Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Tax Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Roanoke council rejects HeartCry Missionary Society property tax‑exemption request
Summary
Council considered and denied a tax‑exemption for property at 5732 Airport Road NW owned by HeartCry Missionary Society; staff noted the property assessment (~$1,700,000) and statutory criteria, and the final roll call produced five votes in favor, one opposed and one abstention, resulting in failure.
Get email alerts on the Tax Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Roanoke City Council considered a request Dec. 15 from HeartCry Missionary Society Inc. for a real‑property tax exemption on parcels at 5732 Airport Road NW and voted to deny the exemption after a roll‑call vote.
Jesse Wiese, representing HeartCry, told council the nonprofit operates media‑production activities in Roanoke, employs 25 full‑time staff locally, hosts conferences that bring visitors and estimated roughly $35,000 in local revenue for 2026 tied to its events. He asked council to grant an exemption under the city's ordinance for qualifying nonprofit uses.
City Attorney David Collins outlined the review process: the director of real estate valuation initially denied the exemption because the property was not already exempt under the Virginia Constitution and state code, and staff then evaluated the application under the Code of Virginia (transcript cites "58.13651"). Collins said staff reviewed 501(c)(3) documentation, revenue impacts and compensation levels; he noted the property is assessed at approximately $1,700,000 (as reported to council).
After a public hearing with no public speakers, the clerk called the roll. The votes recorded were: Hagen (aye); Sanchez Jones (aye); Vice Mayor McGuire (aye); Nash (nay); Vollison ("I'm staying"/abstain); Powers (aye); Mayor Cobb (aye). The motion failed.
Council members did not record a formal written explanation on the record beyond the roll call, and the city clerk concluded the matter after the vote. The applicant may pursue other administrative or legal options outside the council action, but none were discussed during the hearing.

