The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMARCH 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