Also, personnel of The Department of Motor Vehicles
will be permitted to observe, inspect and study funded projects with my cooperation.
(7) Is subject to the provisions of the Single Audit Act of 1984. If the audit reveals unallowable
expenditures, the political subdivision will be responsible for repayment.
(8) Requires a report to be submitted to The Department of Motor Vehicles in line with an approved
reporting scheduling.
(9)
Requires that upon the sale, transfer or other disposition of all non-expendable equipment
purchased in whole or in part with the use of Federal Highway Safety monies, that The Depart-
ment of Motor Vehicles will be notified prior to the disposition of same.
The project recipient named above fully understands and will comply with The Department of Motor
Vehicles' Minority Business Enterprise Plan (MBE). Copies of the MBE Plan are available for review at each
of the seven District offices. [ A
144~ATURE PROJECT DI]~'~TOfl ~ ~ D~li'TE --
SIGNATURE AUTHORIZED OFFICIAL DATE
FORM NO P S lB
City of Virginia Beach
INTER-OFFICE CORRESPONDENCE
February 17, 1993
TO: James K. Spore Executive
Ralph A. Smith
Public !~orks
SUBJECT: SAFETY PROJECT AGREEMENT - REGIONAL TRAINING IN TRAFFIC
ENGINEERING
Recently, the Traffic Engineering Division was again awarded a
Itighway Safety Grant from the Department of Ilotor Vehicles for the
purpose of providing regional training in traffic engineerIng to
the Traffic Engineering personnel in Hampton Roads region. This is
the second year that the city's Traffic Engineering Division has
had the opportunity to bring specialized training in traffic
engineering to the area. Traffic Engineering w~ll act as
administrators of the grant, as well as assess the regional
training needs.
Attached is the Agenda Request to go before Council for the
acceptance of th~s Highway Safety Grant. It would be greatly
appreciated if you could take the time to sign the attached Safety
Pro3ect Agreement, as the Authorized Official for the C~ny, so that
%~e may forward it to the Department of I~otor Vehicles. Your
signature is required before any funds will be reimbursed. Please
return this to Valerie Henchel in Traffic Engineering atter ~t has
been signed.
Tl~ank you for your assistance.
~ S
Director
Attachments
c: Valerie J. Henchel
DONALD E WILLIAMS
COMMISSIONER
COMMONWEALT I of VIRC_jINIA
Department of g4otor Vehicles
2300 West Broad Street
WILLIAM H LEIGHTY
DEPUTY COMMIIilONER
RICHMOND! VIRGINIA Z3311'-0001
February 2, 1993
John W. Herzke
Traffic Engineer
Municipal Center
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
Dear Mr. Herzke:
After reviewing recommendations that we had received from the
Regional Transportation Safety Board along with the additional
information supplied to us by Ms. Valerie J. Henchel, I am pleased
to inform you that your grant request titled, Regional Training in
Traffic Engineering, project number HD93-13-59813, has been
approved in the amount of $15,000.00. A copy of DMV's final
approval form is enclosed for your records.
Before proceeding with the objectives in your highway safety
project application, the appropriate officials must sign the
enclosed safety project agreement, (TSA-12) and the original
returned to this office. All federal funds obligated under this
agreement must be expended by September 30, 1993. No payments will
be reimbursed to you until the project agreement has been signed
and returned to DMV. Also enclosed are TSA-15 reimbursement request
forms for your use in requesting payment under your project.
I am excited about the prospects that this project will have a
positive impact on solving the identified highway safety problem in
your area, and thank you for taking the time and effort to
contribute to Virginia's transportation safety solutions.
W. H. Leighty
Deputy Commissioner
Enclosure
WHL/ck
cc: Maggie Haley
Partnership With the Public
PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION
REBA S McCLANAN CHAIRMAN * ROBERT M MURPHY VICE CHAIRMAN · ROBERT G BAGLEY, TREASURER
ARTHUR I_ COLLINS EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR/SECRETARY
CHESAPEAKE
Robert G Begley City Counc#man
Dr Alan P Krasnoff CIIy Count//men
James W Rein, City Manager
FRANKLIN
Robert E. Hsrreli, City Councilman
/Dim J Jackson City Manager
HAMPTON
T Melvin Butler, V/ce Mayor
Jame~ I_ Eason MayOr
Roi)er/J O Nelll Jr City Manager
ISLE OF WIGHT COUNTY
O A Spady, Board ol Supervlaore
Myles E. Stan~l~ County Administrator
JAMES CITY COUNTY
David B Norman County Admmlstrator
David L Sisk, Board o! Supe~laors
NEWPORT NEWS
Joe $ Franl( City Counc#man
Dr Vincent T Joseph City Councilman
Edgar E Maroney, City Manager
NORFOLK
Mason C Andrews, M D City Councilman
Paul D Fralm City Councllrn~n
Joseph A Leele Mayor
James B Oliver Jr City Manager
G Conoly Phflhps, City Counc#man
POQUO$ON
k Cornell Burcner Mayor
Rol~er[ M Murphy City Manager
May 7, 199~,
Mr. John W. Herzke
City Traffic Engineer
Municipal Center
Virginia Beach, Virginia
23456
Re'
Hampton Roads Regional
Highway Safety Grant
(THY: Highway Safety)
Dear Mr. Herzke'
The Hampton Roads CTS Technical Committee, during its monthly
meeting of April 8, 1992, unanimously endorsed the Highway Safety
Grant application requesting funds to provide traffic engineering training.
Securing funds to bring the training session to the region would be an
extremely cost effective and efficient method of training many traffic
engineering staff without the financial burden of out of town travel and
the associated expenses. As you are aware from the meeting, many of
the localities are extremely interested in participating in this program.
If we can be of additional assistance in this matter, please advise.
PORTSMOUTH
Johnny M Clemons City Count#men
V Wayne Orlon, City Manager
GIor,a Q WeDb, Mayor
SOUTHAMPTON COUNTY
Rowland L. Taylor County Administrator
C Harrall Turner Board ol Sul~ervtsors
SUFFOLK
R,cllard L Hedrlck City Manager
S Chris Jones, City Counctlman
Sincerely,
Dwight L. Farmer, PrE.
Director of Transportation
VIRGINIA BEACH
JOhn A Baum City Councilman
Robert E Fe~lress Vice Mayor
Harold He,schol~er City Councilman
Waller F Mather C/I/zen Appo/nlea
Reba S McClanan City Councilwoman
Meyers E Obernclort Mayo¢
James K Sgora City Manager
DLF:dfs
WIM. IAMSBURG
John Hodge$ Mayor
Jackson C Turtle II City Manager
YORK COUNTY
Paul W German Boara of Supervisors
Daniel M Stuck County Adm~nlstralor
HEADQUARTERS · THE REGIONAL BUILDING · 723 WOODLAKE DRIVE · CHESAPEAKE, VIRGINIA 23320 · (804) 420-8300
PENINSULA OFFICE · HARBOUR CENTRE. 2 EATON STREET · SUITE 502 · HAMPTON VIRGINIA 23669 · (804) 728-2067
- 28 -
Item III-H. 7.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36632
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance granting a franchise to operate an open air caf~ on public
property in the Resort Area to Kitchin Corporation, t/a Seahawk
Motel/Kitchin's Kitchen Cafd at 26th Street and Atlantic Avenue
(VIRGINIA BEACH BOROUGH).
Voting: 10-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis 1~ Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf and Vice Mayor William D.
Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Abstaining:
Nancy IC Parker
Council Members Absent:
None
Council Lady Parker DISCLOSED pursuant to Section 2.1-639.14(E), Code of Virginia, she and her
husband are owners of Parker Pools, Inc., and Parker Pools, Inc. has a contract with Kitchin Corporation
for the maintenance of the pool at Seahawk Motel. Although the City Attorney has advised this interest
does not meet the criteria of a personal interest in the transaction under the Conflict of Interests Act, she
wishes to disclose this interest and abstain from participating in this transaction.
March 23, 1993
City of Virginia IBeach
NANCY K PARKER
COUNCILWOMAN
AT-LARGE
604 GOLDSBORO AVENUE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23451
(804) 425-1589
March 23, 1993
Mrs. Ruth Hodges Smith, CMC/AAE
City Clerk's Office
Municipal Center
Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456
Dear Mrs. Smith:
Re: Disclosure Pursuant to Section 2.1-639.14(E), Code of Virginia
Pursuant to the Virginia Conflict of Interests Act, Section 2.1-639.14(E), Code of
Virginia, I make the following declaration:
lo
The transaction for which I am executing this written disclosure is the Council
consideration of an ordinance granting an open air caf6 franchise to Kitchin
Corporation (t/a Seahawk Motel/Kitchin's Kitchen Kaf6).
.
The nature of my personal interest is that my husband and I are owners of
Parker Pools, Inc., and that Parker Pools, Inc., has a contract with Kitchin
Corporation for the maintenance of the pool at the Seahawk Motel.
go
Although the City Attorney has advised me that this interest does not meet the
criteria of a personal interest in the transaction under the Conflict of Interests
Act, I wish to disclose this interest and abstain from participating in this
transaction.
~
Mrs. Ruth Hodges Smith -2- March 23, 1993
Re: Disclosure Pursuant to Section 2.1-639.14(E), Code of Virginia
Accordingly, I respectfully request that you record this declaration in the official
records of the City Council. I have enclosed an opinion letter from Leslie L. Lilley, City
Attorney, which addresses this same matter.
Thank you for your assistance and cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
~~a ~ ~~ncy K. parker
Councilwoman
NKP/clb
Enclosure
LESLIE L L~LI_E'/ MUNICIPAL CENTER
CiT", ,A f ~-ORNE¢ ~;IRGINIA BEACH VA 23456 9004
(804) 427 4531
FAX (804) 426 5687
March 23, 1993
Councilwoman Nancy K. Parker
Mumcipal Center
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
Re: Conflict of Interests Act Opinion
Dear Councilwoman Parker:
I am writing in response to your request for an opinion as to whether you may
participate in City Council's discussion and vote on an ordinance granting an open air caf6
francluse to Kitchm Corporation (ifa Seahawk Motel/Kitchin's Kitchen Kaf6). The ordinance
is scheduled for consideration by City Council at its March 23, 1993, meeting.
SUMMARY/CONCLUSION:
From my review of the Conflict of Interests Act and the information provided by you,
I am of the opinion that you do not have a personal interest in the transaction of Council
concerning ~ts consideration of an ordinance granting an open air caf6 franchise to Kitchin
Corporation. Thus, you may vote on this matter without restriction. For your information,
I have outlined the disclosure requirements of Section 2.1-639.14(G) should you desire to
disclose your relationship and vote; I have also set forth the applicable provisions for
abstention set forth in Section 2.1-639.14(E), should you choose not to vote.
I base the aforesaid conclusions on the following facts which you have presented.
Please review and verify the accuracy of the facts as set forth as you may only rely upon this
opinion if they are correct and complete.
Councilwoman Nancy K. Parker -2- March 23, 1993
Re: Conflict of Interests Act Opinion
FACTS PRESENTED:
Your request for an advisory opinion is generated by an ordinance granting an open
atr caf6 franchise to Kitchin Corporation (ifa Seahawk Motel/Kitchin's Kitchen Kaf6). The
ordinance is scheduled to be considered by the Council at its March 23, 1993, meeting. You
have advised that your concern, and reason for requesting this opinion, is that you and your
husband are the owners of Parker Pools, Inc. ("Parker Pools"), that you have an interest in
Parker Pools wtuch exceeds three percent (3 %) of the total equity of the business, and that
Parker Pools has a contract with Kitchin Corporation for the maintenance of the pool at the
Seahawk Motel. You have further advised that Parker Pools received income of less than
$10,000.00 from Kitchin Corporation as a result of last year's contract.
ISSUE:
Are you precluded from participating in the Council's discussion and vote on an
ordinance granting an open air caf6 franchise to Kitchin Corporation?
DISCUSSION:
I. Applicable Definitions of Section 2.1-639.1
A. City Council is a governmental agency, as it is a legislative branch of local
government as defined in § 2.1-639.2 of the Virginia State and Local Government Conflict
of Interests Act.
B. You are an officer within the meaning of § 2.1-639.2 of the above-referenced Act.
C. Council consideration of an ordinance granting an open air caf6 franchise to
Kitchin Corporation is a "transaction" as defined by the Act. A transaction includes any
matters considered by any governmental agency on which official action is taken or
contemplated.
D. "Personal interest" is defined in § 2.1-639.2 as a financial benefit or liability
which accrues to an officer, employee, or to an immediate family member. The interest
exists by reason of one of five categories specified therein as: 1) ownership in a business
if the ownership interest exceeds 3 % of the total equity of the business; (2) annual income
from ownership in real or personal property or a business in excess of $10,000.00; 3) salary
from the use of property or paid by a business that exceeds $10,000.00 annually; 4)
ownership of real or personal property when the interest exceeds $10,000.00 in value,
Councilwoman Nancy K. Parker
-3- March 23, 1993
Re: Conflict of Interests Act Opinion
exclusive of ownership in a business, or salary; and 5) personal liability incurred or assumed
on behalf of a business which exceeds 3 % of the asset value of the business.
E. A "personal interest in the transaction" exists when an officer or employee or a
member of his nnmediate family has a personal interest in property or a business or
represents any individual or business and such property, business or represented individual
(i) is the subject of the transaction or (ii) may realize a reasonably foreseeable direct or
mdirect benefit or demment as the result of the agency considering the transaction.
II. Application of Definitions
A. Personal Interest
You have a personal interest m Parker Pools, Inc., by virtue of your mterest m Parker
Pools wtuch exceeds three percent (3 %) of the equity of the business.
B. Personal Interest in the Transactton
Based on the facts presented, Parker Pools, Inc., is not the subject of the transaction,
nor will it realize a reasonably foreseeable direct or indirect benefit or detriment as a result
of Council's consideration of the aforementioned ordinance.~ Therefore, it is my opinion
that you do not have a personal interest in the transaction within the meaning of the Conflict
of Interests Act.
III. Disclosure Requirements
Based on the fact that you have no personal interest in an ordinance granting an open
air caf6 franchise to Kitchin Corporation, you are not restricted in voting as to that item.
If you are concerned that your participation as to this matter may create some appearance
of impropriety because of your position, there are two options available to you which may
diffuse any perception problems that may arise:
lin circumstances where the effect of a transaction is speculative, remote, or contingent
on factors beyond the officer's control, it is not reasonably foreseeable that the officer's personal
interest will benefit or suffer as a result of the pending transaction. Attorney General Opinion
to the Honorable William F. Parkerson, Jr., Member, Senate of Virginia, dated February 2,
1987.
Councilwoman Nancy K. Parker
-4- March 23, 1993
Re: Conflict of Interests Act Opinion
.
You may either disclose the facts as presented herein and proceed to
vote as to this transaction; or
.
You may abstain from voting and disclose any interest.
Should you decide to declare your interest and vote, a proposed disclosure letter
which complies with § 2.1-639.14(G) is enclosed for your convenience. You may either
make this declaration orally, which is to be recorded in the written minutes of the City
Council, or you may file a signed written declaration with the Clerk of the City Council,
who shall retain and make this document available for public inspection for a period of five
years from the date of recording or receipt.
The Conflict of Interests Act deals with the types of influences upon a public officer's
judgment which are clearly improper. The law does not, however, protect against all
appearance of improper influence. In that respect, the Act places the burden on the
individual officer to evaluate whether the facts presented create an appearance of impropriety
which ~s unacceptable or which would affect the confidence of the public in the officer's
ability to be impartial. I have opined that you may participate in the transaction after
disclosure. However, if you are concerned that parucipafing in the transaction, even after
disclosure, could create an unacceptable appearance, you may abstain from voting under §
2.1-639.14(E) provided that you first disclose your interest in the transaction.
Please contact me should you desire any additional information.
Very truly yours,
Leslie L. Lilley
City Attorney
LLL/RMB/clb
Enclosure
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
AN ORDINANCE GRANTING A FRANCHISE TO KITCHIN
CORPORATION TO OPERATE AN OPEN AIR CAFe,
SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS CONTAINED AND/OR
REFERENCED HEREIN, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO ENTER INTO A FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
WITH THE GRANTEE
WHEREAS, the City has adopted regulations for the
operation of open air cafes on public property in the Resort Area;
WHEREAS, Kitchin Corporation (t/a Seahawk Motel/Kitchin's
Kitchen Cafe) has submitted an application for the operation of an
open air caf~ and has paid the application fee;
WHEREAS, the representations made in the application
comply with the aforementioned regulations;
WHEREAS, the Department of Convention and Visitor
Development has determined that the proposed caf~ will have no
detrimental effect on the public health, safety, welfare, or
interest, and will enhance the festive atmosphere in the Resort
Area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That a franchise is hereby granted to Kitchin Corporation
to operate an open air caf~ at 26th and Atlantic Avenue, Virginia
Beach, Virginia 23451, from April 1, 1993, to April 30, 1994,
conditioned on provision by the Grantee of an approved final site
plan, liability insurance coverage, a security bond, the applicable
franchise fee, and on such other terms and conditions as are
required by the regulations and the Franchise Agreement; and
That the city Manager is hereby authorized to enter into
a Franchise Agreement with the Grantee subject to the
aforementioned conditions.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach,
Virginia, on the 23 day of
March
CA-5056
ORDIN \NONCODE \KITCHIN. ORD
R-1
PREPARED: 03/15/93
, 1993.
·
FRANCHISE AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT, made the
__ day of ,1993, by and
between the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, a municipal corporation, organized and
existing under the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, party of the first part,
hereinafter referred to as "City," and KITCHIN CORPORATION (T/A Seahawk Motel/
Kitchin's Kitchen Caff), party of the second part, hereinafter referred to as "Grantee,"
~s entered into pursuant to those powers vested in the City by Sections 15.1-894 and
15.1-839 of the Code of Virginia and all acts amendatory thereof, and embodied in the
Charter of the City of Virginia Beach, to the end that the public health, safety, peace,
welfare, and amenity be secured and promoted thereby.
WITNESSETH:
WHEREAS, Grantee has applied to the City for a franchise granting unto
it the right to operate an open air caf6 on property owned by the City, and to that end has
represented and does represent that it will comply with all applicable provisions of
Federal, State, and City law and all pertinent rules and regulations of any board,
committee, agency, or commission thereof; and
WHEREAS, the City does find that the operation of such open air caf6
would serve and promote the public interest;
Now, therefore, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and
covenants herein set forth, it is agreed as follows:
1. Conditions of Grant of Franchise
a. It is expressly agreed and understood by Grantee that the grant
of the franchise described hereinbelow is conditional, the grant of such franchise being
condittoned upon approval of a site plan submitted by Grantee, approval by the City
Health Department, and upon Grantee's obtaining all required permits and licenses,
including, without limitation, a City building permit, business license, and State restaurant
license, and, if Grantee intends to dispense alcoholic beverages, a Virginia Alcoholic
Beverage Control License. It is expressly agreed and understood by Grantee that the
failure of Grantee to obtain any one or more of the approvals, licenses, or permits
required herein shall render this Agreement null, void, and of no force and effect.
Grantee further expressly agrees that, in the event of any such failure by Grantee, no
portion of any application fee paid or payable by or on behalf of Grantee shall be
refunded.
b. The grant of the franchise to Grantee shall also be subject, in
addition to the foregoing conditions, to such conditions as the City may, in its discretion,
impose upon Grantee. The City may deny the final approval of the grant of this franchise
or any other such franchise it determines, in its discretion, to be detrimental to the public
health, safety, welfare, or interest.
2. Grant of Franchise
a. Subject to the provisions of paragraph 1 of this Agreement or any
other condition imposed by this Agreement or by law, the City does hereby grant and
award unto Grantee a franchise to operate an open air caft, hereinafter referred to as
"Franchise," more specifically, for the operation of a Resort Open Air Atlantic Avenue
Caf6 to be located at 26th and Atlantic Avenue, Virginia Beach, Virginia, 23451,
hereinafter referred to as "Premises," in the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, for a term
of thirteen (13) months, commencing on April 1, 1993, and ending at midnight on April
30, 1994.
b. For purposes of this Agreement, an open air caf6 shall be defined
as a semi-enclosed portion, as shown on Grantee's approved site plan, of a directly
adjoining, existing restaurant facility in the RT-1 or RT-2 zoning districts, which is
located on public property and which serves food and beverages by means of full-table
waiter and waitress service. No portion of any open air caf6 shall be used for any
purpose other than circulation or consumption of the foods and beverages served therein.
c. A Boardwalk Caf6 shall be defined as an open air caf6 located
on public property facing the Boardwalk. A Connector Park Caf6 shall be defined as an
open air caf6 located on public property in a connector park. An Atlantic Avenue
Sidewalk Caf6 shall be defined as an open air caf6 located on public property adjacent to
Atlantic Avenue; provided, however~ that Atlantic Avenue Sidewalk Cafts shall not be
located between 15th and 24th Streets. An Atlantic Avenue Sidestreet Caf6 shall be
defined as an open air caf6 located on public property on a sidestreet between Atlantic and
Pacific Avenues.
3. Franchise Fee
a. Grantee shall pay to the City, by no later than April 1, 1993, a
sum equal to Three Dollars and Twenty-Five Cents ($3.25) per square foot of space of
the Premises to be occupied by Grantee on public property, as shown on Grantee's
approved site plan, as and for a franchise fee, hereinafter the "Franchise Fee," for the
period of April 1, 1993, to April 30, 1994. The failure of Grantee, for any reason, to
pay the Franchise Fee in full by April 1, 1993, shall constitute grounds for the immediate
cancellation of this Franchise and forfeiture of any rights conferred upon Grantee by this
Franchise. The City may, but shall not be required to, extend the period of time within
which payment of the aforesaid Franchise Fee shall be tendered or may, in lieu of any
other remedy, treat this Agreement as remaining in full force and effect and avail itself
of any and all lawful means of collecting such Franchise Fee.
b. In the event of the cancellation of this Agreement or the
termination of the Franchise granted hereunder prior to the expiration of its stated term,
for any reason, no portion of any monies paid by or on behalf of Grantee on account of
Franchise Fees shall be refundable.
4. Nonexclusivity of Franchise
It is expressly understood and agreed by Grantee that the Franchise
is not exclusive. The City hereby reserves unto itself the right to grant similar franchises
to any person, firm, corporation, or other entity at any time and from time to time;
provided, however, that during the stated term of this Agreement, Grantee shall have the
exclusive right to operate an open air caf6 upon the Premises at the location stated in
paragraph 2 hereinabove, unless such right is sooner terminated or this Agreement is
cancelled in accordance with the provisions herein made.
,
Bond/Letter of Credit
In addition to any other bond required to be executed by Grantee,
Grantee shall, upon final approval of the award of the Franchise and prior to
commencement of its operation, execute a bond or letter of credit in favor of the City in
the amount of Ten Thousand Dollars ($10,000.00), conditioned upon Grantee's
constructing, commencing operation of, maintaining, and landscaping the open air caf6
herein provided for, the removal, if necessary, of the open air caf6 from public property
and the returning of the property to its original condition, and upon the faithful and
substantial performance by Grantee of all of its obligations under this Agreement. The
failure of Grantee to execute such bond or letter of credit in a timely manner shall
constitute grounds for termination of this Agreement and forfeiture of any rights conferred
upon Grantee hereunder.
6. Compliance with Law
Grantee hereby covenants that it will conduct its operation and
' maintain the Premises in strict compliance with any and all applicable statutes, ordinances,
regulations, and laws of the United States, the Commonwealth of Virginia, the City of
Virginia Beach, or any of their agencies, relating to the ownership of the Franchise or to
the occupancy and use of the Premises.
7. Location Criteria
a. The Premises shall extend no more than twenty (20) feet into any
public right-of-way.
b. If used for the operation of a Boardwalk Caft, the Premises shall
be set back a minimum distance of four (4) feet from the western edge of the concrete
bicycle path or, where no such bicycle path exists, from the western curb of the
boardwalk, and shall also be set back a minimum distance of ten (10) feet from any
adjacent public or private property line.
c. If used for the operation of a Connector Park Cart, the Premises
shall be set back a minimum distance of ten (10) feet from the Atlantic Avenue
right-of-way.
d. If used for the operation of an Atlantic Avenue Sidewalk Caft,
the Premises shall be set back a minimum distance of eight (8) feet from all obstructions
in the public right-of-way.
e. If used for the operation of an Atlantic Avenue Sidestreet
Caft, the Premises shah be set back a minimum distance of six (6) feet from all
obstructions in the public right-of-way.
f. The City reserves the right to grant a variance from strict
adherence to the aforementioned criteria when it deems, in its discretion, that such a
variance ~s appropriate.
8. Physical. Criteria
a. Except as may be provided in subsection (b) of this paragraph,
Grantee shall at all times during the term of this Agreement remain in compliance with
the following requirements:
(1) The entire area comprising the Premises shall have a floor
w~th a smooth, clean, permanent surface, which floor shall have been approved by the
City's Health Department prior to the commencement of Grantee's operation.
(2) The Premises shah have an attractive fence around the
perimeter thereof. Any such fence shall be of a minimum height of thirty (30) inches,
shall be of a design approved by the City, and shall have a single opening providing
ingress to and egress from the Premises. No such fence shall have a gate, unless the gate
is removable and is used only during hours of nonoperation for security purposes.
(3) No portion of the Premises shall extend or project beyond
the designated perimeter thereof.
(4) The furnishings of the Premises shall consist solely of
moveable tables and chairs and decorative accessories. No objects, with the exception of
lighting fixtures, shall be permanently affixed to canopy supports. No object of any kind
shall extend beyond the perimeter of the Premises or the canopy thereof nor shall any
object visibly and noticeably diminish the amount of light entering the Premises from
without.
(5) Grantee shall neither erect nor permit there to be any
signs on the Premises other than a sign stating the name of the establishment printed or
sewn in a single location on the valance of the canopy and a menu board no larger than
five (5) square feet located along or inside the perimeter of the Premises. No such
valance shall exceed twelve (12) inches width.
(6) Grantee shall neither store nor allow to be stored any
refuse on public property adjacent to the Premises or in any location visible to patrons of
Grantee's establishment from within the Premises.
(7) Grantee shall neither supply nor permit sound
reproduction or live entertainment within or upon the Premises.
(8) Grantee shaH, prior to commencing its operation, erect
a canopy covering the top of the Premises. Any such canopy shall be made of a
fire-resistant vinyl fabric or canvas and shall require approval as to design, color, and
construction by the City. The canopy shall cover only the top of the Premises, but
Grantee may, at its option, install a transparent vinyl or plastic windbreak on any or all
exposed sides of the Premises. Any such windbreaks shall require approval by the City.
All canopy support systems shah be constructed of metal pipe, and at no point shah the
lowest level of the canopy, excluding the valance, be less than eight (8) feet above the
floor of the Premises.
(9) Grantee shall provide and maintain attractive, well-kept
plantang beds of shrubbery or flowers, or both, around the perimeter of the Premises. AH
such planting beds shall be of a minimum width of five (5) feet.
(10) Grantee shall provide a single, well-defined entrance to
the Premises, which entrance shall be connected to an existing or new walkway system
which, in turn, connects with the Boardwalk, and which entrance shall provide access to
the Premises by handicapped individuals.
(11) The Premises shall not exceed a total gross area of eight
hundred (800) square feet.
(12) Grantee shall neither provide nor permit any type of
illumination within the Premises except for incandescent lighting and/or candles.
b. The provisions of this subsection (b) shall apply only to franchises
of Connector Park Cafts, Atlantic Avenue Sidewalk Carts, and Atlantic Avenue Sidestreet
Cafts. To the extent that any provision in this subsection conflicts with or is otherwise
inconsistent with any provision of subsection (a) of this paragraph, the provision set forth
in subsection (b) shall control. Nothing in this subsection shall apply to any franchise of
a Boardwalk Caft.
(1) Grantee shall neither place nor allow to be placed upon
the Premises any surface covering of any kind, including, without limitation, paint, grass,
artificial turf, carpet, flooring, or platform material. Removable chairs and tables may
be placed upon the paved surface of the Premises.
(2) Grantee shall enclose the Premises by erecting around the
perimeter of such Premises an enclosure composed of self-supporting planters, railings,
or fences, or any combination thereof. The design and construction of such enclosure
shall require the approval of the City. Grantee shall maintain such enclosure in good
condition at all times.
(3) Grantee may, but shall not be required to, erect a canopy
over the Premises. In the event Grantee erects a canopy, such canopy shall conform to
all of the requirements regarding canopies set forth in this Agreement. Grantee may, but
shall not be required to, provide umbrellas on the Premises, but no such umbrella shall
be permanently affixed to any public property.
(4) Grantee may, at the option of the City, be required to
provide planting about the Premises.
(5) The Premises occupied by Grantee shall have a single,
well-defined entranceway opening in the perimeter enclosure, the location of which
opening shall be determined by the City on the basis of safety considerations, aesthetics,
and accessibility to handicapped individuals.
c. The City reserves the right to grant a variance from strict
adherence to the aforementioned criteria when it deems, in its discretion, that such a
variance is appropriate.
9. Condition of Premises
Grantee shall, at all times during the term of this Agreement and at
its sole expense, keep the Premises in a clean and orderly condition. All moveable items
used in and about Grantee's establishment, including, but not necessarily limited to,
furniture and decorations, shall be stored out of sight of the Premises during all periods
of time in which Grantee's establishment is closed for business for a period greater than
five (5) days.
lo
10. Permitted Uses
Grantee shall not use the Premises, nor suffer the Premises to be
used, for any purpose other than is contemplated by this Agreement.
11. Repairs and Alterations
a. Grantee shall, at its sole expense, keep all equipment, fixtures,
furnishings, and other property in and upon the Premises in good condition and repair.
b. Grantee may, at its sole expense, make such alterations to the
Premises as it may from time to time elect; provided, however, that Grantee shah not
make any structural alterations without the prior written consent of the City, and provided
further, that no such alterations shall cause the Premises or any part thereof to fail to
conform to the requirements set forth in this Agreement.
12. Right of Inspection
The City, by its authorized officers, agents, or employees, shall have
the right to inspect the Premises at any and all reasonable times, with or without notice,
for the purpose of determining Grantee's compliance with the provisions of this
Agreement.
13. Compliance
In the event the City determines that the Grantee has failed to
properly comply with any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, Grantee shall be
given a minimum of twenty-four (24) hours and a maximum of ten (10) calendar days to
remedy its nonconformance. The amount of time that Grantee shall be permitted to gain
compliance shall be determined in the sole discretion of the City, by its authorized officer,
11
agent, or employee. However, such time shall be reasonable and shall be based upon the
level of severity of the noncompliance. If Grantee fails to effect compliance within the
time allowed, the City shall have the right to suspend Grantee's operation, in whole or
in part, until such time as Grantee shall remedy its noncompliance.
14. Commencement of Operation
Upon final approval by the City of the Franchise, Grantee shall
promptly undertake all necessary measures in preparation for the commencement of the
operation of its establishment. Grantee's establishment shall be open for business by no
later than the 1st day of June of each year of the Franchise, unless otherwise agreed to
I in writing by the City.
15. Assignment of Franchise
Grantee shall not, without the prior written consent of the City,
assign, delegate, or otherwise transfer, in whole or in part, the Franchise or any of
Grantee's rights or obligations arising hereunder. The City may, at its sole discretion,
consent or decline to consent to any such assignment, delegation, or transfer, or may give
its conditional consent thereto. In the event the City conditionally consents to such an
assignment, delegation, or transfer, such consent may, without limitation, be conditioned
upon Grantee's remaining fully and unconditionally liable to the City for any breach of
the terms of this Agreement by Grantee's transferee and for any damage or injury
sustained by a third party or parties as a result of the intentional act or omission,
negligence, or breach of warranty by Grantee's transferee.
12
16. Interest of Grantee
Grantee shall acquire no interest in the Premises, legal or equitable,
other than the right to occupy such Premises during the term of this Agreement for the
sole purpose of operating an open air caf6 in compliance with, and subject to, the
provisions of this Agreement and such fights in and to Grantee's personalty used in and
about the operation of its establishment as are conferred upon Grantee by law.
17. Reapplication for Franchise
a. This Agreement shall not be renewable by either party at the
expiration of the term hereof nor shall Grantee be accorded any preference in, or have any
right of first refusal of, any future grant of an open air caf6 franchise which may be
offered by the City.
b. Any reapplication by Grantee for a franchise of an open air caf6
commencing after the expiration of the term hereof shall be made to the City Manager or
his designated representative.
c. In the event that a reapplication does not propose a change in
ownership, site plan, or other material terms and conditions of the franchise, neither an
application fee nor any other accompanying documents will have to be submitted with the
reapplication.
18. Relationship of Parties
It is mutually understood and agreed by the parties that nothing
contained in this Agreement is intended, or shall be construed, as in any manner creating
or establishing any agency relationship between the parties or any relationship of joint
3.3
enterprise or partnership. Grantee shall have no authority, express or implied, to act or
hold itself out as the agent or representative of the City for any purpose. Grantee shall
at all times remain an independent contractor and solely responsible for all obligations and
liabilities of, and for all loss and damage to, Grantee's establishment, including the
Premises and property thereupon, and for all claims and demands resulting from Grantee's
operation.
19. Risks
Grantee shall assume all risks incident to or in connection with its
operation and shall be solely responsible for damage or injury, of whatever kind or
nature, to person or property, directly or indirectly, arising out of or in connection with
its occupancy of the Premises or the conduct of its operation. Grantee hereby expressly
agrees to indemnify and save the City, its officers, agents, employees, and
representatives, harmless from any penalties for violation of any law, ordinance, or
regulation affecting its operation and from any and all claims, suits, losses, damages, or
injuries to person or property, of whatever kind or nature, directly or indirectly, arising
out of or in connection with Grantee's occupancy of the Premises or conduct of its
operation or resulting from the negligence or intentional acts or omissions of Grantee or
its officers, agents, and employees.
20. Insurance
a. Grantee shall, prior to the commencement of its operation,
procure and shall thereafter maintain in full force and effect during the entire term of this
Agreement, a policy or policies of insurance protecting and insuring Grantee and the City,
14
and their respective officers, agents, and employees, against any loss, liability, or expense
whatsoever, from personal injury, death, or property damage arising out of or occurring
in connection with Grantee's occupancy of the Premises or conduct of its operation,
whether such injury, death, or damage occurs or is sustained, or the cause thereof arises,
on or off the Premises. The City and its officers, agents, and employees shah be named
as insureds under any and all such policies. Such policy or policies shall be written and
issued by a responsible insurance company or companies authorized to do business in the
Commonwealth of Virgima and shall be approved by the City. Such policy or policies
shall be in a comprehensive general liability form, including products liability coverage,
and shall be in an amount not less than $1,000,000.00 combined single limits. The risks
covered by any such policy or policies of insurance shall not be limited nor the amount
of coverage thereunder reduced by reason of any insurance that may be maintained by the
City.
b. Prior to the commencement of its operation and without demand
by the City, Grantee shall furnish to the Office of the City Manager certificates of
insurance showing Grantee's compliance with the foregoing requirements. Any such
certificate shall state that the policy or policies of insurance named therein will not be
cancelled or altered without the giving of at least thirty (30) days prior written notice to
the City.
c. Grantee's performance of its obligations under the provisions of
this paragraph shall not relieve Grantee of liability under the indemnity and save harmless
provisions of the preceding paragraph of this Agreement.
15
21. Abandonment
In the event Grantee shall vacate or abandon the Premises or permit
the same to remain vacant or unoccupied without the prior written consent of the City,
the City shall have the right to immediately cancel this Agreement and terminate the
Franchise.
22.
Termination of Franchise
a. The C~ty shall have the right to cancel this Agreement and
terminate the Franchise on notice to Grantee upon the occurrence of any of the following
events:
(1) The failure of Grantee to secure any approval, license,
or permit required by this Agreement or by law, or the cancellation or revocation of any
such license or permit.
(2) The failure of Grantee to fulfill, abide by, or comply with
any conditaon of the grant of the Franchise pursuant to paragraph 1 .b of this Agreement.
(3) The failure of Grantee to pay the Franchise Fee required
hereunder, to execute any bond required hereunder, or the cancellation of any such bond
or exoneration of any surety thereon.
(4) The failure of Grantee to comply with any statute,
ordinance, regulation, or other law applicable to the ownership or management of the
Franchise or to the occupancy and use of the Premises.
16
(5) The use of the Premises by, on behalf of, or at the
sufferance of Grantee for any activity or purpose other than is expressly permitted by this
Agreement.
(6) The failure of Grantee to commence the operation of its
establishment by the date specified in paragraph 14 of this Agreement.
(7) The failure of Grantee to procure any policy or policies
of insurance required by this Agreement to have been procured prior to the
commencement of Grantee's operation, the cancellation or lapse of any such policy or
policies so as to cause the aggregate of the limits of liability of coverage thereunder to be
less than the amounts required by paragraph 20 of this Agreement, or any material and
adverse change in the risks covered or persons or entities insured thereunder.
(8) The failure of Grantee to abide by all requirements
pertaining to location and physical criteria as set forth in paragraph 7 and 8, respectively,
of this Agreement.
(9) The purported assignment, delegation, or other transfer
by Grantee without the prior written consent of the City of the Franchise, in whole or in
part, or of any of the rights or obligations of Grantee set forth herein.
(10) The abandonment or vacation of the Premises occupied
by Grantee without the prior written consent of the City.
(11) The refusal of Grantee to permit inspection of the
Premises by the City at reasonable times.
3.7
(12) The death of Grantee, if Grantee is the sole proprietor
of the Franchise, or in any other case, the termination of Grantee's existence as a business
organization, whether by dissolution, consolidation, merger, sale, or other like act, or the
revocation of Grantee's authority to transact business in the Commonwealth of Virginia.
b. The election by the City to exercise its right to cancel this
Agreement and to terminate the Franchise shall be without prejudice to any of its other
rights at law or in equity, and any remedy set forth in this Agreement shall not be
exclusive but shall be cumulative upon any or all other remedies herein provided or by
law allowed.
c. Notwithstanding any other remedy conferred upon the City by this
Agreement or by law, the City may elect to suspend the operation of the Franchise upon
the occurrence of any of the events hereinabove enumerated or in the event of the breach
by Grantee of any other provision or condition of this Agreement. Grantee shaH, upon
receipt of notice of such suspension, immediately cease operation of its establishment until
such time as the City shall permit Grantee to continue its operation. Such permission
shall be granted by the City at such time as Grantee shall have remedied the breach or
breaches of this Agreement giving rise to such suspension.
23. Effect of Termination
a. Grantee shall, upon termination of the Franchise, be entitled to
no payment or other compensation by reason of the value of the Franchise or for any of
the intangible assets thereof.
b. In the event of the termination of the Franchise prior to the
expiration of this Agreement, Grantee shall not, without the prior written consent of the
City, remove any of the furnishings, fixtures, equipment, plantings, or other property
from the Premises for a period of thirty (30) days following the effective date of such
terrmnation. The City shall, within such period of time, have the option to purchase any
or all such furnishings, fixtures, equipment, or other property from Grantee for a sum
equal to the fair market value thereof.
c. Upon termination of the Franchise prior to the expiration of this
Agreement, the City shall have the fight to grant a new franchise for the unexpired
portion of the term of this Agreement.
24. Rules and Regulations
The City Manager shall have the authority to promulgate reasonable
rules and regulations governing the conduct of the Franchise, which rules and regulations
shall be deemed incorporated by reference into this Agreement upon their promulgation.
25. Publicity
The City shall have the fight to photograph the Premises, including
the interior and exterior thereof, any persons in and about the Premises, and the name of
Grantee's establishment, and to use any such photographs in any of its publicity or
adverttsing. Grantee shall not be entitled to compensation by reason of the taking or use
of any such photographs.
19
26. Notices
All notices required or permitted hereunder shall be given and shall
be deemed given if, in writing, mailed by certified or registered mail, and addressed to
Grantee at the address of Grantee stated in its application or to the City Manager, City
Hall, Municipal Center, Virginia Beach, Virginia 23456, or to such other address as either
party may direct by notice given as hereinabove provided.
27. Severability
The provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed to be severable
and should any one or more of such provisions be declared or adjudged to be invalid or
unenforceable, the remaining prowsions shall be unaffected thereby and shall remain in
full force and effect.
28. Descriptive Headings
The descriptive headings appearing in this Agreement are for convenience
only and shall not be construed either as a part of the. terms, covenants, and conditions
hereof or as an interpretation of such terms, covenants, and conditions.
29. Entirety of Agreement
This Agreement and the rules and regulations promulgated hereunder
comprise the entire understanding and agreement of the parties, and no representations,
inducements, promises, or agreements, oral or written, except as may be specifically set
forth herein, shall have any validity or be of any force or effect.
20
30. Waiver
No failure of the City to exercise any right or power given to it by
law or by this Agreement, or to insist upon strict compliance by Grantee with any of the
provisions of this Agreement, and no custom or practice of the parties at variance with
the terms hereof, shall constitute a waiver of the City's right to demand strict compliance
with the terms of this Agreement.
31. Modification
No modification, revision, or deletion of any of the provisions of this
Agreement, and no addition of any provisions hereto, shall be valid unless in writing and
executed with the same formalities as this Agreement.
32. Equal Employment
During the performance of this Franchise, Grantee agrees as follows:
a. Grantee shall not discriminate against any employee or applicant
for employment because of race, religion, color, sex, national origin, or handicap except
where religion, sex, national origin, or handicap is a bona fide occupational qualification
reasonably necessary to its normal operation. Franchisee agrees to post in conspicuous
places, available to employees and applicants for employment, notices setting forth the
provision of this nondiscrimination clause.
b. Grantee, in all solicitations or advertise-ments for employees
placed by or on behalf of Grantee, shall state that such Grantee is an equal opportunity
employer.
21
c. Notices, advertisements, and solicitations placed in accordance
with federal law, role, or regulation shall be deemed sufficient for the purpose of meeting
the requirements of this section.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the following signatures and seals:
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
a municipal corporation
By
City Manager
ATTEST:
City Clerk
KITCHIN CORPORATION
President
ATTEST:
Secretary
22
STATE OF VIRGINIA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
I9
, a Notary Public in and for
the City and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that JAMES K. SPORE, City Manager,
for the CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, whose name as such is signed to the foregoing
Franchise Agreement, has acknowledged the same before me in my City and State
aforesaid.
GIVEN under my hand this
day of , 1993.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
I, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for the City and State aforesaid,
do hereby certify that RUTH HODGES SMITH, City Clerk, for the CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, whose name as such is signed to the foregoing Franchise Agreement, has
acknowledged the same before me in my City and State aforesaid.
GIVEN under my hand this ~ day of
,1993.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
23
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
X,
, a Notary Public in and for
the City and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that WILLIAM H. KITCHIN, III,
President, for KITCHIN CORPORATION, whose name as such is signed to the foregoing
Franchise Agreement, has acknowledged the same before me in my City and State
aforesaid.
GIVEN under my hand this
day of , 1993.
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
STATE OF VIRGINIA,
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, to-wit:
I,
, a Notary Public in and for
the City and State aforesaid, do hereby certify that GERTRUDE KITCHIN KOHL,
Secretary, for KITCHIN CORPORATION, whose name as such is signed to the foregoing
Franchise Agreement, has acknowledged the same before me in my City and State
aforesaid.
GIVEN under my hand this
day of , 1993.
K/FRANCHIS.AGM
Notary Public
My Commission Expires:
24
- 29 -
Item III-H. 8.
CONSENT AGENDA
ITEM # 36633
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessoms, seconded by Councilman Branch, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance authorizing license refunds in the amount of $3,002.95 upon
application of certain persons and upon certification of the Commissioner
of the Revenue.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baurn, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert K. Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy I~ Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
FO~M NO C A. 8 REV
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING LICENSE REFUNDS
UPON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS AND
UPON CERTIFICATION OF THE COMMISSIONER
OF THE REVENUE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA'
That the following apphcat~ons for hcense refunds, upon certification of the Commissioner of the
Revenue are hereby approved
bcense Date
NAME Year Pa~d Base Penalty Int
Total
Cafiero, Louis MD
3425 Warren Place # 101
Virginia Beach, VA 23452
1991 A,]di t ~5.52
Dazo, Honorato S. Jr. 1990-92
T/A Aristocrat Bakery & Cake Shop
1045 Gauguin Drive
Virginia Beach, VA 23~5~
Decker, Vincent A.
T/A Gourmet Goodies
c/o Thomas Paulette
P.O. Box 103
Halifax, VA 24558
Aud-i t 86.33
1991-92 Audit 160.
l~5.52
86.33
160.
Th~s ordinance shall be effective from date of
adoption
The above abatement(s) totahng $ 292.30
of the Oty of V~rgln~a Beach on the 23 day of
Cert~hed as to Payment
an ~__~
Commissioner of the Revenue
Approved as to form
C~ty Attorney
were approved by the Coun¢
March
93
Ruth Hodges Smith
City Clerk
FORM NO C.A. 8 REV 3/86
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING LICENSE REFUNDS
UPON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS AND
UPON CERTIFICATION OF THE COMMISSIONER
OF THE REVENUE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
That the following apphcabons for hcense refunds, upon cerbflcat,on of the Commissioner of the
Revenue are hereby approved
L~cense Date
NAME Year Prod Base Penalty Int
Total
2700 Warwick Blvd. Tax Adm
Newport News, VA 23607
Pear/man, Leroy J. DDS
3065 Lynnda]e Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23452
PLP Enterprises Inc.
T/A Polar Lighting Products
P.O. Box 6173/+ '
Virginia Beach, VA 23~66
1992 Audit 9/+5.07
1989-91 Audit 503.34
464.45
9/~5.07
503.
Th~s ordinance shall be effective from date of
adoption
The above abatement(s) totahng $ ].,0]_2.80
23
of the C~ty of V~rgmm Beach on the day of
Cerbfled as to Payment
(-~r~obert P Vaughan ~
Commissioner of the Revenue
Approved as to form
Cdy Attorney ~
were approved by the Councd
Harch , 19 93
Ruth Hodges SmRh
C~ty Clerk
FO~M NO C.A. 8 REV
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING LICENSE REFUNDS
UPON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS AND
UPON CERTIFICATION OF THE COMMISSIONER
OF THE REVENUE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
That the following apphcabons for hcense refunds, upon cert~hcabon of the Commissioner of the
Revenue are hereby approved
bcense Date
NAME Year Pa~d Base Penalty Int.
Total
Push Ltd
T/^ McDonalds # 2028
1226 Executive Blvd. # 108
Chesapeake, VA 23320
1990-92 Audit 371.
Senco Products Inc. 1991
T/^ Senco Fa$~enin~ Systems
8~85 Broadwell Road
Cincinnati, OH ~52~4
Solt, Sharon J. 1989-92
T/A VA Cato Construction & Elec
26;+ North Liberty Springs Road
Suffolk, VA 23fi3~+
Audit 86.26
A-d~t 167.23
371.0/+
167.23
Cert~hed as to Payment
~06e~ P Vauc~han ~
Commms~oner of the Revenue
Th~s ordinance shall be effective from date of
adoption
The above abatement(s) totahng $ 62/+.
Approved as to form
C,ty Attorney
were approved by the Council
,19 93
of the C~ty of V~rg~n~a Beach on the 23 day of March
Ruth Hodges Smith
C~ty Clerk
FORM NO C.A. 8 REV 3/86
AN ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING LICENSE REFUNDS
UPON APPLICATION OF CERTAIN PERSONS AND
UPON CERTIFICATION OF THE COMMISSIONER
OF THE REVENUE
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
That the following apphcat~ons for hcense refunds, upon certification of the Commissioner of the
Revenue are hereby approved
L~cense Date
NAME Year Prod Base Penalty Iht
Total
Sou%hem Shores Excavation
1740 Princess Anne Road
Virginia Beach, VA 23456
Superior Pawn Inc.
4760 Virginia Beach Blvd.
Vir~Lnia Beach, VA 23&62
Zampi, Don A.
T/A Vals Pizza
713 Match Point Drive # 202
VirEinia Beach, VA 23~62
1990-91 Audit 21.22
1990-91 Audit 32.87
21.22
32.87
119.08
Thru ordinance shall be effectwe from date of
adoption
The above abatement(s) totahng $ '173.17
23
of the C~ty of V~rg~n~a Beach on the day of
Cert~hed as to Payment
~C~bJm~, sPs, oV2a:rg~fa~ e v e n u e
Approved as to form
(~~,e- ~ I'~ey ~//
C~ty Attorney ~
were approved by the Councd
March
,19
93
Ruth Hodges Smith
C,ty Clerk
- 30 -
Item III-L
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36634
PLANNING
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf DECLARED a PUBLIC HEARING on:
PLANNING
,
(a) ROBERT E. LEE
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(b) KEMPSVILLE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(C) SALEM CONGI~GATION OF JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
(d) CH & B
AMENDMENT TO BRENNEMAN
FARM LAND USE PLAN
AND
DRA GAS COMPANIES
CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT
CLASSIFICATION
(e) CITY ZONING ORDINANCE
AMEND AND REORDAIN
SECTION 105 RE CONVERSIONS
OF NONCONFORMING USES
March 23, 1993
- 31 -
Item III-H. 1.a.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36635
PLANNING
Robert E. Lee, 2203 Cromwell Drive, Norfolk, Virginia, represented the applicant
Upon motion by Councilman Lanteigne, seconded by Councilman Brazier, City Council ADOPTED an
Ordinance upon application of ROBERT E. LEE for a Conditional Use Permit for a single family
dwelling in the Agriculture District:
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF ROBERT E. LEE FOR A
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY DWELLING IN
THE AGRICULTURE DISTRICT R03931808
BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
Ordinance upon application of Robert E. Lee for a Conditional Use
Permit a single family dwelling in the Agriculture District on the
southwest side of Princess Anne Road, 1750 feet more or less northwest
of Fitztown Road. Said parcel is located at 537 Princess Anne Road and
contains 7.96 acres. PUNGO BOROUGH.
The following conditions shall be required:
1. A one foot no ingress/egress easement is required along
Princess Anne Road except for one entrance on each lot.
2. This subdivision is approved for one additional lot.
Erosion and sediment control measures must be noted and
described for any land disturbance, exceeding 2500 square feet,
on the site development plan.
A 50-foot vegetated buffer, as described in the Comprehensive
Plan, shall be established along all property lines which adjoin
an active agricultural operation. The required buffers shall be
planted prior to occupancy.
This Ordinance shall be effective in accordance with Section 107 (f) of the Zoning Ordinance.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the Twen~_ -third o_f March, Nineteen
Hundred and Nine~_ - Three.
March 23, 1993
- 32 -
Item III-H.l.a.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36635 (Continued)
PLANNING
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndoff, Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
Item III-H.l.b.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36636
PLANNING
Edward R~ Wall, AIA, President, I W L Architects, P.C., 531 Providence Road, Phone: 474-2040,
represented the applicant
Upon motion by Councilman Clyburn, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessorns, City Council ADOPTED an
Ordinance upon application of KEMPSVILLE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH for a Conditional Use
Permit:
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICA TION OF KEMPSVILLE PRESBYTERIAN
CHURCH FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR A CHURCH
(ADDITION) R03931809
BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
Ordinance upon application of Kempsville Presbyterian Church for a
Conditional Use Permit for a church (addition) at the southwest corner
of Kempsville Road and lz~cke Lane. Said parcel is located at 805
Kempsville Road and contains 8.8 acres. KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH
The following condition shall be required:
Category III landscaping, with a ten foot to fifteen foot planting
bed, is required between the proposed parking area and
existing fencing adjacent to the adjoining multi-family
development. The width of the planting bed will be determined
based on the species of planting material.
This Ordinance shall be effective in accordance with Section 107 69 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the Twen~_ -third of March, Nineteen
Hundred and Ninetv_ - Three.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baurn, Linwood O. Branch, III, James IV.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W..
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy K. Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessorns, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
- 34 -
Item III-H. 1. c.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36637
PLANNING
Earl Jacobs, 1416 Needham Court, Trustee, Member and Elder, represented the Salem Congregation of
Jehovah's Witnesses
Upon motion by Councilman Clyburn, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessoms, City Council ADOPTED an
Ordinance upon application of JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES for a Conditional Use Permit:
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF SALEM CONGREGATION OF
JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES FOR ,4 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
R03931810
BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
Ordinance upon application of Salem Congregation of Jehovah's
Witnesses for a Conditional Use Permit for a church on certain property
located at the southeast corner of Salem Road and Elbow Road. Said
parcel contains 2.8 acres. KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH.
The following conditions shall be required:
Category IV landscaping shall be required along the east side
of the property or a variance must be obtained from the Board
of Zoning ,4ppeals.
2. ,4 60-foot reservation shall be required along Elbow Road.
3. ,4 variable width reservation ranging from 37-foot to 70-foot
will be required along Salem Road.
This Ordinance shall be effective in accordance with Section 107 (]) of the Zoning Ordinance.
,4dopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, on the Twenty-third of March, Nineteen
Hundred and Ninety-Three.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting ,4ye:
John ,4. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W..
Clyburn, Robert I~ Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf,, Nancy I~ Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members ,4bsent:
None
March 23, 1993
Item III-H.l.d.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36638
PLANNING
Attorney Richard H. Matthews, 192 Ballard Court, represented the applicant
Letter of March 18, 1993, from Thomas J. Hansen, Vice President of Dragas companies requesting
deferral is hereby made a part of the record.
Upon motion by Councilman Clyburn, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessoms, City Council DEFERRED until
the City Council Session of April 13, 1993, an Ordinance upon application of CH & B for an amendment
to the Benneman Farm Land Use Plan and an Ordinance upon application of DRAG, dS COMPANIES
for a Change of Zoning District Classification:
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF CH & B FOR AN
AMENDMENT TO THE BRENNEMAN FARM LAND USE PLAN
Ordinance upon application of CH & B for an amendment to the
Brenneman Farm Land Use Plan to delete the previously designated
excess public school site and redistribute residential density. Said
property is located on the east and west sides of South Plaza Trail, north
of Princess Anne Road and south of Independence Boulevard. Said parcel
contains 243 acres. KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH.
AND,
ORDINANCE UPON APPLICATION OF DRAGAS COMPANIES FOR
A CHANGE OF ZONING DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION FROM R-7.5
TO PD-H1
Ordinance upon application of Dragas Companies for a Change of
Zoning District Classification from R-7.5 Residential District to PD-H1
Planned Unit Development District on the following parcels:
Parcel 1: Located on the northwest intersection of Princess Anne Road
and Providence Road.
Parcel 2: Located on the west side of Princess Anne Road beginning at
a point 850 feet more or less north of Providence Road.
The proposed zoning classification change to PD-H1 Planned Unit
Development is for Planned Unit Development Land Use at a density no
greater than 11 dwelling units per acre. The Comprehensive Plan
recommends use of this parcel for single family residential use at a
density of 3 to 3.5 units per acre in accordance with other plan policies.
Said parcels contain 1.58 acres. KEMPSVILLE BOROUGH.
March 23, 1993
- 36 -
Item III-H. 1. d.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36638 (Continued)
PLANNING
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John ,4. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndo~ Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
- 37 -
Item III-H.I.e.
PUBLIC HEARING
ITEM # 36639
PI. atNNING
Upon motion by Vice Mayor Sessorns, seconded by Council Lady Parker, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Section 105 of the City Zoning
Ordinance re conversions of nonconforming uses.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W.. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN
SECTION 105 OF THE CITY ZONING
ORDINANCE, PERTAINING TO CONVERSIONS
OF NONCONFORMING USES
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That Section 105 of the City Zoning Ordinance, pertaining to
conversions of nonconforming uses, be, and hereby is, amended and
reordained, and shall read as follows:
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
Section 105. Nonconformity.
(a) Any otherwise lawful use, structure, or condition of use
which existed in conformity to all applicable zoning provisions
before this ordinance was adopted or amended but which does not
conform to the provisions of this ordinance as a result of its
adoption or amendment shall be deemed a nonconformity. Any lot or
use or structure situated on a lot which, due to council action in
granting a conditional use permit or rezoning, does not meet the
minimum dimensional or area requirements of the district in which
it is located shall also be deemed a nonconformity.
(b) Intent. It is the intent of this ordinance to allow
nonconformities to continue until they are removed, but not to
allow them to become enlarged, expanded, extended, or relocated
except upon resolution of city council as provided for in this
section, and not to allow them to be used as grounds for adding
other structures or uses prohibited elsewhere in the same
district.
(c) Continuation. A nonconformity may continue provided that
it remains otherwise lawful, subject to the provisions set forth in
this section. However, no nonconformity shall continue if it
ceases for any reason for a period of more than two (2) years.
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
(d) Enlargement or extension of nonconformity. No
nonconforming use shall be increased in magnitude. No
nonconforming use shall be enlarged or extended to cover a greater
land area than was occupied by the nonconformity on the effective
date of this ordinance or amendment thereto. No nonconforming use
shall be moved in whole or in part to any other portion of the lot,
parcel, or structure not occupied by the nonconformity on the
effective date of this ordinance or amendment thereto, and no
nonconforming structure shall be moved at all except to come into
compliance with the terms of this ordinance. No nonconforming
structure shall be enlarged, extended, reconstructed, or
structurally altered, if the effect is to increase the
nonconformity. As an exception to the above, any condition of
development prohibited by this section may be permitted by
resolution of the city council based upon its finding that the
proposed condition is equally appropriate or more appropriate to
the district than is the existing nonconformity. City council may
attach such conditions and safeguards to its approval as it deems
necessary to fulfill the purposes of this ordinance. Applications
for the enlargement, extension or relocation of a nonconforming use
or structure shall be filed with the planning director. The
application shall be accompanied by a fee of one hundred twenty-
five dollars ($125.00) to cover the cost of publication of notice
of public hearing and processing. Notice shall be given as
provided by Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia. A sign shall
be posted on the site in accordance with the requirements of
section 108 of this ordinance.
(e) (1) Conversion of a nonconforming use to another use. No
nonconforming use shall be converted to another use which does not
conform to this ordinance except upon a resolution of the city
....... ~ authorizing such conversion,
council ~ ...... ~ based upon its
finding that the proposed use is equally appropriate or more
appropriate to the district than is the existing nonconforming use.
~---~-- authorizing such change,
In the resolution ~ ........... ~ the city
council may attach such conditions and safeguards to its approval
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
as it deems necessary to fulfill the purposes of this ordinance.
When any nonconforming use is converted to another use, the new use
and accompanying conditions of development shall conform to the
provision of this ordinance in each respect that the existing use
conforms, and in any instance where the existing use does not
conform to those provisions, the new use shall not be more
........ ~ authorized by the city council
deficient. Any such use ~ .....
shall thereafter be subject to the provisions of this section and
to any conditions or restrictions attached by the city council.
Applications for the conversion of a nonconforming use or structure
shall be filed with the planning director. The application shall
be accompanied by a fee of one hundred twenty-five dollars
($125.00) to cover the cost of publication of notice of public
hearing and processing. Notice shall be given as provided by
Section 15.1-431 of the Code of Virginia. A sign shall be posted
on the site in accordance with the requirements of section 108 of
this ordinance.
(e) ¢2) Revocation of authorization. In the event a use
other than the specific use authorized by the city council is
carried on, or any condition or restriction attached by the city
council is violated, intentionally or otherwise, such authorization
may be revoked by the city council at a public hearing upon ten
(10) days' written notice to the owner of the property upon which
the use is carried on and to the operator of such use.
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100
(f) Damage or destruction involving nonconformities. Any
structure or condition of development which is, houses, or is
related to a nonconformity may, if involuntarily damaged or
destroyed, be reconstructed or restored to its prior condition and
location within two (2) years of its being damaged or destroyed,
and the nonconformity may continue as before. If it is not
reconstructed or restored within two (2) years, then any future
construction or reconstruction on, or use of, the affected lot
shall be in conformance with the provisions of this ordinance.
(g) Location of uses and structure on lots not meeting
minimum requirements. Any conforming principal or accessory use,
101
102
103
104
105
106
107
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
126
conditional use or conforming structure housing such use may be
enlarged, extended, constructed, located, or moved on any lot
created prior to the effective date of this ordinance regardless of
the size or dimensions of such lot, provided that other
requirements of this ordinance are met. However, in the case of
any lot created or rezoned upon petition on behalf of the property
owner on or after the above date, only those uses and structures
shall be located on the lot for which the lot meets the minimum lot
requirements in the applicable zoning district. Any lot not
meeting the applicable size or dimension requirements due to
governmental action taken on or after the effective date of this
ordinance shall have the same rights of development as before said
governmental action took place.
(h) Buildings being planned or under construction. Nothing
herein contained shall require any change in the plans for
construction of any project, or part thereof, for which an active
use permit, valid building permit, current approved preliminary
subdivision plat or certificate of occupancy was lawfully issued
prior to the effective date of this ordinance, or of any amendment
thereto.
(i) Any resolution adopted by the city council pursuant to
the provisions of this section shall remain in effect for a period
of twelve (12) months from the date of its adoption and shall
thereafter, unless the actual use, construction or other act
authorized by such resolution has commenced, be void and without
force or effect.
127
128
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach on
the 2~rd day of _ March __, 1993.
129
130
131
132
CA-92-4966
ordin%proposed%45-105.pro
R-1
12-28-92
- 38 -
Item III-L1.
APPOINTMENTS
ITEM # 36640
BY CONSENSUS, City Council RESCHEDULED the following APPOINTMENTS:
DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
FRANCIS LAND HOUSE BOARD OF DIRECTORS
March 23, 1993
- 39 -
Item III-K. 1.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
ITEM # 36641
BY CONSENSUS, City Council SCHEDULED the following PUBLIC HEARINGS to consider changes
in the electoral process (ReapportionmenO:
City Council Chamber
Tuesday, April 20, 1993 - 6:00 PM
Tuesday, April 27, 1993 - 4:00 PM
Tuesday, May 4, 1993 - 9:00 A.M.
March 23, 1993
Item III-K. 2.
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
ITEM # 36642
Councilman Lanteigne distributed the DRAFT of a Resolution providing for a Referendum pertaining to
the Electoral Process.
This Amendment concerned whether the General Assembly shouM be requested to Amend the Charter
of the City of Virginia Beach to provide that Members of City Council, including the Mayor shall be
limited to serving three (3) consecutive four-year terms and to provide that employees of the City and
the Virginia Beach School Board shall be eligible to become a candMate for City Council, Mayor, or
the School Board.
Councilman Moss advised he had been working with the City Attorney on the same subject concerning
issues dealing with the Charter on who is and who is not entitled to run for City Council and/or the
School Board. Councilman Moss advised he will be forwarding this to the Attorney General and Chamber
of Commerce as well as other groups.
March 23, 1993
Item III-L.l.a.
NEW BUSINESS
COUNCIL-SPONSORED ITEMS
ITEM # 36643
Mark Brownell, 2208 Wolfsnare Road, represented the Atlantic Beach Club
Melvin Hooker, Phone: 473-9510, represented the Atlantic Beach Club
Upon motion by Councilman Branch, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessoms, City Council ADOPTED:
Ordinance to AMEND and REORDAIN Article II, Chapter 4 of the
Code of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia, by AMENDING Section 4-
16, 4-17, 4-19, 4-32, 4-33, 4-34, 4-35 and 4-37; ana~ by ADDING
Sections 4-18, 4-20, 4-21, 4-38, 4-39 and 4-40 re public dance hails
and teenage nightclubs. (Sponsored by Councilman Linwood O. Branch
iii)
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baurn, Linwood O. Branch, III, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W..
Clyburn, Robert I~ Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Nancy IC Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessorns, Jr.
Council Members l/'oting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
Requested by Councilmember Linwood O. Branch, III
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN ARTICLE II
OF CHAPTER 4 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF
VIRGINIA BEACH, BY AMENDING SECTIONS 4-16, 4-
17, 4-19, 4-32, 4-33, 4-34, 4-35 and 4-37, AND
ADDING SECTIONS 4-18, 4-20, 4-21, 4-38, 4-39
and 4-40, PERTAINING TO PUBLIC DANCE HALLS AND
TEENAGE NIGHTCLUBS
10
11
12
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA
BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That Article II of Chapter 4 of the Code of the City of
Virginia Beach, Virginia, is hereby amended and reordained, and
shall read as follows:
13
ARTICLE II. PUBLIC DANCE HALLS; TEENAGE NIGHTCLUBS
14
DIVISION 1. GENERALLY
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
Section 4-16. ~ Definitions.
For thc purposc cf As used in this articleTi
(a) ~A~..~ ~__~.... "~"~~%~=eDance~~ hall" shall means_ any place
open to the general public where dancing is permitted and to which
an admission fee is charged or for which compensation is in any
manner received, either directly or indirectly, by cover charge~
membership fee, or otherwise, or where refreshments, food or any
form of merchandise are served for compensation before, during or
after dancing; provided, however, that a restaurant licensed under
sections 4-98.1 and 4-98.2 of the Code of Virginia to serve food
and beverages having a dance floor with an area not exceeding ten
(10) percent of the total floor area of the public establishment
shall not be considered a public dance hall, nor shall any
establishment in which alcoholic beverages are dispensed pursuant
to a valid club license issued by the Virginia Alcoholic Beverage
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
Control Board be considered a public dance hall. The sale of any
refreshments, food or any form of merchandise at any such place or
the exhibiting of such for sale shall be deemed compensation of any
such dance hall within the meaning of this section.
(b) "City manager" means the city manager or such other
employee or officer of the city as he may designate.
(c) "Teenage Nightclub" means any establishment, open to
teenage members of the general public and other persons authorized
by this article, where dances or dancing activities, accompanied by
either recorded music or live entertainment, are held or undertaken
for consideration, whether such consideration is by cover charge.
admission fee or the sale of refreshments, food or merchandise;
provided, however, that no restaurant licensed under sections 4-
98.1 and 4-98.2 of the Code of Virginia to serve food and beverages
having a dance floor with an area not exceeding ten (10) percent of
the total floor area of the public establishment shall be
considered a teenage nightclub.
(d) "Teenage" means between and including the ages of
fourteen years and seventeen years.
(e) "Manager" means any person charged with conducting the
business affairs of a public dance hall or a teenage nightclub, or,
in his absence during hours of operation, the person acting in his
stead.
(f) "Person" means any individual, group of individuals,
corporation, partnership, association or other entity formed for
the purpose of conducting business, or any combination of the
foregoing.
57
58
59
60
61
62
Section. 4-17. Violations of article.
Ca) Any person violating any provision of this article, or
any term, condition or restriction of a permit granted under this
article, or failing to comply with any action of the city manager
pursuant to Section 4-35, shall be guilty of a Class 3 misdemeanor.
In addition thereto and not in lieu thereof, any continuing
63
64
65
66
67
68
violation of any provision of this article may be enjoined by the
circuit court upon application of the city attorney.
(b) Neither the commencement of criminal or civil proceedings
under this section, nor any judgment rendered therein, shall
preclude the city manager from taking action in accordance with
Section 4-35.
69
7O
71
72
73
Section 4-18. Security officer required.
At least one (1) police officer, peace officer or special
police officer shall be provided, at the expense of the owner or
operator, for every one hundred (100) patrons, or portion thereof,
in attendance at any public dance hall or teenage nightclub.
74
75
76
77
78
79
8O
Section 4-19. Right of entry of police; enforcement.
The chief of police shall enforce the provisions of this
article, and for that purpose, .- ............... ~vl~A
........ police
officers of the city may enter any public dance hall or teenage
nightclub for which a permit has been granted under this article a~
during all hours of operation to ~ ~ ~ .... ~ ........ ~ ......
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
Section 4-20. Entry prohibited to certain persons.
(a) No person under the age of eighteen (18) years shall
remain in a public dance hall after 9:00 p.m. unless lawfully
employed therein.
(b) No person eighteen (18) years of age or older who is not
the parent or legal guardian of a patron shall enter, or be
permitted to enter, a teenage nightclub during hours of operation
unless for purposes related to his lawful employment, and no person
under the age of fourteen (14) years shall enter, or be permitted
to enter, a teenage nightclub for any reason.
(c) The manager of any public dance hall or teenage nightclub
shall conduct, or cause to be conducted, a positive identification
check of each person seeking admittance to ensure compliance with
this section.
95
96
97
98
(d) It shall be unlawful for any person to falsely represent
his or her age in order to gain admittance to a public dance hall
or teenage nightclub or for any person to aid, abet or assist in
making such false representation.
99
100
Section 4-21. Required closinq hours.
No public dance hall shall remain open after 2:00 a.m.
101
102
Sections 4-22 through 4-31 . Reserved.
DIVISION 2 ~~mT,,~ PERMITS; REVOCATION
103
104
105
106
107
Section 4-32. Permit Required.
(a) A4%y No person ~A_;_~.__ ~A
........ ~ .~ shall conduct or operate a
public dance hall or teenage nightclub in the city _u.~ ~__~
A~.'- =-~- ~ -~ ......... without valid permit ~ ~ -~
authorizing the operation of such establishment·
108
109
110
111
112
113
114
115
116
117
118
119
120
121
122
123
124
125
Section 4-33. Application.
(a) Any person desiring to obtain a permit required by this
d ..... on article shall _.uA submit an application therefor to the
city manager A_ u~_ ~A--~----~A~ ........ ~..~ accompanied by
non-refundable processing fee of one hundred dollars ($100.00).
Such application shall contain, or have appended to it, the
following information:
(1) The ~baee street address where the proposed dance
hall or teenage nightclub is to be located=l
(2) The name and address of thc ~ each individual
who ~ ...... uA will uA ~u ......... ~ have
...................... an
ownership interest in the proposed dance hall or
teenage nightclub ~ ...... ~--
~.. ~ ........ and, if the owner or
owners is will not be the only individuals
responsible for the management of the establishment
manager, in addition thereto, the name~ and
residence addresses of ~u ........
........... ~ each individual
having management authority;v
126
127
128
129
130
131
132
133
134
135
136
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
(3) If the owner or operator is a corporation or other
entity, such application shall set forth the ~
residence addresses of the officers and directors
of such corporation or other entity, or, if there
are no such officers or directors, the names and
addresses of all persons having an ownership
interest therein of twenty (20) per cent or moreTi
(4) A statement as to the type of food to be offered
and the facilities to be provided for the
preparation and service thereofTl
--' .... A written certification by the zoning
for ~ .......
administrator that the proposed use of the property
is permitted and that there is sufficient vehicular
parking provided on the property to meet the
requirements of the City Zoning Ordinance;
(6) Proof of compliance with the requirements of
subsection (b) hereof;
¢7) If the application is for a public dance hall
permit, a statement of whether or not alcoholic
beverages are to be served on the premises together
with copies of the license application filed with
the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, if anvo and
the license issued by the Board or writing
constituting a denial of such application;
(8) The name and address of the person who is
designated to receive notices given pursuant to
Section 4-35; and
(9) A statement of whether any of the individuals whose
names are required to be set forth in the
~pplication pursuant to subdivisions (2) and (3)
has ever applied for, or had an ownership interest
in any business entity which applied for, a permit
required by this article or a similar ordinance of
161
162
163
164
165
166
167
168
169
170
171
172
173
174
175
176
177
178
179
180
181
any other county, city or town. If such statement
is in the affirmative, the applicant shall give
full particulars as to the nature of the
application, the date thereof, and the disposition
of the application.
(b) The applicant shall also cause to be published, at his
expense, at least once weekly for a period of two (2) successive
weeks, notice of such application. Such notice shall be published
in the legal notices section of a newspaper of general circulation
within the city, and shall state the name and address of the
applicant, as they appear on the application, the street address of
the proposed public dance hall or teenage nightclub, and a
statement to the effect that a copy of the application is on file
and open for public inspection at the office of the city manager.
No application shall be deemed complete until the second
publication of such notice has occurred.
(c) Within twenty-four (24) hours after the application is
submitted, the applicant shall cause to be posted in a conspicuous
location on the lot on which the proposed dance hall or teenage
nightclub is to be located a sign containing a statement that such
application has been made and that further information is available
182
183
184
at the office of the city manager. Such signs shall be obtained at
the department of planning or be of identical size, material, color
and lettering as signs obtained at the department of planning.
185
186
187
188
189
190
191
192
193
194
195
196
197
198
199
200
201
202
203
204
205
206
207
208
209
210
211
212
213
214
215
216
217
218
219
220
221
222
223
224
225
226
227
228
e · ,
...... appear
(a) The application shall be granted if it contains all of
the information required by Section 4-33 and:
(1) None of the individuals whose names are required to
be set forth in the application pursuant to Section
4-33 has been convicted of a felony or of any crime
involving moral turpitude or the possession or sale
of, attempted possession or sale of, or conspiracy
to possess or sell, a controlled substance, alcohol
or firearms; and in the case of an application for
a permit to operate a teenage nightclub, in
addition to the foregoing, contributing to the
delinquency of a minor or any other criminal
offense aqainst a juvenile;
(2) There has been no misrepresentation or misstatement
concerninq, or omission of, any fact, material or
otherwise, in the application, whether such
misrepresentation, misstatement or omission is
intentional or inadvertent; and
(3) In the case of an application for a permit to
operate a teenaqe nightclub, no portion of the
proposed establishment, including any on-site
parking, is located within five hundred (500) feet
of any business havinq a license issued by the
Alcoholic Beveraqe Control Board to sell alcoholic
beverages for either on-premises or off-premises
consumption.
(b) The city manager shall grant or deny the application
within forty-five (45) days after receipt hy him of a complete
application; provided, however, that in the event the city manager
is unable to determine within such time whether or not the
229 application complies with the requirements for the grantinq of a
230
231
232
233
234
235
236
237
238
239
240
241
242
243
244
permit on the basis of the information provided, he may so notify
the applicant and require the applicant to provide such additional
information as may be necessary. In such case, the city manager
shall have an additional thirty (30) days from the date on which
such information is furnished to grant or deny the application. In
the event the applicant shall fail to provide such information
within a reasonable time after being required to do so by the city
manager, the application shall be denied.
(c) The city manager may attach such conditions to a permit
as are reasonably related to the preservation and protection of the
public peace and order.
(d~ A permit shall not be issued to a person, nor shall a
permit be deemed to authorize the operation of a public dance hall
or teenage nightclub by any person, other than the applicant or
applicants whose names are set forth in the application.
245
246
247
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
264
Section 4-35. Conditions and restrictionsl ...... ~"
~ ........ j; revocation,
etc.
_ d ........ article shall be
(a) Every permit granted under this ~..~_~A_
subject to the conditions and restrictions set out stated in this
a ...... the permit and to all applicable laws, ordinances and
requlations.
(b) The city manager may, after notice and hearing, take such
action as is allowed pursuant to subsection (d) if he finds, by a
preponderance of the evidence presented at such hearing, that:
(1) The establishment is a public nuisance;
(2) The establishment is frequented by persons under
the age of eighteen (18) years, if such
establishment is a public dance hall;
(3) That the establishment is frequented by persons
engaged in disorderly, violent, indecent or
unlawful conduct;
(4) The operation of the establishment is in violation
of any of the provisions of the Virqinia Fire
Prevention Code, the Virginia Uniform Statewide
Building Code, the City Zoning Ordinance, public
8
265
266
267
268
269
270
271
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
279
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
health regulations or any provision of this
article;
(5) The establishment or its operation is not in strict
compliance with the terms of the permit, including
any condition or restriction thereof;
(6) The application contains any misrepresentation,
misstatement or omission, intentional or
inadvertent, concerning any information required to
be provided in, or in connection with, the
application; or
(7) The permit has been assigned or otherwise
transferred, or the permit holder has failed to
provide the city manager with the information
required by Section 4-37.
¢c) Upon the submission by the chief of police of a written
complaint to the city manager, setting forth facts which, if
proven, would constitute grounds for taking any of the actions set
forth in subsection Cd). the city manager shall promptly notify the
permit holder, or his designee for receiving notice, of such
complaint and schedule a hearing thereon. Such grounds shall be
limited to those set forth in subsection (b). The notice shall be
personally delivered or sent by certified or regular mail to the
person designated to receive such notices and shall:
¢1) Set forth the facts upon which the complaint is
based or, alternatively, make reference to the
complaint and contain a copy of such complaint as
an attachment;
(2) State the actions which may be taken by the city
manager pursuant to subsection (d) or,
alternatively, make reference to this section and
contain a copy thereof as an attachment;
(3) State the date, time and place of such hearing,
which shall not be held less than seven (7) days
after the date the notice is mailed or delivered;
an.d
300
301
302
303
304
305
306
307
308
309
310
311
312
313
314
315
316
317
318
319
320
321
322
323
324
(4) State that the applicant is entitled to be present
at the hearing, in person or by a representative,
and to present evidence on his behalf.
(d) If the city manager finds, by a preponderance of the
evidence presented at such hearing, that one or more of the grounds
alleged in the complaint have been proven, he may:
¢1) Revoke the permit;
(2) Suspend the permit;
(3) Attach one or more additional conditions or
restrictions to the permit; or
(4) Require the posting of a bond, in an amount and
form satisfactory to the city manager, securing to
the city the faithful performance of the terms and
conditions of the permit and compliance with all
applicable laws, ordinances and regulations.
The city manager shall render a decision within ten (10) days
of the date of the hearing and shall promptly notify the permit
holder, or the person designated to receive notices, of the action
taken by the city manager. Such notice shall be sent by certified
or registered mail.
Ce) Any permit holder aggrieved by a decision of the city
manager may appeal such action to the circuit court by proper
application filed within thirty (30) days from the date of such
decision; provided, however, that the commencement of such appeal
shall not stay the action of the city manager.
325
326
Section 4-36. Not transferable.
A permit granted under this article shall not be transferable.
327
328
329
330
331
332
Section 4-37. New permit upon change in ownership, management or
location
Any change in the ~he ownershi~ or management or location of
a public dance hall or teenage nightclub shall invalidate the
permit for such establishment, unless the city manager consents, in
writing, to such change. Any change in the location of a public
10
333
334
dance hall or teenage nightclub shall invalidate the permit nct bc
~ .... ~ ._.~A..~ A~-~ ........... ~ ~-~- ~ city manager
335
336
337
338
339
Section 4-38. Exemptions.
The provisions of this article shall not apply to any dance
sponsored by a school or governmental entity, held for benevolent
or charitable purposes, or conducted under the auspices of a
religious, educational, civic or military organization·
340
341
342
343
344
345
346
347
348
349
350
351
Section 4-39. Special provisions applicable to teenage nightclubs.
The provisions of this section shall apply only to teenage
nightclubs·
(a) No person who has been convicted of any offense set forth
in Section 4-34(a) (1) shall be employed in a teenage nightclub.
(b) The total number of persons, other than employees, shall
not exceed the number of seats at any time·
(c) No teenage nightclub shall remain open after 11:30 p.m.,
except that such establishments may remain open for one (1)
additional hour on New Year's Eve.
(d) It shall be unlawful to permit any person apparently
under the influence of alcohol or a controlled substance to enter
352
353
354
355
upon, or remain within, a teenage nightclub.
(e) No patron, once admitted to a teenage nightclub, shall be
permitted to reenter the premises on the same day after having
exited therefrom.
356
357
Section 4-40. Severabilit¥.
The provisions of this article shall be deemed to be
358
359
360
severable, and if any such provision is adjudged to be invalid or
unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall be unaffected thereby
and shall remain in full force and effect.
361
362
363
364
365
366
Adopted by the Council of the City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
on the 23rd day of March , 1993.
CA-4780
\proposed\04-16et.pro
R-10
02-05-93
11
Item III-L. 1.b.
NEW BUSINESS
COUNCIL-SPONSORED ITEMS
ITEM # 36644
Upon motion by Councilman Branch, seconded by Vice Mayor Sessoms, City Council ADOPTED, AS
AMENDED:
Resolution directing the Planning Commission study and forward its
recommendation to the City Council re City's current parking
requirements for restaurants in the Resort Tourist Districts. (Sponsored
by Councilman Linwood O. Branch III)
The Planning Commission shall forward its findings and recommendations to the City Council within 120
days. The Planning Commission is also directed to examine the City's current parking requirements in the
B-3 Zoning District.
Voting: 11-0
Council Members Voting Aye:
John A. Baum, Linwood O. Branch, Ill, James W. Brazier, Jr., Robert W.
Clyburn, Robert IC Dean, Louis R. Jones, Paul J. Lanteigne, John D.
Moss, Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf, Nancy K. Parker and Vice Mayor
William D. Sessoms, Jr.
Council Members Voting Nay:
None
Council Members Absent:
None
March 23, 1993
Requested by Councilman Linwood O. Branch III
A RESOLUTION DIRECTING THE PLANNING
COMMISSION TO STUDY AND FORWARD ITS
RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COUNCIL
CONCERNING THE PARKING REGULATIONS
FOR RESTAURANTS IN THE RESORT
TOURIST DISTRICTS
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
WHEREAS, the parking space requirements for restaurants
in the Resort Tourist districts is controlled by Section 203 of the
City Zoning Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, Section 203 of the City Zoning Ordinance
requires that restaurants in the Resort Tourist districts must
provide one (1) parking space for each seventy-five (75) square
feet of floor area; and
WHEREAS, the City Council desires that the Planning
Commission examine the aforesaid parking requirement for
restaurants in the Resort Tourist districts so as to determine
whether the City's Zoning Ordinance should be amended to reduce the
parking requirements for restaurants in such districts.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA:
That the Planning Commission is hereby directed to
examine the City's current parking requirements in the B-3 Zoning
district and for restaurants in the Resort Tourist districts and to
forward its findings and recommendations to the City Council within
120 days of the date of the adoption of this Resolution.
26
27
ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH,
VIRGINIA, ON THIS 23rd DAY OF MARCH, 1993.
28
29
30
31
CA-5063
ORDIN~NONCODE~PARKING . RES
R-2
PREPARED: 03 / 24 / 93
Item III-L.l.c.
NEW BUSINESS
ADD -ON
ITEM # 36645
Councilman Moss referenced the City Manager's response relative the integrating of the Cap~
Improvement Program and the Operating Budget. Councilman Moss was most appreciative of all the
analysis. However, last Fall the City dealt with the White Papers among other issues after the ADOPTION
of the CIP. Then the public was informed because of the shortfalls forecasted in the revenue book, the
only other alternative to financing the CIP was a tax increase at 5. 7 cents. Councilman Moss would hope
in the future that while the City Council may ADOPT a CIP in terms of a program, the City Council
should not ADOPT Appropriation Ordinances and impose fiscal burdens on the citizens until a total
assessment of the City's revenues.
March 23, 1993
Item III-L.l.d.
NEW BUSINESS
ADD -ON
~EM#36~6
Councilman Moss referenced his letter from the Chamber of Commerce. Councilman Moss forwarded
a copy of the "Red Book" to numerous organizations in the community. As this is a very frui(ful piece
of work, he thought the Council would wish to share this analysis with the general public. The City's fiscal
review process needs worlc
March 23, 1993
Item III-L.l.e.
NEW BUSINESS
ADD -ON
ITEM # 36647
Council Lady Parker referenced correspondence of March Twenty-third concerning VDOT and Ferrell
Parkway Phase V, CIP 2-096. It advises this project will provide a much improved access between the
Resort Area and the Princess Anne Road area. Council Lady Parker had not seen this as the primary
reason previously.
Councilman Moss requested a verbatim of the City Manager's Briefing on February 9, 1993 on the
VIRGINIA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION PREALLOCATION HEARING /
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM to provide clarification.
March 23, 1993
Item III-L. 1.
ADJOURNMENT
ITEM # 36648
Upon motion by Councilman Baum, and BY CONSENSUS, City Council ADJOURNED at 8:25 P.M.
Chief Deputy City Clerk
Ruth Hodges Smith, CMC/AAE
City Clerk
Meyera E. Oberndorf
Mayor
City of Virginia Beach
Virginia
March 23, 1993
I
JOBNAME Ya Beach O.b PAUL
/br 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/frontcvr
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
$155,000,000'
GENERAL OBLIGATION REFUNDIi~/G BONDS
SERIES OF 1993
$20,000,000
GENERAL OBLIGATION PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT BONDS
SERIES OF 1993-A
*Prehm~nary, SubJect to change
/hr 1/304/te am3/offmlrept/3789- 77566/councfl
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA
THE CITY COUNCIL
Meyera E. Oberndorf, Mayor
Wdham D. Sessoms, Jr., V~ce Mayor
John A. Baum
L~nwood O. Branch
James W. Bramer, Jr.
Robert W. Clyburn
Robert K. Dean
Louis R. Jones
Paul J. Lanteigne
John D. Moss
Nancy K. Parker
CERTAIN APPOINTED OFFICIALS
James K. Spore, C~ty Manager
Leshe L. Lflley, C~ty Attorney
Ruth Hodges Smith, C~ty Clerk
Patnc~a A. Phflhps, D~rector of Finance
BOND COUNSEL
Hunton & Wllhams
Rlverfront Plaza, East Tower
951 East Byrd Street
R~chmond, V~rgmla 23219
FINANCIAL ADVISORS
Government F~nance Group, Inc.
4350 N. Fmrfax Drive, State 760
Arhngton, VA 22203
Government F~nance Associates, Inc.
71 Broadway, Suite 1301
New York, NY 10006
I
I/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/toc ~
No dealer, broker, salesman, or other person has been authorized by the City or the Underwriters to
give any information or to make any representations with respect to Virginia Beach, Virginia, or the Bonds
issued thereby, other than those contained in this Official Statement, and if given or made, such other
information or representation must not be relied upon as having been authorized by the City. This Official
Statement does not constitute an offer to buy, nor shall there be any sale of the Bonds by any person, in
any jurisdiction in which it is unlawful for such person to make such offer, solicitation or sale.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
SECTION ONE INTRODUCTION
The Issuer 1
The Bonds ........... 1
Use of Proceeds . . 1
Optional Redemption 1
Delivery .. 1
Ratings . . . 1
Financial Advisors 2
Bond Counsel 2
Underwriting . 2
Underwriters' Counsel . .. 2
Verification Agent 2
Auditors 2
Additional Information 2
SECTION TWO THE BONDS
Description of the Bonds 3
Security 3
Redemption . . 3
Book-Entry-Only System 5
Authorization and Purpose of the Bonds 7
Plan of Refunding 8
Bondholders' Remedms ~n the Event of Default ~ 9
Approval of Legal Proceedings .. 10
Op~mon of Bond Counsel 10
Other Tax Matters 10
Litigation ... 11
General Fuhd 11
Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund 11
Verification 12
Cemficates of City Officials 12
SECTION THREE CERTAIN INFORMATION
CONCERNING THE CITY
Introduction 14
Certain Elected Officials and Administrative Staff
Members. 14
Elected Officials' 14
Appointed Officials 15
Governmental Services and Facilities 16
Overview of Governmental Organization and
Selected Functions . . 17
Certain City Council Appointees 19
Departmental Teams ..... 19
Uommumty Development and Revitalization Team 19
Internal Services Team 20
Library, Recreation, and Cultural Team 21
Human Services Team 22
Pubhc Safety Team 22
Team Support Group . 23
Economic and Demograph~c'Fac~tors 23
Population . 23
Housing and Construction 24
Page
Employment ................. 26
Business and Industry ................... 27
Retail Sales ........................... 29
Tourism and Conventions ............... 29
Military ................................. 30
Medical Facilities ............................ 30
Agribusiness ............................... 30
Education ...................... 30
SECTION FOUR' CITY INDEBTEDNESS AND
CAPITAL PLAN
Limitations on Incurrence of Debt ............. 33
Debt Management Policies. 33
Outstanding Debt and Lease'~l~h~tlons".."ii'i'iii'"i 35
Authorized but Unissued Bonds ........ 35
Water and Sewer System Debt .... 38
Assets Acquired and Financed Under Ca'l~lt~l
Leases ......... 38
Overlapping 13ebt .................. 39
Short-Term Borrowing .............. 39
Debt History ............... 39
Comprehensive Plan ............. 39
Capital Improvement Program ......... 39
Fiscal Year 1993-1998 CIP ....................... 40
SECTION FIVE FINANCIAL INFORMATION
Basis of Accounting and Accounting Structure ........ 44
Virginia Beach Development Authority .... ... 44
Tidewater Transportation District Commission ...... 44
Fund Accounting ............. 44
Certificate of Achievemen[ ............ 45
Budgetary Process ....................... 45
1992-93 Operating Budget 46
General Government Revenues .................... 47
General Fund ............................. 48
Personal and Real Property Tax Revenues .......... 48
Published Financial Information ................ 51
The Water and Sewer System Financial Results .. 54
Typical Water and Sewer Bills ................... 56
Operating Results--Water and Sewer System ...... 56
Water and Sewer Capital Improvement Program ...... 57
The Lake Gaston ProJect ..................... 58
Background ............................................ 58
Water Supply System Status Report .................. 60
Lake Gaston Financing Plan ....................... 61
Insurance ........................................... 62
Commitments and Contingencies ......................... 62
Retirement and Pension Plans... 63
Employee Relations and Collective Bargaining ........ 63
Approval of PrehmInary Official Statement ............ 64
APPENDICES
Financial Statements .................. A-1
Form of Bond Counsel Opinion .............. B-1
All quotations from and summaries and explanations of provisions of law and documents herein do not
purport to be complete, and reference is made to such laws and documents for full and complete statements
of their provisions. Any statements made in this Official Statement involving estimates or matters of
opinion, whether or not expressly so stated, are intended merely as estimates or opinion and not as
representations of fact. The information and expression of opinion herein are subject to change without
notice, and neither the delivery of this Official Statement nor any sale made hereunder shall, under any
circumstances, create any implications that there has been no change in the affairs of the City since the
respective dates as of which information is given herein.
I/brl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789-77566/toc
(Th~s Page Intent~onally Left Blank)
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAOE. 1 SESS. 197 OUrlPU'I Mon Mar 2¢ 1~; 52
/b r 1/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/cvr
PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED APRIL 7, 1993
NEW ISSUE
BOOK ENTRY ONLY
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.:
Standard & Poor's Corporation:
(see "Ratings")
In the optnton of Bond Counsel, under extsttng law and subject to condtttons described tn the Sectton heretn" The Bonds,"
mterest on the Bonds, (1) wtll not be tncluded tn gross tncome for Federal tncome tax purposes, (2) wtll not be an item of tax
preference for purposes of the Federal alternattve mmtmum tncome tax tmposed on mdtvtduals and corporattons, and (3) wtll
be exempt from income taxatton by the Commonwealth of Virgmta Such mterest may be mr luded tn the calculatton of a
corporatton's alternattve minimum mcome tax, and a homer may be subject to other Federal tax consequences as described
tn the sectton heretn "The Bonds"
$155,000,000'
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series of 1993
The Bonds will constitute valid general obligations of the City of Vlrgima Beach, and the full faith and credit and unlimited taxing
power of the City Is irrevocably pledged to the payment of the principal of, and premium, if any, and the interest on the Bonds.
Dated: May 1, 1993
Due: July 15, as shown below
The Bonds w~ll be ~ssued ~n registered form, registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of The Depository Trust
Company, New York, New York ("DTC"). DTC will act as securmes depository of the Bonds. Indiwdual purchases of
benefioal ownership ~nterest ~n the Bonds wdl_be made in book-entry form on_ly, ~n the pnnopal amount of $5,000 and ~ntegral
multIples thereof. Ind~vidual purchasers will not receive physmal dehvery of cemficates representing their ~nterest ~n the Bonds
purchased. Interest on the Bonds w~ll be payable January 15 and July 15, commencing January 15, 1994 Payment of pnnc~pal,
premium, ~f any, and ~nterest wdl be made by w~re transfer to DTC or ~ts nominee, Cede & Co., which will then remit such
payments to the DTC Part~opants, for subsequent d~sbursement to the Benefioal Owners of the Bonds, as described ~n the
section entitled "Book-Entry Only System."
The Bonds are not subject to redemption prior to thmr stated maturities.
AMOUNTS, MATURITIES, INTEREST RATES, AND PRICES OR YIELDS
Principal Interest lmttal Pnnopal Interest Imtml
Year Amount Rate Y~eld/Pnce Year Amount Rate Y~eld/Pnce
1994 $ % % 2003 $ % %
1995 2004
1996 2005
1997 2006
1998 2007
1999 2008
2000 2009
2001 2010
2002 2011
The Bonds are offered for dehvery, when, as, and ff ~ssued, subject to the approval of validity by Hunton & Wdhams,
Richmond, Vlrg~ma, Bond Counsel, and to certain other conditions referred to here~n It is expected that the Bonds will be
avmlable for delivery at the expense of the C~ty ~n New York, New York, through the fac~ht~es of DTC on or about May 11,
1993
T/us cover page contains certatn mforrnatton for qutck reference only It ts not a summary of thts issue. Investors must read
the enttre Offictal Statement to obtain mformatton essentzal to the makmg of an m formed mvestment dectston
Dated:
*Prehm~nary, subject to change
I
JOBNAMk Va Beach k).S. PAGE I SkS5 5 Obi-PUl Mon Mar _'y la 51 5-+ 1~.~
/br1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789-77566/pre-oscvr
I
--
PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT DATED APRIL 7, 1993
NEW ISSUE
BOOK ENTRY ONLY
Moody's Investors Service, Inc.:
Standard & Poor's Corporation:
(see "Ratings")
In the optnton of Bond Counsel, under ex~sttng law and subject to con&aons described tn the
Section heretn "The Bonds," tnterest on the Bonds, (1) wtll not be tncluded tn gross mcome for Federal
mcome tax purposes, (2) wtll not be an ttem of tax preference for purposes of the Federal alternattve
mmtmum income tax tmposed on tndtvtduals and corporattons, and (3) will be exempt from mcome
taxatton by the Commonwealth of l/Trgmta Such interest may be included tn the calculatton of a
corporatton's alternattve mtntmum tncome tax, and a holder may be subject to other Federal tax
consequences as descrtbed tn the sectton herem "The Bonds."
$20,000,000
City of Virginia Beach, Virginia
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds, Series of 1993-A
The Bonds will constitute vahd general obhgat~ons of the City of Virgmia Beach, and the full froth and credit and unhmited taxing
power of the Czty ~s ,rrevocably pledged to the payment of the prmczpal of, and premium, ~f any, and the ~nterest on the Bonds.
Dated: May 1, 1992 _ _ Due: July 15, as shown below
The Bonds will be issued m registered form, registered in the name of Cede & Co., as nominee of
The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York ("DTC"). DTC will act as securities depository
of the Bonds. Individual purchases of beneficial ownership interest m the Bonds will be made ~n book-entry
form only, ~n the principal amount of $5,000 and integral multiples thereof. Ind~vldual purchasers will not
receive physical dehvery of certhficates representing their interest in the Bonds purchased. Interest on the
Bonds will be payable January 15 and July 15, commencing January 15, 1994. Payment of pnnc~pal,
premium, ~f any, and interest will be made by w~re transfer to DTC or ~ts nominee, Cede & Co., which will
then remit such payments to the DTC Participants, for subsequent d~sbursement to the Beneficial Owners
of the Bonds, as described ~n the section enmled "Book-Entry Only System."
The Bonds that mature on or before July 15, 2003 are not subject to redempnon prior to their stated
matunnes. The Bonds that mature on or after July 15, 2004, will be subject to redempnon prior to
maturity at the option of the City as described herein under "DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS."
AMOUNTS, MATURITIES, INTEREST RATES, AND PRICES OR YIELDS
Principal Interest lmt~al Prtnc~pal
Year Amount Rate Yield/Price Year Amount
1994 $1,000,000 % % 2004 $1,000,000
1995 1,000,000 2005 1,000,000
1996 1,000,000 2006 1,000,000
1997 1,000,000 2007 1,000,000
1998 1,000,000 2008 1,000,000
1999 1,000,000 2009 1,000,000
2000 1,000,000 2010 1,000,000
2001 1,000,000 2011 1,000,000
2002 1,000,000 2012 1,000,000
2003 1,000,000 2013 1,000,000
Interest Initial
Rate Yield/Price
% %
The Bonds are offered for dehvery, when, as, and ~f issued, subject to the approval of vahd~ty by
Hunton & Williams, Rmhmond, V~rgmia, Bond Counsel, and to certain other condmons referred to
herein. It is expected that the Bonds will be available for dehvery at the expense of the C~ty m New
York, New York, through the facilities of DTC on or about May 11, 1993.
Thts cover page contatns certatn tnformatton for qutck reference only. It ts not a summary of thts
tssue Investors must read the enttre Offictal Statement to obtain mformatton essenttal to the making of
an reformed investment dectston.
Dated:
I
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 1 SESS. 340 OUTPUI' Men Mar 29 lb.Su 3u Iv'to
/br 1/304/team3/offmlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
SECTION ONE: INTRODUCTION
The following material ~s quahfied m ~ts entirety by the detmled mformat~on and financml
statements appearing elsewhere m this Officml Statement, reference to which is hereby made for all
purposes.
The Issuer
The issuer of the Series of 1993-A Bonds, and the Series 1993 Refunding Bonds (hereafter referred
to collect~vely as the "Bonds") is the C~ty of Virginia Beach located ~n the southeastern portion of
Virginia. Virg~ma Beach is the most populous mty ~n the Commonwealth, w~th a 1990 Census population
of 393,069.
The Bonds
The Bonds consist of $155,000,000' General Obligation Refunding Bonds, Series of 1993 (the
"Series 1993 Refunding Bonds"), dated May 1, 1993 and matunng annually on July 15 from 1994
through 2011 and $20,000,000 General Obhgat~on Pubhc Improvement Bonds, Series of 1993-A (the
"Series 1993-A Bonds"), dated May 1, 1993 and matunng annually on July 15 from 1994 through 2013.
The Bonds will be issued in authorized denominations of $5,000 and multiples thereof and will be held
by The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York ("DTC") or by ~ts nominee as securities
depository w~th respect to the Bonds.
Interest on the Bonds wdl be payable on January 15 and July 15, commencing January 15, 1994,
until the earlier of maturity or redemptlon. As long as the Bonds are held by DTC or ~ts nominee,
interest will be paid to Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, ~n next day funds on each interest payment
date.
Use of Proceeds
The proceeds of the Series 1993 Refunding Bonds will be used to refund certain bonds ~n advance
of their stated maturity and to pay costs related to the issuance of the Bonds. The proceeds of the Series
1993-A Bonds will be used to finance various capital projects for schools and to pay costs of msuance
related to the Bonds A more complete description of the use of proceeds Is provided in Section Two.
Optional Redemption
The Series 1993 Refunding Bonds are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. The Series
1993-A Bonds maturing on or after July 15, 2004 w~ll be subject to redemption beg~nmng July 15, 2003,
as a whole at any t~me or ~n part on any ~nterest payment date, at the option of the C~ty. A more
complete description of the optional redemption features ~s provided ~n Section Two.
Delivery
The Bonds are offered for dehvery, when, as, and ~f issued, subject to the approval of vahd~ty by
Hunton & Williams, Richmond, V~rg~ma, Bond Counsel, and to certain other conditions referred to
herein. Certain legal matters will be passed upon for the Ctty by the Ctty Attorney, Leshe L. L~lley,
Esquire, and for the Underwriters by their counsel, Brown & Wood, New York, New York. It is
expected that the Bonds wdl be avmlable for delivery, at the expense of the City, in New York, New
York, through the facilities of DTC, on or about May 11, 1993.
Ratings
Ratings have been assigned by Moody's Investors Service, Inc., 99 Church Street, New York, New
York 10007, and Standard & Poor's Corporation, 25 Broadway, New York, New York 10004 as shown
on the front cover. An explanation of the significance of such ratings may only be obtained from the
*Preliminary, subject to change.
I
JOBNAME' Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 2 SESS 345 OUTPUI Mon Mar 29
/b r 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
rating agency furnishing the same. The City furnished to such ranng agencies the information contained
in this Official Statement and certmn publicly available materials and ~nformauon about the C~ty.
Generally, rating agencies base their ratings on such materials and information, as well as lnvesuga-
uons, studies and assumptions of the rating agencies. Such ratings may be changed at any time, and no
assurance can be given that they will not be rewsed downward or w~thdrawn entirely by either or both
of such rating agenmes if, ~n the judgment of either or both, circumstances so warrant. Such
circumstances may include, w~thout hm~tauon, changes m or unavaflablhty of ~nformauon relating to the
C~ty. Any such downward revision or withdrawal of either of such ratings may have an adverse effect
on the market price of the Bonds.
Financial Advisors
Government Finance Group, Inc. and Government Finance Associates, Inc. are employed as Financial
Advisors to the City in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. The financial adxnsors' fee for services
rendered w~th respect to the sale of the Bonds ~s not contingent upon the ~ssuance and dehvery of the Bonds.
Bond Counsel
Hunton & Wflhams is Bond Counsel to the City in connection with the issuance of the Bonds.
Underwriting
The Bonds are being purchased by Qoldman, Sachs & Co., as S_emor Managing Underwriter, on
behalf of a group of Underwriters (the "Underwriters"). The purchase contract for the Bonds (the
"Bond Purchase Agreement") sets forth the obligation of the Underwriters to purchase the Bonds at an
aggregate underwriting discount of $ , plus accrued interest, from the initial pubhc offering prices
set forth on the cover page of th~s Official Statement and ~s subject to certain terms and conditions,
~ncludmg the approval of certain legal matters by counsel. The Bond Purchase Agreement provides that
the Underwriters will purchase all of the Bonds if any are purchased. The Underwriters may offer and
sell the Bonds to certmn dealers (including dealers deposmng the Bonds ~nto ~nvestment trusts) and
others at prices different from the public offering prices stated on the cover page of this Official
Statement. The pubhc offenng prices may be changed from Ume to time at the discretion of the
Underwriters.
Underwriters' Counsel
Brown 8: Wood ~s Underwriters' Counsel to Goldman, Sachs & Co. m connecnon w~th ~ssuance of
the Bonds.
Verification Agent
Deloltte & Touche, cerufied pubhc accountants and consultants, located in Houston, Texas has
been appointed venfiCatlon agent.
Auditors
The financial statements of City of Vlrg~ma Beach included in th~s official statement have been
audited by KPMG Peat Marwmk, independent certified public accountants, to the extent and for the
periods ~nd~cated ~n thmr report thereon. Such financial statements have been included in reliance upon
the report of KPMG Peat Marwick.
Additional Information
Any questions concermng the content of this Official Statement should be directed to the
Department of Finance, Municipal Center, Virginia Beach, Virginia, 23456, (804) 427-4681, or the C~ty's
F~nanc~al Adwsors, Government Finance Group, Inc., (703) 528-5785 or Government Finance Associ-
ates, Inc., (212) 809-5700.
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE: 3 SESS. 345 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 18 50 3U 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
The C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach will prepare and periodically disseminate annual audited financial
reports, including a comprehensive annual financml report and other ~nformat~on that the C~ty deems
pertinent. The City will dehver copies of all perlod~c reports and other pertinent published ~nformatlon
to a nationally recognized mumc~pal securities ~nformat~on repository. Based upon ~nformat~on
available to the C~ty, investors and other ~nterested part~es may contact one of the following NRMSIRs
for addmonal information: Bloomberg Fmancml Markets (609/497-3632), Kenny Information Servtces
(212/770-4530), and the Bond Buyer's Repository (212/807-5930).
While the City encourages ~nterested part~es to obtmn copies of ~ts official statements and periodic
financial reports directly from the NRMSIRs, the City will provide relevant pubhshed ~nformation upon
request. Wh~le the C~ty currently does not charge for cop~es or mall dehvery, the C~ty expressly
reserves the right to make any reasonable charge for provision of such ~nformat~on by mml as ~t shall
determine. The C~ty also will provide appropriate credit ~nformation to the nat~onally-recogmzed rating
agencies that rate the C~ty's securities to enable these orgamzat~ons to revmw the outstanding rating.
However, the rating may be revised or w~thdrawn at any t~me and the C~ty's provision of information
to the rating agencies does not ensure the continued existence of a rating.
I
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 4 SESS 346 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 lS 5U 3ti 19~)3
/brl/304/team3/off~clrept/3789-77566/pgs
SECTION TWO: THE BONDS
The purpose of th~s Official Statement, ~nclud~ng the cover page and the appendmes, ~s to furnish
~nformatlon ~n connection with the sale by the Oty of V~rg~ma Beach, V~rg~nla (the "City") of
$155,000,000' General Obhgatlon Refunding Bonds, Series of 1993 (the "Series 1993 Refunding
Bonds"), dated May 1, 1993, to be issued in accordance w~th the Resolutions adopted by the City
Council on March 30, 1993 and $20,000,000 General Obhgatlon Pubhc Improvement Bonds, Series of
1993-A (the "Series 1993-A Bonds") dated May 1, 1993, to be ~ssued in accordance with the Resolution
adopted by the City Council on March 30, 1993.
Th~s Officml Statement has been approved and authorized by the City for use ~n connection w~th the
sale of the Bonds. F~nanclal and other information contained in this Official Statement has been
prepared by the City from its records (except where other sources are noted). The information is not
~ntended to lndlcate future or contlnmng trends in the financial or economic posit~on of the C~ty.
DESCRIPTION OF THE BONDS
The Bonds consist of $155,000,000' General Obligation Refunding Bonds, and $20,000,000 General
Obligation Public Improvement Bonds to which the full froth and credit and unhm~ted taxing power of
the City are pledged for payment (see "Security" below). The Series 1993 Refunding Bonds wdl be
dated May 1, 1993 and mature on July 15 from 1994 through 2011 ~n the principal amounts set forth on
the cover page of this Officml Statement. The Series 1993-A Bonds will be dated May 1, 1993 and mature
on July 15, from 1994 through 2013 in the principal amounts set forth on the cover page of this Official
Statement. The Bonds will be ~ssued ~n authorized denominations of $5,000 and multiples thereof and
will be held by The Depository Trust Company, New York, New York ("DTC") or by ~ts nominee as
securities depository wIth respect to the Bonds.
Interest on the Bonds will be payable on January 15 and July 15, commencing January 15, 1994,
until the earher of maturity or redemption. As long as the Bonds are held by DTC or ~ts nominee, interest
will be prod to Cede & Co., as nominee of DTC, ~n next day funds on each ~nterest payment date.
Security
The Bonds will be general obhgatlons of the City, and the full faith and credit of the City are
~rrevocably pledged to the payment of principal, premium, ~f any, and interest on the Bonds. The
resolutions prowd~ng for the ~ssuance of the Bonds provides that the City Councd shall, ~n each year
whde any of the Bonds shall be outstanding, levy and collect an ad valorem tax, over and above all other
taxes authorized or hmlted by law, upon all property ~n the C~ty subject to local taxation, sufficient to
pay the pnnc~pal, premium, ~f any, and ~nterest on the Bonds as the same shall come due, unless other
funds are lawfully avadable and appropriated for t~mely payment of the Bonds. It is the C~ty's pohcy to
pay debt service on general obhgatlons issued for water and sewer purposes from revenues of the water
and sewer system, even though such revenues are not legally pledged as security for such obligations.
Redemption
The Series 1993 Refunding Bonds are not subject to redemption prior to maturity. The Series
1993-A Bonds that mature on or before July 15, 2003 are not subject to redemption prior to their stated
maturities. The Bonds that mature on and after July 15, 2004, will be subject to redemption beg~nmng
July 15, 2003, as a whole at any time or in part on any interest payment date, at the option of the City,
upon payment of the follow~ng redemption prices (expressed as a percentage of principal amount of
Bonds to be redeemed) plus ~nterest accrued and unpmd to the redemption date'
Period Dunng Which Redeemed
(both dates mclus~ve) Redemption Price
July 15, 2003 to July 14, 2004 .......... 102%
July 15, 2004 to July 14, 2005 .......... 101
July 15, 2005 and thereafter ......... 100
* Prehm~nary, subject to change.
I
JOBNAME. Ya BeachOS. PA(Ma ~ SESS 345 OUIPUI
/b r 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Mon Mar 29 1~ 5U.3tJ 19')3
If less than all of the Bonds are called for redemption, the Bonds to be redeemed shall be selected
by the City's chmf financial officer ~n such manner as he may determine to be ~n the best ~nterest of the
C~ty. If less than all of the Bonds of a particular maturity are called for redemptton, DTC or any
successor securities depository will select the Bonds to be redeemed pursuant to ~ts rules and
procedures, or if the book entry system ~s d~scontlnued, will be selected by the Registrar by lot ~n such
manner as the Registrar in its discretion may determine. In either case, each portion of the $5,000
pnnclpal amount ~s counted as one Bond for such purpose. The City will cause notice of the call for
redemption ~dentlfylng the Bonds or portions thereof to be redeemed to be sent by registered or certified
mall, not less than 30 nor more than 60 days prior to the redemption date, to DTC or its nominee as
registered owner thereof. The City shall not be responsible for mmhng not~ce of redemption to anyone
other than DTC or another qualified securities depository or its nominee unless no quahfied securities
depository is the registered owner of the Bonds. If no qualified secunnes depository or ~ts nominee ~s
registered owner of the Bonds, not~ce of redemption shall be mailed to the registered owners of the
Bonds. If a portion of a Bond ~s called for redemption, a new Bond ~n pnnc~pal amount equal to the
unredeemed port~on shall be ~ssued to the registered owner upon the surrender thereof.
Book-Entry-Only System
The Depository Trust Company ("DTC"), New York, New York, will act as securities depository
for the Bonds. The descnpnon whmh follows of the procedures and recordkeeping with respect to
benefimal ownership interests ~n the Bonds, payment of ~nterest and other payments on the Bonds to
Partlclpants, defined below, or Beneficml Owners, defined below, confrrmatlon and transfer of beneficial
ownership ~nterests in the Bonds and other related transactions by and between DTC, the Participants
and Benefimal Owners ~s based solely on information furmshed by DTC.
DTC will act as securities depository for the Bonds. The Bonds will be issued as fully-registered
secunnes registered in the name of Cede & Co., DTC's nominee. One fully-registered Bond certificate
will be ~ssued for each maturity of the Bonds, each in the aggregate pnnclpal amount of such maturity,
and will be deposited w~th DTC. DTC ~s a hm~ted-purpose trust company orgamzed under the New
York Banking Law, "a banking orgamzat~on w~th~n the meamng of New York Bank Law", a member
of the Federal Reserve System, a "cleanng corporation" wlth~n the meaning of the New York Umform
Commercial Code, and a "clearing agency" registered pursuant to the provisions of Section 17A of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934. DTC holds securities that its partic~pants (the "Participants") deposit
with DTC. DTC also faclhtates the settlement among Participants of securities transactions, such as
transfers and pledges, in deposited securities through electronic computerized book-entry changes ~n
Participants accounts, thereby ehmlnat~ng the need for physmal movement of securities certificates.
Direct Partm~pants include securities brokers and dealers, banks, trust compames, cleanng corpora-
tions, and certain other organizations. DTC is owned by a number of ItS Direct Participants and by the
New York Stock Exchange, Inc., the American Stock Exchange, Inc., and the National Association of
SecuritIes Dealers, Inc Access to the DTC system is also available to others such as banks, brokers,
dealers and trust companies that clear through or mmntaln a custodial relationship w~th a D~rect
Participant, e~ther directly or Indirectly (the "Indirect Partlmpants"). The Rules applicable to DTC and
~ts Part~mpants are on file w~th the Secuntms and Exchange Commission.
Purchases of Bonds under the DTC system must be made by or through Direct Pamc~pants, which
will receive a credit for the Bonds on DTC's records. The ownership interest of each actual purchaser
of each Bond ("the Benefimal Owner") ~s ~n turn to be recorded on the D~rect and Indirect Participants'
records. Beneficial Owners wdl not recmve written confirmation from DTC of thmr purchase, but
Beneficial Owners are expected to receive written confirmations prov~ding details of the transaction, as
well as periodic statements of their holdings, from the D~rect or Indirect Participant through which the
Beneficial Owner entered into the transaction. Transfers of ownership ~nterests in the Bonds are to be
accomphshed by entries made on the books of Partlc~pants acting on behalf of Beneficial Owners.
Beneficial Owners will not receive cernficates represennng their ownership ~nterests in Bonds, except
in the event that use of the book-entry system for the Bonds is d~scontlnued.
JOBNAME' Va. Beach O S PAGE: 6 SESS. 343 OUTPU~I
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Mon Mar 29 18.50 30 1993
THE CITY WILL HAVE NO RESPONSIBILITY OR OBLIGATION TO SUCH PARTICI-
PANTS OR THE PERSONS FOR WHICH THEY ACT AS NOMINEES WITH RESPECT TO
PAYMENT TO OR PROVIDING OF NOTICE FOR SUCH PARTICIPANTS OR THE PERSONS
FOR WHICH THEY ACT AS NOMINEES.
To facilitate subsequent transfers, all Bonds deposited by Participants with DTC are registered in
the name of DTC's partnership nominee, Cede & Co. The deposit of Bonds w~th DTC and their
registration in the name of Cede & Co. effect no change in beneficial ownership. DTC has no knowledge
of the actual Beneficial Owners of the Bonds. DTC's records reflect only the identity of the Direct
Participants to whose accounts such Bonds are credited, wNch may or may not be the Beneficial
Owners. The Participants will remain responsible for keeping account of their holdings on behalf of their
customers.
Conveyance of notices and other communications by DTC to Direct Participants, by Direct
Participants to Indirect Participants, and by Direct Participants and Indirect Part~clpants to Beneficml
Owners will be governed by arrangements among them, subject to any statutory or regulatory
reqmrements as may be ~n effect from time to t~me.
Redemption notices shall be sent to Cede & Co. If less than all of the Bonds within an ~ssue are
bmng redeemed, DTC's practice is to determine by lot the amount of the interest of each Direct
Pamc~pant ~n such ~ssue to be redeemed.
Neither DTC nor Cede & Co. will consent or vote w~th respect to Bonds. Under its usual
procedures, DTC mads an Omnibus Proxy to the Issuer as soon as po_sslble after the record date. The
Ommbus Proxy assigns Cede & Co.'s consenting or voting rights to those D~rect Participants to whose
accounts the Bonds are credited on the record date (identified ~n a hstlng attached to the Omnibus
Proxy).
Pnnmpal and ~nterest payments on the Bonds w~ll be made to DTC. DTC's practice is to credit
D~rect Participants' accounts on payable date ~n accordance wlth their respective holdings shown on
DTC's records unless DTC has reason to beheve that it will not receive payment on payable date.
Payments by Participants to Beneficial Owners wdl be governed by standing instructions and customary
practices, as ~s the case with Bonds held for the accounts of customers in bearer form or registered in
"street name," and w~ll be the responslblhty of such Participant and not of DTC, the Registrar, or the
City, subject to any statutory or regulatory requirements as may be in effect from time to time. Payment
of principal, premium, if any, and interest to DTC is the respons~blhty of the City or the Registrar,
d~sbursement of such payments to D~rect Participants shall be the respons~Nhty of DTC, and
disbursement of such payments to the Beneficial Owners shall be the respons~blhty of Direct and
Indirect Participants.
DTC may d~scont~nue providing ItS services as securities depository with respect to the Bonds at
any t~me by g~v~ng nonce to the C~ty or the Registrar. Under such c~rcumstances, ~n the event that a
successor securities depository is not obtained, Bond certificates will be pnnted and delivered.
The C~ty may determine to d~scontlnue the use of the system of book-entry transfers through DTC
(or a successor securities depository). In that event e~ther a successor securities depository will be
selected by the C~ty or Bond cernficates will be prepared, executed and dehvered.
The C~ty has no responsibility or obhgat~on to the Partic~pants or the Beneficial Owners wlth
respect to (A) the accuracy of any records mmntmned by DTC or any Participant; (B) the payment by
any Participant of any amount due to any Benefimal Owner ~n respect of the pnnclpal of and premium,
~f any, and ~nterest on the Bonds; (C) the dehvery or t~mehness of dehvery by any Participant of any
nonce to any Beneficial Owner that is required or permitted under the terms of the resolution providing
for the issuance of the Bonds to be given to Bondholders; or (D) any other action taken by DTC, or ~ts
nominee, Cede & Co., as Bondholder, ~ncludlng the effectiveness of any action taken pursuant to an
Ommbus Proxy.
So long as Cede & Co. ~s the registered owner of the Bonds, as nominee of DTC, references in this
Official Statement to the Owners of the Bonds shall mean Cede & Co. and shall not mean the Beneficial
JOBNAME. Va Beach O.S. PAGE. 7 SESS. 346 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 18 50 3(} 1993
/b r 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Owners, and Cede & Co. will be treated as the only Bondholder of Bonds for all purposes under the
resolution providing for the issuance of the Bonds
The C1ty may enter into amendments to the agreement with DTC or successor agreements w~th a
successor securities depository, relating to the book-entry system to be maintained with respect to the
Bonds w~thout the consent of Beneficial Owners or Bondholders.
The foregoing information ~n this section concermng DTC and DTC's book-entry system has been
obtained from sources that C1ty beheves to be rehable, but the C~ty takes no respons~Nhty for the
accuracy thereof.
AUTHORIZATION AND PURPOSE OF THE BONDS
The Series 1993-A Bonds will be ~ssued pursuant to the Constitution and statutes of the
Commonwealth of V~rglnm, including the Charter of the C~ty of Vlrg~ma Beach (Chapter 147, Acts of
Assembly of 1962, as amended) and the Pubhc Finance Act of 1991 (Chapter 5.1, T~tle 15.1, Code of
V~rgmm of 1950, as amended).
Of the $20,000,000 General Obllgatlon Public Improvement Bonds, Series of 1993-A, $1,295,000 of
the Series 1993-A Bonds were authorized by an ordinance adopted by the C1ty Council on August 21,
1989 and approved at an elecuon on November 7, 1989, to provide funds to finance the conUnmng
development of the C1ty's school system.
$9,060,000 of the Series 1993-A Bonds represent a pornon of $36,100,000 of bonds that were
authorized by an ordinance adopted by the C~ty Council on November 12, 1991, to provide funds,
together w~th other funds that may be available, for the following purposes:
School projects, 1nclud~ng planmng, design, construction, renovation, site
acqmslt~on, expansion, eqmpplng, and furmsNng of schools and related
facd~tles ................................................ $ 9,060,000
Engtneenng and highway projects, including s~te acqms~tion and improve-
ments, design, planning, construction, improvement, replacement, ex-
pansion and extension of streets, h~ghways, b~keways, and brtdges .... 20,894,026
Drainage projects, and out fall improvements, including channel ~mprove-
ments and pumping stations ................................. 2,766,294
Braiding projects, including design, planning, construction, improvement,
renovation, expansion, eqmpp~ng, and furmsh~ng of a Beach Borough
Service Center, other mumc~pal offices, fire and rescue stations, courts,
storage and other facdmes ............................... 1,596,810
Parks and recreation projects, ~ncludlng new athletic fields and park faclh-
t~es, upgrading emst~ng athletic fields, renovating tenms courts, park
improvements, storage, and other fac~ht~es .................... 1,782,870
Total ................................................. $36,100,000
After this sale, the City w~ll have an authorized but umssued balance of $27,040,000 remmmng from
the 1991 Charter Bonds.
$9,645,000 of the Series 1993-A Bonds represent a portion of $41,300,000 of bonds that were
authorized by an ordinance adopted by the C~ty Council on November 24, 1992, to provide funds,
together w~th other funds that may be avmlable, for the follow~ng purposes'
School projects, ~nclud~ng planmng, design, construction, renovanon, ex-
pansion, equipping, and furmshlng of schools and related faclht~es . .. $40,545,232
Bmld~ng projects, 1nclud~ng design, planning, construction, ~mprovements,
renovation, expansion, eqmpp~ng, and furmsh~ng of courts, I~branes,
storage, and other facd~t~es ............................... 754,768
Total .............................................. $41,300,000
After th~s sale, the C~ty wdl have an authorized but umssued balance of $31,655,000 remalmng from
the 1992 Charter Bonds
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 8 SESS. 345 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 18.50.30 1993
/brl/304/team3/offlclrept/3789-77566/pgs
PLAN OF REFUNDING
Upon delivery of the Bonds, the City will enter into an Escrow Deposit Agreement with Bankers
Trust Co., as Escrow Agent (the "Escrow Agent"). The Escrow Deposit Agreement creates an
irrevocable Escrow Fund, which is to be held by the Escrow Agent and is to be applied solely to the
payment of the Refunded Bonds. The City will deposit the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds and other
avadable funds wlth the Escrow Agent for deposit in the Escrow Fund ~n an amount which wdl be
Invested, at the direction of the City, in direct obligations of the Umted States of America ("Govern-
ment Securities") matunng ~n amounts and beanng interest at rates sufficient without relnvestment (l)
to pay when due the interest on the refunded Bonds through the first day in which they may be redeemed
at the option of the City, (il) to pay the principal of the Refunded Bonds at their stated redemption dates,
and (nl) to pay the redemption prices of the Refunded Bonds at redemption prices equal to the
respective principal amounts of the Refunded Bonds to be redeemed, plus Interest accrued and unpaid
to such redemption date, plus the applicable premium. The Government Securities will be purchased
from the Treasury Department of the United States of America or ~n the open market at ~nterest rates
which will cause the yield thereon, computed in accordance with the provisions of Section 148 of the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and applicable regulations thereunder, not
to exceed the yield permitted by such Code. The Escrow Fund, including the interest earnings on the
Government Securities, is pledged solely for the benefit of the holders of the Refunded Bonds.
The Refunded Bonds have been irrevocably designated for redemption in accordance with the
follow~ng chart and provision has been made in the Escrow Deposit Agreement for the giving of notice
of such redemption. - -
The following Bonds (the "Refunded Bonds") will be redeemed on thmr respective earhest
redemption dates with the proceeds of the 1993 Refunding Bonds
Matunhes being Principal
Refunded Amount to Redemption
Issue (years Inclusive) be Refunded Date
General Obhgat~on Refunding Bonds,
Ser~es of 1985 ..... 1996 and 1997 $ 6,930,000 December 1, 1995
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1986 1997-2006 24,390,000 May 1, 1996
General Obligation Water and Sewer B~ds,
Series of 1986 ........... 1997-2006 3,940,000 May 1, 1996
General Obhgatlon Public Improvement Refunding
Bonds, Series of 1986 .............. 1998-2000, 2004 14,700,000 July 15, 1996
General Obligation Water and Sewer Refunding
Bonds, Series of 1986 ......... 1998-2000, 2004 4,335,000 July 15, 1996
General Obligation Pubhc Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1987 ............... 1998-2000 7,230,000 May 1, 1997
General Obhgation Pub'hc Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1988A .............. 1999-2008 20,960,000 May 1, 1998
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1989A ...... 2000-2009 20,100,000 October 1, 1999
General Obligation Public Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1990A ........ 2004-2010 14,350,000 June 1, 2000
General Obligation Water and Sewer Bonds,
Series of 1991A ................. 2006-2011 11,940,000 March 1, 2001
General Obligation Pubhc Improvement Bonds,
Series of 1991C ................. 2008-2011 9,850,000 August 1, 2001
The C~ty w~ll realize a reduction of $ from its aggregate debt service requirements due to the
refunding. The present value savings is estimated to be , or % of the par amount of the refunding
bonds.
JOBNAME: Va. Beach O.S. PAGE: 9 SESS. 343 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 18.50.30 1993
/brl/304/team3/offmlrept/3789-77566/pgs
I
SOURCES OF FUNDS
Bond Proceeds ................... $
Cash Contnbunon ...........
Accrued Interest .................
Total Sources of Funds ......... $
USE OF FUNDS
Cost of Government Securities to fund
Escrow Fund ............... $
Issuance Expenses ................
Underwriters' Discount ..........
Accrued Interest ................
Total Uses of Funds .......... $
BONDHOLDERS' REMEDIES IN THE EVENT OF DEFAULT
Section 15.1-227.61 of the Code of V~rglma of 1950, as amended, provides that upon affidawt filed
with the Governor by any holder of or paying agent for a general obligation bond in default as to
payment of pnnc~pal, premium, or interest, the Governor shall conduct a summary ~nvest~gatlon to h~s
satmfactlon and, if satisfied that such default has occurred, the Governor shall order the State
Comptroller to withhold all funds appropriated and payable by the Commonwealth to the poht~cal
subdivision so in default and apply such funds to payment of the defaulted pnnc~pal, premium, and
~nterest.
Section 15 1-227 61 also provides for notme to the registered owners of such Bonds of the default
and the avallablhty of withheld funds. The State Comptroller advises that to date no order to w~thhold
funds pursuant to Section 15.1-227.61 or Its predecessor, Section 15.1-225, has ever been issued.
Although Section 15.1-227.61 or xts predecessor, Section 15.1-225, has not been approved by a V~rg;ma
Court, the Attorney General of Virg~ma has ruled that appropriated funds may be withheld by the
Commonwealth pursuant to that section. In the fiscal year ended June 30, 1992, the Commonwealth
approprmted $196,516,773 to the City of which $73,346,815 was deposited in the City's General Fund.
Neither the Bonds nor the proceedings w~th respect thereto specifically provide any remedies that
would be available to Bondholders if the C~ty defaults in the payment of principal, premium, ~f any, or
Interest thereon, nor do they contmn any provision for the appointment of a trustee to protect and
enforce the interests of the bondholders upon the occurrence of such a default. Upon any default ~n the
payment of pnnclpal, premium, if any, or interest, a Bondholder may, among other things, seek a writ
of mandamus from an appropriate court reqmrlng the City Council to levy and collect taxes as described
in the Section "Descript~on of the Bonds--Security." The mandamus remedy, however, may be
impracticable and difficult to enforce. Furthermore, the right to levy and collect taxes to enforce
payment of the Bonds may be limited by bankruptcy, ~nsolvency, reorganization, moratorium and
similar laws and equitable principles, which may hm~t the specific enforcement of certain remedies.
Chapter 9 of the United States Bankruptcy Code (the "Bankruptcy Code") permits a mumclpahty such
as the C~ty, if insolvent or otherwise unable to pay its debts as they become due, to file a voluntary petition
for the adjustment of debts provided that such municipality is "generally authorized to be a debtor under
[Chapter 9] by State law, or by a governmental officer or organization empowered by State law to authorize
such entity to be a debtor under such chapter "Bankruptcy Code, §109(c)(2) Current Virginia statutes do
not expressly authorize the City or munlc~pahties generally to file under Chapter 9 It is unclear, however,
whether powers otherwise conferred by Virginia law upon the City, municipalities generally, or govern-
mental officers might provide "general authorization" for filing of a Chapter 9 petition by the City. Chapter
9 does not authorize the fihng of ~nvoluntary petitions against municipalities such as the City
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAGE: 10 SESS. 343 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 18:50.30 1993
/br 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Bankruptcy proceedings by the C~ty could have adverse effects on the Bondholders, ~nclud~ng (1)
delay ~n the enforcement of their remedies, (2) subordination of their claims to claims of those supplying
goods and services to the City after the initiation of bankruptcy proceedings, and to the admimstratlve
expenses of bankruptcy proceedings, and (3) imposition without their consent of a reorgamzat~on plan
reducing or delaying payment of the Bonds. The Bankruptcy Code contains prowslons ~ntended to
ensure that, ~n any reorgamzat~on plan not accepted by at least a majority of a class of creditors such
as the holders of general obhgatlon bonds, such creditors will have the benefit of their original claim or
the "indubitable eqmvalent" thereof, although such plan may not provide for payment of the Bonds m
full The effect of these and other provls~ons of the Bankruptcy Code cannot be predicted and may be
s~gmficantly affected by judicial ~nterpretatlon.
APPROVAL OF LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
Certmn legal matters relating to the authorization and validity of the Bonds will be subject to the
approving opinion of Hunton & Wflhams, Richmond, Vlrg~ma, Bond Counsel, which will be furmshed
at the expense of the City upon dehvery of the Bonds (the "Bond Opinion"). The Bond Oplmon will be
hm~ted to matters relating to authorization and validity of the Bonds and to the tax-exempt status of
~nterest thereon. See the Section "Opimon of Bond Counsel" below. Bond Counsel has not been
engaged to ~nvestlgate the financial resources of the C~ty or its ability to provide for payment of the
Bonds, and the Bond Opinion w~ll make no statement as to such matters or as to the accuracy or
completeness of this Officml Statement or any other information that may have been relied on by anyone
in making the decls~on to purchase Bond_s. The form of the proposed Bond Op~mon for the Bonds ~s
found in Appendix B to th~s Officlal Statement.
Opinion of Bond Counsel
In the opinion of Bond Counsel, under emst~ng law, ~nterest on the Bonds, (1) will not be ~ncluded
in gross ~ncome for Federal income tax purposes, (2) w~ll not be an ~tem of tax preference for purposes
of the Federal alternative m~mmum ~ncome tax imposed on individuals and corporations; however, w~th
respect to corporations (as defined for Federal ~ncome tax purposes) subject to alternative m~mmum
income tax, such ~nterest ~s taken ~nto account in determining adjusted current earmngs for purposes of
computing such tax, and (3) wall be exempt from income taxation by the Commonwealth of V~rg~ma. No
other opinion ~s expressed by Bond Counsel regarding the tax consequences of the ownership of or the
receipt or accrual of ~nterest on the Bonds.
Bond Counsel's optnion will be g~ven ~n rehance upon certfficatlons by representatives of the C~ty
as to certain facts relevant to both the opinion and reqmrements of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986,
as amended, (the "Code"). The C~ty has covenanted to comply w~th the provisions of the Code
regarding, among other matters, the use, expenditure and investment of the proceeds of the Bonds and
the timely payment to the United States of any arbitrage rebate amounts with respect to the Bonds.
Fmlure by the City to comply with such covenants could cause interest on the Bonds to be included in
gross income for Federal ~ncome tax purposes retroactively to their date of issue.
Other Tax Matters
In addition to the matters addressed above, prospective purchasers of the Bonds should be aware
that the ownership of tax-exempt obhgat~ons may result ~n collateral Federal ~ncome tax consequences
to certmn taxpayers, including without hm~tation, financ;al ~nst~tutlons, property and casualty insurance
companies, S corporat;ons, foreign corporations subject to the branch profits tax, corporations subject
to the environmental tax, recipients of Soc:al Security or Rmlroad Retirement benefits and taxpayers
who may be deemed to have ~ncurred or continued ~ndebtedness to purchase or carry tax-exempt
obhgat~ons. Prospective purchasers of the Bonds should consult thexr tax adwsors as to the applicability
and ~mpact of such consequences.
Prospective purchasers of the Bonds should consult their own tax advisors as to the status of
interest on the Bonds under the tax laws of any state other than V:rglnla.
10
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 11 SESS 340 OUTPU'I Mon Mar 29 1~5.50.3u 19y5
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
LITIGATION
According to the City Attorney, there is no htlgatlon of any klnd now pending or, to the best of h~s
information, knowledge and belief, threatened to restrain or enjoin the Issuance or delivery of the Bonds
or In any manner questioning the proceedings and authority under which the Bonds are issued or
affecting the abdlty of the City to levy or collect ad valorem taxes w~thout hm~tat~on as to rate or amount
for the payment of the principal of, premium, if any, or interest on the Bonds.
General Fund
The City is a named defendant ~n various lmgatlon matters filed by parries concerning alleged
personal injuries, property damage and other causes of action which are being vigorously defended by
the City. In the opimon of the City Attorney, none of the pending htlgatIon, if decided adversely to the
City, would materially affect the C~ty's financial position.
Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund
The City has been involved ~n htlgat~on for more than e~ght years, as various parties in Vlrglma and
the State of North Carohna have opposed the City's efforts to construct the Lake Gaston Project. The
C~ty Counc~l has reaffirmed ~ts commitment to the Lake Gaston Project as the most effective means of
provldlng the necessary supply of water for the City's continued welfare, growth and prosperity. The
C~ty ~s committed to pursmng wgorously all ht~gat~on necessary to complete the Lake Gaston ProJect
at the earliest practicable date. - -
(a) In January, 1984, the City filed suit in the United States District Court for the Eastern D~stnct
of Virginia, later transferred to the Eastern District of North Carolina, seeking a declaratory judgment
that its withdrawals from Lake Gaston will not violate the riparian rights of certain owners of property
on the Roanoke River The suit was stayed on September 12, 1991, pending the approval of the Federal
Energy Regulatory Commission ("FERC") of the conveyance of easements from Vlrgima Power to the
City for construction, operation and maintenance of an intake facility.
(b) In November, 1988, the Board of Supervisors of Mecklenburg County, Virginia, filed stat in
Mecklenburg County Circuit Court agmnst the C~ty, and Hahfax County subsequently intervened as
party plmntlff, seeking a declaration that consent of the Boards of Supervisors for use bf the storage
capacity of the John H. Kerr Reservoir is required under V~rglma's Local Consent Law. It is the
position of Mecklenburg and Halifax Counties that consent to the project is required solely because the
City has purchased storage capacity in Kerr Reservoir, which abuts the two counties, and which the
City will use on occasion to mitigate the effects of its w~thdrawals on downstream flows during certain
low flow periods. No portion of the p~pellne or its appurtenant faclht~es ~s located in either county.
The case was submitted to the court on cross motions for summary judgment, and on July 6, 1992,
the Mecklenburg County C~rcult Court ruled in favor of the Plaintiff. The City of Virginia Beach has
appealed this decision to the Supreme Court of Virglma.
In the lawsuit described in paragraph (e), below, the Boards of Supervisors of Mecklenburg and
Hahfax Counties have alleged that the General Assembly granted rehef to V~rg~ma Beach on the merits
of the lawsmt described in this paragraph (b).
(c) The City awarded two contracts to begin construction of the Lake Gaston pipeline in the
summer of 1990. Shortly thereafter, the Umted States Dlstrmt Court for the Eastern District of North
Carohna enjoined actual construction of any phase of the project untd further order of the Court or untd
FERC approves an apphcat~on of Virginia Power for permlss~on to convey certain easements to the City
for the construction, operation and mmntenance of the project's ~ntake facd~ty. On December 6, 1991,
the Umted States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Clrcmt modified the ~njunctlon to permit construction
of two "critical path" elements of the project, so named because their construction w~ll expedite the
completion of the remmnder of the project by apprommately fifteen to e~ghteen months.
11
JOBNAME 'va Beach O 5 PAOE 12 5E5~ 54~ OUTPU~I
/br l/304/team3/off~clrept/3789- 77566/pgs
The Court of Appeals demed the petition for reheanng filed by the State of North Carohna on
December 20, 1991, and North Carohna d~d not pursue an appeal. In keeping w~th the December 6,
1991, order of the Court of Appeals, construction has begun on the two Cntlcal path elements of the
project.
(d) On May 2, 1991, the National Oceamc and Atmospheric Adm~mstrat~on ("NOAA") ruled that
the Coastal Zone Management Act authorized the State of North Carohna to review the Lake Gaston
Project for consistency with its Coastal Zone Management Plan in connection w~th the Vtrglma Power
apphcat~on before the Federal Energy Regulatory Commlss~on. On September 9, 1991, North Carohna
filed ~ts objecnon to the project, claiming that the w~thdrawal of water from Lake Gaston would be
~ncons~stent w~th ~ts Coastal Zone Management Plan. The C~ty and Virg~ma Power appealed the North
Carohna object~on to the Umted States Secretary of Commerce.
On December 3, 1992, the Secretary of Commerce ruled In favor of the City and terminated the
proceedings, finding that North Carohna lacked authority to object to the consistency certificate, and
that the object~on was ~mproperly lodged. The State of North Carolina has asked the Secretary of
Commerce to reconsider that dems~on.
(e) On March 12, 1993, the Boards of Supervisors of Mecklenburg and Hahfax Counties filed suit
~n Mecklenburg County C~rcmt Court agmnst the C~ty, seeking a declaratory judgment that Chapter 812,
1992 V~rg~ma Acts of Assembly, whmh allocates to the C~ty 60 mdhon gallons a day of water from Lake
Gaston, wolates the V~rg~ma Constttution. In the op~mon of counsel, the legislative allocat~on ~n
Chapter 812 ~s not necessary for the Cut5' to w~thdraw water from-Lake Gaston and therefore the
outcome of the suit will have no effect upon the project
VERIFICATION
Deloitte & Touche, certified pubhc accountants and consultants, will verify the anthmanc accuracy
of certain mathemancal computations (a) to the sufficiency of the momes and investments deposited m
the Escrow Fund 0) to pay, when due, the interest on the Refunded Bonds from their respecnve
prewous interest payment dates to thmr respective earhest redemption dates, (n) to pay the principal of
the Refunded Bonds at thmr stated redempnon dates, and (m) to pay the redemption prices of the
Refunded Bonds at redempnon prices equal to the respective pnnmpal amounts of the Refunded Bonds
to be redeemed, plus interest accrued and unpmd to such redemptmn date, plus the apphcable premmm
based on mformat~on provided by the Underwriters and interpretations provided by Bond Counsel, (b)
as to the yields on the Bonds and the Refunded Bonds and on the Government Securities to be
purchased w~th the proceeds of the sale of the Bonds and the City's cash contribution and deposited ~n
the Escrow Fund pursuant to the terms of the Escrow Deposit Agreement (see "Plan of Refunding"
herren) rehed upon by Bond Counsel to support ~ts op~mon that ~nterest on the Bonds will not be
~ncluded in gross ~ncome for federal ~ncome tax purposes
CERTIFICATES OF CITY OFFICIALS
Concurrently with the dehvery of the Bonds, the City will furnish (1) a cernficate dated the date of
dehvery of the Bonds s~gned by the officers who s~gn the Bonds and stating that no htigat~on is then pending
or, to their knowledge, threatened to restrain or enjoin the issuance or delivery of the Bonds or the levy or
collection of taxes to pay pnnc~pal, premium or ~nterest thereon, or ~n any manner quest~omng the
proceedings and authority under which the Bonds are ~ssued, and (2) a certificate dated the date of the
dehvery of the Bonds, s~gned by the appropriate City officials and stating that the descriptions and
statements ~n th~s Official Statement (except ~n the secnon enntled "Lmganon" and ~n the column "Imtml
Y~eld/Pnce" on the cover) on the date of th~s Official Statement and on the date of dehvery of the Bonds
were and are true and correct ~n all material respects, d~d not and do not contmn an untrue statement of
material fact or omit to state a material fact reqmred to be stated thereto or necessary to make such
descnpnons and statements, in the light of the circumstances under which they were made, not misleading,
and that no material adverse change has occurred ~n the financial condlt~on of the City between the date of
this Officml Statement and the date of dehvery of the Bonds other than as contemplated ~n th~s Official
12
I
JOBNAME Va Beach O S. PAGE 13 SESS' 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18 50 3(} 1993
/br 1/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/pgs
Statement. Such certificates wdl also state, however, that such C~ty officials d~d not ~ndependently verify the
information ~ndlcated in this Official Statement as having been obtmned or derived from sources other than
the C~ty and its officers but that they have no reason to believe that such information is not accurate,
provided that such certificates w~ll not ~nclude consideration of ~nformation supphed by, or that should have
been supphed by, the successful bidder on the Bonds.
The C~ty Attorney will also furmsh concurrently w~th the dehvery of the Bonds a certzficate dated
the date of delivery of the Bonds, stating that the statements ~n the section hereto entitled "Litigation"
on the date of th~s OfficIal Statement and on the date of dehvery of the Bonds were and are true and
correct ~n all material respects and d~d not and do not contmn an untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a rnater~al fact reqmred to be stated there~n or necessary to make such statements, zn the
hght of the c~rcumstances under which they were made, not misleading.
13
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O S PAGE 14 SESS. 343 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 18 50 312 1993
/brl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789-77566/pgs
SECTION THREE: CERTAIN INFORMATION CONCERNING THE CITY
INTRODUCTION
The present C~ty of V~rgmla Beach was formed on January 1, 1963 by the merger of Princess Anne
County and the former smaller C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach. This merger created one of the largest reties ~n
the Commonwealth of V~rg~ma w~th an area of 310 square miles and 38 miles of shore hne on the Atlantm
Ocean and thc Chesapeake Bay. The City covers the entire eastern border of V~rg~ma south of the
Delmarva Peninsula and includes all of the area from the Chesapeake Bay to the North Carohna border.
The City of V~rgmm Beach now has the largest population of any mty ~n V~rgmm. As a c~ty on the
eastern seaboard, V~rgmm Beach has always been known as a resort community. However, the strength
of the C~ty's economy I~es m ~ts d~versfficat~on. Construction/real estate, light ~ndustry, wholesale and
feted sales, agriculture, four major m~htary bases, and resort and convention trade are the major aspects
of the economy. The C~ty encourages and supports th~s d~vers~ficat~on.
V~rgmla Beach is an independent, full-service city with sole local governmental taxing power wlth~n
~ts boundaries It derives ~ts governing authority from a charter granted by the General Assembly of thc
Commonwealth of V~rgmm The govermng body of the C~ty ~s the C~ty Councd, whmh formulates
polmms for the administration of the C~ty. The current charter provides for a Councd-Manager form of
government
There ~s no overlapping debt or tatung powers w~th other poht~cal subdivisions. The water and
sewage systems are operated on a self-support~ng bas~s. -
The Executive Offices are located at the Municipal Center, Virg~ma Beach, Vlrg~ma, 23456, (804)
427-4242 The telephone number for the Finance Department is (804) 427-4681
CERTAIN ELECTED OFFICIALS AND
ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF MEMBERS
The City operates under the Councd-Manager form of government as established by ~ts Charter.
There is an ll-membel City Council vested with local legislative powers. Each member of the C~ty
Councd is elected on an "at large" basis; however, seven seats must be filled by ~nd~v~duals who reside
~n the seven respective boroughs of the City. There ns no borough residency reqmrement for the
remmnlng four seats. The Mayor ~s elected by the voters and occupies one of these four seats. All
members of the Council are elected for terms of four years, with the elect~ons being held ~n even/odd
years for apprommately half the seats. The Council elects a V~ce-Mayor from among ~ts members.
The City Manager ~s the admlmstratlve head of the mumc~pal government and carries out the
pollcms of the City Council. The C~ty Manager ~s appointed by the C~ty Councd and serves at the
pleasure of the Counc~l
There ~s an l 1-member School Board appointed by the C~ty Council. The School Board exercises
all the powers conferred and performs all the duties ~mposed upon them by general law L~ke the C~ty
Council, seven seats must be filled on the School Board by ~nd~wduais who reside ~n the seven
respective boroughs of the City. The four additional members of the School Board are appointed from
the C~ty at large. All appointments are made for a period of three years.
The City Council also appoints members to certmn boards, commissions, and authorities as ~t
deems necessary to the operation of the C~ty
Elected Officials
Meye,-a E Oberndo~f, ,~4ayor
Civic leader and former school teacher, employed as a Radio Broadcaster. Elected to City Councd
in 1976. Re-elected in 1980 and 1984. F~rst elected Mayor on July 1, 1988 and re-elected ~n 1992. Served
as Chairman of the Southeastern V~rglma Planmng District Commission from 1982 through 1984.
Bachelor of Science degree in Elementary Education from Old Dominion University
14
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S PAGE 15 SESS 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 lb 50 30 1993
3~* r 1/304/te a m 3/off~ cl rept/3789 - 77566/pgs
Wtlllam D. Sessoms, Jr, Vice Mayor
Vice President of Central Fldehty Bank. Elected to C~ty Council in 1988 to serve the two remmmng
years of an unexpired term, re-elected ~n 1990. Bachelor of Science degree m Bus~ness Adm~mstratmn
and Management from Vlrgima Commonwealth Umvers~ty.
John A Baum, Councdman
Farmer w~th an Agricultural Engmeenng degree from V~rglma Polytechmc Institute and State
Umversgy. Elected to C~ty Council m 1972, re-elected in 1976, 1980, 1984, 1988 and 1992.
James W Brazter, Jr, Counctlman
Virginia Beach Pohce Officer. Elected to City Council in 1990. Graduate of Old Dom~mon
University w~th a degree ~n law enforcement. Passed the Vlrglma Bar Exam ~n 1976.
Robert W Clyburn, Councdman
Pharmacist Elected to C~ty Council ~n 1990. Graduate of the School of Pharmacy at the Medmal
College of V~rg~ma/V~rg~ma Commonwealth Univers~ty.
Louts R Jones, Counctlman
Owner and operator of Hollomon-Brown Funeral Homes, Inc. Elected to C~ty Council ~n 1982 and
served as Mayor from 1982 to 1984. Re-elected to Council ~n 1990. Bachelor of Sctence degree ~n
Bustness Adm~mstrat~on from the Collegg of Wilham and Mary, Norfolk Division (now Old Domimon
University).
Paul J Lantelgne, Councilman
V~rgtma Beach Pohce Officer. Elected to C~ty Council ~n 1990. Bachelor of Science degree ~n
Criminology from St Leo College
Nancy K Parker, Councdwoman
Secretary/Treasurer of Parker Pools, Inc Former teacher ~n the V~rg~ma Beach Pubhc School
System 1968 to 1969 and 1971. Elected to the C~ty Council ~n 1986, re-elected in 1990. Bachelor of
Science degree m Education from Old Dom~mon Umvers~ty.
Robert K Dean, Counctlman
C~v~c leader and tormer retail manager for J.C. Penney Company, Inc. Elected to C~ty Council ~n
1992 Attended Un~ver,,~ty of Florida.
Ltnwood 0 Branch, III, Counctlman
Owner/Manager South Shore Resort Inn Elected to C~ty Council m 1992 Bachelor of Arts degree
~n Psychology, Randolph-Macon College.
John D. Moss, Counctlman
D~rector, Total Force Manpower programming and analys~s, Umted States Navy. Elected to C~ty
Council ~n 1986, re-elected in 1992. Bachelor of Arts in Poht~cal Science from V~rg~ma Polytechnic
Institute and Master of Arts ~n Pubhc Adm~mstrat~on from Old Domimon Umvers~ty.
Appointed Officials
James K Spore, Ctty Manager since November 25, 1991
Previously served as C~ty Manager of Garland, Texas (1985 to 1991) and Burnsvfile, Minnesota
(1981 to 1985). Also served as the D~rector of Commumty Development for the C~ty of Lakewood,
Colorado (1976 to 1981) and the C~ty of Elgin, Ilhnms (1970 to 1976). Master of Pubhc Adm~mstrat~on,
15
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S. PAGE 16 SESS 343 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 llg.50 30 1993
/b r 1/304/team 3/offlcirept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
UnIversity of Colorado, Boulder, Master of Urban Plann~ng, University of Illinois, Urbana, Bachelor of
Urban Planning, University of Ilhno~s, Urbana.
C Oral Lambert, ChtefofStaffsmceJuly 1, 1991
PrevIously served as D~rector of Public Works for thc City of Vlrglma Beach from 1976 to 1991.
Also served the City of Virginia Beach as D~rector of General Services from 1967 to 1976 Attended Old
Dominion University and Tidewater Community College.
Leshe L. Ltlley, City Attorney since October 31, 1989
Previously Assistant City Attorney for the City of Virginia Beach from 1987 to 1989. Employed as
assocmte wxth the law firm of Taylor, Walker & Adams, P.C., from 1983 to 1987. Served as Assistant
Commonwealth's Attorney for the City of Virginia Beach from 1979 to 1983. Served as Assistant to the
City Manager for Intergovernmental Relations for the City of Virginia Beach from 1974 to 1976. Served
as Budget Officer for the City of V~rgima Beach from 1972 to 1974. Bachelor of Science Degree in
Bus~ness Administration from Umvers~ty of Richmond, Virginia (1971) and Master of Business
Admlnlstrat~on from College of Wflham & Mary (1972), and Juns Doctor Degree from T. C Williams
School of Law, University of Richmond, Virginia (1978).
Ruth Hodges Srntth, Ct02 Clerk smce January 1, 1979
Certified Mumclpal Clerk, Bachelor of Arts degree in Admimstrat~on from Potomac State College
of West Virginia University ~ -
Patrlcta ,4 Phtlhps, Director of Finance since ,4prtl 16, 1992
Previously served as Director of the Office of Research and Strategic Analysis from 1975 to 1992.
Also served as a public accountant for Coopers and Lybrand from 1970 through 1975. Bachelors of
Science In Business Administration, Magna Cum Laude, Old Dominion University. Master ~n Bus~ness
Administration, Old Domimon Umversity. Certified Public Accountant since 1972.
Ed~,,a~ Dean Block, Dt~ector of Management and Budget since July 1, 1992
Previously served as Assistant C~ty Manager for Analysis Evaluation from 1985 to 1991 and Deputy
City Manager/Administrative Services for the City of Tallahassee, Florida from 1980 to 1984. Also
served as Assistant to the City Manager/Management Services for the City of Tallahassee from 1979 to
1980, and D~rector of the Office of Management and Budget for the City of Tallahassee from 1975 to
1979 Bachelor of Arts degree m History from California State Umvers~ty m Long Beach, and a Masters
degree m Administration from George Washxngton University m Washington, D.C.
GOVERNMENTAL SERVICES AND FACILITIES
The C~ty provides general governmental services for its citizens including police and fire protection,
collection and disposal of refuse, water and sewer services, parks and recreation, hbrar~es/culture,
health and social services, and maintenance of streets and highways. Other services provided by the
City, and which receive partial funding from the State, include public education in grades k~ndergarten
through twelfth, and certain techmcal and specml education, mental health assistance, agrmultural
services, and judicial activities.
The City's maln municipal complex includes two general administrative buildings, a school
adm~mstrat~on braiding, a pubhc safety building, a Clty jail, and a judicial complex. In close proximity
are a city garage complex and a highway maintenance facility There are four police precincts, 18 fire
stations, one fire training center, one central library along with five area hbrarles, over 65 city parks, and
73 elementary and secondary schools located throughout the City
Some of the other major facilities provided by the City include a convention center, the Vlrg~ma
Marine Science Museum, a civic dome facility, three recreational centers, a tennis complex, three
municipal golf courses, and a farmers' produce market
16
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S. PAGE 17 SESS 343 OUTPU'I
/b r 1/304/t e am3/ofhcl rept/3789 - 77566/pgs
I
Mon Mar 29 lb 50 3~ 19?3
The C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach provldes a comprehensive range of pubhc services charactensnc of ~ts
pos~non as the most populous mty ~n the Commonwealth of V~rg~ma.
OVERVIEW OF GOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION AND SELECTED FUNCTIONS
In the summer of 1991, the C~ty Councd approved a C~ty government orgamzat~on plan developed
by thc C~ty Manager The new orgamzat~on consists of three components, a Management Leadership
Team, five teams of departments, and a team support group consisting of the Department of
Management and Budget and the Pubhc Informanon Office. The Management Leadership Team
consists of the c~ty manager, the chief of staff, a representative from each of the five department teams,
whmh are called team leaders, and other staff as needed. The Management Leadership Team acts as the
focus group for issue resolunon, ~dent~fies and manages the C~ty's strategic plan, d~rects quahty
management and producnv~ty ~mprovement, and supports the overall team structure of the orgamza-
t~on
Each of the C~ty Departments are grouped ~nto one of the following five teams: Commumty
Development and Revitalization, Internal Services, L~brary, Recreanon and Cultural, Human Services,
and Pubhc Safety A team leader ~s chosen for each group from emst~ng C~ty staff
The changes were implemented to provide a bas~s for ~mproved customer service and a platform for
total quality management and an opportumty for greater management participation and collaboration ~n
a team environment. Presented ~n the following pages ~s an orgamzanon chart for the C~ty, a description
of the major c~ty appointed officials, and a-description of selected departments contmned w~th~n each of
the five teams
17
/~ri/3~)-~/t~m3/o£fic~r;pt/3789- 7756~/pgs
18
JOBNAME Va Beach O S PAGE 19 SESS 343 OUTPUq
/br l/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
Mon Mar 29 lb 50 30 1993
CERTAIN CITY COUNCIL APPOINTEES
The C~ty Manager ,s responsible for planmng, orgamz~ng, d~rectmg, and coordinating all acttwt~es
of the C~ty. He ~s responstble for appmnt~ng and d~schargtng all Ctty employees and officers, though he
may delegate that responslb~hty to h~s subordinates. A major responslb~hty of the C~ty Manager ~s the
preparation of the annual C~ty Operating Budget
The C~ty Attorney has management, charge, and control of all legal bus~ness of the C~ty. He is chief
legal advisor to the C~ty Council, the Ctty Manager, and all City departments and agenctes. It ts his duty
to advise Councd concermng the legahty of actions by the C;ty and to represent the C~ty tn all matters
affecting ~ts ~nterest
It ts the responsibility of the Real Estate Assessor's Office to annually appraise ali real property ~n
the C~ty In addition, the Office admmtsters the Land Use Assessment Program for quahfymg farm and
forest lands and processes the Tax Exemption Program for quahfytng semor cmzens and d~sabled
persons.
The C~ty Clerk's office ts responsible for recording and maintaining all legislative documents and
actions of the C~ty Councd
DEPARTMENTAL TEAMS
Community Development and Revitalization Team
Thru team addresses the maintenance, planning, and development of the Ctty's physical and
economic infrastructure. It consists of the Departments of Pubhc Utflit~es, Public Works, Agriculture,
Planning, Housing and Nmghborhood Preservation, Economic Development, and Conventxon and
V~s~tor Development
The Department of Public Works provides engineering, traffic, highway and san~tatlon services,
oversees the operanon of the Ctty's parking lots and parking meter program, and enforces the ctty
budding code standards The Engineering Division is responsible for sub&vtston and site plan revtews
for construction projects, exclusive of public utflttles and schools; surveys, mapping; waterfront
construction, and permits Traffic Englneenng is responsible for the design, ~nstallatlon, and mainte-
nance of s~gns, street l~ghts, traffic detours due to construction, and all traffic control devines and
parking meters. The H~ghway Dwlsion is responsible for the matntenance of all public streets, bridges,
drainage systems, and s~dewalks. The Inspection division's personnel approve and tnspect all permtt
construction actlvlt~es with the City's right-of-way including lnspecnon of subdivision right-of-way
construction The Sol~d Waste Admlmstratton D~vis;on collects and disposes of the City's garbage. The
dtvtston coordinates recycling activtttes as well as related programs involving waste management such
as groundwater studies for Mt. Trashmore Park and the sale of methane gas at the Landfill II site. The
Department through ~ts Permits and Inspections D~vls~on ensures comphance with Cl.ty and/or state
building code standards with the tnspectlon of all construction In the City
The Department of Publ~c Unht~es provides water and sewer service to City residents. Its
respons~b~lttms include the Installation and maintenance of more than 2,250 miles of water and sewer
l~nes For a description of the Water and Sewer System, see, "Section Five. Water and Sewer System
Financial Results"
The Department of Agriculture provides educanonal and regulatory services in agriculture, home
economics, 4-H, and community resource development The department has three major diwstons.
Vlrg~n,a Tech extension services offers educational programs and techmcal tnformatton on agriculture
and horticulture The d~vls~on of Environmental Services provides expert Information on soft and
vegetation. The Farmer's Market provides a place for the sale of goods and products of local farmers
and craftsmen and for the provision of farm related commumty act~vtties
The Department of Planning provides policy and operational planmng support ~n the areas of
transportatIon, land use. zoning, and environmental protection and management The department ts
19
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S. PAGE 20 SESS 343 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 1~.50 30 1993
/bt 1/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/pgs
responsible for malntalmng a long-range Comprehenslve Plan which provides guidance for the physical
development of the City The department reviews subdivision plans, site plans, and land management
plans and prepares the monthly Planning Commission Agenda. Its division of Development Services
provides customer-oriented management of plan review, utlhty, right-of-way, moving and hauling
permit issuance and surety adminlstranon. The division of Environmental Management coordinates
many of the City's environmental programs and serves as a point of contact for ~nformatlon and liaison
w~th the community on environmental Issues. Zoning Code Enforcement interprets and ensures
compliance w~th the City zoning ordinance and other secnons of the City Code related to land use.
The Department of Housing and Neighborhood Preservation designs programs involving capital
~mprovements, new construction, and rehabilitation to revitalize areas. The department administers the
State program, which subsidizes rent up to 70 percent for quahfied tenants and the Urban Preservation
and Infill Program, which provides permanent mortgage financing to qualified persons in specified areas.
The Office ~s funded entirely by the Federal government.
The Economic Development Department promotes and encourages the economic growth and
diversity of the City. The Department works with the V~rglma Beach Development Authority to attract
business and industry to V~rgmla Beach and to develop sites for new or expanding businesses in the
City's Business/Industrial Parks. The Department was named one of the top ten development
organizations in the nat~on for 1990 by Site Selection and Industrial Development magazine.
In 1988 the Tourist Development and Convention Promotion dxv~s~ons of the Economic Develop-
ment Department were reorganized and formed a new department named the Convention and Visitor
Development Department. This department coordinates the advertising and promotion of tourist
act~vmes and is responsible for bringing meetings, conferences, and conventions of large groups to
Virginia Beach. The department operates a V~s~tor Information Center, the large convennon center
known as the Pavilion, and a civic center known as the Dome. Over 2.5 million tourists and
conventloneers vxsited Virginia Beach in calendar year 1991 spending an estimated $500 mflllon and
generating over $40 million in tax revenues.
Internal Services Team
The internal servmes team addresses activities essential to the internal management of the
organization and operational support of other team areas. Falling under this team are General Services,
Inlormat~on Technology (formally Data Processing), Finance, Human Resources, and Video Services.
In addition, the Real Estate Assessor, Treasurer, Commissioner of Revenue, C~ty Clerk, City Attorney,
and General Registrar serve on this team.
The Department of Finance oversees the financial affairs of the City and ensures the financial
integrity of City operations Departmental services include payment of all City and School Board bills;
maintenance of accounting records, payment of all C~ty employees and administration of employee
benefits, license tax audits of businesses; provision of insurance and self-insurance; and mmntenance of
the City's fixed assets inventory; procurement of all equipment, materials, and services for all City
agencies, and coordmanon and admlnlstratlon of the City's long-term debt program.
The Department of Human Resources ~s responsible for developing and managing the City's
personnel management programs to ensure an effective delivery of services by the workforce. The
Department provides services in applicant counseling, recruitment, testing, volunteer referrals, policy
~nterpretations, fnnge benefits, grievance procedures, disciplinary action, career counsehng, profes-
sional development, compensation, employee safety, and occupatlonal health services.
The function of the Department of Information Technology ~s the processing and electronic storage
of information used in the daily bus~ness of the City The Department collects, organizes and
d~ssem~nates information to all City departments, City agencies, and the Public School system. It also
provides consulting services m related areas to mumctpal users to assist them m formulating goals,
objectives and long-range plans
20
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 21 SESS 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18 5ti 3(~ 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
The Department of General Services provides support functions for C~ty departments General
Servmes consists of five divisions' Automotive Services, Budding Maintenance, Landscape Services,
and Pnnt~ng and D~stnbut~on.
Video Services manages school and C~ty v~deo production services and facd~nes. The department
prowdes ~nformatlon to the community on mumclpal government and the pubhc school system through
dally cablecastlng of programs on the City's Municipal Cable Access Televlslon Statlon, Channels 28
and 29
The Office of the General Registrar is responsible for prov~ding an accessible and fmr means by
which City residents can register and vote. Ma~ntmmng 250,000 records, the Office makes approprmte
changes and/or deletions as requlred by law The number of registered voters was approxlmately
147,000 during fiscal year 1992
Library, Recreation, and Cultural Team
Th~s team addresses the ~nterrelated systems that contribute to quality of life and ~ndiv~dual and
group development, such as libraries, recreational programs, museums, arts and humanities and h~storic
preservation. Pubhc Libraries, the new department of Museums, and Parks and Recreatton all belong
to this team
The Department of Museums combines the Marine Science Museum, the Francis Land House, the
deWltt Cottage and the Arts and Humanities Comm~ssion. The V~rgima Marine Science Museum
opened in June 1986 The 41,500 square f6ot museum ~s designed to ~ffcrease the pubI~c's knowledge of
thc nature and needs of Virginia's marine environment, to servc as a marine educational facility for
Vlrg~ma's school d~v~s~ons, and to be a revenue producing entity and tourist attraction for the City and
State Attendance during fiscal year 1992 was approximately 325,000. Plans are underway for a
proposed $25 7 milhon dollar expansion, whlch will nearly triple the enclosed square footage. Wlth
these expansions, museum attendance is projected to ~ncrease by 85 percent. The purpose of the Francis
Land House is to collect, preserve and present historically accurate material reflecting hfe in e~ghteenth
century Pnncess Anne County. The house ~s also used for official C~ty receptions. Apprommately
1(),000 v~s~tors tour the house each year
The Arts and Humanmes Commiss~on serves in an adwsory capacity to City Council on matters
relating to the Arts. The Commission adm~msters pubhc funds to arts orgamzat~ons and monitors grants
to assume fiscal responslbdlty
The deWitt Cottage, built in 1895, is the last beach cottage on the resort oceanfront and ~s listed in
the National Historic Register The V~rg~ma Beach Foundation and the C~ty have joined forces to
acquire and renovate the cottage The renovation project, ~ncluding raising the necessary funds and
overseeing the rebuilding, wdl be the respons~bdlty of the Foundation, which w~ll eventually transfer the
property to the C~ty The Back Bay Wild Fowl Gudd will operate the building as a museum and arts
center
The Department of Pubhc Libraries manages five area hbrar~es, along w~th a central hbrary, that
provides services lncludlng: a Reference Division ~ncludlng a Mumc~pal Reference section and a Law
L~brary, Outreach Services, Including an Extension Division utilizing the Bookmobde, the Mad-A-Book
Program, and Special Services for the Bhnd, a Chddren's Dlws~on, and a Technical Services D~vls~on.
During 1990, the C~ty completed the construction of the Kempsvdle Library. The new hbrary has a total
area of 22,000 square feet, part of a planned total hbrary system of 130,475 square feet.
The Department of Parks and Recreation conducts a wide range of h~gh quahty, year-round leisure
t~me programs that are responsive to the physical, mental, and cultural needs of the citizens of Vlrglma
Beach The Department consists of the Parks D~ws~on and the Recreatlon D~vlslon. In fiscal year 1991,
the Department generated revenues of over $4.5 m~lhon through ~ts various programs and activities.
The Parks D~v~slon plans, acqmres, constructs, and mmntains parks, playgrounds, public beaches,
golf courses, and open spaces The Recreation D~v~slon has responslb~htles ~n the following areas:
21
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAOE. 22 SESS. 343 OU~IPU] Mon Mar 29 115.50.30 1993
/brl/304/team3/offmlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
providing recreation and leisure services to adults, senior citizens, and youths, organizing well-rounded
athletic program for persons from ten years of age and older; provides all disabled cluzens the
opportunity to receive the benefits of recreation and leisure in the least restnctlve environment;
operaung a series of recreauon centers located throughout the City, and provldlng classes ~n the
Performing Arts
Human Services Team
The human services group focuses on social, health and human services to famd~es and mdlv~duals.
Departments w~th~n th~s group ~nclude Mental Health/Mental Retardauon/Substance Abuse, Social
Services, Public Health and Pendleton Chdd Services.
The Department of Public Health Is responsible for promoting the best possible state of health for
all V~rglma Beach citizens. The Department assumes primary respons~blhnes for provld~ng protecnve,
curanve, and environmental health servmes when not otherwise provided by the private sector. The
Public Health Department offers services and chmcs in the areas of pedmtncs, dentistry, family
plannIng, ~mmumzat~ons, home nursing, matermty, chest x-rays, venereal disease, health education,
and enwronmental health.
The %rgima Beach Community Services Board is responsible for the mental health, mental
retardauon, and substance abuse services and facdmes in %rgima Beach. The Board works to develop
a system of preventative, developmental, therapeutic, and trmnmg serwces to meet the mental health
needs of Virg~ma Beach cmzens. Th~s ~s accomplished through program coordination wlth the Eastern
State Hospital, Southeastern Virginia Training Center for the Mentally'Retarded, the private sector, and
the general community.
The Department of Social Services provides opportunities for citizens in need to achieve
self-support and self-suffic~ency. The department provides programs for children in chdd protection and
prevention services, aid to dependent children and foster care To assist adults, the department has
programs ~n employment services, care for the elderly and emergency needs services
The Pendleton Child Service Center is a commumty treatment agency serving children of Virginia
Beach and Chesapeake, ages 12 and under, who are exhibiting serious antisocial and maladapt~ve
bchavlors ~n the home, school, and/or communIty The Juvenile Probation Office provides support
servmes to the Juvemle and Domestic Relations District Court
Public Safety Team
The public safety team addresses basic governmental respons~bflitles for the mmntenance of order,
the protecuon of hfe and property, the administration of justice and the fostering of a safe and secure
place in which to live Included in th~s team are Pol~ce, Fire, Emergency Medical Services, Commumty
Correcuons, Clerk of Court, Sheriff, Commonwealth's Attorney, Juvemle Probation, Adult Probauon,
and all courts and Magistrates.
The Oty's Fire Department, which is responsible for both fire prevention and fire suppression,
handled 14,204 fire and rescue ~ncidents ~n fiscal year 1992. The C~ty's 345 firefighters perform the actual
emergency responses to fires from the C~ty's 18 fire stations. Currently, the C~ty's Fire Department ~s
recognized as one of the top 25 fire departments in the nation In addition, available volunteer
firefighters with proper-training prowde a significant manpower contribution to the firefightlng force.
The Emergency Serv:ces Office whose normal daily operauons are overseen by the Fire Department ~s
responsible for protecting the lives and property of %rg~ma Beach citizens during a major emergency
d~saster.
The PoI~ce Department ~$ composed of five major units Administration, Services, Uniform,
Communications and Invest~gat:ve D~vls~ons. The Department operates through four precincts located
throughout the C~ty Vlrgima Beach's crime rate for 1991 was 58 3 crimes per 1,000 population.
The Department of Emergency Medical Services coordinates the pre-hospital emergency care
provlded by the 11 volunteer Rescue Squads In 1991, it answered 23,000 calls for medical assistance.
22
JOBNAME. V,t Beach O S PAGE 23 SESS 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18 5(I 30 1993
/b r ]/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Apprommately 748 volunteers were acnve w~th the rescue squads ~n 1991. Th~s care ~ncludes rap~d, safe
response to the scene, proper treatment of the vmt~m, and prompt transfer to a hospital. The Office also
prov~cles all rescue squad training and coordinates the use of specmhzed resources ~ncludmg pohce, fire,
hospital personnel, d~spatchers, and the N~ght~ngale A~r Ambulance to deal w~th me&cal emergenmes
in the Cl~ of Virg~ma Beach
Team Support Group
The team qupport group ~s led by the chief of staff and assists the C~ty manager and the Management
Leadership Team by providing support to all the other departmental teams. The team support group
consists of the Pubhc Information Office and the Department of Management and Budget, which
Includes the former Office of Research and Strategic Analysis.
The Office of Public Informanon commumcates C~ty information and news to the public and press
as well as ass~snng w~th City commumcat~ons. The Office reports to the C~ty Manager. Key duties
~nclude the operation of the C~ty's Services and Informanon Hothne and pubhcat~on of numerous
newsletters, manuals and brochures.
The Department of Management and Budget develops and oversees the C~ty Operating Budget and
Capital Improvement Program. The department provides assistance and d~rectlon to City departments
for any amendments to the above programs. The department reviews and recommends alternative
budget formats, prov~dcs multi-year forecasting of revenues and expenditures, evaluates C~ty programs
and services and assists departments ~n management ~ssues. -
ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS
Population
Based on the April 1990 census conducted by the Bureau of the Census, the population of the C~ty
of V~rg~n~a Beach was 393,069. Th~s census estabhshed Vlrg~ma Beach as the most populous c~ty ~n the
Commonwealth of V~rg~n~a. The following table presents population figures for selected years. The
Department of PlannIng estimates the 1992 population to be 404,822.
POPULATION AND RATE OF CHANGE
VIRGINIA BEACH AND THE UNITED STATES
SELECTED YEARS
V~rgmla Annual Rate Annual Rate
Year Beach of Change Umted States of Change
1950 47,667 N/A% 150,697,361 N/A%
1960 85,218 5.98 178,464,236 1.71
1970 172,106 7.29 203,211,926 1.31
1980 262,199 4.30 226,545,805 1.09
1985 321,700 4 18 238,291,000 92
1986 343,200 6.68 241,596,000 1.39
1987 363,000 5 77 243,915,000 96
1988 379,900 4 66 246,329,000 .99
1989 390,800 2.87 248,239,000 1.01
1990 393,069 .58 248,709,873 19
1991 401,409 2.12 254,305,000(1) 2.25
1992 404,822 .85 255,414,000(1) .44
Note Population figures for V~rg~ma Beach ~n the years 1985-1989, 1991 and 1992 are estimates of the
C~ty's Planmng Department based on new housing construction.
(1) Estimate from U S Department of Commerce
Source Ctty Department of Planning, U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
23
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S PAGE' 24 SESS. 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 2c) 18 50 3D 1993
/b r 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789 - 77566/pgs
FIVE MOST POPULOUS CITIES IN VIRGINIA
1990 POPULATION
City
V~rg~ma Beach ........................
Norfolk ..............
R~chmond ......................
Newport News ............................
Chesapeake ...........................
Source' U S Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census
The following tables present per capita ~ncome and personal ~ncome.
PER CAPITA INCOME
Population
393,069
261,229
203,056
170,045
151,976
1970 1980 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
Vlrglma Beach $3,613 $9,837 $14,907 $15,542 $16,287 $16,844 $17,383 $17,697
Norfolk 3,412 8,201 12,333 12,640 13,358 13,709 14,211 16,412
Chesapeal~ .. 3,038 8,430 12,816 13,949 14,574 15,055 15,709 16,924
Portsmouth ....... 3,148 8,236 11,231 11,929 12,568 13,415 14,448 14,803
Commonwealth of
Vtrgtma ...... 3,712 9,305 14,473 15,433 16,516 17,665 18,979 19,701
Umted States ..... 3,945 9,494 13,899 14,609 15,484 16,490 17,592 18,696
Source' U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analys~s.
TOTAL PERSONAL INCOME
(In Millions)
1970 1980 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990
Vlrgm~a Beach $ 626 $ 2,559 $ 4,745 $ 5,230 $ 5,701 $ 6,152 $ 6,615 $ 7,025
Commonwealth of'
Vlrg~ma ........ 17,295 49,891 82,523 89,427 97,506 106,260 115,762 122,401
V~rg~nm Beach as a
percent of state . 3.62% 5.13% 5.75% 5.85% 5.85% 5.79% 5.71% 5.74%
Source U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Economic Analys~s
Housing and Construction
The data ~n the tables below are presented to dlustrate various housing characteristics for the City
of Vtrgtn~a Beach As of January, 1992, the total number of dwelhng umts ~n the C~ty was 147,303
excluding md~tary housing. S~ngle-famlly umts represented 58 percent of th~s total. The d~stnbut~on of
all dwelling un~ts is as follows
DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE
(As of January, 1992)
Umts Percent
S~ngle Fatally ............... 85,:~43 58%
Duplex .......... 4,221 3
Townhouse ......... 18,938 15
Multi-Family ................ 38,401 26
Total ...... 147,303 100%
Note' Does not ~nclude M~htary Combined Umts.
Source C~ty Department of Planmng.
24
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S. PAGE 25 SESS 347 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18.StJ.3t/ 1993
/b r 1/304/tcam3/officlrept/3789- 775 66/pgs
During calendar year 1992, the City issued 16,673 braiding permits with a total value of
$267,009,962 The following table presents a further breakdown on bmld~ng permits.
NUMBER OF BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED AND VALUE
Calendar Year Res~dentml Commercial Industrial Other Total Value
1980 .............. 2,023 579 13 7,317 $236,175,999
1981 1,956 814 13 7,105 261,207,207
1982 ............. 3,366 727 4 10,208 353,858,706
1983 ............... 4,638 855 2 11,644 550,743,864
1984 ...... 4,135 1,112 4 11,468 538,987,719
1985 4,052 1,136 11 12,885 556,635,423
1986 4,948 1,218 13 15,024 689,314,035
1987 ................ 2,324 1,151 22 14,344 443,586,254
1988 ........... 3,176 1,145 13 14,849 470,847,401
1989 .... 2,405 1,014 9 13,028 417,563,210
1990 .. 1,582 922 3 12,229 364,313,097
1991 ... 1,390 802 8 12,433 252,723,848
1992 ....... 1,480 825 7 14,361 267,009,962
Note One resldentml bmld~ng permit does not necessarily equal one residential umt; ~n many ~nstances
one permit ~s for mulnple res~dennal units. _
Source Ctty Department of Permits and Inspections.
The table below presents annual construction information for V~rg~ma Beach including the number
and assessed value of residential and commermal units. Resldent~al and commercml construction dunng
fiscal year 1992 totaled 1,956 residential braiding units and 840 commercml construction permits for a
total value of 5174,942,857. The major increase m building permits and new construction activity
recorded m fiscal year 1986 was driven in part by homebuflders and developers filing their applications
prior to July 1, 1986 to avoid paying a scheduled ~ncrease ~n the City's Water Resource Recovery Fee.
(See Lake Gaston F~nanc~ng Plan).
NEW CONSTRUCTION: NUMBER OF UNITS
AND ESTIMATED VALUE
Residential Construct,on
F~scal Number of Estimated
Year Umts Value
1981 3,455 $168,959,750
1982 3,392 171,533,375
1983 7,352 348,718,623
1984 8,461 368,428,172
1985 7,121 325,240,900
1986 12,290 540,090,148
1987 3,229 204,492,419
1988 4,289 248,389,813
1989 3,685 241,529,126
1990 3,265 194,529,071
1991 1,957 175,002,369
1992 1,956 131,208,657
Commercial Construction
Number of
Permits
675
807
745
1,025
1,126
1,218
1,154
1,157
1,129
942
826
840
Estimated
Value
$ 43,686,085
70,159,880
67,498,647
137,328,223
94,931,085
142,916,151
114,089,375
101,451,989
89,392,741
162,173,281
51,636,092
43,734,200
Source C~ty Department of Permits and Inspections
25
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 26 SESS. 346 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18 50 30 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
Employment
The private employers ~n the City of V~rg~ma Beach provided jobs for 103,364 persons in the second
quarter of 1992. The following table presents the number of estabhshments, employment, and quarterly
gross wages for the second quarter of 1992, the most recent data available.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
NUMBER OF ESTABLISHMENTS, EMPLOYMENT
AND QUARTERLY GROSS WAGES
QUARTER ENDING JUNE 30, 1992
Industry Group
Private
Agriculture, Forestry and Fishing ..... 162
Mining ......................... *
Construction .................. 1,035
Manufacturing ................. 172
Transportanon, Commumcat~ons and
UtilItIes 239
Whotesale/R~ta~'l Trade.. ' .......... ...... 1,976
FInancial, Insurance and Real Estate
Services .............. .~. 686
Services ........ 2,820
Total Private ................. 7,092
Public
State Government ................ 24
Local Government ......... 20
Federal Government ........... 21
Total Pubhc .................... 65
TOTAL ..
Average
Number of Employment
Estabhshments for Quarter
7,157
Average
Quarterly Weekly
Gross Wages
Wages Per Employee
1,161 $ 3,880,311 $257
8,070 42,350,622 404
4,332 23,080,894 410
5,269 32,073,291 468
38,799 123,971,506 246
7,317 41,388,114 435
38,39~3 179,185,760 358
103,344 $446,041,128 $332
1,414 $ 7,184,621 $391
16,397 91,700,631 430
3,140 18,357,384 450
20,951 $117,242,637 $430
124,314 $563,283,764 $349
Note: Excludes non-civilian employment and wages at military installations located wlthln the City.
Pursuant to the Virginia Unemployment Compensation Act Title 60.3 Code of Vlrg~nla Section 60.2-114
and 60 623, certatn data ~s suppressed wlthln the mining, agricultural, manufacturing, services and
non-classifiable categories.
Source V~rglnla Employment Commission, Economic Information Services DlVlS~On.
The following table ~s a breakdown of employment by sector ~n the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach.
EMPLOYMENT BY SECTOR
AS A PERCENTAGE OF TOTAL
QUARTER ENDING JUNE 30, 1992
Trade .................
Services .............................
Government .......................
Construction ...............
F~nanclal, Insurance and Real Estate ........
Transportation, Commumcatlon and UtilIties ..
Manufacturing ................
Mining and Agriculture ..................
Total ...........
31.22%
30.89
16.85
6 49
5.89
4.24
3.48
0.94
100 00%
Source: Virginia Employment Commission, Economic Information Service Division.
26
JOBNAME Va Beach O.S PAGE. 27 SESS 345 OUTPU~I Mon Mar 29 la 50 30 1993
j/brl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/pgs ~
As illustrated in the table below, the unemployment rate for the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach has been
consistently lower than the rates for the Metropohtan Statistical Area (MSA) and the Umted States.
UNEMPLOYMENT RATE
ANNUAL AVERAGE RATE
1984 To July 1992
1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Virg~ma Beach 3 6% 3 6% 3 5% 3 5% 3 5% 3 8% 4 0% 5 4% 6 2 %(2)
MSA(1) 46 5.0 46 5 3 45 46 47 6 1 70(2)
Commonwealth of V,rgln,a 5 0 5 6 5 0 4 2 3 8 3 9 4 3 5 8 6 4
Umtcd States 79 72 70 62 55 53 55 67 74
(1) MSA Includes V~rg~nla Beach, Norfolk, Newport Nexvs and Portsmouth.
(2) Data are provisional 12-month averages and do not reflect the full range of usual annual revisions and
may not be comparable to past data.
Source U S Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics
Business and Industry
V~rg~n~a Beach has five major concentranons of office, ~ndustnal and commercml property--
Airport Industrial Park, Greenwlch/W~tc~hduck Corridor, Central B_us~ness D~stnct/Pembroke area,
Oceana West Corporate Park/Lynnhaven Corridor, and Corporate Landing.
Airport Industrtal Park. The park encompasses 250 acres w~th 4 m~lhon square feet of hght
~ndustrtal and office space Nattonal and ~nternatlonal manufacturing, warehousing and dtstrtbut~on
operations are located here.
Greenwtch/Wttchdt~ck Corrtdor Greenw~ch/W~tchduck currently contains 1.3 million square feet of
Iow and m~d-nse suburban office space in business parks Including Corporate Woods and Commerce
Park that house corporate headquarters and bus~ness operattons of many types The Corridor currently
contains 1 8 million square feet of hght industrial space, housing regional warehousing and dmtnbut~on
operations
Central Business Dtstrtct/Pernbroke Area' The CBD encompasses 500 acres and 1.8 mdhon square
feet of m~d and high-rise office space ~n bus~ness parks ~nclud~ng Columbus Center, Pembroke Office
Park and Corporate Center One hundred and fifty acres are presently available for development and an
additional 150 acres are to be recycled ~n the future Thirty-seven acres in the CBD are mun~c~pally-
o~vned and presently available Corporate citizens in the area include six of the seven largest law firms
in V~rglma Beach as well as numerous financial, Information processing and professional services firms.
Oceana West Corporate Park/Lynnhaven Corrtdor The park encompasses 1,100 acres and
currently contains 1 4 m~llion square feet of Iow and m~d-nse suburban office space and 3.2 mllI~on
square feet of hght ~ndustrlal space. Two hundred twenty acres are presently available for development.
Corporate citizens ~n Oceana West and adjacent bus~ness parks ~nclud~ng Reflections and Oceana East
comprise a wide variety of domestic and foreign firms, including corporate headquarters, manufactur-
ing, warehousing and d~stnbut~on operations.
Corporate Landing' The park owned and operated by the V~rg~ma Beach Development Authortty,
~s currently undergoing a phased ~nfrastructure development with 125 acres of the ultimate 425 acres
presently avadable for corporate headquarters, professional services, research and development, office
buildings, retail and two hotel conference centers. Th~s master-planned, mult~-faceted park contains 38
acres of lakes, jogging trmls, plazas, green space and recreational opportumtles.
Throughout V~rgln~a Beach there are many additional smaller nodes of office and commercial
activity including Little Neck, Oceanfront, Blrdneck/Laskln Road, F~rst Colontal and Kempsvdle.
27
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S. PAGE 28 SESS 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 Ii> 5(/30 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
The table below presents data regar&ng the major private employers in Virginia Beach, including
the products and services they provide and the number of employees.
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
MAJOR PRIVATE EMPLOYERS
(As of August 1992)
Firm
Lynnhaven Mall ................
Pembroke Mall .........
Lllllan Vernon Corp .............
Christian Broadcasting Network ......
Vlrglma Beach General Hospital ......
Hampton Roads Sanitation District. . .
Humana Hospital Bayslde ........
The Virginian-Pilot/Ledger Star
U S Postal Service ..........
Stihl, Incorporated ...............
Q E D Systems, Inc ......
Cigna Direct Marketing Division ......
Sandier Foods, Inc ..............
SAIC-AmSEC ............
Computer Dynamics, Inc ..........
Haynes Furniture ...........
Old Dominion Tobacco Co., Inc ......
V~rg~n~a Power ....
Hermes AbrasIves ..........
Raytheon Service Co ......
C&P Telephone Company .......
Controls Corporation of America .....
Planning Research Corporation ....
PARAMAX ...
Cox Cable of Tidewater ..
M&G Electronics Corporation .....
VNU/Leadlng National Advertisers ...
Kransco Manufacturing Inc .........
Cherokee Corporation .............
Type of Bus~ness
Retail trade
Retail trade
Catalog fulfillment center
Education & communlcanons
Medical services
Maintenance shop and repair facility for
sewage pumping stations and intercepter
lines
Medical services
Newspaper
Postal delivery
Assembly, manufacture and distribution of
chain saws -
Marine engineering & technical services
Customer Service Center
Food service distributor
Engineering and technical services on
machinery
Computer programmtng
Furniture
Wholesale distribution
Pubhc utility
Coated abrasives
Repair and maintenance of electronic
systems
Public utility
Gas control devices and welding equip-
ment
Systems engineering & design services
Defense Systems and Technical Services,
DIgital computers hardware, software
and logistics
Cable television
Manufacturer of wiring harness sets
Advertis~ng data collection
Recreational and leisure products
Electronic repair
Number of
Employees
3,000
2,300
1,250
1,200
1,000
650
600
593
55O
450
45O
45O
375
350
350
350
350
334
330
330
325
275
260
240
225
200
180
175
170
Source Department of Economic Development August, 1992
28
JOBNAME Va Beach O.S PAGE 29 SESS 345 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18 50 3ti 1993
/br 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Retail Sales
The table presented below is a summary of the City's taxable retail sales; it does not include sales
whIch are exempt from tax. Spec~fically exempt from the sales tax under Section 58-441 6 of the V~rglma
Retml Sales and Use Tax Act are sales of alcohohc beverages in government stores, sales of certain
motor vehicles, traders and semitrailers, mobile homes, and travel trailers; and sales of certain motor
vehicle fuels. Also, the figures do not include non-taxable sales on mlhtary bases ~n the City estimated
to be in excess of $125,000,000 annually.
REGISTERED RETAIL/WHOLESALE ESTABLISHMENTS AND TAXABLE SALES
Registered Taxable
Calendar Retail/Wholesale Retad/Wholesale
Yea r Estabhsh men ts Sales
1983 4,936 $1,347,208,987
1984 5,317 1,577,379,085
1985 5,491 1,839,499,419
1986 6,615 1,935,133,389
1987 6,885 2,146,526,437
1988 7,110 2,231,775,041
1989 6,520 2,321,351,781
1990 7,258 2,372,539,391
1991 7,331 2,384,755,654
1992 7,468 2,422,970,525
Source V~rg~ma Department of Taxation.
Tourism and Conventions
In calendar year 1991, an estimated 2.5 million people v~s~ted the resort c~ty and spent over $500
m~ll~on dunng their stay for accommodations, meals, entertmnment and other servmes. Approximately
$40 mflhon accrued to the City ~n the form of local and state tax revenues. Despite the slowdown in the
national and regional economies, the C~ty continued to experience a strong tourist season ~n the summer
of 1992 Hotel occupancy ~n the oceanfront area ~ncreased slightly, by 2.4 percent, over the 1991
summer levels Several thousand Virglma Beach businesses employ 12,000 full-t~me and 9,000 part-time
summer workers in the travel and tourism market.
Statistics for 1991 show that 128,000 convention and trade show delegates attended 350 meetings
at the ConventIon Center and at the City's more than two dozen conference hotels, producing $40.9
m~ll~on m gross revenue Of th~s amount, $1.63 mdl~on went d~rectly to the City as tax revenue.
HOTEL ROOM AND RESTAURANT TAX RECEIPTS
FISCAL YEARS 1983 THROUGH 1992
F~scal Total Hotel Room and
Year Restaurant Tax Receipts
1983 $10,609,016
1984 11,823,586 (1)
1985 11,979,781
1986 13,702,569
1987 15,205,849
1988 16,600,490
1989 18,135,286(2)
1990 20,465,279
1991 20,633,367
1992 22,356,705
(1) The restaurant tax was reduced from five to four percent, effective January 1, 1984
(2) The hotel room and restaurant taxes were ~ncreased from four to four and one-half percent, effective
January 1, 1989
Source City D~rector of F~nance.
29
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 30 SESS. 343 OUTPU'I Mon Mar 29 lb 50.30 199.3
/brl/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pgs
I
Military
Four military bases in V~rg~ma Beach have a 1991 combined annual payroll of $625 mflhon for
34,233 armed services and c~whan workers.
Oceana Naval Air Station
Naval A~r Stanon Oceana ns one of only four master jet bases in the U.S. Navy. A total of 13 fighter
and 8 attack squadrons, 11,020 active duty personnel and 1,050 Clvlhan employees are assigned to the
stanon. The base has a $220 mflhon plus payroll.
Little Creek
The Naval Amphibious Base, Little Creek, the largest base of ~ts kind ~n the world, ~s the major
operating base for the amphibious forces of the United States Atlantm Fleet. Little Creek has an annual
payroll of $252 million for 11,408 military personnel and 2,036 civilian employees.
Fort Story
Fort Story is an Army base established as a coast artillery post in 1917. The primary mission is to
provide unique training facilities for the conduct of amphibious tralmng and to serve as the Amy's
Logistics-Over-The-Shore (LOTS) training and testing s~te, to ~nclude tesnng new doctnnes, concepts
and equipment Fort Story is also utilized by Navy and Manne tenants and as a penodm trmmng s~te for
acnvc and reserve Army, Navy, Manne,-and Air Force units and ROTC detachments. Fort Story has
an annual payroll of apprommately $35 mflhon for 2,153 military personnel and 329 c~vflmn employees.
Dam Neck
Fleet Combat Tralmng Center, Atlantic, Dam Neck's primary mission is to provide tralmng in the
operanon and employment of combat direction and control systems. The average base population is
6,600 persons and the total military and mvfl~an payroll ~s approximately $118 mflhon
Medical Facilities
As of August 1992, there were two major hospitals in the City w~th a combined total of 524 beds.
In addition there were 24 Emergency Centers for medical assistance. Apprommately 690 doctors and
165 dennsts practme m V~rg~ma Beach.
Agribusiness
The V~rglma Polytechmc Insntute and State Umversay Extension Division of the Department of
Agriculture m the C~ty of Vxrgmla Beach esumates that the economic contnbuuon from agricultural
related expenditures w~thm th, e C~ty amounted to $75.7 mflhon m 1991. Th~s esnmate includes purchases
for farm equipment, livestock feeding, fernhzer, etc., as well as those expen&tures for producnon of
farm products. The product value itself was estimated at $23.6 million for 1991. The principal products
were swine, soybeans, corn, horticultural specialties, wheat, vegetables, horse breeding, and dairy
products There are approximately 150 farms ~n the City, each averaging slightly more than 200 acres,
resulting in approximately 35,000 acres of land under culnvanon
Education
Available w~thtn the City of V~rg~ma Beach is a w~de variety of educanonal famhtles including
public elementary, junior and semor h~gh schools, private and parochial schools, and three colleges. In
terms of pupil enrollment, the City's public school systcm is the largest city school system in the
Commonwealth of Vlrglma
3O
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S PAGE 31 SESS 346 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 18.50 30 1993
I /brl/304/team3/officlrept/3789-77566/pgs
I
PUBLIC EDUCATION FACILITIES
1992-1993
52 Elementary Schools
12 Jumor H~gh Schools
9 Senior High Schools
1 Vocatlonal-Techmcal School
1 Center for Effective Learmng
1 Career Development Center
1 Center for the Gifted and Talented
1 Adult Learmng Center
1 Open Campus High School
Source Pubhc Information Office, Vlrglma Beach Public Schools
Pubhc Schools
The City of Virg~ma Beach public school enrollment totalled 73,729 for the 1992-93 school year, an
increase of 1.86 percent over the previous year. Summarized below is the total annual school
membership (enrollment) and the annual percentage change for the period from 1983 to 1992.
PUBLIC SCHOOLS -
STUDENT POPULATION
1983-1992
School Number of Percent
Year Students Change
1983-84 55,131 0.65%
1984-85 58,747 4.52
1985-86 59,936 2.02
1986-87 62,215 3 80
1987-88 64,623 3.87
1988-89 66,999 3.68
1989-90 68,348 2.01
1990-91 70,423 3.04
1991-92 72,386 2.79
1992-93 73,729 1.86
Source State Department of Education
Private and Parochtal Schools
There are 15 private and parochial schools in the City Approximately 3,900 students are enrolled
in these schools
Htgher Edttcatlon
Vlrg~nla Beach's higher educational resources include the Old Dominion University--Norfolk State
University Graduate Center, Virg~ma Wesleyan College, Tidewater Community College, and Regent
Umvers~ty (formerly Christian Broadcasting Network Unlvers~ty). Vlrg~ma Beach is home to branch
campuses of George Washington University, the University of V~rg~ma and the Virginia Polytechnic
Institute and State University
Tidewater Community College, with an enrollment of more than 18,300, ~s a division of the Virginia
Department of Community Colleges The V~rglma Beach campus has an enrollment of approximately
31
JOBNAME Va Beach O.S. PAGE. 32 SESS 343 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 lb 50 30 1993
/bt 1/304/team3/0fflclrept/3789- 77566/pgs
11,300. Th~s two-year college offers general, occupat~onal-techmcal, and umversity parallel-college
transfer education, represennng the largest post-secondary ~nst~tut~on ~n the region. T~dewater
Commumty College ~s a resource for bus~ness and ~ndustry to gmn techmcal employees, as well as
expertise for trmmng and retrmmng programs for current employees.
V~rg~ma Wesleyan College ns a four-year hberal arts private college located on the V~rg~ma
Beach/Norfolk boundary hne It has an enrollment of approximately 1,300 students w~th 200 part-time
students ~n the adult studies program
Regent University has an enrollment of approximately 850 w~th graduate schools of bus~ness
admimstrat~on, commumcation, education, law, public pohcy and B~bhcal studies, and an Institute of
Journahsm
The C~ty of Virginia Beach recently donated 36 acres adjacent to Tidewater Commumty College to
Old Domlmon Umvers~ty/Norfolk State for future graduate and undergraduate faclht~es.
32
/hr 1/304/team3/offIclrept/3789 - 77566/pages2
SECTION FOUR: CITY INDEBTEDNESS AND CAPITAL PLAN
LIMITATIONS ON INCURRENCE OF DEBT
Pursuant to the Constitution of Vlrginla (the "Constitution") and the Public Finance Act of 1991,
Chapter 5.1, Title 15.1, Code of Virginia, as amended, a city in Virginia is authorized to issue bonds and
notes secured by a pledge of its full faith and credit and unhmited tatung power. The Constitution and
the Public Finance Act of 1991 also limit the Indebtedness which may be incurred by cities to 10 percent
of the assessed valuation of real estate subject to local taxation. There is no requirement in the
Constitution or the Code of Virginia that the issuance of general obhgatlon bonds of the City be subject
to approval of the electors of the City at referendum.
As of June 30, 1992, the City the total assessed value of real property in the City was
$16,913,600,366 which translates into a debt limit of $1,691,360,036. The City's net obligations subject
to debt limitations as of June 30, 1992 totaled $395,939,143 and represented 23.41 percent of this limit.
On July 9, 1991, City Council approved a resolution to restrict any increase in debt serv:ce costs
for fiscal year 1992-1993 for future capital projects to debt service costs for fiscal year 1991-1992. The
resolution exempts from th~s limitation any debt supported by special dedicated tax funding or
enterprise fund revenues.
The City Charter further limits the City's power to create debt. It prowdes that no bonds or notes
(other than refunding bonds, revenue antl~patlon notes, revenue bond~, and other obligations excluded
from the City's debt limit under Section 10(a) of Article VII of the Constitution) shall be ~ssued until
their issuance has been authorized by a majority of the qualified voters of the City voting in an elect~on
on the question. The City Charter further provides, however, that the C~ty Council may authorize bonds
or notes without an election in any calendar year in such amounts as shall not increase the total
Indebtedness of the City, as determined In the manner set forth in Section 10(a) of Arncle VII of the
Constitution, by more than $10,000,000 above the amount of such ~ndebtedness at the beginning of such
calendar year.
In addition to the authority to issue bonds without an election described above, the City may ~ssue
up to $8,000,000 of general obligation bonds in any calendar year for road, highway, or bridge purposes,
provided that not less than 20 percent of the amount of bonds authorized during such year to be issued
without an elecnon pursuant to the authority described in the previous paragraph shall have been
designated for road, highway, and bridge purposes. The authority to ~ssue $8,000,000 of general
obligation bonds each year, without an election, for road, highway, or bridge purposes expires on
December 31, 1996.
For purposes of computing the annual limitation on the amount of bonds or other obhgat~ons that
may be issued without an election, authorized and unissued bonds or other obligations which could have
been issued without an election on December 31 in the year they were authorized may be issued ~n a
subsequent year without affecting the annual hmltanon for such subsequent year. In addition, refunding
bonds shall not be ~ncluded for purposes of determining the amount of bonds or other obligations that
may be Issued without an elecnon in any calendar year. Contractual obligations of the City other than
bonds and notes are not Included with the annual limitations described herein.
DEBT MANAGEMENT POLICIES
The City has developed a series of Debt Management Policies to provide a functional tool for debt
management and capital planmng. The policies reiterate the City's commitment to prlnclples such as
rapid principal retirement, maintaining sufficient working capital to avoid the use of short-term
borrowing for operating purposes, and the use of self-supporting or revenue-supported debt where
appropriate. The pohcles also establish the foIlowlng target levels for these key debt ratios:
33
Jk2b.Nc~.~¥1L h, d. D~..d.~ll U ,_'.'.'3 U2~,~L., _ :3L,,b.b DDU L~ 11-C~ I ~c)l~ .~l,~i _:2 ~:2._~b .3U
/br1/304/team3/officlrept/3789-77566/pages2
Ratto of Overall Net Debt to Esttmated Full Market Value
This ratio Indicates the relationship between the City's debt and the taxable value of property in the
City. It is an important indicator of the City's ability to repay its tax-supported debt, since property
taxes are a major revenue source. A small ratio indicates that the City will be better able to withstand
economic downturns.
It is the City's policy that, as a general rule the computed value of this ratio should not exceed (1)
the average of the most recent three years of Moody's median ratios of overall net debt to estimated full
market value for Clttes of comparable size, or (2) 3.5 percent of estimated full market value.
Overall net Debt per Captta
Thls ratio indicates the per capita debt burden and 1s a general lndmation of the City'S debt burden.
A smaller ratio indicates a lighter burden.
It is the City's policy that, as a general rule, the computed value of this ratio should not exceed (1)
125 percent of the average of the most recent three years of Moody's median ratios of overall net debt
per capita for cities of comparable size, or (2) $1,300 per capita.
Ratto of Debt per Captta to per Captta Personal Income
This ratio is a measure of the capacity of citizens to finance tax-supported debt. A low ratio means
that taxes required to repay debt represent a smaller portion of the average citizen's income. It is the
City's policy that, as a general rule, debt per capita should not exceed 6.5 percent of per capita income.
Ratto of Annual Debt Servtce to General Government Expen&tures
Thls ratio measures the City's ability to repay debt wlthout hampering other City services. A small
ratio indicates a lesser burden on the Ctty's operating budget. As a general rule, this computation should
not exceed 12.5 percent.
KEY DEBT RATIOS
Year Ending June 30
March 31,
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993
,,,
Overall Net Debt and
Lease Obhgat~ons $303,426,631 $277,940,748 $337,635,668
Net Debt Per Capita $799 $711 $859
Ratio to Estimated-
Full Value (1) 2 3% 1 9% 2 2%
Ratio of Per
Capita Debt to Per
Capita Income 4 7% 4 1% 4 9%
Ratto of Annual Debt
Sermce to General
Government
Expenditures 8 6% 9 1% 8 3%
$392,084,628 $423,758,765(3)
$977 $1,047
2 4% 2.5%
--(2) --(2)
9 3% 10.0%
(1) Real property is assessed at 100 percent of falr market value.
(2) Per capita income figures for years subsequent to 1990 are not available.
(3) Does not include current issue
Source City Financial Statements
34
OUTSTANDING DEBT AND LEASE OBLIGATIONS
Information on the C~ty's indebtedness ~s presented in the following tables. Included is information
on net and overlapptng tax-supported debt, rapidity of principal retirement, selected debt service
schedules, and ~nformat~on on capital lease obhgatlons.
OVERALL NET DEBT AND LEASE OBLIGATIONS
As of March 31, 1993
(Including current issue)
General Obhgation Bonds(l) .............................. $461,294,890.00
Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds(2) ........................ 41,810,000.00
Capital Leases/COPs(3) ...............................
Plus: 1993-A Public Improvement Bond ..................... 20,000,000.00
1993 Refunding Bonds .............................. 153,515,000.00
Less: Refunded Bonds .................................. 138,725,000.00
Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds(2) ................... 41,810,000.00
Double Barrel Bonds(4) ............................ 30,215,000.00
General Obhgatlon Bonds for Water and Sewer Purposes ... 7,610,147.50
Capital Leases for Water and Sewer Purposes ............
Overall Net Debt and Lease Obhgat~ons .....................
$503,104,890.00
676,619,890.00
$458,259,742.50
(1) Includes $7,610,147.50 general obligation debt for water and sewer purposes and $30,215,000 general
obhgatlon debt additionally secured by the net revenues of the water and sewer system.
(2) Water and sewer revenue bonds not secured by a pledge of the City's full faith and credit and
unlimited tatung power. These bonds are secured solely by the net revenues of the water and sewer
system.
(3) A full description of the Capital Leases and Certificates of Participation can be found in the
subsection "Assets Acqmred and F~nanced Under Capital Leases" herein.
(4) General obhgat~on bonds addmonally secured by the net revenues of the water and sewer system.
Source: C~ty Department of F~nance.
*Prehm~nary, subject to change.
Authorized But Unissued Bonds
After ~ssuance of the Bonds, the C~ty wdl have authorized but umssued $277,070,000 general
obhgatlon bonds and $28,330,000 revenue bonds, as shown below:
Authorization
Purpose Amount Security Year Manner
Roads $ 8,000,000 general obligation 1991 Council
Pubhc Improvement 10,375,000 general obhgation 1990 Council
Pubhc Improvement 27,040,000 general obhgatlon 1991 Council
Pubhc Improvement 31,655,000 general obhgat~on 1992 Council
Water and Sewer 200,000,000 general obligation plus revenues 1988 referendum
Water and Sewer 1,605,000 revenues 1988 Council
Water and Sewer 2,525,000 revenues 1989 Council
Water and Sewer 10,430,000 revenues 1990 Council
Water and Sewer 13,770,000 revenues 1991 Council
35
o 0
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pages2
I
z
I I
37
/br 1/304/team3/offtclrept/3789- 77566/pages2
RAPIDITY OF PRINCIPAL RETIREMENT
ALL GENERAL OBLIGATION BONDS (1)
As of March 31, 1993
Maturzng Amount
W, th~n Maturing
5 years $197,434,783
10 years 345,854,786
15 years 451,209,664
20 years 495,084,890
Percent
of Total
Debt
Outstanding
39.80
69.72
90.95
99.80
(1) Includes the current bond ~ssue and general obhgat~on bonds add~t~onally secured by water and
sewer revenues and general obhgat~on bonds not secured by water and sewer revenues but whmh are
serviced annually from those revenues. Does not ~nclude capital leases or Certificates of Participa-
tion.
Water and Sewer System Debt
The C~ty has issued three types of securities to finance capital ~mprovements to ~ts water and sewer
system
(1) Prior to 1977 and m 1982, the~C~ty ~ssued general obhgat~oh pubhc ~mprovement bonds that
were not secured by a pledge of the net revenues of the water and sewer system. As of March 31,
1993, $7,610,147 50 of these bonds were outstanding.
(2) Pursuant to Artmle VII, Sec. 10(a)(2) of the Constitution of V~rg~ma, the C~ty has ~ssued
general obhgation water and sewer bonds, which are secured by both a pledge of the net revenues
of the water and sewer system and a pledge of the C~ty's full froth and credit and unhm~ted taxing
power As of March 31, 1993, $30,215,000 of these bonds were outstanding.
(3) Pursuant to Amcle VII, Sec. 10(a)(3) of the Constitution of V~rgmm, the C~ty has ~ssued
water and sewer revenue bonds whmh are secured solely by the net revenues of the water and
sewer system. As of March 31, 1993, $41,810,000 of these bonds were outstanding.
It ~s the City's policy to service all debt ~ssued for water and sewer purposes by revenues from the
water and sewer system.
Assets Acquired and Financed Under Capital Leases
The C~ty was contractually hable for the payment of $238,309 as of June 30, 1992 to the C~ty of
Norfolk, Vlrg~ma for the purchase of a water d~stnbut~on system (excluding raw water mares) owned by
Norfolk w~th~n the boundaries of the C~ty. The C~ty ~s making equal annual ~nstallments of $250,000
which includes interest at a rate of 4.905989 percent through 1993. Th~s obhgat~on ~s payable exclusively
from revenues from the sale of water furnished the C~ty from Norfolk's "surplus supply," as defined m
the Lease-Purchase Contract, as amended, dated April 24, 1973, and ~s therefore not considered to be
tax-supported debt. The title to the system ~s to be transferred to the C~ty upon completion of payment,
which ~s expected to occur on June 30, 1993.
Non-water and sewer capital assets consisting of a hehcopter, commumcat~ons, pubhc works,
automotive vehmles, modular braidings, fire eqmpment, and other capital assets acqmred under capital
leases on which the City, as of June 30, 1992 had pnnc~pal outstanding of $2,591,282. In addition, as of
June 30, 1992, the C~ty has $3,070,000 Certificates of Participation, Ser~es of 1987, and $31,255,000
Certificates of Partmlpat~on, Ser~es of 1990, outstanding to finance the acqms~t~on of real property to
expand the C~ty's Mumc~pal Center Complex and to construct a Judicial Center Complex, respectively.
These leases contmn non-approprmt~on clauses and therefore are not considered debt for purposes of
calculating obhgat~ons subject to the Constitutional debt hm~t.
38
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.b PAGE 7 SESS. 330 OU2PU¥. Mon Mar 25) 19.2~ oo 19'~o
/br 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pages2
I
The estimated scheduled capital lease payments on non-water and sewer lease obligations for the
fiscal years ending June 30 are as follows:
Capital Lease
Capital
Fiscal Year Assets
Certificates
of
Participation (1)
Total
1993 $981,053 $ 4,379,828 $ 5,360,881
1994 438,984 4,371,987 4,810,971
1995 438,984 3,697,650 4,136,634
1996 404,562 3,016,921 3,421,483
1997 393,089 3,013,180 3,406,269
1998 and later 473,933 41,758,142 42,232,075
(1) Includes 1987 and 1990 Certificates of Participation issued for land acqms~tion and construction of
Judicial Center.
Overlapping Debt
The City is autonomous from any county, town, or other pohtlcal subdivision. There are no
overlapping jurisdictions with debt outstanding for which City residents are liable.
Short-Term Borrowing
The City does not borrow on a short-term basis for working capitol purposes. The City's pohcy is
to malntmn the General Fund balance at a level that provides sufficient cash flow for working capital
purposes.
Debt History
The C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach has never defaulted on ~ts general obhgat~on bonds, or water and sewer
system bonds, or capital lease obligations.
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
The City of Virglma Beach's Comprehensive Plan was adopted on March 5, 1991. Among some of
the key planmng pohc~es embodied ~n this Plan are urban and rural growth management strategies,
economic development opportunmes, transportanon and other public facility ~mprovements, care of the
environment, housing, historic resource management, neighborhood preservation and community
aesthetics. By adopting these key provisions of the Comprehensive Plan, the C~ty has committed itself
and expects to continue to commit itself to providing sound planning policies that ensure a fair and
workable balance between the supply of public service dehvery systems and the demand placed on
those systems by the ex,sting and future land uses
S~nce 1971, the City Council has periodically revised and adopted the City's Master Street and
Highway Plan, as needed, to meet the need for an efficient and cost-effective roadway system. This
policy document describes the characteristics of the major streets and highways that comprise the City's
exlsnng and future major transportation network. The Plan also describes the characteristics of
bikeways, scenic easements, and other s~mdar features related to the C~ty's major roadway system, and
provides policy guidance regarding matters related to future right-of-way acqms~non and ~mprovement.
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The City's Capital Improvement Program ("CIP") provides for improvements to the C~ty's public
facd~nes, along w~th the means of financing these ~mprovements. In the past, the CIP was prepared for
the ensuing fiscal year and four years thereafter The program also included an additional five year
summary of projects w~th estimated project costs, thereby identifying pubhc facility needs for a ten year
period. Begmmng ~n fiscal year 1993, the format of the CIP was changed to cover the ensuing fiscal year
and the five years thereafter, thus creanng a sm-year CIP. The first year of the program constitutes the
capital budget for the current fiscal year; the remmmng years serve as a planmng guide.
39
/brl/304/team3/officlrept/3789-77566/pages2
The approved CIP Is the result of a process that balances the need for public facilities against the
fiscal capability for the City to provide for these needs. It Is the C~ty's policy to fund individual capital
projects of less than $250,000 through General Fund appropriations (pay-as-you-go financing).
Fiscal Year 1993-1998 CIP
On December 1, 1992 the C~ty Council approved the Fiscal Year 1993-1998 Capital Improvement
Program (CIP). In response to recent economic con&uons and sensitivity to debt affordabfl~ty, the
program represents a s~gmficant departure from the prewous years CIP. As previously explained, the
~mme&ate planmng horizon has been extended from five years to sm years. In addition, the total
slx-year program aggregates $1.06 bflhon, a $46.1 mflhon decrease from the F~scal Year 1992-1996 CIP,
which ~s a five-year program. The CIP includes a $346.4 million Water and Sewer program 0nclu&ng
$206 mflhon for the Lake Gaston ProJect) and $713.6 mflhon for General Government. The program will
reqmre a property tax increase of $0.11 over the st,x-year period, wlth a $0.057 ~ncrease effecUve July 1,
1993 for year one of the CIP.
The CIP adopted by the Council on December 1, 1992 ~ncluded some s~gmficant modificaUons to the
program proposed to the Council ~n September. The approved CIP includes a storm water utihty, to be
financed through an enterprise fund and revenue bonds, and an expanded economm and tourism
development program, to be financed through a special revenue fund. To finance the Storm Water
Management Utility, the Council estabhshed an Eqmvalent Res~denual Umt (ERU) charge, w~th a
monthly ERU rate of $2.74 for all developed property. The Council also approved certmn projects ~n the
CIP to be funded by the uUhty. The stx-year progra, m total for the Storm Water Utility ~s $10,250,746.
The Council also estabhshed a special revenue fund, the Tourism Growth Investment Fund (TGIF),
to fund a new ~mt~at~ve designed to ~mprove the City's tourism ~ndustry. W~th the ad&tion of the TGIF
program, the scope of the s~x-year economic and tourism development program increased from $24.1
mflhon to $101.6 mflhon. The resolution passed by Council that estabhshed the TGIF fund, dedicated
specific emstlng and new revenues to the Fund and ~denUfied the projects to be funded w~th these
revenues. Several projects ~ncluded ~n the emst~ng CIP were expanded or accelerated and other projects
were added to the program.
The table below provides a comparison of the new appropnaUon authority for the total six-year
Fiscal Year 1993-1998 to the comparable sm-year period in the Fiscal Year 1992-1996 CIP. It should be
noted that the figures shown illustrate the amount of addlUonal approprmuons (together with
appropnatmns to date) reqmred to fund the CIP projects. They do not indicate total project costs or the
amount of debt financing antmlpated to be used.
PROPOSED FY 1993-1998 CIP
NEW APPROPRIATION AUTHORITY
FY 92 CIP
(Fiscal Years Percent
Category 1993-1998) of Total
Schools $185,601,600 42 3%
Roadways 201,849,941 46 1
Stormwater
Coastal 13,099,326 3 0
Economic & Tourism
Development 16,047,671 3 7
Buildings 11,845,803 2 7
Parks &
Recreation 9,771,728 2 2
Total General Public
Improvement $438,216,069 100 0
Water & Sewer 80,035,200
Total $518,251,269
FY 93 CIP
(Fiscal Years Percent
1993-1998) of Total
Change Percent
$179,995,737 46 36% ($ 5,605,863) -3 11%
54,690,516 14 09 (147,159,425) -269.08
10,250,746 2 64 10,250,746 100 0
16,280,316 4 19 3,180~990 19.54
98,672,521 25 42 82,624,850 83.74
19,819,879 5 11 7,974,076 40.23
8,522,329 2 20 (1,249,399) -14 66
$388,232,044 100 0 $ (49,984,025) -12.87
71,790,310 (8,244,890) - 10.30
$460,022,354 $ (58,228,915) -11 24
40
JOBNAME Ya. Bcacl~ 0.3 PAUL Y 3tz33 Joi OblPbi
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789 - 77566/pages2
The changes ~n the F~scal Year 1993-1998 CIP also reflect a shift from the use of voter authorized
debt to the use of the C~ty's charter bond authority, particularly ~n the area of schools. The new CIP
does not ~nclude any new bond referendums as a source of financing for the CIP.
The uses by project categories and major funding sources for the total program as noted ~n the CIP
are shown below:
USES
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
USES AND SOURCES OF FUNDS SUMMARY
FISCAL YEARS 1993 THROUGH 1998
Estimated Authorized
Total Costs to Date
School ProJects .....................
Roadways .........................
Storm water ........................
Coastal ...........................
Economic and Tourism Development .....
Braiding Projects ....................
Parks and Recreation Projects ..........
Water Utdlty Projects (1) ..............
Sewer Utd~ty ProJects ................
Total ........................
SOURCES
Local Bond Issues'
Water and Sewer GO Bonds (1) .......
Other GO Bonds ...................
Total GO Bonds ....................
Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds .....
Environmental Services Revenue
Bonds .........................
Total Local Bond Issues ..........
General Fund Appropriations .........
Environmental Serwces Fund
Appropnanons (2) ................
Water and Sewer Fund Appropriations ....
Federal Revenue Sharing ...........
Federal, State and Private Contributions ..
Lease Purchases and Certificates of
Participation ......................
Southeastern Pubhc Service Authority ....
Transfer from Golf Courses ............
Norfolk Port and Industrial Authority .....
C~ty of Chesapeake ..................
Other .............................
Total Other Sources of Financing ......
Total Flnanmng All Sources .........
Amount
Remaining
$ 265,109,142 $ 85,113,405 $179,995,737
146,593,093 91,902,577 54,690,516
29,212,795 18,962,049 10,250,746
31,179,150 14,898,834 16,280,316
138,463,155 39,790,634 98,672,521
70,158,983 50,339,104 19,819,879
32,840,710 24,318,381 8,522,329
256,336,263 227,883,263 28,453,000
90,098,952 46,761,642 43,337,310
$1,059,992,243
_$599,969,889
$460,022,354
$ 173,683,000 $173,683,000 $ 0
446,597,688 202,254,424 244,343,264
$ 620,280,688 $375,937,424 $244,343,264
101,512,822 41,722,512 59,790,310
6,875,746 0 6,875,746
$ 728,669,256 $417,659,936 $311,009,320
134,051,452 76,947,554 57,103,898
3,375,000 0 3,375,000
34,784,015 22,784,015 12,000,000
7,508,692 6,738,692 770,000
11,620,735 2,682,025 8,938,710
81,334,370 32,534,370 48,800,000
15,337,972 4,828,746 10,509,226
100,000 100,000 0
428,675 0 428,675
34,568,417 34,424,667 143,750
8,213,659 1,269,884 6,943,775
$ 151,603,828 $ 75,839,692 $ 75,764,136
$1,059,992,243 $599,969,889 $460,022,354
(1) The C~ty wdl be undertaking major capital expenditures ~n future years for a water supply source (as
described ~n Section Five, in the subsection entitled "The Lake Gaston ProJect"). This Capital
Improvement Program ~ncludes 100 percent of the capital costs for the water supply project, w~th total
project cost estimated at $206,000,000 and completion expected w~th~n 4 to 6 years after start of
construction.
Source. Capital Improvement Program for F~scal Year 1992-93/1997-98.
41
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pages2
The following tables present a summary of project estimates by major functional categorles and a
summary of the principal means of financing.
Project Class Title
Schools
Roadways
Stormwater
Coastal
Economic and
Tourtsm Devel-
opment
Buddings
Parks and Recrea-
tion
Total Public
Improvements
Water Utlhty
Sewer Utd~ty
Total Utdmes
Grand Total
PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SUMMARY OF PROJECT ESTIMATES BY YEARS (1)
FISCAL YEARS 1993 THROUGH 1998
Estimated 1992-93 Subsequent Fiscal Years
Total Financing to Capital
Costs Date (2) Budget 1993-1994 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998
$ 265,109,142 $ 85,113,405 $43,126,294 $32,454,038 $28,312,034 $30,231,202 $40,638,336 $ 5,233,833
146,593,093 91,902,577 7,648,467 6,360,860 13,764,220 15,306,106 3,977,841 7,633,022
29,212,795 18,962,049 0 1,700,000 975,000 2,768,327 2,487,582 2,319,837
31,179,150 14,898,834 10,742,316 3,461,000 461,000 616,000 500,000 500,000
138,463,155 39,790,634
70,158,983 50,339,104
32,840,710 24,318,381
$ 713,557,028 $325,324,984
$ 256,336,263 $227,883,263
90,098,952 46,761,642
$ 346,435,215 $274,644,905
$1,059,992,243 $599,969,889
9,036,179 37,661,266 10,412,701 29,700,000 6,062,375 5,800,000
6,783,612 3,450,213 3,318,445 509,000 449,000 5,309,609
1,510,000 1,340,480 1,363,670 1,399,150 1,435,694 1,473,335
$78,846,868 $86,427,857 $58,607,070 $80,529,785 $55,550,828 $28,269,636
$ 927,000 $ 3,670,000 $ 5,926,000 $ 6,850,000 $ 2,325,000 $ 8,755,000
__ 1,073,000 9,890,000 7,790,0~0 9,927,000 6,619,310 8,038,000
$ 2,000,000 $13,560,000 $13,716,000 $16,777,000 8,944,310 $16,793,000
$80,846,868 $99,987,857 $72,323,070 $97,306,785 $64,495,138 $45,062,636
(1) The Budget Year represents the C~ty's Capital Budget as approved by City Council. Subsequent
years are for planmng purposes and are subject to revision.
(2) Financing to Date refers to funding authorizations by C~ty Council and not to bonds issued or other
finanmng transactions.
Source' Capital Improvement Program for Fiscal Year 1992-93/1997-98.
42
I /brl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789-77566/pages2
Type of Financing
General Appropriations
Environmental Services
Utility Fund
Water and Sewer Fund
Local Bond Issues
General Obhganon
Bonds
General
Improvements
Road Bond Authority
1987 Recreation
Referendum
1986 School
Referendum
1989 School
Referendum
1980 Highway
Referendum
1986 Highway
Referendum
Storm Water Revenue
Bonds
Water and Sewer
Bonds
Water Resource
Referendum
Revenue Bonds
1977 Referendum
1980 Referendum
PROPOSED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
MEANS OF FINANCING SUMMARY BY YEARS
FISCAL YEARS 1993 THROUGH 1998
Estimated 1992-93 Unappropriated Subsequent Fiscal Years
Total Financing Capital
Cost To Date Budget 1993-1994 1994-1995 1995-1996 1996-1997 1997-1998
$ 134,051,452 $ 76,947,554 $ 9,190,700 $ 9,635,213 $10,257,690 $11,204,171 $ 8,179,884 $ 8,636,240
3,375,000 0 0 1,700,000 975,000 300,000 200,000 200,000
34,784,015 22,784,015 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000 2,000,000
321,236,699 84,893,435
41,411,597 33,411,597
10,000,000 10,000,000
3,816,244 3,816,244
62,945,000 62,945,000
2,226,588 2,226,588
4,961,560 4,961,560
6,875,746 0
51,199,922 40,775,529 43,156,605 39,376,287 44,702,362 17,132,559
0 0 4,000,000 4,000,000 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 2,468,327 2,287,582 2,119,837
161,522,000 161,522,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
101,512,822 41,722,512 0 11,560,000 11,716,000 14,777,000 6,944,310 14,793,000
429,745 429,745 0 0 0 0 0 0
11,731,255 11,731,255 0 0 0 0 0 0
Total Local Bond Issues $ 728,669,256 $417,659,936 $ 51,199,922 $ 52,335,529 $ 58,872,605 $ 60,621,614 $ 53,934,254 $ 34,045,396
Revenue Sharing $ 7,508,692 $ 6,738,692 $ 770,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
Other Sources of
Financing
Federal Contributions
State Contributions
City of Chesapeake
Lease-Purchases
Certificates of
Pamcipatlon
COP-Interest
Marine Science Mu-
seum Retained Earn-
~ngs
Golf Course Retained
Earnings
Fire Programs Fund
Norfolk Port and In- dustrial Authority
Southeastern Public
Service Authority
Transfer from Golf
Courses
Other
Total Other Financing
Sources
6,890,547 $ 1,883,087 $ 2,007,460 $ 3,000,000 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 0
4,730,188 798,938 3,500,000 431,250 0 0 0 0
34,568,417 34,424,667 0 143,750 0 0 0 0
1,300,000 1,300,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
78,334,370 30,334,370
1,700,000 900,000
0 25,000,000 0 23,000,000 0 0
800,000 0 0 0 0 0
50,000 50,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
1,267,000 0 362,000 181,000 181,000 181,000 181,000 181,000
1,820,009 1,143,234 320,000 320,000 36,775 0 0 0
428,675 0 187,560 241,115 0 0 0 0
15,337,972 4,828,746 10,509,226 0 0 0 0 0
100,000 100,000 0 0 0 0 0 0
5,076,650 76,650 0 5,000,000 0 0 0 0
$ 151,603,828 $ 75,839,692 $ 17,686,246 $ 34,317,115 $ 217,775 $ 23,181,0005 181,0005
181,000
Total Financing--All
Sources
$1,059,992,243 $599,969,889 $ 80,846,868 $99,987,857 $ 72,323,070 $97,306,785 $64,495,138 $45,062,636
43
JOBNAME' Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 1 SESS 195 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/off~clrept/3789- 77566/pages3
I
SECTION FIVE: FINANCIAL INFORMATION
BASIS OF ACCOUNTING AND ACCOUNTING STRUCTURE
All of the C~ty's Governmental Funds, Expendable Trust Funds, and Agency Funds (assets and
hab~htles) are reported under the modified accrual bas~s of accounting. Revenues are recogmzed ~n the
accounting; period in which they become susceptible to accrual (i.e., measurable and avadable).
"Measurable" means the amount of the transaction can be determined and "available" means
collect~ble w~thm the current period or soon enough thereafter to be used to pay habd~tms of the current
period. The City considers property taxes as avmlable ff they are collected w~th~n 45 days after year end.
Expenditures are recognized m the accounting period ~n which the corresponding habtht~es are ~ncurred,
ff measurable (except for unmatured interest on general long-term debt which ~s recogmzed when due
and paid).
The following ~s a hst of the major revenue sources whmh meet the "susceptible to accrual"
criteria
General Property Taxes Interest on Deposits and Investments
General Sales Tax Revenue from Commonwealth
Ut~hty Taxes Revenue from Federal Government
All Proprietary Funds are reported under the accrual bas~s of accounting. Revenues are recogmzed
when earned and expenses are recogmzed when ~ncurred. Unbdled Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund
accounts receivable for ut~hty services provided through June 30 are ~ncluded in the financial
statements. The City operates on a July 1-through June 30 fiscal year:.
Virginia Beach Development Authority
The Vlrg~ma Beach Development Authority operates for the specific purposes of attracting new
~ndustnes and expanding ~ndustr~es. The V~rg~ma Beach Development Authority ~s authorized to ~ssue
Industrial Development Bonds after approval by the C~ty Counc~I. The bonds do not constitute
~ndebtedness of the C~ty but are collaterahzed solely by revenues from the orgamzat~on on whose behalf
the bonds were ~ssued. A total of $841,353,221 tn Industrial Development Bonds have been authorized
and issued s~nce 1973.
In addmon, the Authority has undertaken several projects d~rectly. Among the projects that ~t has
undertaken, the Authority has financed a corporate office park whmh has $15 mllhon ~n Indebtedness
outstanding. Because the project has not attracted as many tenants as expected, the Authority ~s
experiencing cash flow difficulties.
On October 6, 1992, the C~ty of V~rg~ma Beach passed an ordinance authonmng a $6 mfihon loan
to the Authority. The loan proceeds were used to consolidate outstanding pr~nclpal and Interest on three
notes payable. The loan wdl be payable on demand and secured by a first deed of trust on the Oceana
West Corporate Park and Oceanfront land owned by the Authority.
Tidewater Transportation District Commission
The City's financial statements ~nclude ~ts share of the operating cost deficit of the regional mass
transit operations of the Tidewater Transportation D~stnct Commission. For fiscal year 1992, the C~ty's
share of deficits was $955,857
Fund Accounting
The Accounts of the City are orgamzed on the bas~s of funds and account groups, each of whmh
is considered a separate accounttng enuty. The operations of each fund are accounted for wtth a
separate set of self-balancing accounts which comprise its assets, hablht~es, fund equity, revenues, and
expenditures, or expenses, as appropriate. The various funds are grouped in the financial statements
Into eight generic fund types and three broad fund categories, as follows:
Governmental Funds
General Fund--Is the general operattng fund which is used to account for all financial resources
except those reqmred to be accounted for tn another fund.
44
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 2 SESS' 194 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 19.09 15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789 - ??566/pages3
Spectal Revenue Funds--are used to account for the proceeds of spemfic revenue sources (other
than special assessments, expendable trusts, or for major capital projects) that are legally restricted to
be expended for specified purposes.
Debt Servtce Funds--are used to account for the accumulation of resources for, the payment of
pnnmpal and interest on, general obhgat~on debt and related costs.
Capttal ProJects Funds--are used to account for the financial resources for the acqms~tion or
construction of major capital faclht~es (other than those financed by proprietary funds and trust funds).
Spectal Assessment Funds--are used to account for the financing of pubhc ~mprovements or
services deemed to benefit the properties against which specml assessments are levied.
Proprtetary Funds
Enterprise Funds--are used to account for operations (a) that are financed and operated ~n a
manner s~mIlar to private business enterprises where the intent of governing body ~s that costs
(expenses, including depreciation) of providing goods or services to the general pubhc on a cont~nmng
basis be financed or recovered primarily through user charges; or (b) where periodic determination of
revenues earned, expenses incurred, and/or net ~ncome is deemed appropriate for capital maintenance,
public policy, management control, accountability, or other purposes.
Internal Service Funds--are used to account for the financing of goods and services provided by
one department or agency to other departments or agencies of the governmental umt, on a cost-
reimbursement basis
Fiduciary Funds
Trust and Agency Funds--are used to account for assets held by a governmental unit ~n a trustee
capacity or as an agent for individuals, private orgamzat~ons, other governmental units, and/or other
funds These ~nclude Expendable Trust Funds, Non-Expendable Trust Funds, and Agency Funds.
CERTIFICATE OF ACHIEVEMENT
The Government Finance Officers Association of the United States and Canada ("GFOA")
awarded a Cernficate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City of Virginia
Beach for its Comprehensive Annual Flnancml Report for fiscal year 1991. In order to be awarded a
Certificate of Achievement, a governmental unit must publish an eastly readable and efficiently
organized Comprehensive Annual Financial Report that substannally conforms to the h~gh standards for
financial repomng as promulgated by the GFOA.
A Certificate of Achievement is valid for one year only. The City has been awarded a Certificate
of Achievement (called a Certificate of Conformance prior to 1985) for its Comprehensive Annual
Flnanclal Report for 13 of the past 14 years
The City of Virginia Beach was also awarded the Certificate of Achievement for Distinguished
Budget Presentation from the GFOA for its 1991/92 budget. The C~ty also received this award for the
previous seven years
BUDGETARY PROCESS
The City Charter requires the City Manager to submit a balanced, proposed operating budget to the
City Council at least 90 days before the beginning of each fiscal year which begins July 1. Each
department of the C~ty prepares its own budget request for rewew by the City Manager. The School
budget ~s prepared by the School Board, transmitted to the City Manager for his review, and then
submitted to the City Council for consideration as part of the C~ty's general operating budget. The C~ty
Council IS required to hold a public heanng on the budget at which time all ~nterested persons have the
opportunity to comment. If the proposed operating budget is not legally adopted by the City Council by
45
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 3 SESS 194 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pages3
June 1, the operating budget submitted by the City Manager shall have full force and effect as if it had
been adopted by the City Council.
The Clty Manager is authorized to transfer appropriations up to a maximum of $10,000. Transfers
in excess of $10,000 require City Council approval. Addltlonal approprlatlons must be offset by
additional estimated revenues and/or a transfer from the proper undesignated fund balance and require
a public hearing if the amount of the addltlonal appropriation exceeds one percent of the total revenue
in the approved budget.
Unexpended appropriations (except for the Capltal Projects, Grant, and Grants Consolidated
Funds) lapse and are closed to the proper fund balance at the end of each fiscal year. However, upon
City Council approval, the appropriation for the subsequent fiscal year ~s increased by the amount
necessary to satisfy the outstanding encumbrances at June 30 of each fiscal year.
Capital ProJects are budgeted separately from the operating budget. The Department of Manage-
ment and Budget annually prepares a sm-year Capital Improvement Program. Because the Capital
ProJects Funds' appropriations do not coincide with the City's fiscal year, the accounting, encumbering,
and controlling of the funds are based upon the length of each project. Similarly, Federal and State
grants in the Grants and Grants Consolidated Funds are budgeted separately from the operating budget
because these revenues do not necessarily coincide wlth the City's fiscal year.
Each capital lease obligation has a non-appropriation clause which generally states that each fiscal
year's lease payments are subject to City Council approval. These caDtal lease appropriations are offset
by an equal amount of estimated revenue (-other financing sources), and are functlonally budgeted in the
General Debt Service Fund.
1992-93 Operating Budget
Like many cities in the United States and the Mtd-Atlanttc Region, the Ctty of Virginia Beach has
been affected by the nationwide recession. The Fiscal Year 1992-93 Operating Budget reflects the City's
response to this environment by focusing on a plan that is sustainable over the long run and emphasizes
economy and equity in all programs. On May 12, 1992, the City Council approved a Fiscal Year
1992-1993 Operating Budget of $668,512,416, which represents a $23,076,257 or 3.6 percent increase
over the original Fiscal Year 1992 Operating Budget. The increase Is prlmarlly in schools, debt service
and public utlhtles A salary increase of 2 percent effective July 1, 1992 and 2.5 percent effective
January 1, 1993 is included for all employees (including school employees). The ~ncrease effective
January 1 is capped so that employees earning over $48,000 received an increase of $100 per month. The
budget also Includes a $20 per month increase in the City's contribution to School and City employees'
health premiums, effective January 1, 1993. Of the total Operating Budget, the General Fund budget
totals $440.9 mllhon, which is a $10.9 million or 2.41 percent decrease from the prior year. A summary
of the Fiscal Year 1992-93 budget is presented on the following page.
In keeping with Council policy, no fund balance or anticipated Fiscal Year 1992 ending balances are
used to support the budget. The budget incorporates no real estate tax increase from the current rate of
$1.09 per $100 (assessments are at 100 percent of market value). To further reduce costs and streamline
operations, the budget included many organizational changes, including the consolidation of several
departments and programs. Overall, 106 full-txme-equlvalent positions are ehminated and 36 new
positions added, for a net decrease of 70 positions. In an effort to avoid layoffs, persons whose positions
were eliminated were given the opportunity to transfer to other positions within the City. The new
organizational chart is included in Section Three. Certain Information Concerning the City.
In determining which programs and services would receive funding, the following key principles
and goals were utilized to guide staff in allocating resources (1) Maintaining the existing property tax
rate; (2) Meeting mandated programs; (3) Retaining funding of critical capital improvement program
projects; (4) AvoidIng layoffs~all position reductions to be accomphshed through attrition or reassign-
ments, (5) Avoiding substituting city funding for reductions in state budgets wherever possible. These
guidelines allowed City Council to adopt a budget which anticipated continued budget reductions at the
46
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE' 4 SESS 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
I /brl/304/team3/offtclrept/3789-77566/pages3
Commonwealth level and a continued slowdown ~n the local and regtonal economy whde matntatmng
essential government services.
The City ant~cipates cont~nmng measures such as the hlnng freeze and restrictions on capital outlay
purchases until national and local economic trends ~mprove. As in the past, the City w~ll continue to
constantly monitor the budget, ~nclud~ng practices such as m~d-year reviews, and wdl take ~mmed~ate
corrective actions as necessary to mmntmn stable and posmve financial conditions.
The following table shows the C~ty's estimated revenues and budgeted expenditures for the original
Fiscal Year 1993 Budget.
ESTIMATED REVENUES AND BUDGETED EXPENDITURES
ORIGINAL FISCAL YEAR 1993 BUDGET(I)
REVENUES
General Property Taxes .........................
Other Local Taxes ...............................
Permits, Privilege Fees, and Regulatory L~censes .........
Fines and Forfeitures ..............................
From Use of Money and Property ....................
Charges for Service ............ ~ ................
Commonwealth Revenues ...........................
Federal Revenues ............................
Miscellaneous Revenues & Non-Revenue Recmpts ........
Capital Project Reserve ............................
Financlng from Unappropriated Fund Balance ..........
Total Revenues ............................
Percent of
Original OrJgmal
F~scalYear F~scalYear
1993 Budget 1993 Budget
$228,594,969 34.30%
103,954,727 15.60
1,684,249 0.25
2,723,906 0.41
12,973,904 1.94
61,441,162 9.22
227,996,383 34.21
24,037,049 3.60
3,137,589 0.47
1,968,478 0.29
0 0.00
$668,512,416 100.00%
EXPENDITURES
General Government ............................
Mental Health ...............................
Social Services ...................
Police ........................................
Pubhc Works ..................................
Parks and Recreation ...........................
Libraries ......................
F~re ...........................
Public Utd~ties ..................................
Education ............................
Debt Service ................................
Reserve for Contingencies ...........................
Capital Projects ..........................
Total Expenditures ...........................
$ 74,580,606 11.16%
11,865,194 1.78
17,086,535 2.56
40,422,731 6.05
43,263,366 6.47
14,195,753 2.12
7,314,412 1.09
17,586,460 2.63
34,914,064 5.22
312,800,160 46.79
78,518,753 11.75
7,112,834 1.06
8,851,548 1.32
$668,512,416 100.00%
(1) All funds combined.
Source' Fiscal Year 1993 Budget.
GENERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES
In F~scal Year 1992, tax revenues accounted for 57.41 percent of general governmental revenue,
State assistance 33.08 percent, federal sources 4.80 percent, and other sources 4.7~ percent.
' 47
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE 5 SESS. 195 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09.15 1993
for 1/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/pages3
I
The following table shows the C~ty's Fiscal Year 1992 actual revenues by source.
REVENUES
GENERAL GOVERNMENT REVENUES
FISCAL YEAR 1992 REVENUES BY SOURCE (1)
Increase/
Percent (Decrease)
1992 of Total From 1991
General Property Taxes ............
Other Local Taxes ................
Permits, Prlwlege Fees, and
Regulatory L~censes ............
F~nes and Forfeitures .............
From Use of Money and Property ....
Charges for Services ..............
Miscellaneous Revenue ............
From Commonwealth .............
From Federal Government ..........
Total Revenues ..............
1991
$233,979,953 39.60% $19,970,284 $214,009,669
105,230,533 17.81 5,402,400 99,828,133
2,259,878 0.38 11,697 2,248,181
2,710,157 0.46 (427,518) 3,137,675
8,463,124 1.45 (4,136,859) 12,599,983
9,816,701 1.66 1,411,402 8,405,299
4,580,576 0.78 303,321 4,277,255
195,443,109 33.08 (5,728,949) 201,172,058
28,319,753 4.80 (4,215,941) 32,535,694
$590,803,784 100.00% $12,589,837 $578,213,947
(1) Includes General, Special Revenue and Debt Service Funds.
Source C~ty Department of F~nance.
~CJENERAL FUND
In accordance w~th the general practice of governmental umts, the C~ty records ~ts transactions under
various funds. The largest, the General Fund, is that from which all general costs of C~ty government are
paid and to which taxes and other revenues, not specifically d~rected by law or adm~mstrative action to be
deposited in specml revenue funds, are recorded. Examples of special revenue funds are the School
Operating Fund, the School Grants Fund, and the Grants Consohdated Fund.
The General Fund is comprised of revenue derived from ad valorem taxes, other local taxes,
hcenses, fees, permits, certmn revenue from the Federal and State governments, ~nterest earned on
invested cash balances, and other revenues. General Fund disbursements include the costs of general
C~ty government, transfers to the School Operating Fund for local share of school costs, and transfers
to the Debt Service Funds to pay pnnclpal and ~nterest on the C~ty's general obhgatlon bonds for other
than water and sewer purposes.
Personal and Real Property Tax Revenues
Ad valorem property taxes contributed 52.8 percent of the City's General Fund revenues ~n fiscal
year 1992 The C~ty lev~es an ad valorem tax on the assessed value of real and personal property located
w~th~n the City. Other local taxes contributed 23.5 percent of the City's General Fund revenues m fiscal
year 1992. These ~nclude (1) a one percent local sales tax (collected by the state and remitted to the
C~ty); (2) a tax on consumer utility bills (20 percent each for gas, electric, water, and telephone on bills
up to $12.00 per month for res~dential classes and 20 percent on the first $400.00 per month for ~ndustr~al
and commercial classes), (3) a cigarette tax of 10 mds/c~garette; (4) property transfer recordation taxes,
(5) an automobile license tax; (6) various business, professional, and occupational taxes; (7) a four and
one-half percent hotel room tax, (8) a restaurant meal tax of four and one-half percent, and (9) an
amusement tax of 10 percent on gross admissions for certmn events.
The following table shows the C~ty's principal tax revenues by source for each of the last ten fiscal
years Growth ~n total tax revenues has averaged 11.09 percent annually over the last ten years.
48
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE: 6 SESS 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19'09 15 1993
/hr 1/304/team3/off~clrept/3789- 77566/pages3
PRINCIPAL TAX REVENUES BY SOURCE
FISCAL YEARS 1983 THROUGH 1992
Real Personal
Fascal Property Property General Utd~ty
Year Taxes Taxes Sales Tax Tax
1983 $ 55,384,155 $21,094,514 $13,097,204 $12,503,043
1984 63,856,868 26,283,462 15,678,478 13,975,592
1985 73,359,552 29,773,929 17,723,943 15,341,627
1986 85,965,738 32,834,807 19,712,454 16,392,450
1987 96,111,448 38,232,286 21,866,473 17,592,733
1988 117,598,401 43,578,938 22,850,321 19,430,560
1989 133,104,573 46,122,120 24,783,920 20,620,452
1990 150,807,805 48,181,625 25,717,605 21,550,390
1991 166,322,153 46,671,195 25,018,786 22,086,327
1992 184,968,826 47,421,189 26,235,734 22,934,698
Source' C~ty Department of Finance.
Restaurant Other
Meal Tax Taxes Total
$ 8,407,540 $21,668,050 $132,154,506
9,190,858 23,759,460 152,744,718
9,005,334 27,188,049 172,392,434
10,179,945 29,188,001 194,273,395
11,448,327 32,838,879 218,090,146
12,439,435 34,060,127 249,957,782
13,504,257 37,487,616 275,622,938
15,375,668 38,460,754 300,093,847
15,629,196 38,110,145 313,837,802
16,466,309 41,183,730 339,210,486
An annual ad valorem tax ~s lev~ed by the C~ty on the assessed value of real property subject to
taxatton within the City as of July 1. The City assesses real property at 100 percent of ~ts fatr market
value (with the excepnon of pubhc service properties whlch are assessed by the State Corporation
Commission) Real property taxes are due on December 5, and June 5 of the fiscal year tn whmh they
are levied. A penalty of ten percent of the, tax owed or $10, wh~chever-~s greater, along with interest of
9.6 percent for the first year, ~s assessed on dehnquent taxes. Subsequent year's interest penalty rates
are set by the City Councd and are currently 8.4 percent
A pomon of tangible personal property located w~thm the C~ty ~s also assessed an annual ad
valorem tax The assessed value of personal property ~s 100 percent of apprmsed value. Personal
property taxes are due June 5, and delinquent payments are subject to the same penalties as described
above for real property.
The following table sets forth the assessed value of all taxable property ~n the City for the last ten
fiscal years. Tax-exempt properties owned by Federal and state governments, churches, and schools,
among others, aggregating apprommately $2,887,843,853 for fiscal year 1992, are not included m the
table The assessed value of real property in the C~ty at June 30, 1992 was $16,913,600,366 (includes
public service real property).
HISTORICAL ASSESSED VALUE
FISCAL YEARS 1983 THROUGH 1992
Public
Real Percentage Personal Percentage Service Percentage Percentage
Property Change Property Change Property Change Total Change
F~scal Assessed From Assessed From Assessed From Assessed From
Year Value(l) Prtor Year Value Prior Year Value Prior Year Value Prmr Year
1983 $ 6,800,526,008 15 77% $ 342,050,616 17 78% $189,515,962 3 27% $ 7,332,092,586 15 50%
1984 7,893,246,685 16 07 436,115,053 27 50 212,974,730 12 38 8,542,336,468 16 51
1985 8,890,778,108 12 64 497,670,483 14 11 253,693,018 19 12 9,642,141,609 12 87
1986 10,444,890,701 17 48 555,796,061 11 68 273,750,957 7 91 11,274,437,719 16 93
1987 11,815,311,756 13 12 861,705,873 (2) 55 04 297,499,489 8 68 12,974,517,118 15 08
1988 13,178,749,889 11 54 1,167,615,684 35 50 366,416,362 23 17 14,712,781,935 13 40
1989 14,454,647,772 9 68 1,223,028,889 4 75 389,762,087 6 37 16,067,438,748 9 21
1990 15,267,860,244 5 63 1,264,174,067 3 36 425,932,492 9 28 16,957,966,803 5 54
1991 16,047,722,536 5 11 1,216,538,447 -3 77 488,287,602 14 64 17,752,548,585 4.69
1992 16,407,454,278 2 24 1,226,396,729 81 506,146,088 3 66 18,139,997,095 2 18
(1) Real property is assessed at 100 percent of fmr market value.
(2) In 1987 the assessed value of personal property changed from 50% to 100% of estimated apprmsed value.
Source City Department of Finance
49
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S PAGE. 7 SESS. 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
I/br 1/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/pages3 I
The C~ty is reqmred to levy taxes on the assessed value of real and personal property w~thout limit
as to the rate or amount to the extent necessary to pay prlnc~pal and interest on its bonds. The following
table sets forth the City's tax rates and tax lev~es on real property for fiscal years 1983 through 1992.
PROPERTY TAX RATES AND CHANGE IN TAX LEVY
FISCAL YEARS 1983 THROUGH 1992
Percentage
Tax Rate Real Annual
on Real Property Change ~n
Fascal Year Property(l) Tax Levy Tax Levy
1983 $0.800 $ 55,397,150 28.25%
1984 0.800 64,246,361 15.97
1985 0.800 73,175,631 13.90
1986 0.800 85,257,778 16.51
1987 0.800 96,248,640 12.89
1988 0.877 117,624,210 22.21
1989 0. 915 133,152,987 13.20
1990 0.977 151,785,105 13.99
1991 1.032 169,244,306 7.58
1992 1. 090 182,106,809 7.60
(1) Tax rate per $100 of assessed value.
Source. City Department of Finance.
The following table sets forth ;nformatlon concerning the City's real property tax collection rate for
each of its ten most recent fiscal years.
REAL PROPERTY TAX COLLECTION RATE
FISCAL YEARS 1983 THROUGH 1992
Current Total
Total (Net) Taxes Percent Dehnquent Total Collections
Fiscal Taxes Recetvable of Levy Tax Tax As Percent of
Year Receivable Collected Collected Collecttons Collections(I) Current Levy
1983 $ 55,397,150 $ 54,041,012 97.6% $1,213,332 $ 55,254,344 99.7%
1984 64,246,361 61,711,675 96.1 1,527,596 63,239,271 98.4
1985 73,175,631 70,876,808 96.9 2,879,831 73,756,639 100.8
1986 85,257,778 82,711,220 97.0 2,405,689 85,117,133 99.8
1987 96,248,640 93,645,011 97.3 2,579,865 96,224,876 100.0
1988 117,624,210 114,062,572 97.0 3,111,850 117,174,422 99.6
1989 133,152,987 128,906,814 96.8 3,678,195 132,585,009 99.6
1990 151,785,105 146,277,878 96.4 3,770,337 150,048,215 98.9
1991 169,244,306 161,746,760 95.6 4,894,582 166,641,342 98.5
1992 182,106,809 176,242,802 96.8 7,958,457 184,201,259 101.2
(1) Includes a 10 percent penalty ($10 mlmmum) on delinquent collections.
Source City Department of Finance.
5O
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 8 SESS. 194 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 19.09 15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pages3
I
The following table sets forth the City's 25 largest taxpayers of ad valorem real property taxes and
the assessed value of property owned by each such taxpayer.
25 LARGEST TAXPAYERS
(Fiscal Year 1992)
V~rglma Power(l) .........................
Chesapeake & Potomac Telephone Company(l) ..
R.G. Moore, et al .........................
Lynnhaven Shopping Center Ltd. Ptnrshp .......
Chrlstmn Broadcasting Network ..............
Aetna Life Insurance Co ...................
F Wayne McLeskey, Jr ..................
Kemps River Shopping Center ...............
Westminster-Canterbury of Hampton Roads ....
Cavalier Hotel Corp ....................
Pembroke Square .........................
W~ndsor Holland Properties .................
gumlle Potter et al ......................
Lee A. Glfford ........................
Watergate Treehouse Assoc ......... .~ .......
Philadelphia Assoc ..................
Ramon W. Breeden, et al ...................
Coastal Inn Assoc ......................
W W & Lucy Reasor ................
Thaha Garden Assoc ......................
Tidewater Oxford LTD ....................
Tidewater Partners Ltd. Partnership ...........
Vlrg~ma Beach Associates ..................
Lake Associates .......................
Neptune Associates ..............
Assessed
Valuahon
of Real Property Type of Business
$230,346,836 Pubhc Utihty
192,955,059 Public Utility
144,785,376 Residential Developer
106,224,345 Shopping Center
64,951,414 Broadcasting
34,043,616 Apartments
33,369,372 Shop. Ctr./Off. Bldg./Apts.
30,867,474 Shopping Center
30,645,700 Life Care l::acfl~ty
29,415,810 Hotel
28,859,395 Shopping Center
26,785,602 Shop. Ctr./Apts.
26,264,065 Shop. Ctr./Offices
26,255,967 Shop. Ctr./Apts.
25,973,460- Apartments
19,453,345 Apartments
18,893,324 Shop. Ctr./Off. Bldg./Apts.
17,414,879 Hotel
17,350,663 Resldentml Developer
17,313,655 Apartments
16,991,798 Apartments
16,111,855 Offices
15,691,076 Offices
15,303,851 Apartments
13,094,465 Hotel
(1) Includes personal property taxes at real property tax rates.
Source: C~ty Assessor
Published Financial Information
The City Issues and distributes a Comprehensive Annual Flnancml Report on its financial
operatIons for each fiscal year. The last report pubhshed covers the fiscal year ended June 30, 1992.
Copies of the Annual F~nanc~al Report are available to the pubhc upon request from the Department of
Ftnance, Vlrgima Beach Mumc~pal Center, Virginia Beach, V~rglma 23456, or from one of the nationally
recognized municipal securities repositories hsted in Section One.
In addition to the Annual Financial Report, the City also annually publishes an Operating Budget
and a Slx-year Capital Improvement Program. These documents are available through the C~ty
Manager's Office, V~rgmla Beach Mumc~pal Center, V~rg~nla Beach, V~rg~ma 23456
The following table compares C~ty General Fund revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund
balance for Fiscal Years 1987 through 1992.
51
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S PAGE. 9 SESS 195 OUTPUT Mort Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/brl/304/team3/off~clrept/3789-77566/pages3
[
GENERAL FUND
COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF REVENUES AND EXPENDITURES,
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCE
FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30
REVENUES
General Property Taxes
Other Local Taxes
Permits, Pnvdege Fees, and
Regulatory LIcenses
F~nes and Forfmtures
From Use of Money and
Proper~
Charges for Services
M~sccllaneous
From Commonwealth
From Federal Government
Non-Revenue Recczpts
TOTAL REVENUES
EXPENDITURES
Operating
Lcg~slattvc
Executive
Law
Finance
Personal
JudicIal
Health
Social Services
Pohcc
PublIc Works
Parks and Recreation
L~brary
Planmng .
Agrmulture
Natural Resources and
Rural Services
Econorntc Development
Convention and VIsitor
Development
General Services
Boards and Commms~ons
Fire
Data Processang
Permits and Inspections
Mental Health and Mental
Retardation
Museums
Non-Departmental
Housing and Neighborhood
Preservation Department
Total Operating
Capital Outlay
Debt Service
Principal Retirement
lntcrcst and F~scal Changes
Total Expenditures
EXCESS OF REVENUES
OVER (UNDER) EXPEN-
DITURES
OTHER FINANCING
SOURCES (USES)
Proceeds of Capital Leases
Operating Transfers ~n
Operating Transfers out
Total Other F~nanc~ng
Sources (Uses)
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
$ 134,996,893 $ 162,096,806 $ 180,110,033 $ 200,133,681 $ 214,009,669 $ 233,979,953
83,093,253 87,059,437 94,672,198 99,104,124 98,922,738 104,300,667
2,884,982 2,938,867 2,670,252 2,604,931 2,248,181 2,259,878
2,193,061 3,030,415 3,662,150 3,858,028 3,137,675 2,710,157
8,794,348 11,775,610 14,725,392 14,693,688 11,765,893 7,562,190
6,184,968 5,960,973 5,787,462 5,763,803 6,410,212 7,617,729
1,658,475 2,698,598 4,293,172 3,908,537 3,899,524 3,685,755
56,668,657 60,671,981 65,911,807 69,121,063 71,349,961 73,346,816
5,402,154 6,018,993 7,317,361 6,397,698 6,540~041 7,950,942
$ 301,876,791 $ 342,251,680 $ 379,149,827 $ 405,585,553 $ 418,283.894
$ 443,414,087
530,413 $ 562,435 $ 569,773
1,048,977 1,071,544 1,189,558
1,296,389 1,395,814 1,480,584
7,518,153 8,309,895 8,857,915
1,299,174 1,466,492 1,784,643
8,751,387 9,658,183 9,190,536
2,015,447 - 2,051,854 2,285,180
9,282,063 10,192,901 11,817,113
25,728,456 28,606,418 31,994,842
29,139,939 33,169,623 34,442,948
7,407,192 8,251,410 8,961,814
3,410,584 4,428,029 5,073,518
1,309,075 1,295,954 1,489,908
545,492 617,692 637,168
$ 674,927 $ 683,913
1,547,372 1,502,231
1,542,577 1,601,393
9,521,813 9,841,722
2,012,731 2,038,214
10.636,036 11,767,277
~360,900 2,478,544
12,889,205 14,132,844
35,509,917 37,837,681
39,644,910 36,770,515
9,543,780 11,054,238
5,791,272 5,949,252
1,855,492 1,545,418
722,248 714,039
-- --
991,943 1,074,010
5,554,576 5,465,271
16,392,667 16,644,784
3,643,160 3,921,407
17,989,288 18,714,433
4.132,011 4,171,127
2,125,172 2,246,813
4,717,502 5,054,714 5,562,627
12,421,915 14,404,501 15,718,724
4,262,741 4,825,099 4,075,240
14,457,308 15,424,639 16,652,661
3,805,673 4,025,900 3,808,216
1,918,706 2,162,393 2,305,442
5,392,270 5,795,777 6,663,912
-- -- __
3,180,999 3,700,126 3,334,136
$149,412,855
10,266,579
3,237,509 3,700,890
409,838 478,053
$ 166,471,393 $ 177,896,458 $ 188,729,344
10,490,209 10,350,951 10,625,492
$ 159,679,434 $ 176,961,602 $ 188,247,409 $ 199,354,836
$ 142,197,357 $ 165,290,078 $ 190,902,418 $ 206,230,717
$ 687,736
1,614,552
1,475,308
11,393,020
2,669,709
13,561,700
2,252,423
15,218,923
38,372,131
37,172,735
11,330,498
5,845,858
1,564,023
225,073
446,496
1,091,542
6,608,949
16,375,486
3,985,940
18,143,906
--
2,243,690
242,904
2,964,571
507,894
$ 194,334,069 $ 195,995,067
8,512,687 7,842,104
$ 202,846,756 $ 203,837,171
$ 215,437,138 $ 239,576,916
$ -- $ -- $ -- $ -- $ -- $ --
..... 381,790
(128,637,826) (158,667,499) (190,399,141) (210,851,799) (213,493,818) (237,665,759)
$(128,637,826) $(158,667,499) $(190,399,141) $(210,851,799) $(213,493,818) $(237,283,969)
52
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAGE: 10 SESS. 195 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/brl/304/team3/officlrept/3789-77566/pages3
REVENUES
EXCESS OF REVENUES
AND OTHER FINANCING
SOURCES OVER (UNDER)
EXPENDITURES AND
OTHER FINANCING
FUND BALANCE
(DEFICIT)--JULY 1
Residual Eqmty Transfers
ADJUSTED FUND
BALANCE--JULY 1
FUND BALANCE-- JUNE 30(1)
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991
$13,559,531 $ 6,622,579 $ 503,277 $(4,621,082) $ 1,943,320
40,250,172 53,864,754 60,487,928 61,106,482 56,494,680
55,051 595 115,277 9,280 (242,683)
$40,305,223 $53,865,349 $60,603,205 $61,115,762 $56,251,997
$53,864,754 $60,487,928 $61,106,482 $56,494,680 $58,195,317
1992
$ 2,292,947
58,195,317
--
$58,195,317
$60,488,264
Note to the Table
(1) The entire General Fund balance is not available for appropriation because of outstanding ~nterfund
and mteragency loans, prepaid items, encumbrances, and a designation for school capital projects. An
analys~s of the General Fund balance (unaudited) is as follows
Fund Balance--June 30, 1992 ...................... $60,488,264
Less Reserved Amounts'
Encumbrances ............................... $5,470,243
Advances to Other Funds ....................... 727,450
Loans ............. ? ............... - 1,433,605
Prepaid Items .............................. 5,655
School Capital ProJects ......................... 2,581,062
Federal Arbitrage ............................ 1,923,172 12.141,187
Net Balance Avmlable for Appropriation--July 1, 1992... $48.347,077
Source. City Department of Ftnance.
At the end of F~scal Year 1992, the General Fund had an operating surplus of $2,292,947 leaving a
General Fund balance at June 30, 1992, of $60,488,264. The following table presents a comparison of the
C~ty's General Fund balance for Fiscal Years 1987 through 1992.
GENERAL FUND BALANCE
FISCAL YEAR 1987 THROUGH 1992
June 30
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
General Fund
Bahmcc
Reserved for
Encumbrances $ 5,961,534 $ 6,251,028 $ 6,962,355 $ 6,489,612 $ 6,483,447 $ 5,470,243
Advance to
Other Funds 347,450 347,450 1,347,450 1,127,450 927,450 727,450
Loans 877,305 870,305 704,055 897,305 723,955 1,433,605
Prepaid Items 1,655 5,655 5,655 5,655 8,930 5,655
School Capital
ProJects ..... 2,581,062
Federal
Arbitrage .... 1,577,461 1,923,172
Unreserved
Des,gnated for
Subsequent
Year's
Expenditures ......
Undesignated $46,676,810 $53,013,490 $52,086,967 $46,397,197 $48,244,604 $48,347,077
Totals $53,864,754 $60,487,928 $61,106,482 $56,494,680 $58,195,317 $60,488,264
53
] JOBNAME. Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 11 SESS: 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09.15 1993
] /brl/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pages3 I
The C~ty has mmntmned a s~zable General Fund balance ~n each of the past ten fiscal years, as
summarized in the table below.
GENERAL FUND BALANCE AS PERCENT OF GENERAL FUND REVENUES
Fiscal Year
FISCAL YEAR 1983 THROUGH 1992
General Fund Balance
Fund Balance As Percent of General
June 30 Fund Revenues
1983 $25,435,873 13.72%
1984 42,359,649 19.95
1985 56,260,496 23.12
1986 40,250,172 14.75
1987 53,864,754 17.83
1988 60,487,928 17.67
1989 61,106,482 16.12
1990 56,494,680 13.93
1991 58,195,317 13.91
1992 60,488,264 13.64
Source: C~ty Department of F~nance.
THE WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM: FINANCIAL_ RESULTS
The Department of Pubhc Uttlmes operates a water distribution system and owns transm~sston
lines and pump stations to d~stnbute to customers m the City surplus water purchased ~n bulk from the
C~ty of Norfolk under the terms of a 20-year contract expiring in June 1993. The City also has contracts
w~th Isle of Wight and Southampton Counties and the C~ty of Suffolk to pump water from freshwater
wells dunng periods of severe drought to augment the C~ty water supply. The Isle of W~ght contract
expires in 1996, the Suffolk contract expires ~n 1999, and the Southampton contract expires m 1996.
The physical property of the V~rgmm Beach water system as of June 30, 1992 ~ncluded apprommately
133 miles of transm~ssion mmns, 1,103 mdes of d~stnbut~on mmns, 6,123 fire hydrants, 15 water storage
facdmes, and 8 pumping stations. The City water system is fully metered, with tap sizes ranging from 3Aqnch
to 12 roches. As of June 30, 1992, the water system had approximately 111,297 connections, represennng a
1.61% increase of the number reported m 1991, and an apprommate service area of 382,862 people.
Vlrglma Beach also owns collector hnes, force mmns, and pump stations to transport sewage to the
treatment faciht~es operated by the Hampton Roads Samtat~on D~stnct ("HRSD"), the regional
treatment agency V~rglma Beach c~ttzens pay sewer collection and maintenance fees to the City of
V~rglnla Beach and sewerage treatment charges to HRSD The City's sewer system consists of 339
sewer pumping stations and over 1,257 miles of pipeline ranging ~n size from 4 ~nches to 36 inches ~n
d~ameter. As of June 30, 1992, the number of City sewer connections was 106,638, representing a 1.73%
increase over the number reported in 1991.
The HRSD, established in 1940, provides wastewater treatment services for nine c~ties and three
counties ~n southeastern Virginia. The HRSD operates nine treatment facilities with a total treatment
capacity of 204 m~lhon gallons per day ("MGD"). Two HRSD plants are located in the C~ty of V~rglma
Beach. The Chesapeake-Ehzabeth Plant, in operation s~nce 1968, has an operating capacity of 24 MGD,
w~th average annual flow estimated at 15 MGD. The Atlantic Plant has the capacity of 36 MGD and
average annual flow estimated at 30 MGD. The Plant was designed with the capability to be expanded
to 72 MGD. As of June 30, 1992 the HRSD had 381,000 service connections. According to the HRSD,
the HRSD is meeting all its dmcharge permit requirements estabhshed by the U.S. Environmental
Protecnon Agency and the V~rg~ma Water Control Board.
The consulting engineering firm of Alvord, Burdtck & Howson continues to be used as the City's
Water and Sewer Rate consultant and has been used each year s~nce 1986 to perform various studies and
analys~s for the water and sewer system. In the opinion of the water and sewer rate consultants, the
C~ty's water and sewer facdltms are operated and malntmned ~n good working order including repairing,
54
JOBNAME. Va. Beach O S. PAGE. 12 SESS. 194 OUTPUT. Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/hr 1/304/team3/off~clrept/3789- 77566/pages3
rebuilding, or replacing of equipment and structures when reqmred. In addition, the City has developed
an ongoing training program to develop a staff of personnel ~n sufficlent numbers to promote safe and
techmcally competent operation of the water and sewer system.
In addition to the City's water and sewer system, there are two private water unhties serving 770
customers
The estimated depreciated value of the water and sewage property, plant and eqmpment was
$264,590,500 as of June 30, 1992, ~ncludlng land and mr rights.
The following table sets forth the number of connections and other statistics for each of the last
seven fiscal years.
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM
ASSET EVALUATION
FOR FISCAL YEARS ENDING JUNE 30
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
.,
Millions of Gallons of
Water Storage 30 45 30 45 30 45 30 45 31 45 31 45
Mzlc~ of Water L~ncs 1,117 1,152 1,180 1,212 1,226 1,236
Miles of Sewer Lines 1,151 1,185 1,125 1,236 1,244 1,257
Number of Water Pump Sta-
tzons 8 8 8 8 8 8
Number of Sewer Pump Sta-
tions 305 312 319 322 331 339
Number of Water
Connections 96,991 100,498 104,560 107,495 109,573 111,297
Number of Sewer
Connections 93,769 97,148 100,471 103,066 104,870 106,638
Total Value of Utility Plant in
Scrvlcc $272,363,213 $281,550,209 $289,867,334 $317,809,617 $328,379,708 $339,339,588
Source City Department of Pubhc Utflltles.
The C~ty's water and sewer system is operated on a self-sustmnlng basis, w~th rates and charges
adjusted when necessary to assure a stream of revenues adequate to cover the costs of operations and
maintenance of the system and debt servme on all water and sewer system bonds. Revenues from water
and sewer charges are reserved solely for the payment of water and sewer fund obhgations and have not
been used for any non-water or non-sewer related purpose. Water and sewer charges are maintmned at
a level sufficient to pay all water and sewer operating expenses and debt service.
In accordance wlth a contract dated June 10, 1986, the firm of Alvord, Burdock & Howson
examined the books and records of the Department of Pubhc Utilities and conducted a physical
~nspection of the operating faclhties ~n order to develop adequate water and sewer rates. The terms of
the contract were to conduct a cost of service study and to develop rates which would be adequate for
the fiscal years from 1986-87 to 1990-91. The study resulted m a four year plan for water rate ~ncreases,
beg:nmng ~n the fiscal year 1987-88 and extending to the fiscal year 1990-91, to provide annual
adjustments taking into account the need for an increase ~n revenue due to the addition of the Lake
Gaston water supply projects to the Vlrg~ma Beach Water Supply System. On July 6, 1987, the C~ty
Council accepted the recommendations of the consultant, and authorized increased water rates for fiscal
years 1987-88 and 1988-89. In June 1989, the City Council authorized rate ~ncreases for Fiscal Year
1989-90 and F~scal Year 1990-91.
In 1989, Aivord, Burdtck & Howson was retmned to update the 1987 rate study. Their report
forecasted a need to ~ncrease water and sewer rates for fiscal years 1990-91 through 1992-93 to fund the
water and sewer capital program. On August 14, 1990, the C~ty Councll accepted the recommendations
of the consultant, and authorized ~ncreased water and sewer rates for fiscal years 1990-91, 1991-92 and
1992-93
55
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 13 SESS 195 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/brl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789-77566/pages3
I
The City's water and sewer activities are operated on an enterprise fund accounting bas~s. F~scal
year 1992 operating revenues were $56,760,230. Th~s represents a 6.58 percent increase over fiscal year
1991. As a result from the positive net ~ncome, in addition to the carry over of retained fiscal year 1991
earnings, the Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund had posmve unreserved retained earmngs of
$106,252,377 at the end of fiscal year 1992.
Typical Water and Sewer Bills
Under the C~ty's current rate structure, a s~ngle-famlly residence consuming 6,000 gallons for 31
days would receive a bill as follows:
Water Usage, 6 x $3.11 per 1000 gallons ................... $18.66
Minimum Service Avmlab~hty Charge ..................... 3.40
Samtary Sewer Service ................................
Total Due for Water and Samtary Sewer Service .............
$22.06
$ll.38
$33.44
In addition, the same residence would be charged $8.40 in sewer treatment charges from the
Hampton Roads Sanitation District. The last HRSD rate increase was on July 1, 1992.
Operating Results--Water and Sewer System
The C~ty Council fixes water and sewer rates and charges such that estimated income generated by
such rates and charges will cover operating expenses and debt service relating to the water system.
Funds and accounts relating to the Department of Pubhc Utilities are kept separate from other funds and
accounts of the City.
The Department of Pubhc Utdit~es has financed the construction and acquisition of water and sewer
facilities through Federal and State grant proceeds and the issuance of C~ty general obhgatlon water and
sewer bonds, water and sewer bonds (secured both by water and sewer revenues and the C~ty's general
obligation pledge) and water and sewer revenue bonds.
The Department ~s required by the City's bond resolutions to establish rates sufficient to cover
operations and mmntenance and debt service on the general obhgat~on water and sewer bonds and the
water and sewer revenue bonds. Certmn general obhgat~on bonds ~ssued prior to 1977 for water and
sewer purposes are not secured by such a pledge. However, ~t ~s C~ty Council pohcy to pay debt service
on those general obhgat~on bonds ~ssued for the water and sewer purposes from revenues of the Water
and Sewer Enterprise Fund, and to set water and sewer rates accordingly.
The following table presents the operating results of the Water and Sewer Enterprise Fund,
exclusive of depreciation, as used in computing coverage of debt service, for fiscal year 1987 through
fiscal year 1992. Coverage of debt service on the water and sewer revenue bonds and the general
obhgat~on bonds ~ssued for water and sewer purposes ~s shown separately from the coverage of debt
service on all bonds issued for water and sewer purposes
56
JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S. PAGE. 14 SESS. 194 OUTPUT: Mon Mar 29 19 09.15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/pages3
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM
COVERAGE OF DEBT SERVICE
FOR YEAR ENDING JUNE 30
(in 000's)
1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992
Operating Revenues
Service Charges .............. $18,221
Water Usage ................. 15,535
M~scellaneous ................ 3,381
Total Operating Revenues ..... $37,137
Operating Expenses
Water Production ............. $ 8,240
Water Distribution ........ 2,761
Sewer Collection ............. 3,711
Administration and Engineering .. 5,608
Customer Services .......... 3,566
Total Operating Expenses ..... 23,886
Net Operating Income ......... $13,251
Non Operating Income
Interest ................. $ 4,390
Water Resource Recovery Fee ... 6,155
Sewer Connection Fees .......... 1,348
Total Non-Operating Income ..... 11,893
Income Available For Debt
Services ................. $25,144
Annual Debt Service
Water and Sewer Revenue
Bonds* ............... $ 1,090
Total Water and Sewer Debt
Service? ................. $12,230
Coverage of Debt Service on Water
and Sewer Revenue Bonds ...... 23.07x
Coverage of Debt Service on All
Debt Supported by Water and
Sewer Revenues ............. 2.06x
$19,994 $21,061 $21,255 $21,898 $23,960
19,014 22,653 26,204 29,644 31,204
1,623 2,404 1,883 1,741 1,617
$40,581 $46,118 $49,312 $53,283 $56,760
$ 9,628 $ 9,941 $11,332 $12,643 $12,980
2,758 3,222 3,520 3,374 3,356
4,218 4,680 5,154 5,450 5,047
6,174 6,281 7,275 7,845 7,786
3,697 3,914 4,069 3,876 3,970
26,475 28,038 31,350 33,188 33,139
$14,106 $18,080 $17,962 $20,095 $23,642
$ 5,544 $ 7,529 $ 8,482 $ 7,480 $ 5,562
7,569 7,335 4,982 4,400 3,609
2,020 2,114~ 1,617 1,674 1,723
15,133 16,978 15,081 13,554 10,894
$29,239 $35,058 $33,043 $33,649 $34,536
$ 1,074 $ 1,058 $ 2,179 $ 2,742 $ 2,703
$12,249 $12,459 $13,569 $13,446 $13,778
27.22x 33.14x 15.16x 12.27x 12.78x
2.39x 2.81x 2.44x 2.50x 2.51x
'~ Includes General Obhgat~on debt issued for water and sewer purposes and General Obhgat~on debt
addmonally secured by a pledge of water and sewer revenues and Capital Leases.
Source: Financial Feas~bd~ty Study, Water and Sewer Revenue Bonds, Series 1992.
WATER AND SEWER CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
The Department of Pubhc Ut~htles annually prepares the port,on of the City's Capital Improvement
Plan concermng the ~mprovement and extension of the water and sewer system. According to the C~ty's
Capital Improvement Program, water and sewer utlhty projects m the amount of $346,435,215 account
for 34.7 percent of overall City capital spending anticipated dunng the period of fiscal years 1993 to
1998.
The C~ty has developed a Water and Sewer revenue bond program and has passed a Master
Resolution for the program. The City issued $19,975,000 of self-supported Water and Sewer Revenue
Bonds for various Water and Sewer projects in February 1992. Th~s ~ssue was the first of a proposed
series of Water and Sewer revenue bonds, as the City ~s contemplating ~ssmng approximately $12 to $15
million per year through 1998. For a more detailed description of this financing schedule, see "Capital
Improvement Program" herein
The following table presents the financing sources expected to meet the s~x-year capital ~mprove-
ment plan for the water and sewer utd~ty projects. It should be noted that numbers ~n the tables,
57
JOBNAME Va Beach O S PAGE 15 SESS 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/offmlrept/3789- 77566/pages3
"F~nanc~ng to Date" and "Funds Prewously Provided" refer to funding authorizations by C~ty Council
and not to bonds ~ssued or other financing transactions.
WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
Fiscal Year 1993 To Fiscal Year 1998
Financing Plan
Water and
Funds Balance Water and Sewer
Total Previously To Be Sewer Revenue
Uhhty Estimated Costs Prowded Funded Approprmt~ons Bonds
Bonds
Water $256,336,263 $227,883,263 $28,453,000 $ 6,021,000 $22,432,000
Sewer 90,098,952 46,761,642 43,337,310 5,979,000 37,358,310
Total $346,435,215 $274,644,905 $71,790,310 $12,000,000 $59,790,310
Source Proposed Capital Improvement Program for F~scal Year 1993-1998.
THE LAKE GASTON PROJECT
A major element of the Water and Sewer System Capital Improvement Plan is the Lake Gaston
Water Supply Project (the "Lake Gaston Project"). The proposed project consists of an 84-m~le,
60-tach p~pehne from the Pea H~ll Creek Tributary of Lake Gaston ~n Brunswmk County, V~rg~ma to the
C~ty of Norfolk's raw water facilities. The Lake Gaston water ~s expected to be treated at the Norfolk
Moores Bridges Water Treatment Plant. The cost of the project, as specified ~n the C~ty's C.I.P. for
fiscal years 1993-1998, ~s $206,000,000. Construction of sm river crossings began ~n July 1992, and the
below-ground port~on of the pump station at Lake Gaston was started m August 1992. It ~s antm~pated
that thc project wdl be completed four years after the start of constructton. On February 2, 1990 the
U S D~str~ct Court, Eastern D~stnct of North Carohna, ~ssued a final ruhng in the federal permit
ht~gat~on and vahdated the Corps of Engineers Construction Permit for the Project. On July 3, 1991, the
Fourth C~rcmt Court of Appeals upheld the lower court's ruhng that the Corps of Engineers'
Construction Permit for the Project ~s vahd. At that point the State of North Carohna filed a writ of
cert~on to the Umted States Supreme Court. The Supreme Court dechned to hear the case. In December
of 1992, the Corps of Engineers approved certain minor modifications to the construction permit. As of
February 1993, the C~ty has ~ncurred expenditures of $25,208,416 for the Lake Gaston Project, of whmh
the C~ty of Chesapeake has prod or wall pay $3,994,444.
The present status of ht~gat~on concermng the Lake Gaston ProJect ~s discussed ~n the section
"L~t~gat~on" hereto. Certain background ~nformat~on on the Lake Gaston Project and the proposed
approach to financing are presented m the following pages.
Background
The rap~d growth of V~rg~ma Beach s~nce 1950, combined w~th recent water shortages, has caused
the C~ty to ~nvest~gate and locate a source of water supply to supplement emstlng supphes and to meet
the long-term demands of the City. V~rg~ma Beach has no independent water supply and purchases bulk
treated water from the City of Norfolk. The C~ty's present contract w~th the City of Norfolk provides
for the sale of surplus water to V~rg~ma Beach through 1993. Negotiations with the C~ty of Norfolk to
renew th~s contract are nearing completion.
58
I JOBNAME. Va. Beach O S. PAGE 16 SESS. 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
I /brl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789-77566/pages3 ~
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
ESTIMATED WATER DEMAND (MGD)
FOR PLANNING PURPOSES
Year
2000 ................ 44
2010 ................ 50
2020 ................ 53
2030 ............ 55
Source: Magmre Associates, Inc., Malcolm P~rme, Inc., C~ty Department of Pubhc Utilities. The
current average annual demand ~s 30.1 MGD in fiscal year 1992 (all figures are net of apprommately
2MGD demand of U.S. Government Mdltary estabhshments, which purchase water from the City of
Norfolk).
Severe drought conditions dunng 1980 and 1981 made the City's search for a long-term water
supply solution, begun in the m~d-1970's, all the more vital. The City responded to thls situation by (1)
~mposlng water use restrictions and surcharges for excessive water consumption; (2) constructing five
emergency water supply wells in the neighboring City of Suffolk and Counties of Isle of Wight and
Southampton; and (3) undertaking a number of water supply studies which rewewed, analyzed, and
stud~ed more than 24 possible long-term sources of water.
The City must augment ItS ex~st~ng water supply sources. If the contract w~th the C~ty of Norfolk
were to be renewed upon expiration in 1993, the Norfolk water system would not be sufficient to meet
the C~ty's long-term water needs. The 1992 V~rglnla General Assembly passed legislation granting water
rights to Southeast Virglma and authorized the transfer of 60 MGD from the Roanoke R~ver to Southeast
V~rgmia. It is expected that the City's water reqmrements of 55 MGD to serve the year 2030 population
can be met by construction of the Lake Gaston ProJect and emstlng raw water supplies in Southeast
Virginia. In addition to the C~ty of Chesapeake having contracted for a one-s~xth share of the project,
two other jurisdictions have expressed an interest ~n the project. The City of Frankhn has indicated a
need for 1.0 MGD and Isle of Wight County has ~nd~cated a need for 1.0 MGD.
Therefore, the Lake Gaston ProJect has been sized to supply 60 MGD in the year 2030 in order to
supply the following commumt~es, pending an appropriate contract being entered ~nto between V~rg~ma
Beach and these commumt~es:
Virginia Beach ....................
Chesapeake ....................
Frankhn ........................
Isle of Wight County ................
Total ..........................
48MGD(1)
10MGD(2)
1MGD
1MGD
60MGD
(1) The demand which cannot be met by the Lake Gaston Project is expected to be made up from the
Norfolk water system.
(2) In November, 1987 Vlrglma Beach executed an agreement w~th the C~ty of Chesapeake for one-s~xth
of the project cost and one-sixth ownership of The Lake Gaston System.
In 1982 the C~ty Counc~I designated the Lake Gaston Project as the preferred water supply
alternative and d~rected the staff of the Department of Public Ut~ht~es to proceed with the necessary
eng~neenng and techmcal studies. On July 15, 1983, the C~ty filed the Lake Gaston Water Supply
Environmental Report and Joint Permit Application w~th the Vlrg~ma Manne Resources Commission
and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. After three pubhc hearings, the City of Virginia Beach received
the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 10 Permit on January 9, 1984 to withdraw water from Lake
Gaston.
59
JOBNAME Va. Beach O S. PAGE' 17 SESS 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09.15 1993
/hr 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/pages3
The project consists of an 84 mile, 60qnch diameter plpehne from the Pea Hill Creek tributary of
Lake Gaston to the Norfolk raw water facilities m Isle of Wight County and the City of Suffolk, V~rglma.
A submerged water intake structure would be located m Pea Hill Creek to supply water to an onshore
pump station v~a an underground p~pehne. From the pump station, the p~pehne would proceed east for
about slx mdes until ~ts ~ntersect~on w~th a V~rgmm Power powerhne right-of-way. The p~pehne would
follow the northeast route for 21 miles w~thln the V~rglma Power right-of-way until ~ts intersection with
the abandoned Norfolk and Western red hne near Purdy, V~rg~ma. The p~pehne would follow an easterly
route wlthm the radroad rtght-of-way for 42 mtles until its intersection wtth Norfolk's raw water lines
just east of Walters, V~rglma. Still cont~nmng east, the p~pehne would parallel the Norfolk right-of-way
for seven m~les to a booster pump station, and then east along or w~thm h~ghway rights-of-way for e~ght
mdes to the intersection with Norfolk raw water transmission hnes near Red Top m Suffolk, V~rg~ma.
The project ~s d~wded ~nto two segments. Segment One will consist of the intakes, pump station site and
76 miles of p~pehne and associated appurtenances. Segment Two will consist of the booster pump
station and the last eight miles of pipeline. The plpehne would traverse land ~n the Counties of
Brunswick, Greensvdle, Sussex, Southampton, and Isle of Wight, and the C~ty of Suffolk.
With the exception of slx stream and river crossings, the plpehne wdl be burred with a mtmmum of
three feet of cover. With the exception of the Meherr~n R~ver, all major stream and river crossings will
use emst~ng concrete p~ers which prewously supported an abandoned rad hne.
The Norfolk water system, which provides water service to the City of Norfolk, the mlhtary
installations m both Virginia Beach and Norfolk, all of Vlrgmm Beach, and approximately one-third of
the C~ty of Chesapeake, is operating at lexTels above system capacity. Dunng drought cond~tmns, ~t will
be necessary for the cities m southeastern Virginia to ~mpose mandatory water restrictions, establish
allocations of pubhc water and impose fines for violators.
Water Supply System Status Report
The D~rector of Pubhc Utilities presented a Water Supply System Status Report to the City Council
on October 22, 1991 which noted that the water supply system ~s over-extended. The Report c~ted
delays m the construction of the Lake Gaston project and continually increasing water demand as
contributing factors to a critical water supply s~tuat~on.
The report h~ghhghted a serious ~mbalance between water supply and water demand, observing that
the C~ty has no indigenous water supply and currently depends upon its "surplus only" water contract
w~th the C~ty of Norfolk which expires ~n 1993. Dunng drought periods, the Norfolk water system
0ncludmg water from five Vlrglnta Beach emergency wells) can prowde 81 MGD (mdhon gallons per
day) The water demand on the Norfolk system ~n 1990 was 86 MGD, which ~s 5 MGD above the amount
the system could be depended upon to prowde under drought conditions.
The report then examined several alternatives the City might consider ~n order to develop
add~tlonal water supply sources. The report concluded that the Lake Gaston Water Supply ProJect
remains the best water supply alternative available when evaluated from an enwronmental and
regulatory standpoint. Opposition and delays, however, have prevented the project from being
developed on schedule. One alternative examined ~n the report, sea water desaltmg, was deemed
lmpracttcal because of the h~gh cost assoctated w~th such a project, as well as on account of the
environmental consequences of h~gh energy consumption and waste brine d~scharge reqmred in the
desahmzat~on process. It was also estimated ~n the report that such a fac~hty would reqmre the utility
to at least double water rates.
The report was prompted by the C~ty of Norfolk's notification to V~rg~ma Beach ~n August 1991 that
the City must restrict ~ts use of the Norfolk system to 30 MGD. At the time th~s notice was g~ven, the
average annual use for V~rg~ma Beach was 31.8 MGD.
The alternative plan of action m the October 1991 Report which the C~ty has ~mplemented ~s a
mandatory water use restriction program, ~ncludmg a hm~t on new connections to the system. The
program became effecttve in February 1992, and to date results have been encouraging. For F~scal Year
60
JOBNAME Ya. Beach O S PAGE. 18 SESS 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09.15 1993
/~rl/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 77566/pages3
1992, the average annual demand for V~rglma Beach dropped to 30.1 MGD. The restnctlon program
remmn in place until additional water supply ~s obtmned.
Lake Gaston Financing Plan
Present estimates prepared by the C~ty and Magmre Assomates, Inc., put the total project cost
(excluding financing costs) at $206,000,000. Based on a resolution passed by City Council on August 13,
1984, the primary means of financing the Lake Gaston project shall be City general obligation bonds
which are additionally secured by a pledge of net revenues of the water and sewer system. In add~tton,
the resolution directed City staff to examine secondary sources of financing ~f ~t was determined that
such sources of financing will: (1) reduce user charges; (2) be ~n the best ~nterest of the C~ty; and (3) not
adversely affect the City's credit rating. The general obhgat~on revenue bonds reqmre voter approval
and C~ty Council approved placing the Lake Gaston Project on a bond referendum for November 8,
1988 The referendum for $200,000,000 for the project was approved by voters by a margin of
approximately three to one. In November, 1987 the C~ty executed a cost participation agreement with
the C~ty of Chesapeake for one-s~xth of the project and for one-s~xth ownership of the Lake Gaston
System V~rg~ma Beach's share of the cost of the system, derived from the ~ssuance of bonds ~s expected
to be approximately $171,667,000, w~th the C~ty of Chesapeake providing $34,333,000. The C~ty ~s
negotiating w~th the other participating jurisdictions to identify their respective roles and financial
commitments to the Project.
On January 6, 1986, the C~ty Council adopted an ordinance estabhsh~ng a Water Resource
Recovery Fee to be charged to all new connections to the water system from either new construction
or emstmg structures served by well water. The purpose of the fee is to provide an additional funding
source for financing a portion of the costs of the Lake Gaston water supply project. The ordinance
ellm~nated emstmg C~ty developer fees. The fee shall be prod as the property owner's share of the cost
of water resources development and associated dmtnbut~on famhtms. The fee ~s collected at the t~me of
apphcat~on for a braiding permit. The fee ~s determined on the basis of the drainage fixture unit schedule
provided ~n the Uniform Statewlde Braiding Code, or an eqmvalent drmnage fixture umt value computed
by the Department of Public Utd~tms. Water Resource Recovery Fee revenues are being collected at a
rate of $66.00 per drainage fixture unit.
The income generated by the Water Resource Recovery Fee ~s set aside ~n a Rate StaNhzat~on
Account, rather than being used for general System needs. This practme has three consequences for the
C~ty, ~ts ratepayers and the holders of ~ts bonds. F~rst, the Rate StaNhzatlon Account serves to stabd~ze
the water rate, so that fluctuations ~n System operating costs, fees and revenues do not cause
fluctuations ~n the price of water to the System's users. Second, the Rate StaNhzat~on Account gives
the C~ty some lead t~me to plan and ~mplement any necessary rate ~ncreases. Third, the Rate
Stab~hzat~on Account serves as an additional source of funds for debt service in case system revenues
fall short, thus further protecting the C~ty's general obligation bonding capacity and insulating the tax
base from water and sewer revenue fluctuations and project costs. In addition, ~ncreases ~n water rates
dedicated to the Lake Gaston project are deposited ~nto the Rate Stabilization Account. These ~ncreases
were ~mplemented ~n August 1987, July 1988, July 1989 (at $0.19 per 1000 gallons each) and ~n July 1990
(at $0 18 per 1000 gallons). As of June 30, 1992, the Rate StaNhzat~on Account had an estimated net
ending balance after disbursments of $63,665,338. Of th~s amount, $41,813,138 was attributable to Water
Resource Recovery Fee collections, and $21,852,200 was attributable to water resource rate increases.
Based on five years of collecting data, the Department of Public Utlhnes estimates that each new
s~ngle family res~dentml dwelhng averages 24 drmnage fixture units. Thus, the s~ze of the Water
Resource Recovery Fee for new residential properties connecting to the C~ty Water System ~s averaging
$1,584 per dwelhng. The ordinance provides full exemption or partial exemption of the fee for elderly
and hand~capped persons, for certain financ~ally disadvantaged persons, and for famd~es in commumty
development target areas.
The following table lists Water Resource Recovery Fee and Water Resource Rate Increase
receipts, ~nterests earmngs, and disbursements s~nce the mcept~on of the fee.
61
I
JOBNAME Va Beach O.S. PAGE. 19 SESS 194 OUTPUT Men Mar 29 19 09.15 1993
/br 1/304/team3/ofhclrept/3789- 775 66/pages3
Water Resource Recovery Fee
History of Receipts and Disbursements
Fiscal Year
Balance--July 1
Receipts
Fees
Interest Income
1985-86 1986-87 1987-88 1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92 Totals
$ 0 $ 4,535,877 $11,138,679 $19,667,279 $25,220,770 $31,024,573 $37,102,720
$4,535,854 $ 6,148,272 $ 7,516,926 $ 7,239,626 $ 4,151,208 $ 4,343,304 $ 3,680,392 $37,615,582
$ 23 $ 454,530 $ 1,011,674 $ 2,017,918 $ 2,340,171 $ 2,408,273 $ 1,729,155 $ 9,961,744
Total R¢cclpts
(1)
$ 6,751,577 $ 5,409,547 $47,577,326
$4,535,877 $ 6,602,802 $ 8,528,600 $ 9,257,544 $ 6,491,379
Disbursements
(2) $ 0 $ 0 $ 0 $ 3,704,053 $ 687,192 $ 673,430 $ 699,129 $ 5,764,188
Balancc--Junc30 $4,535,877 $11,138,679 $19,667,279 $25,220,770 $31,024,957 $37,102,720 $41,813,138
(1) 92% of total receipts are restricted for the Lake Gaston Project and major infrastructure
improvements associated w~th the Lake Gaston supply ~nclud~ng water supply, raw water transmission,
and treatment.
(2) Disbursements have been used to partially fund Lake Gaston capital costs and debt service.
Water Resource Rate Increases
History of Receipts and Disbursements
Fiscal Year
1987-88
Balancc--July 1 $0 $0 $ 0
Receipts
Net Billings $0 $0 $1,713,634
Dzsbursements $0 $0 $ 0
Balancc--June 30 $0 $0 $1,713,634
1985-86
1986-87
1988-89 1989-90 1990-91 1991-92
$1,713,634 $1,942,003 $ 7,312,435 $14,647,866
Totals
$3,932,422 $6,057,624 $ 6,008,086 $ 7,902,963 $27,614,729
$3,704,053 $ 687,192 $ 672,655 $ 698,629 $ 5,762,529
$1,942,003 $7,312,435 $14,647,866 $21,852,200
INSURANCE
The City utilizes a combination of commercial ~nsurance and selfqnsurance to protect ~ts assets,
including employees, money and securities and buildings and eqmpment. City buildings and thmr
contents are covered by an all risk property ~nsurance program which is written with a $100,000 per
occurrence deductible. Other types of property insurance are written w~th deductibles ranging from
$5,000 to $50,000 and include coverage for such ~tems as computer equipment, heavy contractor's type
eqmpment, fine arts and valuable papers. All City employees are bonded for $1,000,000.
The City is primarily selfqnsured for the first $2,000,000 of any automobile habfl~ty, commercial
general liability, pubhc officials' haNhty and pohce professional habfllty claims. The C~ty has
$10,000,000 of commercial insurance coverage above this selfqnsured retention on these lines of risks.
The C~ty ns also primarily self-insured for workers' compensation and carries commercial ~nsurance in
excess of any claims totahng $500,000 in any s~ngle occurrence.
The C~ty's Risk Management Fund had a cash balance of $10,272,337 as of July 1, 1992. An
actuarial study conducted by the firm of Marsh & McLennan, Inc. determined that the appropriate s~ze
of this fund as of July 1, 1992 was $8,156,000, which represented the discounted llabihty of the City.
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The City entered into agreements during fiscal year 1981 with Isle of Wight County, Southampton
County, and the City of Suffolk to drill wells to prowde water ~n periods of drought emergencies. The
City has agreed to bear the costs of alleviating adverse ~mpacts to private property well owners from the
pumping of well water from these locahtles. As a condition of the agreements, the City is required to
62
JOBNAME Va Beach O S PAGE 20 SESS 194 OUTPU'I Mon Mar 29 19 0Y 15 1993
/br 1/304/te am3/offlclrept/3789 - 77566/pages3
I
estabhsh an escrow account fund in the amount of $50,000 for each of the above contractual agreements.
Therefore, cash in the amount of $150,000 has been restricted in the C~ty's Risk Management Fund for
the well water mitigation programs. The Southampton and Isle of Wight County agreements will expire
~n 1996 The Suffolk agreement expires ~n 1999.
The C~ty partm~pates ~n a number of federal and state grants, entitlements, and shared revenues
programs These programs are subject to program comphance audits by the apphcable federal or state
agency or thmr representatives. Furthermore, the U.S. Congress passed legislation called the "S~ngle
Audit Act of 1984" (pubhc law 98-502) which reqmred most governmental recipients of federal
assistance to have an annual ~ndependent orgamzanon-w~de finanmal and comphance audit. The results
thereof for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1992 has been ~ssued ~n a separate report. The amounts, ~f any,
of expen&tures which may be &sallowed by these audits cannot be determined at this time although the
C~ty expects such amounts, if any, to be ~mmatenal.
RETIREMENT AND PENSION PLANS
The C~ty has elected to part~cxpate ~n the V~rg~ma Retirement System ("VRS"), and substantially
all of the full-time salaried general government and school employees are covered by a retirement plan,
group term hfe ~nsurance, and d~sabfllty and death benefits. Prior to January 1, 1978, employees
contributed five percent of thmr annual salary There ~s presently no employee contribution; the City
pays the entire cost. If there are ~nsuffiment funds to meet the vested benefits of the employees, the City
is liable
The VRS mmntmns separate accounts-for each part~clpatlng locality based on contributions made by
the locahty and the benefits prod to former employees. The C~ty's contributions are actuarlally determined
for the VRS every two years by the actuarial firm of George B. Buck, Consultant Actuaries, Inc., at rates
that prowde for both normal and accrued funding habflity. The VRS basis calculation method is an entry age
normal cost calculation with 30 year amortization of the unfunded accrued habfl~ty.
The entry age normal cost method ~s designed to produce normal costs over the working hfet~me
of the parnc~panng employees and to permit the amornzanon of any unfunded habfl~ty over a period of
years The unfunded liability arises because normal costs based on the current benefit formula have not
been prod throughout the working hfenme of current employees. The value of the unpaid normal costs,
adjusted for actuarial gmns and losses, constitutes the unfunded liability.
The last actuarlally computed habfllty was determined as of June 30, 1991 and ~ncluded amounts for
general government and school nonprofessional employees. Total habfllty as of June 30, 1991 both
funded and unfunded, follows'
Funded Unfunded Total Lmbfl~ty
General Government Employees ................ $178,649,761 $50,281,058 $228,930,819
School Nonprofessional Employees ............. 26,699,379 6,265,712 32,965,091
Total ............................. $205,349,140 $56,546,770 $261,895,910
The unfunded habdlty of $56,546,770 is being amortized over 30 years according to a schedule
prescribed by the VRS.
The City also provides an Internal Revenue Service approved deferred compensation plan under
section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code. All City employees are ehglble to partmlpate and may defer
25 percent of gross income or $7,500 per year, whmhever is less. There are slx investment options
(guaranteed ~nterest, common stock, money market U.S. Government Secuntms and two common
stock mutual funds) avmlable to the employees. At June 30, 1992 the market value of the employee
contributed assets m the plan was approximately $14,707,645.
EMPLOYEE RELATIONS AND COLLECTIVE BARGAINING
There were 5,128 C~ty employees 0ncludlng part-time and seasonal employees) and approximately
8,000 School Board employees as of June 30, 1992. Some employees are members of umons or trade or
professional associations. However, the City does not, and cannot under Vlrglma law, bargain
63
~ JOBNAME Va. Beach O.S PAGE 21 SESS. 194 OUTPUT Mon Mar 29 19 09 15 1993
i/brl/304/team3/officlrept/3789-77566/pages3
I
i
collectively w~th any of its employees. The V~rg~ma General Assembly has rejected several recent
leg~slanve proposals to authorize public employees to engage in collect~ve bargmmng. Pubhc employees
of Vlrg~ma or of any county, city, or town in Vlrg~ma do not have a legal right to strike. Any such
employee who engages ~n any orgamzed strike or willfully refuses to perform his/her duties shall,
according to V~rg~ma law, be deemed to have terminated h~s/her employment. Re-employment of any
such employee reqmres court approval.
APPROVAL OF PRELIMINARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT
The distribution of this Prellmlnary Official Statement has been duly authorized by the C~ty
Council. The C~ty has deemed this Prehminary Official Statement final as of its date w~thln the meaning
of Rule 15c2-12 of the Securities and Exchange Commiss~on except for the omission of certain pricing
and other ~nformatlon permitted to be omitted by Rule 15c2-12
City of Vlrglma Beach, Vlrg~ma
Dated ,1993
By
J^~aEs K.
City Manager
64
/br 1/304/team3/officlrept/3789- 77566/appendrxa
I
APPENDIX A
INDEX TO SELECTED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Auditor's Opinion .....................................................................................................
Combined Balance Sheet--Ail Fund Types and Account Groups ......................................
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes ~n Fund Balances--
All Governmental Fund Types and Expendable Trust Funds .........................................
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes ~n Fund Balances--
Page
A-1
A-2
A-6
Budget and Actual--General, Special Revenue, and Debt Service Fund Types ........ A-10-A-13
Combined Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes ~n Retmned Earmngs--
Ail Proprietary Fund Types ................................................................................... A-14
Combined Statement of Cash Flows--Ail Proprietary Fund Types ............................ A-15-A-16
Notes to Financial Statements ............................................................................ A-17-A-49
Schedule of Reqmred Supplementary Information ......................................................... A-50
/br 1/304/team3/offlclrept/3789- 77566/appendlxb
APPENDIX B
FORM OF~BOND COUNSEL OPINIOlql
B-1