OCTOBER 21, 2008 MINUTESCITY COUNCIL
MAYOR MEYERA E. OBERNDORF,, ,41 -Lenge
I'7C•EMA}'OR LOUIS R. JONES, Bayside - District 4
WILLIAM R. DeSTEPH, Al -Large
HARRY 6. DIEZEL, Kemp.vville - District 2
ROBERT At DYER„ Centerville - District I
BARBARA Al HENLEY, Princess Anne - District 7
RE BA S. A-LcCLANAN, Rose Hall - District 3
JOHN E. UHROJ, Bench — District 6
RON A. f 7LLANUEV4, At -Large
ROSEMARY L17LSON, Ai -Large
JAMES L. WOOD, L nnhaven-Distric! 5
CITY MANAGER - JAMES K. SPORE
CITY ATTORNEY - LESLIE L. LILLEY
C/TY CLERK - RUTH HODGES FRASER, MMC
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
"COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME"
CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP AGENDA
21 OCTOBER 2008
CITY HALL BUILDING
2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 234568005
PHONE: (757) 385-4303
FAX (757) 385-5669
E-MAIL: Ctycncl@vbgov.cont
L CITY MANGER'S BRIEFINGS
- Conference Room -
A. NORTHEAST CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TIF
David Bradley, Management Services Administrator
B. PLANNING ITEMS — Pending City Council Agenda
Jack Whitney, Director — Planning
II. CITY COUNCIL DISCUSSION
A. COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
3:00 PM
1
MINUTE S
VIRGINIA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Virginia Beach, Virginia
October 21, 2008
Mayor Meyera E. Oberndorf called to order the CITY COUNCIL BRIEFING in the City
Council Conference Room, re NORTHEAST CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRAICT TIF on
Tuesday, October 21, 2008, at 3:00 P.M
Council Members Present:
William R. "Bill" DeSteph, Harry E. Diezel, "Robert M "Bob" Dyer, Barbara H.
Henley, Louis R. Jones, Reba McClanan, Meyera E. Oberndorf John E. Uhrin and
James L. Wood
Council Members Absent:
Rosemary Wilson and Ron A. Villanueva
October 21, 2008
2
CITY COUNCIL'S BRIEFING
NORTHEAST CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT TIF
3:08 P.M.
David Bradley, Management Services Administrator, opened by saying the pedestrian bridge
was in year three (3) of the CIP. There wasn't an immediate funding issue for the pedestrian
bridge but it is actually going to be funded or programmed for FY 2011.
"Tax Increment Financing" captures the incremental real estate assessments that occur when
a boundary is defined. There is also a "base year" established associated with a TIF. For
example, if there were only two (2) businesses in a TIF and the total assessment is $3-M that
could become the base year. Real Estate taxes, based on the $3-M, would go back to the
General Fund forever as long as the TIF is in place. Before there is a change in the
assessments over time, the tax rate is applied and that amount would be the real estate amount
that goes to the new fund.
One key to a TIF is there is no change in real estate tax rate. The tax rate stays the same. So
whether you live inside or outside a TIF, there would be no difference in the real estate tax.
Sometimes people may get confused when they compare a TIF to a Special Service District. A
Special Service District (SSD) is when you increase the real estate tax rate to pay for services.
TIF does not contemplate that. This is only a change in the incremental assessments. Usually
the TIF pays for a public purpose cost. At Town Center, the TIF paid for the debt service
associated with the parking facilities. At Sandbridge, it has paid for the sand replenishment.
If the TIF is doing very well and it exceeds the costs identified, the money reverts back to the
General Fund at the end of the fiscal year. This has been happening with the Sandbridge
TIF. About $9 -Million per year has reverted for a one-time purpose for the CIP.
There are three (3) TIF's presently. All three (3) created in the late 1990's. The first was
Lynnhaven Mall, second was Sandbridge and the third was the Central business District —
South TIF.
The presentation of the proposed Central Business District — Northeast TIF, is attached and
made part of these proceedings.
October 21, 2008
a4
~ ISI
= —11
PC1
..* -44
Cit ct
;.•
-4.-) ci?
= P4
(U Ime
;10
LI) O
Pm:
44
O •�
O wl.'i�
Pal A
Council Briefing
October 21, 2008
1)
1)
u
0
1)
tO
rmC
0
0
.r..4
•
ImC
0
U
Pedestrian Bridge
Establishment of a TIF to pay debt service
, r:)
' a'
c 1 . )
E
c i )u
7i
.�^
r'1
ct
U
O
E
c
O
S2 —
au
• ,1
-- O
E 1 ,- '
E E
O 1)
wJ ct
• rl �--�
U
c
ct
cu
4)
ct
U
7d
e -1
C -17E1 $-4 N
Ct
Ct
Real estate taxes on the base value return to the General
0
CD CD
N ct
U
4) 'c:
,4 N �
to H cit
ci) CD
7i ct
o Eli 4
h, 0 0
Z
- Lynnhaven Mall TIF (est. June 2, 1998)
- Sandbridge TIF (est. December 1, 1998)
Lt)
1
s•
•
► 11048:toit\Extvii#, vetImamariS
tD
N
oc
O
ct
ct
ct
c -t
'•-•
a)
W
71-3' C!)
CU0
CU
4-1
N � �
O
O a)
ct
up
O
ct)
4-1
14 O
cCi �
;_ 0 ,sz
,12)
;_4
O ci)
w
'id
CBD -Northeast TIF
Year 23
FY 31
O
1--+
O
00
00
Il
I
64
M
01
--+
'O
64
N
Cr)
O
00
N
69
•�
N
O
^+
69
$233,466
N
O
O
v7
0 ,,
,,,,4
69
Year 15
FY 23
$149,847,106
$447,242
280,326
.-1
N
M
00
'1-
\0
N
Cr)
O
\0
N
00
00
O
69
69.
69
Year 5
FY 13
M
$262,756
M
000`09$
V1
$499,488
00O
el 0\
00
69
N
N
9
N_
69
Year 1
FY 09
‘4:)
O
O
O
r.
O
O
O
01
N
h
h
,--1
69
.--,
64
,-1
6)
11
69
Base Year
FY 08
N
N
WI
01
V)
Q1
01
6t3
Central Business
District -NE TIF
Assessment
Revenues
Debt Service
Maintenance
Net Revenues
Cumulative Fund
Balance
� IIcA3i
Council Briefing
First Public Notices
Second Public Notices
Third Public Notices
Nov. 16-17:
Public Hearing
Council Action
CO
O
N CV
0) • 0) cfl
a) O d' a0
0) O
as v-
>. CO O• N) • CO
LL ct • CO'
N
Report Date: 08Oct08
Computation of Proposed Central Business District -Northeast TIF
(D
Q On 0)
N n 0
N
'ch 'ch
1• (N
Ocib
M V M
r
On 0) M
O
0)
U)
M
0)
M
N
O
0)
N
o) tro
E. ((0 r--
03 (D CO
N M (n O
0 0)
(} V' I- O
0 V' M
M N CO 0
O 0
N
`-•0 co' (n
•-•V co Q
} (D CO O
LL ti % ci
N V' 0 0
CO 0 0
(0 (() 0
O O h
(0 0
D-0) (0 O
LL u) (vj
0 0
0 0
(O 0 '
0)
00)) 0
} (()
• cY sT
N
N
O
0)
O
0)
0)
O 0 0
111 (41
Existing Assessments
Add: Additional Improvements in FY 09
Add: Additional Improvements in FY 10
ct
N_
CO
O N
O
N.
0)
M 0)
N 0)
0 N
(0
(O
0) tri
0)
CO t(7
00 0)
0)
N N_
N N
(0 (0
0[) (0C)
00) 00)
Total Assessments
TIF Base Assessment
J
N
CO1.0
(Si
CO
O
M
N
co
O
M
N
O
0)
Net Assessments for TIF
0
0
0)
co
O
0
0
0)
co
O
O
O
0)
co
O
O
O
0)
0
O
0
0
0)
O
O
O
O
0)
co
O
Real Estate Tax Rate
0)
M
0)
0)
0)
r --
Total Revenues -CBD -NE TIF
Expenditures
Debt Service on Pedestrian Bridge ($3.35M)
0
0
M
Maintenance of Town Center Bridge
CO
N_
(.1
CD
N
M
O
M
Total Expenditures
0)
01
(O
0)
M
N
co
O
(nO
n
N
N
(L)
0)
N
0)
N
N
n
Cn
b
N
N
Net Revenues
O
(O
O
O
0)
M
N
N
M
n
M
co
a)
0)
CO
C()
O
n
b
O
(0
(0
0)
to
b
N
O
M
Net Revenues -Cumulative
_ E
M
w
O
a)Cal co oo r -
T co 00) t00
m N (0 of V'
0 ( (0
O (0C)
Report Date: 08Oct08
Computation of Proposed Central
rW LO
I,- 0) CO
V' O
N
co -a co
a0 U) (M
M
r co N ONO 7
Is- N 03
T C7) C6
N CO CO M
LL U)
10
co.(O U) M
M
CV a- Nd' 0r•-•
. N
O) Is- co.
0
N OO O
} U) CO V'
I1 V U) M
CO
T I` at O
T 0) r-
O O N
T M N CO--
} U) N V'
LL N (A
M
O(O CO
T 6) U) 1"..-
CO
`M N V'
CO N tO O
T I- 'a C.-
›-
`} U) CO
V- O (n Ci
0) O N- U)
U) M
f- N U)
I` N O O
>- (0 O CO
LL O U)
N
CO U) N 0
co_N0 (M7
O'7 O
T V' O co
>- I` 0) N
U (p (v)
N
d o 0 0
(0 N (OO. 1.9 Lo.OOO
c
C .-- r
CV
< C
Existing Assessments
Additional Improvements in FY 09
Additional Improvements in FY 10
Less: TIF Base Assessment
Net Assessments for TIF
(0 .0 U 'CI 0) to -
co
O
O)
CO
O
0
O
0)
CO
O
O
O
co
O)
co
O
O
O
O
co
0
O
O
O
O
Real Estate Tax Rate
0)
N
N
V
M
M
N
U)
O
O
V
so -
0)
O
co
co
O
r
O
M
1`
O
(()
tO
M
N
r-
03 M
M
Total Revenues -CBD -NE TIF
L
Expenditures
CO CO
M CO
O co
N I`
O CO
MLO
co
O 0)
N CO
CO
N M
M L)
0 r -
co N CO
O
M
O
CO
N
Debt Service on Pedestrian Bridge ($3.35M)
10
Lo
(0
0
O
M
Maintenance of Town Center Bridge
t0
(0
co
1
CO
N
(O
CO
N
00
(D
M
CO
b
O
(0
CO
CO
00
(0
O
T
I0
O
(0
T
co
to
Total Expenditures
Net Revenues
O
O
T
N
U1
O
N
I0
ti
O
M
O
0
'et
(l)
(D
0)
M
M
1`
M
00
M
(0
Leiv
M
Net Revenues -Cumulative
M
0 ee{�
M N `7 CO �
03 0 O e-
03 cl)T
ca el
d 10 3.-N '41 ▪ 0
LL O CO et
O
Report Date: 08Oct08
Computation of Proposed Central
Ni CO 0 O
N01 CSO o
O
M T (▪ 0
O O et
O
0) CO N
N (0 CO CO
W
O co • co
co o
O
0 0 CO N
N 0) C. N
CO Li/
N O
N A h N
to co (
- O M
O
0) co M
T (OM ,(1-3
n - o 0
N OO) co CO• (0
} N CO O
LL o) to M
NI-
C7)
O
M 0) - O
CO O 0)
CO
N O 0) • 0
>- O C- co
LL N U) (M
et
N et O co
T O_ M O)
Net (0
N 16
o O
>" m /7. N-
LL of LO.
et
t0et
T O V' CO
a O O N
N 1` N • 0)
>- N- CO CO
LL N O M
() o 0 0
e.
i0
to (• o
o to
c wC ▪ .- T T
Q • C
Existing Assessments
Add: Additional Improvements in FY 09
Add: Additional Improvements in FY 10
et NLO _
(O N
(0
O )
CO co
O 0)
(O 0)
0) N_
M N
C3i 16
0)
O
(0 0)
0)
C� N
O
N N
a• 0,
O
0) 0)
to 0)
O N_
N N
� 00))
M O
0)
O 0)
Total Assessments
Less: TIF Base Assessment
0)
CD
CD
N
M
CO
O
a
et
0)
O
(00
(0
0)
O
(0
O
O
O
3
0
(0
0)
0)
et
N
O
Net Assessments for TIF
CO .0 0 '0 O) w
O
O
0)
CO
O
O
O
0)
O
0
O
O
0)
O
O
O
O
0)
CO
O
O
0
0
CO
CO
O
O
O
o)
O
O
0
0
0)
CO
O
Real Estate Tax Rate
0)
1`
M
0)
O
(0
O
M
M
0)
O
(0
O
ti
O
M
O
O
to
O
ti
O
0)
N
O
O
(0
O
O
O
TO -
lo O
C`
CO
et
(0
N
(0
-4-
Total Revenues -CBD -NE TIF
.0 L
Expenditures
CO N
M N
0
(00 0)
N
(O O
M N-
6 a
N 0)
O N
CNI e -
o 0
O CO
N
CO CO
(N 10
oo CO
N
Debt Service on Pedestrian Bridge ($3.35M)
a
O
O
M
O
O
CO
(0
1'-
0
O
OD
M
co
0
1-
M
CO
CO
yr -
co O
(O
T
O
O
CO
O
O
M
CO
Total Expenditures
CO
tO
et
M
N
0)
M
N
et
N
M
O
N
(()
0)
O
(0
(O
O
0)
0)
1�
O
T
M
N
r
O)
CO
T
O
O
(O
N
(0
t0
tD
M
O
T
Net Revenues
O
O
CO
(O
1
T
0)
(O
CO
N
0
T
(O
0
O
0)
O
CO
O
r.
m
N
0)
co
CO
O
N
M
co
0)
O
N
T
N
Net Revenues -Cumulative
Y _ E
3
CITY COUNCIL'S BRIEFING
PLANNING ITMES PENDING
3:48 P.M.
Jack Whitney, Director of Planning, detailed the Planning items to be hard by the City
Council in November 2008. Detailed items are hereby made a part of these proceedings.
November 18, 2008
Argold Dam Neck, LLC
Christine Pinkston
Tanika Drawhorn
T -Mobile North East, LLC
City of Virginia Beach — Resolution to adopt the 2008 Outdoors Plan
November 25, 2008
City of Virginia Beach — Rezoning Sportsplex Retail
City of Virginia Beach - Use Permit-Indoor/Outdoor Recreation at the Sportsplex
Thomas E., Sr. and Nancy I. Coghill
NKEAssets, LLC dba Lighting Virginia
City of Virginia Beach — Ordiance to amend Section 4.1 of Appendbc B, Subdivision
Regulations
October 21, 2008
PLANNING COMMISSION ITEMS TO BE
HEARD BY CITY COUNCIL ON
NOVEMBER 18 AND 25, 2008
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (11-0)
• There was opposition.
• Item Deferred by City Council on April 8.
November 18 Items
• Argold Dam Neck (Rezoning I Deferred on
April 8)
• Christine Pinkston (Use Permit)
• Tanika Drawhorn (Use Permit)
• T -Mobile (Use Permit)
• Resolution to Adopt Outdoors Plan
Relevant Information
• Applicant requests a Change of
Zoning from AG -2 and R-15 to R-7.5
for the purpose of developing 113
single-family dwellings.
• Homes will have 2,000 to 2,400 SF of
floor area.
• Proposed density is 3.5 units per
acre; surrounding area ranges from
2.2 to 3.5 units per acre.
• AICUZ is Less than 65.
1
Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use
Permit for a residential kennel of up to
eight (8) adult dogs. The City Zoning
Ordinance allows four (4) adult dogs
without a residential kennel permit.
• Applicant's Afghan dogs are consistently
ranked in the Top Ten of the breed, are
used in television commercials and films,
and some are `therapy dogs.'
• The dogs live indoors within air-
conditioned and heated individual areas
with television, radio, and indoor bathing.
There are, however, four (4) outdoor
fenced -in areas for the dogs to exercise.
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (10-0).
• Consent Agenda.
• No opposition.
2
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (10-0).
• Consent Agenda.
• No opposition.
Relevant Information
The applicant currently has a license with the
Department of Social Services and cares for two
(2) children in addition to her own five (5)
children.
The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit
for a family daycare home to allow the applicant
to care for six (6) children in addition to her own
five (5) children (an increase of four children over
her current number of children).
The site, zoned A-12 Apartment, is approximately
4,122 square feet in size. There is an existing
1,890 square foot, townhouse dwelling located on
the site, with a fenced -in rear yard.
3
Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use
Permit to allow for a 135 -foot tall
monopole communications tower with
flush -mounted antennas.
• The tower will be built to accommodate up
to three (3) wireless carriers.
The site is developed with a church,
daycare facility, and associated parking.
The tower will be located on the southern
side of the site within a fenced enclosure.
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (10-0).
• Consent Agenda.
• No opposition.
4
November 25 Items
City of Virginia Beach (Rezoning -
Sportsplex Retail)
• City of Virginia Beach (Use Permit -
Indoor/Outdoor Recreation @ Sportsplex)
• Coghill (Street Closure)
• NKE Assets (Use Permit)
• City of Virginia Beach (Amendment re
Street Widths)
5
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (10-0).
• There was no opposition.
• Consent agenda.
ANNE ATI41 ENE
•R�Y0JRAM tNMYROMM
VIRGINIA BEACH
SPORTSPL.EX
Relevant Information
• 91.5 acre site adjacent to Sportsplex.
• Rezoning of 7.1 acres to B-2 for sports -
related retail, sports skills instruction,
sports training, sports therapy, wellness
training and conditioning, and a
restaurant.
• Use Permit on 84.4 acres for indoor and
outdoor recreation consisting of soccer,
field hockey, lacrosse and flag football on
various sized indoor playing fields. The
facility will also incorporate locker rooms,
party rooms, a concession area and a
small gym.
6
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (10-0).
• There was no opposition.
• Consent agenda.
Relevant Information
• The applicant requests the closure of
the western 7.5 feet of a 15 -foot wide
unimproved alley located in Croatan
for the purpose of incorporating the
right-of-way into their adjoining
single-family residential lot.
• There have been several street
closure requests granted along the
subject alleyway during the past 15
years.
7
Relevant Information
• The applicant requests a Conditional Use Permit
for bulk storage, which will permit the temporary
storage of six (6) portable cargo containers in the
rear of the property. The cargo containers are
currently located on the site.
• The applicant has had need for additional space
and is also looking at the possibility of renting
another condominium unit within this complex,
which will eliminate the need for the storage
containers.
A one-year limit is recommended to provide time
for the applicant to secure another condo unit
and to move the items out of the cargo containers
to that unit.
596 Central Dr Bonn 104 • 110
Virginia Beach, VA 23454
International
rrrRr, �1 Kfi i r"1
Evaluation and
Recommendation
• Planning Staff recommended approval
• Planning Commission recommends
approval (10-0).
• There was no opposition.
• Consent agenda.
l i A*.f"? S` rM l:i"�ifC'I'Y �'A14.1P;yi"
8
9
4
CITY COUNCIL'S BRIEFING
COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
4:08 P.M.
Robert "Bob" Matthias gave the presentation on the Community Legislative Agenda which is
attached and made part of these proceedings.
October 21, 2008
COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
GENE AL ASSEM It ]LY SESSION 2009
CITY OF VIRGINIA /i EACH
Photograph taken by Steve Budman, 2007
ID)
UILDING "A COMMUNITY FOR A LIFETIME"
MUNICIPAL CENTER BUILDING ONE
2401 COURTHOUSE DRIVE, SUITE 234
VIRGINIA BEACH, VIRGINIA 23456
Final Draft 10/28/08
For City Council Adoption
2009 COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS -
PREFACE -
Page #
1-2
3-4
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH 2009 REQUESTED CODE OF VIRGINIA CHANGES - 5-21
1. Arrest or Issuance of a Summons by an Officer Based on the Observations 5
of a Different Officer
2. Issuance of a Warrant in a DUI Case by an Officer Based on the 6
Observations of the Arresting Officer
3. DUI Cost Recovery Program 7
4. Raise Accident Report Damage Threshold to $2500 8
5. Energy Conservation 9
6. CSA Administrative Allocation 10
7. Loss of Medicaid Eligibility for Teens in Foster Care with Earned Income 11
8. Prohibit Possession of Firearms and Other Delineated Weapons in Mental 12
Health Facilities
9. Allow VRS to Administer the Other Post Employee Benefits (OPEB) Trust 13
10. Four Year State -Supported College in Virginia Beach 14
11. Capture of Sales Tax from Tourism Related Venue 15
12. Assessment for Courthouse Construction, Renovation or Maintenance 16
13. Smoke Free Restaurants 17
14. Expand Definition of Firearms to Include Replica and Gas & Air Weapons 18
15. Expand Tree Protection Legislative Authority for Conservation During 19
Land Development Process to Include Other Localities
16. Expansion of the Virginia Human Rights Act 20
17. Revise Chesapeake Bay Regulations to Include Water Features like Pools 21
and BMP's as Permeable Surfaces
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH FUNDING ITEMS - 22-30
1. Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center -Ocean in Motion Aquarium 23
Truck
2. Support for Regional Plan for Geropsychiatric Services 24
3. Support for Additional State General Fund Dollars for Mental Health and 25
Mental Retardation
4. Funding for Public Health Services 26
5. Virginia Beach Convention Center Funding 27
6. Sandler Center for the Performing Arts 28
7. Funding For the Virginia Tourism Corporation 29
8. Support For Increased Funding For the Governor's Opportunity Fund 30
Page 1
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
Page #
APPENDIX: DRAFTS OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION — KEYED TO REQUESTED CODE 31-41
CHANGES
1. Arrest or Issuance of a Summons by an Officer on the Observations of a
Different Officer 32
2. Issuance of a Warrant in a DUI Case Based on the Observations of the
Arresting Officer 33-34
3. DUI Cost Recovery Program 35
4. Raise Accident Report Damage Threshold to $2500 36
12. Assessment for Courthouse Construction, Renovation or Maintenance 37
14. Expand Definition of Firearms to Include Replica and Gas & Air Weapons 38-41
Page 2
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
2009 COMMUNITY LEGISLATIVE AGENDA
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
PREFACE
The 2009 session of the General Assembly will take place during the second year of the
Commonwealth's adopted biennial budget and eight months before the statewide elections
for Governor, Lieutenant Governor, Attorney General, and all 100 House seats. Despite the
impending elections, we believe there are important, ongoing issues that must be addressed.
The most important and pressing challenge the City of Virginia Beach is facing concerns
transportation.
When City Council adopted its 2008 Legislative Agenda, that document was based on HB
3202's commitment to address funding for the region's six major projects. Unfortunately,
the State Supreme Court later found most of HB 3202 to be unconstitutional, leaving the
region without the financial means to move forward with these projects. In the meantime,
the need has been compounded by the addition of the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel to the
project list.
The result is that Route 460, the Southeastern Parkway and Greenbelt, I-64 on the Peninsula
and Southside, the Hampton Roads Third Crossing and the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel
may have to be removed from the regional long-range transportation plan because that plan
must be fiscally constrained by Federal law and regulations.
For 2009, we are respectfully requesting that the General Assembly address this issue
quickly. A significant increase in funding will enable us to maintain roads that have fallen
into serious disrepair. Allocating dollars to the statewide funding program for urban,
secondary and primary roads, as well as transit, is also critical.
In the past, the State has increased funding for this basic public service so that the City could
provide for the transportation needs of our citizens. For example, in 1985 the City received
approximately $6 million per year in urban funding. By 2004, that figure had increased to
nearly $30 million per year. Yet the current six year plan will reduce our allocation to less
than $10 million per year. Considering the growth in our transportation infrastructure and
the impact of inflation, it is clear that the level of state funding for transportation is not
meeting the needs of our citizens.
Finally, the City Council has consistently requested that the State provide $275 million per
year in ongoing funding through General Assembly action, as well as the ability to toll the
six major projects mentioned above. According to Metropolitan Planning Organization
(MPO) estimates, it is likely that another $40 to $50 million per year will be needed to
supplement the tolls and the Hampton Roads Bridge Tunnel.
Page 3
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
The City is also facing challenges in the area of education. As you are aware, education at
the K-12 level has always been a partnership between the Commonwealth and local
governments. During the 2008 session, there was a move to fundamentally change that
partnership by reducing future appropriations to local governments. This would have been
accomplished by changing the current standards of quality (SOQ's) and what is included in
those standards.
The City currently spends almost $200 million in local tax dollars above what is required to
meet the standards of quality. We believe this commitment is necessary to provide an
education for our children that will prepare them to compete successfully in the global
market place. They do not consider the teacher salary increases given by the Virginia Beach
School Board that are above and beyond the salaries provided by the General Assembly to be
part of the cost sharing between the Commonwealth and the City.
Furthermore, Delegate Joannou, a member of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review
Commission (JLARC), who is also a member of the House Appropriations Committee,
desires to cut state funding for the employer share of teachers' social security benefits. If
enacted, this would represent a significant decrease in state funding for education. Rather
than considering reducing its share of education funding, the General Assembly should
instead fully fund the true cost of the SOQs
In closing, the City Council repeats its request that the State fully fund the true cost of State
government services such as courts, corrections, mental health services and public health.
For several years, the City has paid a larger and larger share of these State responsibilities
because we must retain employees and provide critical services to our citizens. We ask that
the Commonwealth stop this trend of under -funding these important and basic efforts.
Page 4
Final for City Council .Adoption -October 28, 2008
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
2009 REQUESTED CODE OF VIRGINIA CHANGES
1. ARREST OR ISSUANCE OF A SUMMONS BY AN OFFICER BASED ON OBSERVATIONS OF A
DIFFERENT OFFICER
Chief A.M Jacocks
Department of Police
Background Information:
The State Code authorizes an officer who has not observed a misdemeanor or traffic violation to
nevertheless stop and ticket an offender for red light violations and speeding upon receipt of a
radio transmission from the officer observing the violation (§ 46.2-833 and § 46.2-882).
Present traffic volume, especially in heavily populated jurisdictions, and the manner in which
highways are now being constructed, makes it extremely difficult for a single officer to position
him or herself and the officer's police vehicle at a place where the officer can both observe
infractions and then be able to promptly exit the location in order to stop the violator. While the
"team" policing concept has been recognized in other states, it has not been widely accepted in
Virginia.
Additionally, as the technology has become available, more and more police departments are
using camera systems to monitor critical, and vulnerable, areas of the community in an effort to
suppress criminal activity. Frequently officers monitoring these real-time camera systems
observe criminal activity and direct other officers to respond. Unfortunately, the responding
officers are usually unable to make any arrests, as they did not observe the original criminal
activity.
Request:
A. The City requests that the General Assembly expand the authority granted under § 46.2-833
and § 46.2-882 to allow an officer who has not observed a misdemeanor or traffic violation to
nevertheless stop and ticket an offender for red light violations and speeding upon receipt of a
radio transmission from the officer observing the violation.
B. The City also requests that the code be revised to allow officers to make an arrest or issue a
summons based on the observations of another officer, regardless of whether observing officer
used a camera or similar device to view the conduct.
See Appendix Item 1 (page 32) for text of proposed legislative change.
Page 5
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
2. ISSUANCE OF A WARRANT IN A DUI CASE BY AN OFFICER BASED ON THE
OBSERVATIONS OF THE ARRESTING OFFICER
Chief A.M Jacocks
Department of Police
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly change Virginia Code § 19.2-81 to enable a police
officer to stop and arrest an intoxicated driver and transfer that arrest to another police officer.
This change would allow supervisors and specialized officers, such as K-9 and SWAT officers,
to remain available. The arresting officer or supervisor would still appear in court to testify.
This recommended change is similar to the modification that was made several years ago to
allow marine police officers to transfer a boating under the influence violation to another police
officer.
See Appendix Item 2 (pages 33-34) for text of the requested legislative change.
Page 6
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
3. DUI COST RECOVERY PROGRAM
Chief A.M. Jacocks
Department of Police
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly change Virginia Code § 15.2-1716 to clarify the
DUI cost recovery program as it applies DUI arrests. The Attorney General has issued an opinion
that the current statute only applies in cases involving an accident (See, 2004 Op. Va. Atty. Gen.
68)
See Appendix Item 3 (page 35) for text of the requested legislative change.
Page 7
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
4. RAISE ACCIDENT REPORT DAMAGE THRESHOLD TO $2500
Chief A.M Jacocks
Department of Police
Background Information:
State Code § 46.2-373 requires law enforcement officers to submit an accident report if total
damage to all involved vehicles exceeds $1,000. This dollar amount was set approximately 10
years ago and is much too low based on the current cost to repair vehicles.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly increase the required accident report damage
amount to $2,500. This change would greatly reduce the amount of paperwork necessary at
minor accident scenes, reduce the burden on the courts in their attempt to determine fault, and
reduce the time officers spend investigating minor accidents.
See Appendix Item 4 (page 36) for text of the requested legislative change.
Page 8
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
5. ENERGY CONSERVATION
Bob Matthias
Assistant to the City Manager
Office of the City Manager
Background Information:
This is a placeholder for a possible issue still being researched by staff. Staff is investigating
what authority local governments, including Virginia Beach, have to allow density credits for
energy efficient buildings, in addition to whether localities have any ability to require more
energy conservation in buildings constructed. We are also examining whether the State can
allow tax rebates or credits, both at the state and local level, for those who build energy efficient
buildings. Finally, the Commonwealth's Climate Change Commission is meeting next week as a
part of a series of meetings. We are following that Commission to see what recommendations
may come for both statewide enabling legislation, and also enabling legislation for localities.
Page 9
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
6. CSA ADMINISTRATIVE ALLOCATION
Bob Morin
Department Director
Department of Human Services
Background Information:
The funding formula to carry out the provisions of the Comprehensive Services Act defines the
formula for local administrative costs based upon pool allocations from 1997. The maximum
allocation any locality can receive for administrative costs is $50,000. This amount has not
increased in the past 8 years, despite continuing increases in the oversight responsibilities of
CSA. FY 07 expenditures for CSA in Virginia Beach were $10,838,856, which required a
supplemental request of additional state and local dollars. For FY 08, the CSA allocation is
$11,771,757. Covering additional administrative costs on top of the local share of any
supplemental request for child -specific services is an undue hardship.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly amend Title 2.2, Chapter 52 of the Code of Virginia
to eliminate the maximum administrative allocation of $50,000 in order to improve localities
ability to meet the administrative requirements of the CSA and to permit a maximum amount
equal to 2% of the allocation to be used for administrative costs.
Page 10
Final for City ("ouncil Adoption -October 28. 2008
7. Loss OF MEDICAID ELIGIBILITY FOR TEENS IN FOSTER CARE WITH EARNED INCOME
Bob Morin
Department Director
Department of Human Services
Background Information:
Under current Virginia law, the local Department of Social Services must discontinue Medicaid
to a foster care child between the ages of 19 and 21 if the foster child earns more than $208.33 in
gross income per month. These foster children need to have the benefit of Medicaid to cover the
cost of their medical expenses, and they also need to have the opportunity to earn income beyond
the current limitations. This law appears to be in direct conflict with the independent living
program for foster children, which was designed to assist children in foster care aged 16-21 in
becoming self-sufficient. Achieving the goal of self-sufficiency must include the opportunity for
youth to earn income that will prepare them for survival in an independent living situation.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly amend title 32.1 of the Code of Virginia to allow
foster children between the ages of 19-21 to be exempt from the income limitation, thus allowing
them to remain eligible for Medicaid. This would give older foster children the opportunity to
earn the income necessary to achieve the goal of self-sufficiency.
Page 11
Final for City Council adoption -October 28, 2008
8. PROHIBIT POSSESSION OF FIREARMS AND OTHER DELINEATED WEAPONS IN MENTAL
HEALTH FACILITIES
Bob Morin
Department Director
Department of Human Services
Background Information:
The General Assembly passed legislation in 2003 (codified at Virginia Code § 15.2-915) which
prevents localities from prohibiting or restricting the carrying of weapons into City buildings.
As a result, the City may no longer prohibit people from bringing firearms into the City's Mental
Health and Mental Retardation and Substance Abuse Services facilities.
Request:
Code of Virginia § 18.2-308.1 prohibits the possession of firearms and other delineated weapons
on school property. The City requests that the General Assembly enact a similar statute that
would prohibit weapons on the premises of any Mental Health or Mental Retardation and
Substance Abuse facility that is operated by a governmental entity, except when such weapons
are in the possession of licensed security personnel or law enforcement officers.
Page 12
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
9. ALLOW VRS TO ADMINISTER THE OTHER POST EMPLOYEE BENEFITS (OPEB) TRUST
Patti Phillips
Department Director
Department of Finance
Background Information:
The 2007 General Assembly adopted SB789 which allows localities, school divisions, and
certain political subdivisions to establish local trusts to fund post employment benefits other than
pensions (OPEB). The original bill included the option of having VRS set up an OPEB trust for
localities, but this provision was stricken upon final passage. VRS was amenable to taking on
this task. It is still a good idea for VRS to take on this role so that the trusts can be
professionally managed.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly amend the Code of Virginia by adding in Chapter
15 of Title 15.2 an article numbered 8, consisting of §§ 15.2-1544 through 15.2-1549 to include
the establishment and management of a pooled OPEB trust fund for localities by VRS.
Page 13
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
10. FOUR YEAR STATE -SUPPORTED COLLEGE IN VIRGINIA BEACH
Marcy Sims
Department Director
Department of Public Libraries
Background Information:
City Council has consistently been on record requesting a four year State -supported university be
created within the City of Virginia Beach.
Request:
The City recommends that the General Assembly investigate this request either through a study
done by the State Council of Higher Education (SCHEV) or some other agency addressing of
this issue.
Page 14
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
11. CAPTURE OF SALES TAX FROM TOURISM RELATED VENUE
James Spore
City Manager
Office of the City Manager
Background Information:
A number of localities, starting with Roanoke in 1995, have received authority from the General
Assembly to capture a portion of the sales tax generated in a specific public facility such as an
auditorium, a coliseum, a convention center, or a conference center. These jurisdictions which
now include Norfolk, Richmond, Hampton, Newport News, Portsmouth, Salem, Staunton and
Suffolk can retain 3 Y2 % of the 5% sales tax generated within a designated facility to pay debt
service. Virginia Beach wishes to receive this authority for a similarly defined project.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly amend § 58.1-608.3 to add Virginia Beach to the
localities that already have this authority.
Page 15
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
12. ASSESSMENT FOR COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION OR MAINTENANCE
Catheryn Whitesell
Department Director
Department of Management Services
Background:
The legislation enabling localities to assess a fee for courthouse construction, renovation or
maintenance in civil and criminal cases was enacted by the General Assembly in 1990. The
maximum fee amount of $2 has not been increased since then. An increase in the fee from $2 to
$10 would provide the City more than $550,000 a year. This money could be used to fund
maintenance of existing facilities or debt service for new facilities such as the much-needed jail
annex.
Request:
The City requests the General Assembly amend the Code of Virginia § 17.1-281 increase the fee
from $2 to $10.
See Appendix Item 12 (page 37) for text of the requested legislative change.
Page 16
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
13. SMOKE FREE RESTAURANTS
City Council
City of Virginia Beach
Background Information:
City Council requests the General Assembly to either prohibit smoking in restaurants statewide
or adopt enabling legislation that would allow localities to prohibit smoking in restaurants. The
City Council supports this legislation in the interest of public health, not only for the citizens
who might wish to go to a smoke free establishment, but also for hospitality workers who are
exposed to second-hand smoke in a smoking establishment.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly prohibit smoking in restaurants statewide or enact
legislation to enable localities to prohibit smoking in restaurants.
Page 17
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
14. EXPAND DEFINITION OF FIREARMS TO INCLUDE REPLICA AND GAS & AIR WEAPONS
Jim Wood
City Council Member
Background Information:
There have been increasing instances in which Police officers have responded to situations where
an individual was using/brandishing a "replica" firearm. These are instruments that are similar
in appearance to conventional firearms but are toys or air- or gas -operated weapons. Many of
these instruments look so much like pistols or revolvers that a reasonable observer could
conclude that the instruments are firearms.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly amend the state code to expand the definition of
firearms in the sections relating to concealed carrying (§18.2-308), possession on school property
(§18.2-308.1), possession/transportation by a felon (§18.2-308.2) and use/display of firearm in
the commission of a felony (§18.2-53.1) to include replica weapons and air- or gas -operated
weapons.
These requested changes may prompt the General Assembly's Legislative Services Division to
revise Virginia Code § 15.2-915.4. That code section authorizes localities to regulate the use of
"pneumatic guns," which is defined therein as "any implement, designed as a gun, that will expel
a BB or pellet by action of pneumatic pressure."
See Appendix Item 14 (pages 38-41) for text of the requested legislative changes.
Page 18
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
15. EXPAND TREE PROTECTION LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY FOR CONSERVATION DURING
LAND DEVELOPMENT PROCESS TO INCLUDE OTHER LOCALITIES
City Council
City of Virginia Beach
Background:
A regional Ecosystem Analysis of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed, sponsored by USDA, and American
Forests, recommends developing urban canopy goals to a 40% canopy overall. The City's current
Appendix E, Tree Planting, Preservation and Replacement Ordinance, limits Virginia Beach's
requirement to a sliding scale that ranges from 1% to 6% of canopy, depending upon the lot size in
residentially zoned areas. In addition, street trees are required in conjunction with new residential
subdivisions. Non-residential tree planting requirements are established on a case-by-case basis through
the provisions outlined in Section 5A Parking Lot and Foundation Landscaping, of Appendix C, Site Plan
Ordinance. Collectively, these limitations can be only be exceeded by encouraging conservation,
reforestation, planting on public property, and by encouraging private plantings.
During the 2008 General Assembly session, legislation was adopted (HB 1437) providing that localities
in Northern Virginia may, by ordinance, require conservation of trees during the development process.
The bill also provides that the tree conservation ordinance may require that the site plan for any
subdivision or development provide for the preservation and replacement of trees on the development site
such that the minimum tree canopy or tree cover percentage 20 years after development is projected to be
as follows: (i) 10 percent tree canopy for a site zoned business, commercial, or industrial; (ii) 10 percent
tree canopy for a residential site zoned 20 or more units per acre; (iii) 15 percent tree canopy for a
residential site zoned more than eight but less than 20 units per acre; (iv) 20 percent tree canopy for a
residential site zoned more than four but not more than eight units per acre; (v) 25 percent tree canopy for
a residential site zoned more than two but not more than four units per acre; and (vi) 30 percent tree
canopy for a residential site zoned two or less units per acre. Finally, the bill mandates that any tree
conservation ordinance provide for certain deviations from the canopy requirements.
The urban forestry needs and goals of all municipalities are similar, as outlined by the Virginia
Department of Forestry. With amendments to the enabling legislation to allow all localities to implement
tree conservation ordinances such as Northern Virginia, local governments will be able to tailor
ordinances to specific local requirements. The Virginia Urban Forest Council supports such an
amendment.
Expanding tree protection legislative authority enables the City to move forward toward accomplishing
Green Ribbon Committee recommendations and to continue to ramp up our sustainability/Go Green VA
Initiatives.
Request:
The City requests the General Assembly amend Virginia Code § 15.2-961.1 to provide that all localities,
not just Northern Virginia, may implement the above outlined requirements, eliminating the "non
attainment area for air quality purposes" provision that is currently in the adopted legislation for Northern
Virginia localities.
Page 19
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
16. EXPANSION OF THE VIRGINIA HUMAN RIGHTS ACT
Virginia Beach Human Rights Commission
Background:
The Virginia Human Rights Act (Va. Code § 2.2-3900 et seq) currently prohibits discrimination
based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, pregnancy, childbirth or related medical
conditions, age, marital status, or disability. The City of Virginia Beach has prohibited the
aforementioned since 1994.
Request:
The City requests that the General Assembly amend the Virginia Human Rights Act to also
prohibit discrimination based on sexual orientation.
Page 20
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
17. REVISE CHESAPEAKE BAY REGULATIONS TO INCLUDE WATER FEATURES LIKE POOLS
AND BMP'S AS PERMEABLE SURFACES
City Council
City of Virginia Beach
Background:
Title 9, Chapter 10 of the Virginia Administrative Code sets forth the regulations governing the
implementation and administration of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act (Sections 10.1-2100
through 10.1-2112 of the Code of Virginia). Section 120 and 130 of Chapter 10 establish
General Performance Criteria and Development Criteria for Resource Protection Areas. It is the
position of the staff of the Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Chesapeake Bay
Local Assistance Board that the surface area of swimming pools and BMP's be considered as
impervious surfaces to fully comply with the intent of these regulations. The City is of the
opinion that the surface area of swimming pools and BMP's in effect accomplish water quality
protection by reducing the amount of runoff within the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Area and
therefore should not be considered as impervious for the purpose of calculating stormwater
runoff.
Request:
The City requests the General Assembly adopt a resolution requesting that the Virginia
Department of Conservation and Recreation and the Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance Board
amend Title 9, Chapter 10 of the Virginia Administrative Code to specify water features like
pools and BMP's are considered as permeable surfaces for the purpose of calculating stormwater
runoff. Concurrently, City staff is also continuing efforts to attempt to address this issue by
reaching a mutually acceptable position that will negate the need for a regulatory change through
ongoing negotiations with the staff of the Virginia Department of Conservation and recreation,
Division of Chesapeake Bay Local Assistance, and with representatives of the local development
community.
Page 21
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
CITY OF VIRGINIA BEACH
2009 FUNDING ITEMS
The City Council of Virginia Beach recognizes the Commonwealth, as well as the City, are
facing very difficult and trying fiscal realities. Nevertheless, the City Council is including
these requests for funding to the Commonwealth for non -state agencies, as well as State
responsibilities that are under funded. Many of these requests are long standing, others are
new; all merit funding by the Commonwealth when resources are available.
Page 22
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
1. VIRGINIA AQUARIUM & MARINE SCIENCE CENTER -OCEAN IN MOTION AQUARIUM TRUCK
Lynn Clements
Department Director
Museums
Background Information:
The Virginia Aquarium & Marine Science Center requests $900,000 to support the Ocean in Motion
program, which carries marine science education to schools and festivals across the Commonwealth
of Virginia. The current Ocean in Motion aquarium truck has been bringing live marine animals and
interactive programming to students since 2001. In that time, we have reached 175,377 students from
the Coastal Plain to the far reaches of southwest Virginia. In 2006 alone, Ocean in Motion traveled to
more than 55 Virginia cities across 21,900 miles to visit 75 schools and 25,213 students.
As we face new environmental challenges such as global warming, schools must have resources such
as Ocean in Motion to enhance their science curriculum and inspire future scientists. We provide an
experience that no textbook can duplicate — sea stars and horseshoe crabs to touch in the classroom
and native fishes to watch aboard the truck. Without this type of experiential learning, students do
not build emotional connections to the Bay and ocean, only intellectual ones. According to Richard
Louv in his book Last Child in the Woods: Saving Children from Nature Deficit Disorder, individuals
with emotional connections to the environment are the ones most likely to develop a strong
stewardship ethic. This funding would allow Ocean in Motion to continue as a key educational
component for fostering stewardship of the Chesapeake Bay and the ocean in our young people.
This traveling aquarium allows Aquarium educators to reach students who might not have the
opportunity to see the ocean or the Chesapeake Bay in person. This experience is critical to
developing "Bay and ocean literacy" in our citizens. Ocean literacy is an understanding of the
ocean's influence on you and of your influence on the ocean. If you are ocean -literate, you
understand how the ocean functions, can communicate about the ocean in a meaningful way, and are
able to make informed decisions about the ocean and its resources. This concept was developed in
2004 by 100 ocean science and education professionals under the guidance of The National
Geographic Society and NOAA. The work addresses the state of ocean and aquatic science in the
classroom: It is one of the most "under -taught" subjects in K-12. The current reality is that citizens
are not properly educated to deal with issues related to the ocean and to the Chesapeake Bay, both of
which are important resources to the state.
Request:
The Virginia Aquarium is asking the General Assembly for $900,000 to:
• purchase a replacement Ocean in Motion vehicle outfitted with state -of -the art aquariums;
• upgrade the vehicle's onsite "docking" facilities;
• expand the holding systems for marine species used in outreach;
• And support the staffing critical to the success of the program.
Mileage and salt water have started to take their toll on the existing vehicle, which will need to be
replaced within two years. We will add a large "truck port" to protect the vehicle from the elements
and provide shelter for staff doing weekly maintenance. We plan to increase the number of animals
carried aboard the truck and will need additional holding space for them in our upcoming Marine
Animal Care facility. Finally, the success of the program hinges on having qualified staff to
coordinate with schools, conduct the programs, handle routine vehicle maintenance, and provide care
to the animals and life support systems.
Page 23
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
2. SUPPORT FOR REGIONAL PLAN FOR GEROPSYCHIATRIC SERVICES
Bob Morin
Department Director
Human Services
Background Information:
Over the past several years, Eastern State Hospital has been undergoing a transformation from a
nearly 500 bed hospital to a planned 300 bed facility. In 2006, plans for the demolition of the
existing hospital and reconstruction of two new and smaller facilities were announced. The first
phase of the project was to rebuild Hancock Geriatric Unit into a 150 bed facility, resulting in a
loss of approximately 70 beds. The new Hancock Geriatric Unit opened on 4/1/08. The resulting
loss of capacity for long term inpatient services for this fragile and growing population has led
the Executive Directors in Health Planning Region V (HPR V represents CSB's of Colonial,
Chesapeake, Eastern Shore, Hampton/Newport News, Middle Peninsula, Norfolk, Portsmouth,
Virginia Beach, and Western Tidewater) to research and assess the system of services that would
be necessary to serve this population in a community setting.
In early 2007, a task force was created to develop strategic recommendations for a regional plan
for geropsychiatric services in HPR V. Older Americans are the fastest growing segment of the
population in the nation. In 2000, persons over the age of 65 made up 12.4% of the population.
By 2030, this number is estimated to be 25% (representing over 70 million Americans).
Virginia's seniors are growing at a more rapid rate and are expected to reach the 25% level by
2025. The assumptions used in development of the proposed services recognize that aging in
place in the least restrictive environment is preferable and that in order to assure good
stewardship of the resources, consistent service outcomes and cost effective treatment must be
provided. The task force researched existing statistical data, current services, service gaps, and
documented need to develop a comprehensive system of care to meet the needs of the aging
population in the region. There were a number of stakeholders, public and private, facility and
community based, including service recipients and caregivers that contributed to the
identification of service needs that were included in the plan. The resulting document outlines a
continuum of care including inpatient, skilled nursing care, nursing home care, assisted living,
adult foster care, respite, intensive outpatient, partial hospitalization, day treatment and support
options, mobile outreach and triage, case management, and workforce development and training.
(A copy of the complete plan is available upon request.) The proposed services are set up in a
menu format that allow for maximum efficiency and placement across the region and can be
funded in a phased approach if necessary. The total funding request is $7,371,578. This is
excluding anticipated fees to cover remaining costs.
Request:
During the last General Assembly Session, there was a Budget Amendment submitted that would
have provided substantial funding towards "more fully funding" systems of care in HPR V and in
the Northern Virginia area (HPR II), and for funding the development of systems of care in the
remaining 5 regions of the state. Support is requested for resubmission of a budget amendment
to provide the proposed services as outlined in the HPR V Regional Plan for Geropsychiatric
Services.
Page 24
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
3. SUPPORT FOR ADDITIONAL STATE GENERAL FUND DOLLARS FOR MENTAL
HEALTH AND MENTAL RETARDATION
Bob Morin
Department Director
Human Services
Background Information:
There continues to be substantial need in the community for mental health, mental retardation
and substance abuse services, as evidenced by growing waiting lists for community-based
care. There also continues to be substantial needs in child- care, housing, employment, health
care, and transportation for low income and disabled families. Seniors represent the fastest
growing underserved population in Virginia. DHS staff, along with representatives from
other CSB's in the region has recently completed a system of care plan for geropsychiatric
services that will help to address the unmet needs of seniors who will no longer be able to be
served in a downsized Hancock Geriatric Center at Eastern State Hospital. (Copy of the full
plan is available upon request).
Request:
The City of Virginia Beach is requesting that the General Assembly fully fund the mental
health, mental retardation, and substance abuse system to meet the needs of children and
adults on waiting lists for services. Funding is also requested to meet the needs of low-
income families to include child-care, affordable housing, employment, health care, and
transportation. Additionally, the City requests that funds be made available to adequately
cover the cost of building community capacity as a result of downsizing Eastern State
Hospital and Hancock Geriatric Unit. Specifically, funding is requested for the HPR V
Regional Plan for Geropsychiatric Services. The total cost of the plan is $7.3 million dollars.
It is designed in a menu format that will allow for a phased in funding approach.
Page 25
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
I
4. FUNDING FOR PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICES
Venita Newby -Owens, M.D., M.P.H.
Department Director
Department of Health
Background Information:
Costs to provide much needed services have steadily increased in Virginia Beach for public
health. These include not only the traditional services to indigents but also services such as
vector control, identification of West Nile Virus, and weapons of mass destruction. The
dollars provided by the Commonwealth have become more inadequate over the years and the
disparity between Virginia Beach per capita funding for public health care is woefully
inadequate compared to other cities. In order to improve child health and school readiness
and preventing child abuse and neglect, equalized funding is requested.
Request:
The General Assembly is requested to fully fund the Virginia Beach Public Health
Department and equalize funding for Virginia Beach on a per capita basis to match Norfolk
and Portsmouth.
Page 26
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
5. VIRGINIA BEACH CONVENTION CENTER FUNDING
James Ricketts
Department Director
Convention & Visitors Bureau
Background Information:
In January 2007, the City of Virginia Beach completed the new and award winning Virginia
Beach Convention Center. The new facility replaced the obsolete Pavilion Convention
Center.
The old center had a total of 188,000 square feet and lacked the amenities essential for
today's meeting planners. The new facility has a total of 516,000 square feet. This includes
150,000 square feet of exhibition space, over 31,000 sq. ft. of ballroom space and
approximately 29,000 sq. ft. of meeting space. The total cost of the facility is
$202,571.000.00
The new convention center is putting Virginia on the map as a viable convention state.
According to the Feasibility Study conducted by PricewaterhouseCoopers, the
Commonwealth will realize the following economic benefits: Incremental tax revenues (in
2002 dollars) $1.2 to $2 million annually, between 900 - 1,500 additional jobs and between
$27.7 million — $44.8 million in incremental direct expenditures new to the Commonwealth
(not a transfer from other localities in the Commonwealth).
The economic impact for Hampton Roads is $50.5 million to $79.3 million in incremental
direct expenditures and between 1,700 and 2,700 new jobs. This is in addition to the $2.1
million incremental tax revenue to the City of Virginia Beach, $97 million in Sales and 1,900
additional jobs.
Request:
The General Assembly is requested to provide the remainder of the $10 million, beyond what
has been appropriated. This is in keeping with the benefits to the Commonwealth based on
the amount of state tax revenue that will be generated from the new facility over a ten-year
period and the precedent set in State funding assistance provided to the Richmond
Convention Center.
Page 27
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
6. SANDLER CENTER FOR THE PERFORMING ARTS
Emily Spruill
Cultural Arts Coordinator
Office of Cultural Affairs
Background Information:
The Sandler Center for the Performing Arts, a professional -quality 1300 -seat, 84,000 square -
foot facility, is the cultural centerpiece of Virginia Beach, located at the core of the City's
emerging Town Center. Opened in November 2007, the Center has enlarged spaces for
performances, public and performer support and give the opportunity to expand the type and
diversity of the performing arts programs in Hampton Roads and the State of Virginia.
The $47 million facility, built under the General Assembly's PPEA process, has a full range
of amenities, meeting the needs of today and tomorrow. As a tangible demonstration of their
commitment, the Virginia Beach City Council dedicated $35 million of City funds to the
project. Fundraising for capital and an endowment fund is being led by the Virginia Beach
Performing Arts Center Foundation, a non-profit organization spearheaded by some of the
City's top civic and business leaders.
The Sandler Center for the Performing Arts will have a dramatic impact to the State of
Virginia's tax base, generating over $2.2 million for the construction phase and $35,500 in
annual State tax revenue. We ask the State to strengthen its commitment and investment to
the future of this cultural landmark and to the City as a whole, by appropriating $300,000 for
the operations of the Center.
The new location at the exciting Town Center development has become a defining asset for
social development for the City and Hampton Roads. It is a focal point for social activities
from education to the arts and entertainment and illustrates the region's dedication to
furthering the cultural life of its citizens.
Request:
The General Assembly is requested to appropriate $300,000 for the operations of the Sandler
Center for the Performing Arts.
Page 28
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
7. FUNDING FOR THE VIRGINIA TOURISM CORPORATION
John Uhrin
City Council Member
Background Information:
The tourism industry plays an integral role in the Commonwealth's economy. Travelers
spent $18.7 billion, which generated $1.2 billion in State and local tax revenue in 2007. This
spending accounts for over 210,000 jobs in Virginia. The City of Virginia Beach is greatly
concerned over recent discussions regarding the possible further reductions of the budget for
the Virginia Tourism Corporation (VTC). The VTC budget has already decreased over the
past five years where many of our direct competitor States have increased their marketing
budget. Further budget cuts would have a serious negative impact on tourism and its related
tax revenue. It's important to note that the general fund dollars devoted to VTC marking
those efforts unlike most other State expenditures generate a strong return on investment
yielding a $5.00 return for every dollar invested.
Request:
The City of Virginia Beach encourages the General Assembly to preserve and enhance, when
possible, the Virginia Tourism Corporation's current budget and further develop a long-term
sustainable funding source for their marketing budget in order to protect this vital industry.
Page 29
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
8. SUPPORT FOR INCREASED FUNDING FOR THE GOVERNOR'S OPPORTUNITY FUND
City Council
City of Virginia Beach
Background Information:
The General Assembly has for many years had a line item in the budget appropriating funds
for the Governor's Opportunity Fund (GOF). This fund, also known as the "Deal -Closing"
Fund, provides loans and grants to political subdivisions for economic development
purposes. These can be used for public or private utility extensions, capacity development
for on or off site railroad or other transportation costs, site acquisition, training, etc. The City
of Virginia Beach has used the GOF over the last five years to leverage over $237 million in
new capital investment. This investment created over 2,392 high paying jobs. In the current
fiscal year, $7.6 million is appropriated and $7.5 million has been appropriated in the second
year. The City Council desires to have these amounts at least doubled so that more funds can
be available to assist local governments like Virginia Beach. The increase in this fund is
particularly important this time, in as much as the General Assembly has earmarked large
amounts of the funds available to be deposited to the semiconductor memory or logic wafer
manufacturing performance grant program. Other earmarks have also reduced the amount of
money available for economic development generally throughout the Commonwealth.
Request:
The General Assembly is requested to increase, by at least 100%, the amount of funds
appropriated to the Governor's Opportunity Fund or "Deal -Closing" Fund. This will allow
jurisdictions like Virginia Beach to leverage local and private dollars to greatly facilitate
economic development growth within the Commonwealth.
Page 30
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
APPENDIX: DRAFTS OF PROPOSED LEGISLATION - KEYED TO
REQUESTED CODE CHANGES
Page 31
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
LEGISLATIVE ITEM 1
ARREST OR ISSUANCE OF A SUMMONS BY AN OFFICER BASED ON THE
OBSERVATIONS OF A DIFFERENT OFFICER
Chief A.M Jacocks
Department of Police
§ 19.2-81. Arrest without warrant authorized in certain cases — The following officers
shall have the powers of arrest as provided in this section:
1. Members of the State Police force of the Commonwealth,
2. Sheriffs of the various counties and cities, and their deputies,
3. Members of any county police force of any duly constituted police force of any city or
town,
4. The Commissioner, members and employees of the Marine Resources Commission
granted the power of arrest pursuant to § 28.2-900,
5. Regular game wardens appointed pursuant to § 29.1-200,
6. United States Coast Guard and United States Coast Guard Reserve commissioned,
warrant, and petty officers authorized under § 29.1-205 to make arrests, and
7. The special policemen of the counties as provided by § 15.2-1737, provided such officers
are in uniform, or displaying a badge of office.
Such officers may arrest, without a warrant, any person who commits any crime in the
presence of the officer and any person whom he has reasonable grounds or probable cause to
suspect of having committed a felony not in his presence.
Such officers also may arrest, without a warrant, any person who commits any
misdemeanor or traffic infraction as defined by the State Code, or similar local ordinance,
if the officer has received a radio message from another officer who observed the violation
with or without the assistance of a camera or similar device. Such radio message shall
have been dispatched immediately after the alleged offense was observed and positive
identification of the alleged offender is provided to the arresting officer. The arresting
officer shall then proceed as if the offense was committed in his presence in accordance
with § 19.2-74. If a summons is issued in lieu of an arrest, the names of both the arresting
officer and the observing officer shall be included on the summons.
Page 32
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
LEGISLATIVE ITEM 2
ISSUANCE OF A WARRANT IN A DUI CASE BY AN OFFICER BASED ON THE
OBSERVATIONS OF THE ARRESTING OFFICER
Chief A.M. Jacocks
Department of Police
§ 19.2-81. Arrest without warrant authorized in certain cases. The following officers
shall have the powers of arrest as provided in this section:
1. Members of the State Police force of the Commonwealth;
2. Sheriffs of the various counties and cities, and their deputies;
3. Members of any county police force or any duly constituted police force of any city or
town of the Commonwealth;
4. The Commissioner, members and employees of the Marine Resources Commission
granted the power of arrest pursuant to § 28.2-900;
5. Regular conservation police officers appointed pursuant to § 29.1-200;
6. United States Coast Guard and United States Coast Guard Reserve commissioned,
warrant, and petty officers authorized under § 29.1-205 to make arrests;
7. The special policemen of the counties as provided by § 15.2-1737, provided such officers
are in uniform, or displaying a badge of office; and
8. Conservation officers appointed pursuant to § 10.1-115.
Such officers may arrest, without a warrant, any person who commits any crime in the
presence of the officer and any person whom he has reasonable grounds or probable cause to
suspect of having committed a felony not in his presence.
Any such officer may arrest without a warrant any person whom the officer has probable
cause to suspect of operating in his presence either a vehicle while intoxicated in violation
of 18.2-266, 18.2-266.1, 18.2-272, or 46.2-341.24; or a watercraft or motor boat (i) while
intoxicated in violation of subsection B of § 29.1-738 or (ii) in violation of an order issued
pursuant to § 29.1-738.44 ' emay thereafter transfer custody of the person
suspected of the violation to another officer, who may obtain a warrant based upon
statements made to him by the arresting officer.
Page 33
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
Any such officer may, at the scene of any accident involving a motor vehicle, watercraft as
defined in § 29.1-712 or motorboat, or at any hospital or medical facility to which any person
involved in such accident has been transported, or in the apprehension of any person charged
with the theft of any motor vehicle, on any of the highways or waters of the Commonwealth,
upon reasonable grounds to believe, based upon personal investigation, including information
obtained from eyewitnesses, that a crime has been committed by any person then and there
present, apprehend such person without a warrant of arrest. In addition, such officer may,
within three hours of the occurrence of any such accident involving a motor vehicle, arrest
without a warrant at any location any person whom the officer has probable cause to suspect
of driving or operating such motor vehicle while intoxicated in violation of § 18.2-266, 18.2-
266.1, 46.2-341.24, 18.2-272, or a substantially similar ordinance of any county, city, or
town in the Commonwealth.
Page 34
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
LEGISLATIVE ITEM 3
DUI COST RECOVERY PROGRAM
Chief A.M. Jacocks
Department of Police
§ 15.2-1716. Reimbursement of expenses incurred in responding to DUI incidents and
other traffic incidents.
A. Any locality may provide by ordinance that a person convicted of violating any of the
following provisions shall be liable for restitution at the time of sentencing or in a separate
civil action to the locality or to any responding volunteer fire or rescue squad, or both, for
reasonable expenses incurred by the locality for responding law enforcement, firefighting,
rescue and emergency services, including by the sheriffs office of such locality, or by any
volunteer fire or rescue squad, or by any combination of the foregoing, when providing an
appropriate emergency response to any accident, incident related to such violation or the
arrest of the individual for such violation.
1. The provisions of § 18.2-51.4, 18.2-266, 18.2-266.1, 29.1-738, 29.1-738.02, 18.2-272 or a
similar ordinance, when such operation of a motor vehicle, engine, train or watercraft while
so impaired is the proximate cause of the accident or incident;
2. The provisions of Article 7 (§ 46.2-852 et seq.) of Chapter 8 of Title 46.2 relating to
reckless driving, when such reckless driving is the proximate cause of the accident or
incident;
3. The provisions of Article 1 (§ 46.2-300 et seq.) of Chapter 3 of Title 46.2 relating to
driving without a license or driving with a suspended or revoked license; and
4. The provisions of § 46.2-894 relating to improperly leaving the scene of an accident.
B. Personal liability under this section for reasonable expenses of an appropriate emergency
response shall not exceed $1,000 in the aggregate for a particular accident or incident
occurring in such locality. In determining the "reasonable expenses," a locality may bill a flat
fee of $250 or a minute -by -minute accounting of the actual costs incurred. As used in this
section, "appropriate emergency response" includes all costs of providing law-enforcement,
fire -fighting, rescue, and emergency medical services. The court may order as restitution the
reasonable expenses incurred by the locality for responding law enforcement, fire -fighting,
rescue and emergency medical services. The provisions of this section shall not preempt or
limit any remedy available to the Commonwealth, to the locality or to any volunteer rescue
squad to recover the reasonable expenses of an emergency response to an accident or incident
not involving impaired driving, operation of a vehicle or other conduct as set forth herein.
Page 35
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
I
LEGISLATIVE ITEM 4
RAISE ACCIDENT REPORT DAMAGE THRESHOLD TO $2500
Chief A.M. Jacocks
Department of Police
§ 46.2-373. Report by law-enforcement officer investigating accident.
Every law-enforcement officer who in the course of duty investigates a motor vehicle
accident resulting in injury to or death of any person or total property damage to an apparent
extent of $1000 $2500 or more, either at the time of and at the scene of the accident or
thereafter and elsewhere, by interviewing participants or witnesses shall, within twenty-four
hours after completing the investigation, forward a written report of the accident to the
Department. The report shall include the name or names of the insurance carrier or of the
insurance agent of the automobile liability policy on each vehicle involved in the accident.
Page 36
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
LEGISLATIVE ITEM 12
ASSESSMENT FOR COURTHOUSE CONSTRUCTION, RENOVATION OR MAINTENANCE
Catheryn Whitesell
Department Director
Department of Management Services
§ 17.1-281. Assessment for courthouse construction, renovation or maintenance.
Any county or city, through its governing body, may assess a sum not in excess of two ten
dollars as part of the costs in (i) each civil action filed in the district or circuit courts located
within its boundaries and (ii) each criminal or traffic case in its district or circuit court in
which the defendant is charged with a violation of any statute or ordinance. The total
assessments authorized by any county or city in a civil action pursuant to this section and §
42.1-70 shall not exceed four dollars. If a town provides court facilities for a county, the
governing body of the county shall return to the town a portion of the assessments collected
based on the number of civil, criminal and traffic cases originating and heard in the town.
The imposition of such assessment shall be by ordinance of the governing body which may
provide for different sums in circuit courts and district courts. The assessment shall be
collected by the clerk of the court in which the action is filed, remitted to the treasurer of the
appropriate county or city and held by such treasurer subject to disbursements by the
governing body for the construction, renovation, or maintenance of courthouse or jail and
court -related facilities and to defray increases in the cost of heating, cooling, electricity, and
ordinary maintenance.
The assessment provided for herein shall be in addition to any other fees prescribed by law.
The assessment shall be required in each felony, misdemeanor, or traffic infraction case,
regardless of the existence of a local ordinance requiring its payment.
Page 37
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
LEGISLATIVE ITEM 14
EXPAND DEFINITION OF FIREARMS TO INCLUDE REPLICA AND GAS & AIR
WEAPONS
Jim Wood
City Council Member
§ 18.2-308. Personal protection; carrying concealed weapons; when lawful to carry.
A. If any person carries about his person, hidden from common observation, (i) any pistol,
revolver, or other weapon designed or intended to propel a missile of any kind by action of
an explosion of any combustible material or any air or gas operated weapon or any object
similar in appearance; (ii) any dirk, bowie knife, switchblade knife, ballistic knife, machete,
razor, slingshot, spring stick, metal knucks, or blackjack; (iii) any flailing instrument
consisting of two or more rigid parts connected in such a manner as to allow them to swing
freely, which may be known as a nun chahka, nun chuck, nunchaku, shuriken, or fighting
chain; (iv) any disc, of whatever configuration, having at least two points or pointed blades
which is designed to be thrown or propelled and which may be known as a throwing star or
oriental dart; or (v) any weapon of like kind as those enumerated in this subsection, he shall
be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor. A second violation of this section or a conviction under
this section subsequent to any conviction under any substantially similar ordinance of any
county, city, or town shall be punishable as a Class 6 felony, and a third or subsequent such
violation shall be punishable as a Class 5 felony. For the purpose of this section, a weapon
shall be deemed to be hidden from common observation when it is observable but is of such
deceptive appearance as to disguise the weapon's true nature.
§ 18.2-308.1. Possession of firearm, stun weapon, or other weapon on school property
prohibited.
A. If any person possesses any (i) stun weapon as defined in this section; (ii) knife, except a
pocket knife having a folding metal blade of less than three inches; or (iii) weapon, including
a weapon of like kind, designated in subsection A of § 18.2-308, other than a firearm; upon
(a) the property of any public, private or religious elementary, middle or high school,
including buildings and grounds; (b) that portion of any property open to the public and then
exclusively used for school -sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such
functions or activities are taking place; or (c) any school bus owned or operated by any such
school, he shall be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
B. If any person possesses any firearm designed or intended to expel a projectile by action of
an explosion of a combustible material or any air or gas operated weapon or any object
similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to
Page 38
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
reasonably induce fear in the mind of another while such person is upon (i) any public,
private or religious elementary, middle or high school, including buildings and grounds; (ii)
that portion of any property open to the public and then exclusively used for school -
sponsored functions or extracurricular activities while such functions or activities are taking
place; or (iii) any school bus owned or operated by any such school, he shall be guilty of a
Class 6 felony; however, if the person possesses any firearm within a public, private or
religious elementary, middle or high school building and intends to use, or attempts to use,
such firearm, or displays such weapon in a threatening manner, such person shall be
sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment of five years to be served
consecutively with any other sentence.
The exemptions set out in § 18.2-308 shall apply, mutatis mutandis, to the provisions of this
section. The provisions of this section shall not apply to (i) persons who possess such weapon
or weapons as a part of the school's curriculum or activities; (ii) a person possessing a knife
customarily used for food preparation or service and using it for such purpose; (iii) persons
who possess such weapon or weapons as a part of any program sponsored or facilitated by
either the school or any organization authorized by the school to conduct its programs either
on or off the school premises; (iv) any law-enforcement officer; (v) any person who
possesses a knife or blade which he uses customarily in his trade; (vi) a person who possesses
an unloaded firearm that is in a closed container, or a knife having a metal blade, in or upon a
motor vehicle, or an unloaded shotgun or rifle in a firearms rack in or upon a motor vehicle;
or (vii) a person who has a valid concealed handgun permit and possesses a concealed
handgun while in a motor vehicle in a parking lot, traffic circle, or other means of vehicular
ingress or egress to the school. For the purposes of this paragraph, "weapon" includes a knife
having a metal blade of three inches or longer and "closed container" includes a locked
vehicle trunk.
As used in this section:
"Stun weapon" means any device that emits a momentary or pulsed output, which is
electrical, audible, optical or electromagnetic in nature and which is designed to temporarily
incapacitate a person.
§ 18.2-308.2. Possession or transportation of firearms, stun weapons, explosives or
concealed weapons by convicted felons; penalties; petition for permit; when issued.
A. It shall be unlawful for (i) any person who has been convicted of a felony; (ii) any person
adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile 14 years of age or older at the time of the offense of
murder in violation of § 18.2-31 or 18.2-32, kidnapping in violation of § 18.2-47, robbery by
the threat or presentation of firearms in violation of § 18.2-58, or rape in violation of § 18.2-
61; or (iii) any person under the age of 29 who was adjudicated delinquent as a juvenile 14
years of age or older at the time of the offense of a delinquent act which would be a felony if
committed by an adult, other than those felonies set forth in clause (ii), whether such
conviction or adjudication occurred under the laws of the Commonwealth, or any other state,
Page 39
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
the District of Columbia, the United States or any territory thereof, to knowingly and
intentionally possess or transport any firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any
object similar in appearance, whether capable of being fired or not, in such manner as
to reasonably induce fear in the mind of another or stun weapon as defined by § 18.2-
308.1 or any explosive material, or to knowingly and intentionally carry about his person,
hidden from common observation, any weapon described in subsection A of § 18.2-308.
However, such person may possess in his residence or the curtilage thereof a stun weapon as
defined by § 18.2-308.1. Any person who violates this section shall be guilty of a Class 6
felony. However, any person who violates this section by knowingly and intentionally
possessing or transporting any firearm and who was previously convicted of a violent felony
as defined in § 17.1-805 shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment
of five years. Any person who violates this section by knowingly and intentionally
possessing or transporting any firearm and who was previously convicted of any other felony
within the prior 10 years shall be sentenced to a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment
of two years. The mandatory minimum terms of imprisonment prescribed for violations of
this section shall be served consecutively with any other sentence.
B. The prohibitions of subsection A shall not apply to (i) any person who possesses a firearm,
explosive material or other weapon while carrying out his duties as a member of the Armed
Forces of the United States or of the National Guard of Virginia or of any other state, (ii) any
law-enforcement officer in the performance of his duties, or (iii) any person who has been
pardoned or whose political disabilities have been removed pursuant to Article V, Section 12
of the Constitution of Virginia provided the Governor, in the document granting the pardon
or removing the person's political disabilities, may expressly place conditions upon the
reinstatement of the person's right to ship, transport, possess or receive firearms.
C. Any person prohibited from possessing, transporting or carrying a firearm or stun weapon
under subsection A, may petition the circuit court of the jurisdiction in which he resides for a
permit to possess or carry a firearm or stun weapon; however, no person who has been
convicted of a felony shall be qualified to petition for such a permit unless his civil rights
have been restored by the Governor or other appropriate authority. The court may, in its
discretion and for good cause shown, grant such petition and issue a permit. The provisions
of this section relating to firearms and stun weapons shall not apply to any person who has
been granted a permit pursuant to this subsection.
C1. Any person who was prohibited from possessing, transporting or carrying explosive
material under subsection A may possess, transport or carry such explosive material if his
right to possess, transport or carry explosive material has been restored pursuant to federal
law.
D. For the purpose of this section, "explosive material" means any chemical compound
mixture, or device, the primary or common purpose of which is to function by explosion; the
term includes, but is not limited to, dynamite and other high explosives, black powder, pellet
powder, smokeless gun powder, detonators, blasting caps and detonating cord but shall not
include fireworks or permissible fireworks as defined in § 27-95.
Page 40
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
§ 18.2-53.1. Use or display of firearm in committing felony.
It shall be unlawful for any person to use or attempt to use any pistol, shotgun, rifle, or other
firearm or any air or gas operated weapon or any object similar in appearance, whether
capable of being fired or not, in such manner as to reasonably induce fear in the mind
of another • • •• _ while committing or
attempting to commit murder, rape, forcible sodomy, inanimate or animate object sexual
penetration as defined in § 18.2-67.2, robbery, carjacking, burglary, malicious wounding as
defined in § 18.2-51, malicious bodily injury to a law-enforcement officer as defined in §
18.2-51.1, aggravated malicious wounding as defined in § 18.2-51.2, malicious wounding by
mob as defined in § 18.2-41 or abduction. Violation of this section shall constitute a separate
and distinct felony and any person found guilty thereof shall be sentenced to a mandatory
minimum term of imprisonment of three years for a first conviction, and to a mandatory
minimum term of five years for a second or subsequent conviction under the provisions of
this section. Such punishment shall be separate and apart from, and shall be made to run
consecutively with, any punishment received for the commission of the primary felony.
Page 41
Final for City Council Adoption -October 28, 2008
5
Mayor Oberndorf DECLARED the City Council meeting ADJOURNED at 4:08
P.M.
,6-6eA,-... J. it),,,,16,L)
Gloria S. Winkler, MMC
Sr. Deputy City Clerk
uth Hodges
City Clerk
raser, MMC
October 21, 2008