HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994-04-06April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 1)
000ia7
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on April 6, 1994, at 9:00 A.M., Room 7, County Office
Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Messrs.
Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Charles S. Martin, Walter F. Perkins and Mrs.
Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County
Attorney, Larry W. Davis, and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 9:00 A.M., by the
Chairman, Mr. Walter F. Perkins.
Agenda Item No. 2.
Agenda Item No. 3.
Agenda Item No. 4.
Public. There were none.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Upon motion by Mrs. Humphris,
seconded by Mr. Marshall, Items 5.1 through 5.6 were approved, and the
remaining items on the consent agenda were accepted for information. Roll was
called, and the vote was as follows:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
Item 5.1. Resolution affirming the Monticello Area Community Action
Agency as the official community action agency in Albemarle County. (It was
noted that Virginia Department of Social Services regulations require that
every five years the Monticello Area Community Action Agency update its
designation as the official Community Action Agency in each jurisdiction that
it serves. By the vote shown above, the following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS, the Monticello Area Community Action Agency has
been designated by the County of Albemarle as the official commu-
nity action agency for this jurisdiction and is a partner with
said jurisdiction in helping low income persons and communities
sustain themselves and improve their standard of living; and
WHEREAS, the Monticello Area Community Action Agency has
continued to serve the low income residents of this area with many
valuable educational, training, family support and community
development programs; and
WHEREAS, local funding is an important source of matching
support for state and federal funds used to provide service for
residents of the locality; and
WHEREAS, this locality has contributed to the Monticello
Area Community Action Agency in an effort to sustain the work of
this agency;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the County of Albemarle
reaffirms its designation of the Monticello Area Community Action
Agency as the official Community Action Agency for this jurisdic-
tion.
Item 5.2. Request to participate in the Virginia Department of Trans-
portation Revenue Sharing Program. (It was noted that VDOT's County Primary
and Secondary Road Fund, or "Revenue Sharing Program," provides the opportuni-
ty for the County to receive an additional $500,000 for road improvements.
The program requires, a dollar-for-dollar match by the County. The result is a
total commitment of an additional $1.0 million toward improvements to the
local road system. The County has participated in this Program since 1988.)
By the vote shown above, a request to participate in the program was
approved and a letter was directed to Mr. James C. Givens, Acting State
Secondary Roads Engineer, informing him of this decision.
Item 5.3. Approval of Early Retirement Application. (Subsequent to the
Board's earlier approval of those County employees indicating a desire to
retire under the County's Voluntary Early Retirement Incentive Program during
1994-95, staff has received an additional application from an employee who
wishes to retire on November 1, 1994. This employee, upon his retirement,
will have given the County of Albemarle almost 34 years of dedicated service
in the Sheriff's Department and subsequently the Police Department. The cost
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 2)
of this additional early retirement request can be absorbed within the Police
Department's budget and will have no impact on the budget as advertised for
public hearing.)
This request was approved by the vote shown above.
Item 5.4. Statement of Expenses for the Department of Finance, Sheriff,
Commonwealth's Attorney, Regional Jail and Clerk, Circuit Court, for the month
of February, 1994, were approved as presented by the vote shown above.
Item 5.5. Request from Peachtree Baseball League to improve baseball
field at Greenwood Park. (It was noted that in 1989 the Peachtree Youth
Baseball League approached the County Parks and Recreation Department and
Crozet Park with a plan to build two additional fields at Crozet Park to
consolidate as much of the Peachtree program as possible at Crozet Park to
take advantage of increased concession revenues to offset league expenses.
With the approval of the Crozet Park Board, a funding request was placed in
the County's Five-Year Capital Improvements Program. In July of 1993, the
County appropriated $12,000 for this purpose. The Parks and Recreation
Department advised the Peachtree League that funds were available and a plan
needed to be submitted for the approval of the Crozet Park Board. In March of
1994, the Recreation Department was contacted by Peachtree and was advised
that the Junior League Program would remain at the Greenwood Community Center
as opposed to moving to Crozet Park. The change in plans is a result of a
strong desire expressed to Peachtree officials by the Crozet community to keep
the older age group at Greenwood and restrict the play at the Park as much as
possible to little league and T-ball.
The Peachtree Youth Baseball League is now requesting that some of the
funds that have been designated for baseball improvements at Crozet Park be
used for improvements at the Greenwood Community Center. Plans for the
Greenwood field include some additional fencing, minor grading and infield
work and the construction of dugouts. Plans for Crozet Park still include the
purchase of a portable backstop and some field work. Peachtree will supple-
ment the County funding with volunteer labor and donations. Peachtree is
anxious for the approval to be given as soon as possible. The Crozet Park
Board of Directors is in agreement with this request. Since the funds are
designated for youth baseball field improvements and Peachtree is the organi-
zation that operates youth baseball in the western part of the County, staff
recommends that this request be approved. Due to the nature of the improve-
ments and the anticipated volunteer involvement and donations, it is difficult
to estimate the exact funding necessary for each facility.)
Mrs. Humphris requested staff to provide a list itemizing the use of the
$~2,000.
By the vote shown above, the Board approved the transfer of $12,000 to a
new code entitled Crozet Park/Greenwood Community Center Youth Baseball
Improvements.
Item 5.6. Community Outreach Partnership Centers. (It was noted that
the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is making
funds available to establish Community Outreach Partnership Centers. Faculty
members at the School of Architecture at the University of Virginia have
decided to submit a funding proposal that would provide planning functions for
affordable housing and neighborhood revitalization in the communities of the
Thomas Jefferson Planning District. While much of the grant would provide
services in other jurisdictions, one of the benefits to the County is in its
outreach task to assist in developing master development neighborhood plans
for up to four of the County's growth areas in conjunction with the Planning
Department as part of the Comprehensive Plan process. Additionally, grant
funds are proposed to be used to provide designs for moderate income housing
as well as analyzing sites to determine feasibility for new owner or renter
housing in terms of .zoning, infrastructure and a site configuration.)
By the vote shown above, the Board authorized the Chairman to execute a
letter of support for this research project with the understanding that no
local funds are to be committed.
Item 5.7. Wilton Farms Request to place single family attached units
in an area shown for multi-family use. (Provided for the Board's information
was the following: The Wilton Farms property was zoned R-10 with proffers in
April, 1990. The Wilton Farms Apartments were built shortly after approval of
the rezoning. Proffer ~4 states "Our sketch plan for Parcel 8 will serve as a
guide to development." The applicant is proposing to locate 30 attached units
in an area noted as Parcel B which was to contain 76 apartment units.
Staff has interpreted Proffer ~4 as a limitation on areas of develop-
ment, points of access and maximum number of units and not unit type. Staff
has advised the applicant that the changes are acceptable under the approved
zoning based on the following:
1)
Development area is unchanged - the impact of the development to Route
20 should be equal or less effect.
April 6~ 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 3)
2)
3)
O00 fi
Maximum number of units is not exceeded.
Change in point of access should not have a detrimental affect.
The change in dwelling type should reduce building height and be of a
lower scale than the apartment units originally proposed.)
Item 5.8. Copy of Planning Commission minutes of March 8 and March 22,
1994, were received as information.
Item 5.9. Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Albemarle
County Service Authority for February 17, 1994, received for information.
Item 5.10. Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Rivanna
Water and Sewer Authority for February 28, 1994, received for information.
Item 5.11. Copy of Financial Report for the Year Ended December 31,
1993, for Acme Design Technology Company, Crozet, Virginia, was received as
information.
Item 5.12. Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apartments) Bond
Program Report and Monthly Report for the month of February, 1994, received
for information.
Item 5.13. Letter dated March 16, 1994, from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt,
Resident Highway Engineer, re: notice of Location Public Hearing concerning
the extension of McIntire Road in the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle
County, Proj. U000-104-V02, PE-101; 0631 002-128, C-501; Fed. Proj. M-5104
(108). The project runs from the intersection of Route 250 to Rio Road (Route
631). Hearing is scheduled for April 26, 1994, between 4:00 P.M. and 8:00
P.M.
Item 5.14. Letter dated March 24, 1994, from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt,
Resident Highway Engineer, addressed to Mr. David P. Bowerman, Supervisor, re:
feasibility of placing a cross walk on Route 29 North at its intersection with
Woodbrook Drive. Basically, Mr. Roosevelt said the Traffic Engineer has
suggested this area be restudied once construction of Route 29 North is
completed to determine if there is sufficient pedestrian traffic to warrant a
cross walk.
Item 5.15. Letter dated March 25, 1994, from Mr. D. S. Roosevelt,
Resident Highway Engineer, to Ms. Ella W. Carey, Clerk, re: monthly update on
highway improvement projects currently under construction, received as
follows:
PROJECTS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
ALBEMARLE COUNTY
APRIL 1, 1994
ROUTE ESTIMATED
NO. LOCATION STATUS COMP. DATE
631 5TH STREET EXT. CONSTRUCTION 88% COMPLETE MAY 94
S. ROUTE 1-64
20 FROM 3.4 MI. S. ROUTE CONSTRUCTION 11% COMPLETE SEP 94
53 TO 3.8 MI. S. RTE.
53
29 FROM HYDP~AULIC ROAD TO CONSTRUCTION 14% COMPLETE DEC 95
RIO ROAD
Item 5.16. Letter dated March 29, 1994, from Mr. F. E. James, Jr.,
Acting Maintenance Operations Manager, Department of Transportation, addressed
to Ms. Ella W. Carey, Clerk, re: notice that VDoT intends to repair the
existing structure over Stillhouse Creek (Route 693) during the period of
April 4, 1994 through April 8, 1994, received as information.
Item 5.17. Supts. Memo. No. 3, dated March 14, 1994, to Division Super-
intendents, from Mr. William C. Bosher, Jr., Superintendent of Public Instruc-
tion, re: Aid to Localities Appropriation, 1993-94, Report on General
Assembly Actions Affecting 1993-94 Budgets (HB/SB 31), received for informa-
tion.
Item 5.18. Supts. Memo. No. 4, dated March 15, 1994, to Division Super-
intendents, from Mr. William C. Bosher, Jr., Superintendent of Public Instruc-
tion, re: Aid to Localities Appropriations, 1994-96 Biennium, received for
information.
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 4)
000/.40
Item 5.19. Notice dated March 15, 1994, of an application filed with
the State Corporation Commission by Virginia Electric and Power Company for
approval of the pilot program: "Energy Saver Home Plus", received for
information.
Item 5.20. February, 1994 Financial Management Report, received for
information.
Agenda Item No. 6. Approval of Minutes: April 3 and October 7, 1992;
December 1, 1993; March 2 and March 9, 1994.
Mr. Marshall had read April 3, 1992, and found them to be in order.
Mr. Bowerman had read October 7, 1992 (pages 35 at ~16 to the end) and
found them to be in order.
Mrs. Humphris had read March 2, 1994 (pages 16 at #13a to the end) and
found some typographical errors, but otherwise they were in order.
Mrs. Thomas had read March 9, 1994, and found them to be in order.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to
approve the minutes which had been read. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 7a. Transportation Matters: Work Session - Six Year
Secondary Road Plan.
Mr. David Benish, Chief of Community Development, said the Six Year
Secondary Road planning process consists of a County priority list of improve-
ment projects and a Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) financial
implementation plan called the Six Year Secondary Construction Program. The
Six Year Construction Program and County priority list of projects are
reviewed every two years. Since 1986, the Planning Commission and Board have
approved a priority list of road improvements which would cost, in total, in
excess of available funds over the six year planning periods. With such a
list developed, subsequent financial plans can be prepared and revised in
response to available annual funds. VDoT's Six Year Construction Program is
based on the County's priorities.
Provided for the Board's information is the Commission's recommended
priority list of road improvements. This list consists of a total of 65
projects; 13 are new projects to the list. Also, provided for the Board's
information is a draft of VDoT's Six Year Construction Program. Available
funding for the six year period will permit a total of 31 projects to receive
some level of funding; 22 of those are construction projects and nine are road
paving projects.
Mrs. Humphris 'asked what improvements are proposed for Georgetown Road
(priority ~13). Mr. Dan S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, said the
Georgetown Road Task Force made seven recommendations for improvements to
Georgetown Road. The major recommendation is curb and gutter, storm sewer and
sidewalk along the entire length of the roadway which costs approximately
$500,000. The recommendation does not address the number of lanes or align-
ment, which will be discussed in more detail as the project goes through the
preliminary engineering process. Mr. Roosevelt said he intends to pursue a
four lane cross section at the two intersections but the vast major of the
project will be one lane in each direction with left and right turn lanes as
necessary. County staff, the Board and citizens will also have input during
the preliminary engineering process.
Mrs. Thomas said the narrative states that the County has not received
the full allocation possible from the Revenue Sharing Program. She asked if
that is apt to change. Mr. Roosevelt said $10.0 million is the amount that is
distributed each year and not likely to change. Mr. Benish added that if a
locality does not use the money allocated to it, that money goes back into the
pool, and then later in the year localities have an additional opportunity to
apply for extra funds.
Mrs. Humphris said if the Meadow Creek Parkway, from the Route 250
Bypass to the City limits is in the primary system, is not the rest of the
Meadow Creek Parkway defined as a primary road. Mr. Roosevelt said the
section of Meadow Creek from the Route 250 Bypass to the City limits is in the
urban system, not the primary system. Mrs. Humphris asked why this project is
identified as urban/primary in the City and not defined the same in the
County. The project is connecting two major primary roads in the County. Mr.
Roosevelt said the Meadow Creek Parkway is not considered a primary road
because it does not replace an existing primary route. The Commonwealth
Transportation Board would have to designate the route as a primary road to be
eligible for primary road funds. The designation is based on function of the
O00141
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 5) ~'
road, not necessarily traffic volume. In addition, Meadow Creek is an urban
street in the City and not considered a primary road.
Mr. Perkins asked if Jarman Gap Road has moved down on the priority
list. Mr. Benish responded, "no"; it has stayed relatively in the same order.
At this time Mr. Martin requested that the Board discuss, during the
next update of the Six Year Road Plan, its policy on the amount of funds it
allocates to unpaved roads. After this winter, with all the problems the
County had with buses, and the policy recently adopted by the SchOol Board
concerning parents dropping children off at alternate locations, he thinks the
Board should at least take a look at whether it wants to increase the priority
that unpaved road funds have received from this Board in the past. Funds
allocated to one major road can pave a lot of unpaved roads.
Mr. Marshall asked when is something going to be done about the Avon
Street to Route 20 project. Mr. Benish said that project is not eligible for
secondary construction funds. It has remained in the same priority on the
list. One approach that was identified was to use Revenue Sharing Funds since
the project is not eligible for secondary construction funds. Staff is also
looking at the possibility of developer contributions. Mr. Marshall said it
seems to him there is a standoff between the developer and the County as to
whether the road will get built. He thinks the road needs to be built and the
County needs to do something about it. Mr. Cilimberg said the other source of
funding is through the Capital Improvements Plan. He added that funds for the
design of the road was in the CIP, but he is not sure of the status of those
funds at this time. Mr. Tucker commented that there has been some preliminary
design of this roadway. If the Board feels this is an important project, he
would like it to consider revenue sharing. Mr. Marshall said, if it would
speed up the process, he would like to request that the project be considered
for revenue sharing funds.
Mr. Roosevelt said revenue sharing funds can only be used on projects
that the Department agrees are needed improvements for the road system. The
reason this road is not eligible for secondary funding is because the Depart-
ment and County are at odds as to whether this road is actually needed. He
does not believe this road would be eligible for revenue sharing funds. As
the Comprehensive Plan and CATS Plan are revised, this is an issue that should
be pursued to see if the Department and County can reach an agreement on the
need for this road. When the Department agrees this road is needed for the
transportation system, it will be eligible for secondary and revenue sharing
funds, but at this time it is not eligible for either.
Mr. Cilimberg said the Southern Neighborhood Study will be complete
within the next several months. That study will recommend certain projects
either be continued or added to the CATS. The CATS Study is already underway
but it is a two year. process. There may be a recommendation in the Neighbor-
hood Study to build this road, and the CATS may ultimately include it, which
then would make it eligible for other funds. If the Board is interested in
pursuing the project outside of that process, the CIP is the only alternative.
Mr. Marshall said he does not want to pursue it through the CIP and use all
County funds.
Mrs. Humphris then expressed concerns about incorrect statements made in
the Planning Commission minutes of March 8, 1994. In several places one of
the Commissioners stated that the County is allowing new subdivisions to be
built where the Bypass is to be built, and then the County is pushing VDoT to
purchase the properties at a greater cost to the taxpayers. She emphasized
that these new subdivisions are by-right, the County can do nothing about them
and the County has never pushed VDoT to purchase these properties. The only
properties being purchased by V DoT are those which will suffer a hardship.
She said the Planning Commission minutes need to be corrected so that they do
not become incorrect history. Mr. Cilimberg said that information was
provided to the Commission, but it did not get included in the minutes.
Motion was then offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to
set the public hearing on the Six Year Secondary Road Plan for April 20, 1994.
(Note: This motion will be changed later in this meeting). Roll was called,
and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 7b. Transportation Matters: Discussion - proposed
improvements at intersection of Routes 712/713.
Mr. Roosevelt provided the Board a hand drawn sketch of the intersection
of Routes 712/713. This situation has been ongoing for six months or more.
Mr. Marshall asked that he discuss this with the Board. Mr. Roosevelt said
there is a cattle feed lot on Route 713 which generates traffic from large
trucks. The people who live and attend church on Route 713 have expressed
concerns about these large trucks because Route 713 is a narrow gravel road.
This is the only feasible option for these trucks to use. The owner of the
feed lot offered to relocate the entrance to this property to the intersection
of Routes 712/713; however, when the Department looked at the intersection, it
found that the location of the entrance would have sight distance problems,
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 6)
ooo 4
and thus denied the relocation. After that Mr. Roosevelt met with representa-
tives from the feed lot and discussed a small joint project which would
realign the intersection as shown on the sketch. Instead of having Route 712
be the major road that sweeps around the sharp curve, the Department proposes
to bring Route 712 into Route 713 as a T-intersection and make Route 713 be
the through road. This work could be done for about $30,000. The cost of the
materials could come from the maintenance fund. Representatives of the feed
lot have indicated that they will donate the additional right-of-way and build
the entrance, but are not willing to bear the cost for additional work on
Routes 712 and 713.
Mr. Roosevelt said he would categorize this project as similar to other
spot improvements the Board has looked at over the past six months; Route 769
where the Board directed him to spend $20,000 to $30,000 to improve three or
four spots and Route 712 near Route 760 where the Board authorized him to
spend $25,000 to improve the ditches and sight distance.
Mr. Marshall said Route 713 is dangerous and narrow. If a vehicle
approaches one of those trucks, one of the drivers have to back up; they
cannot pass each other. Mr. Marshall noted that several persons from southern
Albemarle were present at the meeting and can attest to the dangerous condi-
tion of the road. He thinks this improvement is necessary and would appreci-
ate the Board's support.
Mr. Roosevelt said the proposal is to relocate the north/south section
of Route 713 about ten feet to the east and regrade the intersection to make
it a "T" intersection. Currently Route 712 sweeps around the curve. He
proposes to realign Route 713, cut the intersection down to make it a little
flatter and then bring the traffic on Route 712 to a stop sign at that
location. The reason the road has to be moved ten feet to the east is so that
when the traffic on Route 712 comes to a stop at this intersection, the driver
would be able to see around the bushes and the fence.
Mr. Martin asked where the funds would come from. Mr. Roosevelt said
there is enough money in the secondary allocations where he thinks $30,000
could be used without delaying or deferring any work that is currently
underway.
Delegate Peter Way said this problem has been going on for 30 years.
use to live just beyond this proposed project and he can attest to the
dangerous situation.' The church congregation has grown considerably. He
hopes the Board will consider the improvement.
He
Motion was offered by Mr. Marshall, seconded by Mr. Martin to authorize
the Virginia Department of Transportation to transfer $30,000 from a current
Secondary Roads project to proposed improvements at the intersection of Routes
712/713. The project is to relocate the north/south section of Route 713
about ten feet to the east and regrade the intersection to make it a "T"
intersection.
Mr. Perkins asked if there would be any cost savings if VDoT also did
the entrance work. Mr. Roosevelt said he thinks the two projects should be
kept separate. If VDoT can get the feed lot to cooperate with the additional
right-of-way that is as much as should be expected.
Roll was then called and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
Agenda Item No. 7c. Other Transportation Matters.
Mr. Benish commented that the Clerk informed him that the public hearing
for the Six Year Secondary Road Plan needs to be changed. The date set would
not allow for proper' advertising.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to change
the date for the public hearing on the Six Year Secondary Road Plan from April
20, 1994 to May 11, 1994. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Roosevelt said on a daily basis his office receives requests for
small improvement projects. If he were to bring all of those requests to the
Board, it would not be long before all the County's secondary funds would be
spent on spot improvements and there would be no funds for the major improve-
ments. He still does not intend to bring these requests to the Board unless
the road has been a longstanding major problem. He thinks the Board will
begin to see a lot more of these requests since acting on Route 769, Route 712
and now Routes 712/713. Board members are going to have more people coming to
them individually with requests for spot improvements. He wanted to add a
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 7)
000 .43
word of caution because eventually these projects, costing between $15,000 and
$30,000, will start affecting the money available for other improvements.
Mr. Roosevelt said the Department authorized a revision in his staff and
created a second assistant position. His new Assistant Resident Engineer is
Mr. Bill Mills, who, prior to his promotion, was Maintenance Manager. Mr.
Mills was in charge Of the maintenance program in this residency for the past
20 years; he has over 35 years experience with the Department, most of that
experience in this area. With the reorganization Angela Tucker will now be
handling the preliminary engineering and distant planning, such as the Six
Year Plan, as well as the contract construction program in this residency.
Bill Mills will be handling the maintenance program, and department review of
site plans, subdivisions, permits, etc.
Mr. Roosevelt said he received information that Albemarle County will
receive about $2.1 million more in secondary allocations over the next six-
year period than was anticipated. He will revise the financial plan between
now and the May 11 public hearing to better reflect these new allocations.
Mr. Bowerman asked if this additional money would change any of the
proposed advertisement dates for projects in the current Plan or would it add
more projects to the six year period. Mr. Roosevelt said the additional funds
will not change the advertisement dates. All of the advertisement dates in
the next three years are based upon how quickly the projects can be moved
through the preliminary engineering process, not when the money will be
available. This will allow the Department to either put additional money to
existing projects already in the Plan or fund another priority further down
the list.
Mr. Roosevelt said VDoT has awarded a contract to Whitman, Requardt &
Associates, a consultant firm from Richmond, to design the three interchanges
on Route 29 North. They have already started taking traffic counts at
numerous intersections. He provided the Department of Planning with a copy of
data on where the counts are being taken and the dates of those counts. The
counts should be completed by the middle of this month.
Mr. Roosevelt said the firm of Hayes, Seay, Mattern & Mattern, from
Roanoke, VA, has been designated to prepare the design work and plans for the
public hearing on the improvement of the third section of Route 29 North,
which is the section from the Rivanna River to the Airport Road.
Mrs. Humphris asked about the possibility of a left turn signal at the
intersection of Georgetown and Barracks Roads. Mr. Roosevelt said he would
contact the traffic engineer and make a report.
Agenda Item No. 8. Presentation on Groundwater Sensitivity to Pesti-
cides from Michael Collins, of the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commis-
sion (deferred from March 2, 1994).
Mr. Collins introduced the project team that worked on this study, which
consisted of Dr. Vernon Shanholtz, Executive Director of Information Support
Systems Lab, Director of Agricultural Engineering, Virginia Tech; Dr. Saied
Mostaghimi, Associate Professor, Department of Agricultural Engineering,
Virginia Tech; Mr. Charles Goodman, Albemarle County Extension Agent, and
himself.
Mr. Collins said the evaluation of groundwater vulnerability to pesti-
cide contamination in Albemarle County was a joint effort between the Thomas
Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC), the Information Support
Systems Laboratory (ISSL), and the Department of Agricultural Engineering at
Virginia Tech. The objective of this project was to evaluate the contamina-
tion potential of groundwater by pesticides in Louisa and Albemarle counties.
Mr. Collins highlighted the following objectives of the project: 1) to
select a model which could evaluate the groundwater contamination potential of
pesticides used in these counties; 2) to construct environmental, chemical and
land use geographic and non-spatial databases; 3) to produce pesticide
pollution potential maps for pesticides used; and 4) to produce a Demonstra-
tion Pesticide Management Study.
Dr. Mostaghimi then made a slide presentation and discussed the results
of the study.
Groundwater in Albemarle County supplies approximately 50 percent of the
total water supply and more than 70 pesticides are currently being used. The
assessment of contamination potential, as performed in this study, was based
mainly on the leaching potential of various pesticides and does not include
their toxicological characteristics.
The intent of the demonstration management recommendations is to provide
sample management programs should the Attenuation Factor (AF) model used in
this project be evaluated, discussed, and approved by resource managers, the
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 8)
000-:].44
scientific community, and the Commonwealth of Virginia. These strategies
could be accomplished under existing enabling legislation through review of
discretionary land uses in areas which are sensitive to pesticides commonly
associated with the proposed land use. If information from this, and other,
studies, is validated, the state could consider relaxing its centralized
regulatory control of pesticides, thereby enabling localities to control by-
right land uses in vulnerable areas, and to have some local control of
pesticide use as well..
Mr. Collins then provided the Department of Planning with detailed land
use maps the project team used to identify pesticides being used where in the
County. The land use on the data was completed as of the Fall, 1992.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the land use maps could be applied to anything that
might be put on land such as fertilizers. Dr. Mostaghimi responded, "no",
this is strictly a pesticide study.
Mrs. Thomas said in the Samuel Miller District there have been groundwa-
ter contaminated with petroleum products. The State Water Control Board nor
the Health Department communicated to the landowners that their wells could
become polluted. She asked how the information from this pesticide study
would be communicated area-wide. Mr. Tucker said since staff is also seeing
this study for the first time, it will discuss the study with Mr. Collins and
get some idea on how best to communicate the information to the public.
Mrs. Humphris said there is a statement in the report that data for
Albemarle County came from the County's well completion data base. She asked
how long the data base has been kept and what goes into the data base. Mr.
Benish said staff receives well reports from the Health Department when a new
well is drilled. Information concerning flow rates, depth of wells, design,
performance and approximate location of the well is put into the data base as
it is received. Mr. Collins commented that the data received does not provide
good information on the yield in terms of flow.
Mrs. Humphris asked if there is a procedure to track the history of a
well after it is stored in the data base. Mr. Benish said there is no
selective monitoring of the data. Mrs. Humphris asked if the well driller has
to supply information on the reason the well being drilled; i.e., whether it
is to replace an existing well that has gone dry. Mr. Benish said the purpose
of the well is not in the report. Mrs. Humphris asked if it is not important
to know that information. Mr. Collins said part of the problem is that the
Health Department operates on minimum state guidelines and there is no County
liaison involved in the process. Mrs. Humphris said she thinks the County is
missing some important information. Mr. Benish said the staff can look into
improving the information received, but he cannot guarantee cooperation from
the Health Department. Mr. Tucker said it might be as simple as talking to
the well drillers in the area and see if this is information they are willing
to provide voluntarily. Mr. Marshall said he thinks the County should require
anyone who is drilling a well to get a permit from the County.
Mr. David Hirschman, Water Resources Manager, commented that he has
already talked to some of the well drillers in the area, and they appeared to
be receptive and expressed a willingness to work with the County.
Mrs. Humphris 'suggested staff look into finding a way to get more
detailed information from the Health Department on wells and tracking wells.
She asked if information could be received from well drillers when they
replace existing wells that go dry.
Agenda Item No. 9. Presentation: Airport Master Plan.
Mr. Bryan Elliott, Director of Aviation, Charlottesville-Albemarle
Airport, reviewed the process the Airport Authority went through in developing
its Airport Master Plan. He indicated that the Authority also has a compre-
hensive plan that guides them. Since 1982 the Authority has been in the
process of updating its 1980 plan and is now ready to move forward.. The
Authority's scope of work involved inventorying what they have, establishing a
forecast for future activity, looking at the capacity analysis or capability
of the airport to accommodate anticipated growth and looking at several
projects for the next 20 years that would accommodate the anticipated demand.
He then reviewed the forecast, some of the environmental issues that were
looked at, facility requirements based on the forecast and presented a phasing
plan. He noted that the Airport's market area stretches 4000 square miles,
north to Culpeper, south to Nelson County, west to Rockingham and Augusta
Counties and east of portions of Louisa County. He provided the Board with a
diagram (copy on file) of the phasing of the Airport Development Program for
the period 1994-2014 and summarized the proposed expansion during the 20 year
period.
Mr. Elliott commented that Federal Aviation Administration standards
require that the airport own all property within the clear zone. Each airport
that has air carrier service needs 1000 feet of overrun at the end of the
runway. This airport does not meet that requirement at the southern because
of the presence of Route 606. Route 606 is located 400 to 500 feet off the
end of the main runway. One of the projects envisioned in Phase I is the
extension and grading of that extended runway safety area out to 1000 feet.
The project will necessitate the relocation of Route 606 as well as relocation
000'145
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 9)
of Route 743. Since it is required under FAA regulations, this entire
project, including the roadway relocations, will receive 90 percent federal
aid funds, five percent state aid funds and five percent funds from the
Airport Authority.
Mr. Martin asked what would happen to the proposed mobile home park with
the relocation of Route 606. Mr. Elliott said the relocation of Route 606 is
south of that proposed development.
Mr. Perkins asked if the Airport would have clear title to the area in
the clear zone or would it have a long term lease. Mr. Elliott said FAA
requires an airport to have fee simple property interest in all clear zone
property. The airport currently has an easement over the property which would
allow them to go in and clear it. The zone is not only flat, but it also goes
up into different degrees. The airport also has the right to cut trees and
remove obstructions that penetrate the zone as it angles up.
Mrs. Thomas asked about the status of the church in the area for the
clear zone. Mr. Elliott said it is believed that the church is an historical
building and there will be special considerations given to the property. This
portion of the project is scheduled in Phase II. Every resident in the area
would be eligible for federal aid to relocate, including purchase of their
property at fair market value, moving expenses, etc. Airport personnel have
attempted to meet with all property owner in that zone to discuss the project..
Mr. Elliott said another project impacting the County is improvements to
access the airport. There have been some preliminary discussions with the
Planning staff and a meeting with VDoT has been scheduled. The idea is to
have one point of ingress and egress for the terminal area and expansion of
the parking area.
Mr. Elliott said the estimated cost for this 20 year project is approxi-
mately $30.0 million. The FAA share of that cost would be $7.0 million, the
state share would be approximately $2.0 million and the Airport Authority's
share would be approximately $12.0. Essentially over the next 20 years
improvements will be made to the parking area, general aviation facilities and
access to the terminal area.
Agenda Item No. 10. Discussion: Amendment of County Code necessary to
implement the election of school board members (deferred from March 16, 1994).
Mr. Davis said at the March 16 Board meeting several questions were
raised regarding the election of school board members. In a memorandum dated
March 24, 1994, he has provided the Board with additional information and will
respond to any questions.
(Note: The following questions were asked: 1) Is there a requirement
that there be a seventh, at-large, School Board member?; 2) Must the at-large
School Board member be elected rather than appointed?; and 3) Could the
elected at-large School Board member be elected by the voters or designated by
the Board of Supervisors as chairperson for the School Board?)
Mrs. Humphris asked how does an even number of school board members
affect a tie vote. Mr. Davis said, in reality, it is the same procedure for
the Board of Supervisors. In a situation where all the members are not
present and there is a tie vote, the Code mandates that the matter be carried
over to the next meeting for another vote. If all the members are present and
there is a tie vote, the matter would die.
Mr. Tucker asked if the Board advertised for public hearing six members
on the school board and then decided that it wanted to remain at seven, would
there be a problem. Mr. Davis said on this particular issue six or seven
members could be decided with one public hearing. This is a sensitive area
especially one that has to be reviewed under the Voting Rights Act and full
public hearings are encouraged so that all the impacts are considered.
Mr. Martin asked if the Justice Department would less likely question a
plan that was the same as the one that already exists. Mr. Davis said he
thinks anytime status quo is maintained, there would less likely be attention
focused on the plan. It would depend on whether or not there were minority
concerns raised about the plan which generally dictates, to a large extent,
the amount of scrutiny the Justice Department places on this type of issue.
Mr. Martin asked if regardless the number on the school board, they
would all have to be elected. Mr. Davis replied, "yes"
Mr. Martin said he thinks the Board should proceed to public hearing
with a seventh member at-large because it would be less questionable by the
Justice Department. There would remain a tie breaker. It may be more
difficult to run for at-large than in a district, but everyone is starting
from the same position. In this instance every person in the County would
have an opportunity to run for the at-large position.
Mrs. HumphriS said she thinks the Board's decision-making should not be
based on what may satisfy the Justice Department because if the Board is fair
in its thinking, the Justice Department should be satisfied. She thinks this
Board should do what it thinks is best for all the citizens of the county, the
000 1.46
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 10)
resulting school board and what is going to make it a level playing field.
Although Mr. Martin has made some good points it seems to her that asking
anybody to run at-large in the county for a school board seat is asking too
much. She does not think it is fair when the other people will be running in
magisterial districts. In the years she has been on this Board, the Board has
had relatively few tie votes that were of any major consequence. She thinks
it would make a level playing field if the Board went with the six school
board members and did not make anyone incur the time, effort and major
financial outlay of having to run county-wide.
Mr. Martin said, except for direct mailings, it costs the same for
newspaper, radio and television advertisements to reach all the areas of the
County. Mrs. Humphris said that is an extraordinary expense and is taking
from the realm of most people's ability to undertake.
Mr. Marshall said he agrees with Mrs. Humphris. There is no way he,
personally, would consider running for the school board county-wide because of
the time and expense. He would run in one magisterial district. He has
always thought the at-large seat should be for a minority person. Considering
the minority population in the County and if they really want an individual on
the school board, he thinks they would be more successful targeting a district
as opposed to county-wide.
Mr. Martin said there would still be six districts. He does not think
it really makes that much of a difference but he thinks the Board should
retain what it has. He does not understand the argument for having six
members. Somebody will run for the seventh seat. As far as minority repre-
sentation is concerned, when the decision to go to elected school boards was
made, that took away the ability to have any affect on a minority on that
board. The only criteria that will be used to get a minority on the school
board is whether one wants to run and can run effectively enough to be
elected.
Mr. Perkins asked if the Board could go to public hearing identifying
the two alternatives. Mr. Davis said he could draft both alternatives to go
to public hearing. The Board could choose which one to adopt or modify after
the public hearing.
Mrs. Thomas said she felt the at-large position introduced more problems
than it solved. In '1988 she stood before members of this Board and said she
felt there should be seven districts. She thinks the public voted on electing
school boards without much discussion. She would like to take the two possi-
bilities to public hearing.
Mr. John Gaines, President of the Albemarle County Chapter of the NAACP,
said he thinks what Mr. Martin said makes sense. At this point it is in the
hands of the voters. The best candidates hopefully will come forward and be
elected to serve on the school board. He feels that if this Board had acted
responsibly, there would be a minority representative on the school board now.
Motion was then offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to
set for public hearing on May 11, 1994, an ordinance to amend the County Code
to implement the election of school board members. The proposed ordinance
should identify two options: the elimination of the seventh (at-large) member
and retaining the seventh member.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
(Note: At 11:20 A.M., the Board recessed, and reconvened at 11:32 A.M.
Mr. Marshall did not return.)
Agenda Item No. 11. Request to set public hearing to amend various
sections of Article IX of the County Code relative to the Industrial Develop-
ment Authority.
Mr. Tucker said many changes have taken place in recent years regarding
tax exempt financing and the roles that local industrial development authori-
ties play. In order to reflect these changes and eliminate undue burdens on
potential applicants, the Albemarle County Industrial Development Authority
has proposed the following amendments:
Remove the specifics of what type of projects can be considered since
Federal law changes so rapidly as well. The amended language basically
requires Board of Supervisors' approval for any project that Federal law
requires Board action on.
Remove the requirement to amend the number of outstanding issues each
time a request is made.
Eliminate the need for the Board to approve financing where the Federal
law does not require Board action (such as Revolving Loan Fund financ-
000147
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 11)
ing), thereby reducing the time needed for appropriate governmental
action.
Authorize the IDA to approve financing in other jurisdictions only after
Board approval.
Lastly, there are several housekeeping amendments to update the County's
ordinance to comply with Federal law.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Martin, to set a
public hearing for May 4, 1994, at 10:00 a.m., on an ordinance to amend
various sections of Article IX of the County Code relative to the Industrial
Development Authority. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mrs. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Marshall.
Agenda Item No. 12. Adopt Resolution of Intent to delete Section 13-18
of the County Code dealing with Hunting Regulations.
Mr. Tucker said the 1993 session of the General Assembly amended
Virginia Code Section 18.2-286 eliminating the prohibition of discharging a
firearm within 100 yards of any road. This amendment now prohibits discharg-
ing a firearm in or across any road or within the right-of-way thereof.
County Code Section 13-18, enacted in 1967, mirrored the state prohibition and
staff now feels that Section 13-18 should be amended to reflect the language
in the State Code.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to set a
public hearing for May 4, 1994, at 10:15 a.m., on an ordinance to amend
Section 13-18 of the County Code to reflect language in Section 18.2-286 of
the Code of Virginia. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the follow-
ing recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mrs. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Marshall.
Agenda Item No. Discussion: Regional Economic Vitality Using Partner-
ships.
(Mr. Marshall returned at 11:35 a.m.) Mr. Tucker said that in Septem-
ber, 1993, Ms. Nancy O'Brien and other members of the Jefferson Area Regional
Economic Development Partnership circulated a draft action plan for consider-
ation in exploring the potential for creating a Regional Economic Development
Partnership (REVUP) . It was proposed that the partnership be created for a
three-year incubation period and its purpose be to fulfill short-term expecta-
tions, such as:
establishing an office as the initial point of contact for economic
development prospects,
identifying knowledgeable individuals to meet with prospective business-
es or industries,
recruiting private sector members,
developing an economic development profile,
inventorying the region, and
developing a regional economic development vision for the future.
Its long-term strategies included implementing a marketing plan for the
region, and other activities still to be determined. The draft envisioned
membership of the Regional Partnership being open to local governments,
institutions of higher education, existing businesses, chambers of commerce,
industrial development authorities, and planning district commissions. It
would serve the counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene, Louisa, Nelson, and
the City of Charlottesville. The draft action plan estimated first year
expenses of the proposed partnership at approximately $71,000.
Mr. Tucker said staff discussions with the State Department of Economic
Development regarding the new administration's agenda in the arena of economic
development indicate that Governor Allen is exploring the concept of regional
economic development counsels statewide. This was a campaign issue for
Governor Allen but, to date, no details have been formulated or strategies
made public giving any indication as to the State's direction. Staff has been
advised that the Department of Economic Development expects some clear
direction on this issue in the next 90 to 120 days.
000148
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 12)
Mr. Tucker said staff will continue to monitor the State's direction in
encouraging regional economic development groups and report back to the Board
as soon as additional information is available.
Mrs. Thomas said she asked that this issue be discussed by the Board
because it has not been discussed much in the past. The idea is that economic
development is best done region-wide. She urged the Board to think region-
wide and if it could give direction to staff that the regional approach is the
way to go in amending the comprehensive plan. She is not urging any action
today, but did want this issue discussed.
Mr. Martin said he supports the concept. It makes sense to him to
cooperate on a regional basis.
Mrs. Humphris said, as she remembers when this was discussed previously,
everybody agreed that the concept was excellent and that this was a good
direction in which to go. The stumbling block was when the Board started
discussing the cost, staffing the office and who would be in control. Her
concern was who would be in control of the expenses and the work program. She
was concerned about whether one locality would be favored over another
locality. It seems to be a good idea for staff to try to give some help and
direction.
Mrs. Thomas said the group that met assumed the localities would be able
to turn to the private sector for the supporting money because it is the
private sector that tends to gain the most from economic development activi-
ties. The idea was never that the local governments would support unless they
chose to go that route.
Mrs. Humphris said the private sector came to this Board for funds
during the budget process to fund strategies outlined in this plan.
Mr. Martin said he thinks the private sector wants to look at this
issue, as well as other issues, as a public/private partnership.
Mr. Perkins said at the Planning District Commission meeting when the
group discussed economic development, he did not hear a lot of support from
the outlying counties for wanting to do something like this. Since the
outlying counties' needs are different from Albemarle needs, he does not see
them buying into this. Mr. Tucker said that is what he has heard from many of
the administrators from the other counties. They are also quite suspicious of
the City and the County because they feel these localities will have control.
Mr. Marshall commented that the private sector is organizing something
of its own. He also agrees that a partnership between the private and public
sector would be a better deal rather than having everyone go off in different
directions.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Marshall to
approve staff's recommendation to continue monitoring the State's direction in
encouraging regional economic development groups with a report back to the
Board as soon as additional information is available. In addition, staff to
communicate with the' newly formed private organization mentioned by Mr. Mar-
shall, to find out what they are planning in the area of economic development.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
Agenda Item No. 14a. Appropriation: School Food Service Program,
$143,205.73 (Form #930065).
Mr. Tucker said the School Board approved and requested a reappro-
priation for this program on March 14, 1994. The Food Services Fund had an
unrestricted fund balance of $143,205.73 at the end of the 1992-93 fiscal
year. The reappropriation of the remaining funds will be used to offset costs
related to operating the Food Service Program for Albemarle County Schools.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt
the following resolution of appropriation, approving the request to appropri-
ate $143,205.73 to the Food Services Fund. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR: 1993-94
NUMBER: 930065
FUND: FOOD SERVICES
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
REAPPROPRIATION OF REMAINING FUND
BALANCE
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 13)
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
1300063100600200 FOOD sUPPLIES
TOTAL
REVENUE
2300051000510100
DESCRIPTION
APPROPRIATION - FUND BALANCE
TOTAL
000149
AMOI/NT
$143,205.73
$143,205.73
~LMOLTNT
$143,205.73
$143,205.73
Agenda Item No. 14b. Appropriation: Teacher Incentive Grant for Stony
Point Elementary School, $90.00 (Form #930066).
Mr. Tucker said the School Board approved and requested an appropriation
for this program on March 14, 1994. The Teacher Incentive Grant Program was
established to help strengthen the quality of arts education in the basic
curriculum of the classroom. The purpose of this project is to expose the
children of Stony Point Elementary School to a cultural performance of the
"Homecoming" by local artists.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt
the following resolution of appropriation, approving the request to appropri-
ate $90.00 for the Teacher Incentive Grant. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR: 1993-94
NT3MBER: 930066
FI/ND: MISCELLANEOUS SCHOOL GRANTS
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: TEACHER INCENTIVE GRANT FOR STONY POINT
ELEMENTARY SCHOOL
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
1310460211312500 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES
TOTAL
INSTRUCTIONAL
AMOUNT
$9o.o0
$90.00
AMOUNT
$90.00
$90.00
REVENUE
2319424999240264
DESCRIPTION
VEA GRANT 941043
TOTAL
Agenda Item No. 14c. Appropriation: Woodbrook PTO Donation, $2,300.00
(Form ~930067) .
Mr. Tucker said the School Board approved and requested an appropriation
for this program on March 14, 1994. The Woodbrook Elementary School received
a donation from the Woodbrook PTO to fund a science room teaching assistant
position (six hours per week) and provide a tutor from the Learning Center to
tutor a student.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt
the following resolution of appropriation approving the request to appropriate
$2300.00 for the Woodbrook PTO Donation. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR: 1993-94
NLTMBER: 930067
FUND: EDUCATION
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
WOODBROOK PTO DONATION
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
1210061101114100 SALARIES - TEACHER AIDE
1210061101210000 FICA
1221261101312500 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES - INSTRUCTIONAL
TOTAL
AMOUNT
$1,200.00
100.00
1,000.00
$2,300.00
REVENLTE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2200018100181140 DONATION $2300.00
TOTAL $2300.00
Agenda Item No. 14d. Appropriation: GE Foundation Grant for Middle
School Science, $14,500.00 (Form ~930068).
Mr. Tucker said the School Board approved and requested an appropriation
for this program on March 14, 1994. This is the second installment of the GE
Foundation Grant for Middle School Science. Albemarle County Schools, in
ooo sO
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 14)
partnership with GE Fanuc, Charlottesville City Schools, and Greene County
Schools, was awarded $46,500 over a three-year period to implement Extra-
Curricular Science, a project designed to increase parent involvement in
middle school students' science learning, to provide opportunities for
selected middle schoo! students to receive mentoring from volunteer scien-
tists, and to increase opportunities for students who have a high level of
interest in science.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt
the following resolution of appropriation, approving the request to appropri-
ate $14,500.00 for the GE Foundation Grant. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR: 1993-94
NUMBER: 930068
FUND: GE FOUNDATION
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
GE FOUNDATION GRANT FOR MIDDLE SCHOOL
SCIENCE
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION
1320661311160300 SALARIES - STAFF
1320661311210000 FICA
1320661311601300 SUPPLIES INSTRUCTIONAL
TOTAL
AMOUNT
$7,0OO.OO
500.00
7,000.00
$14,500.00
REVENTJE
2320618100186025
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
GE FOUNDATION GRANT $14,50.000
TOTAL $14,500.00
Agenda Item No. 14e. Appropriation: Albemarle 250th Birthday Celebra-
tion, $14,235.
Mr. Tucker said that beginning in September, 1994, Albemarle County will
celebrate its official 250th birthday. September 4 starts off the celebration
with the anniversary of the enactment by the Virginia General Assembly for the
division of Goochland County and the establishment of the Albemarle County
seat at Scottsville. Subsequent dates throughout the Fall and into the Spring
of 1995 celebrate other moments in Albemarle's history such as the first
meeting of the county court, the first meeting of county government, etc. To
begin planning how the County might want to celebrate this special year, an ad
hoc committee was formed last December. The Committee, with Steven Meeks as
the elected Chairman, met four times to explore and discuss various ideas and
projects to propose as the official celebration for Albemarle's 250th birthday
year.
Mr. Tucker said the Committee discussed various ways to celebrate these
events, ideas that ranged from an elaborate celebration to historical tours to
school essay contests, trying to keep in mind projects that would involve as
many citizens as possible, projects that would have a lasting meaning or
importance to the county and its citizens, and Projects that would not be a
significant cost to the taxpayers. After much discussion, the committee
finalized the following ideas for Board approval:
The Town of Scottsville has already initiated extensive plans for
a four-day 250th birthday celebration over Labor Day Weekend,
complete with plays, music, tours, games, open houses, and pic-
nics, all culminating with an official ceremony with state, county
and local officials on Monday, September 5. The Committee felt
strongly that the County should not plan a separate event of its
own, but should join with the Town of Scottsville and assist them
with their efforts for this weekend celebration. Scottsville has
requested $2000 from the County to help cover the costs of the
tent rental over the four-day weekend.
The Committee also felt strongly that public funds committed to
the commemoration of the 250th birthday should provide something
of permanent value and future benefit to the county and its
citizens. The Committee agreed that restoring the portrait of the
Earl of Albemarle and preserving the County's historical documents
related to this time period was a priority. The portrait of the
Earl, a 1931 copy of a period portrait in England hanging now at
the Courthouse, is in dire need of cleaning. Other archival
material at the Courthouse, including several documents related to
the Earl and his successors, are also in need of repair, deacidi-
fication and remounting in order to preserve them for future
display.
Several professional conservators and restorers have provided
estimates on the costs of restoring the portrait and the docu-
ments, as well as the cost of displaying these historical docu-
ments in a permanent exhibit. The Committee's recommendation is
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 15)
000 .5 .
that the painting and the documents be professionally restored and
preserved and then brought down to the County Office Building on
McIntire Road to be on show in a permanent wall-hung display
cabinet in the lobby. The estimated costs to restore the painting
and repair and conserve the documents and photographs is approxi-
mately $4000. The cost to permanently display all the artifacts,
text and photographs in a professionally designed and mounted wall
cabinet if $5200.
A dedication ceremony would be planned for the morning of Satur-
day, November 12, 1994, at the County Office Building on McIntire
Road, to present the restored portrait and the permanent display
to the County. The estimated cost for the reception and associat-
ed printing/mailing/display costs is $2500.
The third idea or project is to prepare a time capsule, similar to
what the City did for their 200th birthday, to be buried on the
grounds of the County Office Building on McIntire Road and opened
in the year 2044, the 300th birthday of Albemarle County. The
cost of placing a small, one foot square capsule in the ground
with a granite marker would be approximately $500. If the concept
is agreeable to the Board, it may be that much of this cost could
be donated to the County.
Mr. Tucker said the total cost of these projects amounts to $14,235 with
the hope that some of the costs may be recouped from community contributions
to these efforts. The committee, headed by Steven Meeks, will continue to
provide the oversight for the restoration work and the display, as well as
coordinating efforts with Scottsville for the September celebration and
planning the dedication event at the County Office Building.
Mr. Tucker said staff recommends approval of $14,235 from the Board's
current year contingency account for his event.
Mr. Meeks said the permanent display would involve relocating the
portrait of the Earl of Albemarle and accompanying documents, currently housed
in the courthouse, to the lobby of the County Office Building to be displayed
in a panel on eithqr side of the central doors of the Auditorium.
Mrs. Humphris said the Committee has received a lot of help from the
Albemarle Historical Society. The documents are in poor shape because of the
presence of the acid the paper. The Committee thought moving the documents to
the County Office Building would provide an opportunity for people to see
them.
Mr. Marshall offered to provide some items he personally owns for the
exhibit.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mr. Marshall, to approve
the use of $14,235, for Albemarle's 250th birthday celebration, from the
Board's contingency account. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
Agenda Item No. 15. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the
BOARD.
Mr. Tucker said in January, 1994, the Board appointed Mr. Davis as
Deputy County Attorney. Upon Mr. St. John's retirement Mr. Davis would become
County Attorney. To make it official, he asked that the Board appoint Mr.
Larry W. Davis as Albemarle County Attorney, effective April 1, 1994.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by Mrs. Thomas, to appoint
Mr. Larry W. Davis as the County Attorney, effective April 1, 1994. Roll was
called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
Mrs. Humphris said it was her understanding that the County did not have
enabling legislation requiring evidence of the presence of groundwater before
someone can get a building permit. She was told that Albemarle received that
legislation a couple of years ago, therefore the County can require proof of
groundwater in a sufficient quantity before construction. She asked that this
be researched. Mr. Davis said he looked at that issue a couple of weeks ago.
Albemarle does have the same authority as Clarke County but that it only
pertains to water quality and not quantity. The authority is limited. Mrs.
Humphris asked for ihformation on legislation that would allow Albemarle
County to require evidence of sufficient groundwater before approval of a
building permit.
OOO].52
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 16)
Agenda Item No. 16. Executive Session: Personnel, Land Acquisition and
Legal Matters. At 12:01 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Martin, seconded by
Mr. Bowerman, to adjourn into executive session pursuant to Sections
2.1-344A.1 of the Code of Virginia (to discuss three personnel matters, one
regarding the retaining of legal counsel, one regarding possible appointments
by the Board, and the other regarding a possible reorganization of certain
staff positions); 2.1-344.A.2 (acquisition of property necessary for a
landfill closure and the acquisition of property for a greenway); and 2.1-
344.A.7 (to consult with legal counsel and staff members regarding two matters
of probable litigation, or matters which require specific legal advice, one
concerning an appeal of a zoning decision and one concerning the appeal of a
funding decision).
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris
and Mr. Marshall.
None.
Agenda Item No. 17. Certify Executive Session. At 2:46 P.M., the Board
reconvened into open session. Upon motion by Mrs. Thomas, seconded by Mrs.
Humphris, the following certification of executive session was adopted:
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has con-
vened an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative
recorded vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virgin-
ia Freedom of Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires
a certification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that
such executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia
law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County
Board of Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each
member's knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully
exempted from open meeting requirements by Virginia law were
discussed in the executive meeting to which this certification
resolution applies, and (ii) only such public business matters as
were identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were
heard, discussed or considered by the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors.
VOTE:
AYES: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and
Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT DURING VOTE: Mr. Martin.
ABSENT DURING MEETING: None.
Not Docketed: Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mrs.
Thomas to recommend the appointment of Ms. Mary-Scott Blake Birdsall to the
Moorman's Scenic River Advisory Board by the Governor.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and Mr. Marshall.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Martin.
Agenda Item No. 18. Recess. At 2:49 P.M., the Board recessed until the
night portion of the meeting was to begin.
Agenda Item No. 19. At 7:00 P.M., the Board reconvened in the Auditori-
um, with all members being present at this time.
Agenda Item No. 20. Public Hearing on the FY 1994-95 County Budget.
(Public Hearing advertised in the Daily Progress on March 29, 1994.)
Mr. Tucker gave a summary of the budget (using visual aids) which
included:
1)
Revenue highlights. Total county revenues are increasing by $5.0
million or a five percent increase over the current fiscal year.
General property taxes show an increase of 0.28 percent or $88,000
over the current year's estimate (this was not a reassessment year
and new construction was less than anticipated). The personal
property tax increases by 12 percent due to a growing number of
vehicle sales. Sales tax revenues increase 18.8 percent over the
current fiscal year's estimate. State revenues are increasing
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 17)
000:I.53
overall by 6.96 percent, a combination of 9.12 percent General
Government and 6.46 percent for the School Division. There is
more than $1.1 million in carry-over funds and one-half million
dollars from the Fund Balance used to balance this budget;
2)
Pie chart of revenues. The largest portion of the pie chart is
property taxes at 46 percent. Next is State Revenue - School Fund
at 22 percent and the next largest block of the chart is Other
Local Revenue at 20 percent;
3)
4)
Expenditure highlights. Community agencies are funded with an
average two percent increase over the current fiscal year while
trying to maintain competitive employee salary and health bene-
fits. Funds are provided for needed replacement vehicles in the
Police Department and Sheriff's Office. It maintains current
service levels of General Government, fully funds an additional
$1.18 million in debt service payments for the new Sutherland
Middle School, maintains current student/teacher ratios, provides
funding for 22.6 new teaching positions needed to meet the pro-
jected school enrollment growth of 286 new students, partially
funds the curriculum revision proposed by the School Board for
kindergarten through eighth grades and funds the new textbook
adoption program;
Proposed Expenditures. The School Fund is the largest portion at
64 percent combined with debt service of seven percent which makes
up about 71 percent of the total budget. The next largest portion
is in public safety offices at seven percent and human development
at five percent. All of the remaining categories are less than
five percent;
5)
The proposed budget partially funds the Fire Safety Education
Program, provides funding for the Health Department, the Self-
Sufficiency Program, a technical support analyst in the Infor-
mation Services Department, two additional police officers and a
police records clerk, additional dispatchers and administrative
support staff for JAUNT, full funding for the Library, funding to
continue a part-time recycling coordinator, additional funds for
OAR, the Virginia Discovery Museum and the Social Services Depart-
ment. This proposed budget also provides funding for Community
Attention's Teens Give Program, code compliance equipment in the
Zoning Department and more than $1.38 million in funds for identi-
fied school priorities.
Mr. Tucker said he would be happy to answer any questions.
At 7:10 p.m., Mr. Perkins opened the public hearing.
Mr. Rollin Stanton read and distributed a statement (on file) and said
the proposed budget meets few, if any, of the objections that have been
raised. He said many of the major items which were removed from the budget
were merely shifted to future years, not really eliminated, a seeming change
of ground rules without any apparent basis, obvious inaccuracies in some
numbers which have not been corrected, many budget items are developed based
on incorrect enrollment formulas and incomplete explanations are provided in
the narratives. Mr. Stanton said there are systemic problems in evidence
throughout the whole budget process which prevented a justifiable budget from
being produced.
Mr. Sam Kaplan offered the Board his congratulations on this budget. He
said this Board came forward to this public hearing with a pro-education
budget with no rise in the property tax rate. He does not see how any
reasonable person could be anything but pleased with the proposed budget and
he thanks the Board for its efforts. He did, however, call the Board's
attention to some of the needs of the schools that were not funded this year.
He recently learned that a lot of people feel the support for fine arts in
Albemarle County is tepid at best. Those in fine arts are beginning to look
for opportunities elsewhere in the job market. One of the unfunded priorities
this year was staffing for elementary art and music standards. He hopes this
will be a funded priority next year. Another unfunded priority is the middle
and high school gifted education staffing. Albemarle County has a lot of
bright students and he does not want them to sit in school, bored, deciding
whether to come to school or not the next day. He feels the County has to
offer these students what they need. The County needs long-range planning,
not just planning for growth (infrastructure and new schools), but, long-range
instructional planning. He hopes this Board will get involved in enunciating
an instructional vision for the County for the next 10 or 15 years, so there
will be the willingness to provide the funds it requires. He thanked the
Board again for its efforts.
Ms. Carole Lohman, resident of Key West subdivision and mother of two
children in Albemarle County's public school system, said she is concerned
about the school budget and how things are going in the school system. She
moved here recently after residing in the City of Norfolk for twenty years.
Norfolk had a high tax rate (it is nice to know that it is lower in Albemarle
County), however, the cost of living in this area is astronomical compared to
Norfolk. She noticed a section in the budget about elections and their cost.
In today's issue of The Daily Progress there was article about elected School
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 18)
000 .54
Board's and how the seventh seat may be handled. She asked how this will
impact the budget and if it will go into the budget figures for next year.
Ms. Lohman said she has not perused the school budget in great detail,
however, she has been to her children's schools and talked with administrators
and teachers. The County does not offer a lot of services compared to a city,
except in education. She expects, since 64 percent of the money collected
from taxpayers goes to education, that residents receive "plenty of bang for
the buck." Because of the redistricting her children will attend Burley
Middle School which has the lowest enrollment next year of any of the middle
schools. When she enrolled her daughter at Burley, she was shocked to find a
lack of program diversity. Her daughter was supposed to take Latin, but
Burley does not offer Latin. She is pleased that the Board has agreed to
fully fund the school budget, but feels it is a "crime" that because of
redistricting, the children will suffer from lack of choice, diversities and
lack of experiences, particularly on the middle school level. This Board is
responsible for determining how this County grows and whether it grows safely
and sane. Growth will come at a cost and unless ways are found to fund those
costs through good jobs, job opportunities, businesses that are encouraged to
come here to keep the environment clean and still manage to pay well, she
thinks the County will have serious problems in its school systems. The
County schools will become overcrowded or, at best, very mediocre. .She
thanked the Board and urged it to keep a close eye on the money and to plan
for growth.
Mr. John Carter distributed and read a statement which is on file in the
Clerk's office and is a part of the permanent records of the Board. He
suggested attention be turned to what is causing the County's problems. There
is an ever-growing county government and school system submitting incredibly
complex budgets. It is time to restore balance between part-time representa-
tives and full-time employees. The system is stacked against the Board and
thus it is imperative to change that system to restore a measure of equality.
Mr. Carter suggested that a full-time independent support staff be
established to serve both the Board of Supervisors and the School Board. Its
purpose would be to investigate and analyze proposed budgets and give the
Boards an independent and unbiased source of knowledge on which to base their
decisions. He hopes the Board of Supervisors realizes the value of having a
support staff answering only to it and the School Board. It would not cost
much and he feels it would save millions.
Ms. Diane Behrens, Principal of Agnor-Hurt Elementary School, said she
has watched this budget process and has noticed that this Board has listened
and heard what the citizens have said. She thanked the Board for its support
of education and invited all members of the Board to visit Agnor-Hurt Elemen-
tary School to see where the money budgeted is spent through effective
education and teachers that make a difference in the lives of County students.
Ms. Pat Francis distributed a copy of an article published in the Daily
Progress on Sunday, April, 3, 1994 (on file), and directed the Board's
attention to it. She said at a recent news conference, Dr. Paskel boasted
about the quality of education in Albemarle County. Despite the fact that no
one has yet provided a definition of those words, Dr. Paskel is suggesting
that one-half million dollars be spent to revise the curriculum. In response,
the following questions must be raised. First, what is wrong with the current
curriculum so highly praised by Dr. Paskel and how will revision correct its
deficiencies? Second, the School Division budget is so difficult to compre-
hend because of its shifts and omissions that the School Board, Board of
Supervisors, as well as concerned citizens, struggle to make valid comparisons
and informed decisions. For this reason she reiterated the suggestions made
in the article: 1) replace the base-line budget with a zero-sum budget, 2)
develop a standard budget format, 3) use the expertise of the Center for
Public Service at the University of Virginia to predict enrollment, 4) base
expected expenditures and income on the same projected enrollment, 5) estab-
lish an accord about the definition of "high-quality education" for Albemarle
County schools and make sure that funds allocated for it do, in fact, support
excellence, 6) assume the responsibility of determining the impact of expendi-
tures on those who must pay for them, and 7) be scrupulous in differentiating
between needs and wants, cautious about experimentation and adamant about
eliminating waste. Reward those who identify problems and participate in
solutions. High quality education is not achieved by wasteful budgets, and
the credibility of both the School Board and the Board of Supervisors is
dependent on their willingness to be responsible and responsive to the
citizens of Albemarle.
Ms. Francis said from the time it was organized in January, 1993,
members of the Coalition for Tax Equity, have asked for responsive and
responsible government. It is through the efforts of involved citizens like
the members of the Coalition that issues such as budgetary problems before the
Board and other issues raised and under consideration have been brought to its
attention. Therefore, the Coalition would like the Board to view it, not as
adversaries, but as a motivated and cooperative force for the benefit of the
entire community.
Mr. Jim Howe, President of a PTO, said he would like to applaud and
thank the Board of Supervisors for its increased support of public education
in this year's budget. He notes that there are many things which could
improve situations in the County schools. It is unfortunate that there were
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 19)
000 155
problems with the School Division's budget because that detracted from the
main issue. Albemarle County schools need continued and increased support
each year. The teachers in County schools operate in a "no frill" situation.
He feels anything that will get more money into the school system is to the
benefit of the teachers, as well as the children. This is a highly technolog-
ic world and it is imperative that the students and children of Albemarle
County receive adequate computer education. When looking at the graph in the
proposed budget document, it is clear that the number of dollars, in terms of
education, has gone up but a lot of that money is going toward inflation. The
average per pupil spending has remained flat during the last ten years. There
are a number of federal mandates and special education programs that have to
be provided and the average student is probably receiving less. He thanked
the Board again for what it has done this year for the School Division, and
encouraged the Board to keep the long-term vision of education and support
future School Board initiatives.
Ms. Merri Tomlinson, part-time Director of the Retired Senior Volunteer
Program in Albemarle County, said she is present on behalf of the Albemarle
County volunteers who could not be present tonight. First, she mentioned that
this is a night meeting and for many seniors who rely on public transportation
(there is none available at night), and for those who do not drive at night,
public hearings should be held during the day so they may attend. Second,
studies have shown that seniors who volunteer remain healthy longer and this,
in turn, saves the community costs associated with long-term care. Third,
many older citizens live on fixed incomes and without RSVP they would not have
transportation to the County schools, libraries and social service agencies
that benefit from their expertise and skill. Without County funding to RSVP,
recruiting efforts will be severely reduced. There are presently 112
Albemarle County citizens serving the County and a reduction of funds would
effect identifying, screening and placing the valuable elderly human resources
that enhance this County, its basic operations. In the past year these
volunteers have given the County 13,280 hours of time. If this number were
equated at five dollars per hour, the total would equate to $66,400. The
seniors of Albemarle County ask that the Board give this matter consideration.
Mr. Walter Johnson said he is appearing before the Board on behalf of
the less affluent and disadvantaged youth in the community. Last year for the
first time joint meetings were held between the County and City Planning
Commissions. A dominating subject was Park and Recreation activities,
particularly fees applicable to activities related to "unattached" youth,
"unattached" means those not part of an organization such as Little League.
Thereafter, he proposed, and the Albemarle Planning Commission unanimously
recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve a program which involved:
1) eliminating fees in County park and recreation areas for unattached youth
18 years of age and younger. 2) In agreement with the City, City residents be
considered County residents and visa versa. There are specific activities
where this idea could not be implemented, i.e., at the Pen Park Golf Course.
This would involve a loss of revenue of approximately $36,500 and included
another $5000 loss by eliminating the non-resident fees. This idea received
strong support from the community. It was understood that no youth would be
turned away because of lack of fees. The affected youths never appear before
this Board and are hardly ever represented, but a youth in a park or recre-
ation area is not a youth on a street corner getting in trouble.
Mr. Johnson said the County does not charge, upon entrance, at a library
which is funded through general operating funds. He asked why the County
charges youth for access to a park or recreation area. He cannot guarantee
the degree of good that will accrue by the elimination of these fees, but can
guarantee that there will be no secondary impact or harm resulting from the
elimination of these fees. At approximately $36,000 it is only a minute
portion of the total County budget. Chief John Miller can provide the average
cost of an arrest and a break-even point can be computed between lost revenue
and police savings. Through the implementation of this request, lifestyles
will be improved. He asked that the Board consider his request.
Ms. Lisa Harmon, parent and taxpayer, said she has heard it said that
parents are "greedy freeloaders" who rely on the taxpayers at-large to fund
their children's education. She thinks this is an unfair characterization.
Parents are taxpayers and on top of the moneys collected from parents for
taxes, a $25 textbook rental fee for each child enrolled in school is paid
each year, materials for classes must be provided, and monetary donations are
requested. If children are involved in extra curricular activities, there is
a fee for that as well. Parents also volunteer their time at the schools.
According to information she has, parents have given approximately 230 hours
of time so far this year in just one kindergarten class. If these numbers
hold true for the other three kindergarten classes at the same school, and if
the other fifteen classes at that school have even one-half that number of
volunteer hours, it calculates to almost 2600 hours which is more than 325
days of full-time work, therefore, she feels parents are doing their share.
Ms. Harmon said she feels most teachers are doing a great job and need
to be supported and valued by the community. She feels this budget moves in
that direction. She agrees that the budget process is confusing and invites
errors. It leaves room for speculation that there is "fat to be trimmed,"
however, when she looked at several areas where substantial cuts had been
made, mainly textbooks, curriculum development and technology, she had to
wonder if it was "fat" or "meat" trimmed from the education system. She
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 20)
0005.56
thanked the Board of Supervisors for allocating the additional funds necessary
to support the majority of the needs outlined in the final budget proposal.
Mr. Ed Strauss said it seems that the Board is in an "expansion mode."
The budget is received, then the Board adds to it. There is never a session
where items are taken out of the budget. He asked why police officers are
being hired at a cost of $52,000 each and sheriff's deputies are only $45,362.
Things like this should be caught. He asked why the City and County could not
merge a lot of their programs to save on costs. A couple of years ago the
Board authorized adding a fee to the telephone bill for the E-911 system.
This was to be a two-year temporary fee. Some are now saying that the signs
installed are not working and there is too much damage being done to them.
There is a suggestion that the surcharge be rolled over into a position to
review this problem. This was not the intent of this fee. There has to be
some responsibility when people are taxed and if there are strings attached,
this has to be reviewed. This money was supposed to be returned to the
citizens after E-911 was in place and running. This Board cannot be blamed
for the errors made in E-911, but the residents who are paying for it in good
faith cannot be blamed either. This money should go to E-911 or be returned
to the citizens. If the signs are wrong and cost too much money, then new
signs that are lower maintenance should be installed. Approximately two years
ago, he advised the Board not to go into the sign business. This Board needs
to thinks more about what can be done to improve things through frugal,
efficient government for everyone.
Mr. Strauss said earlier, someone spoke about elected school boards and
whether the County would be redistricted to create seven districts. He feels
that instead of redistricting to create a seventh district, the County should
be redistricted and decreased to five districts.
Mr. Gene Cassidy thanked the Board for not raising the tax rate. This
Board has a thankless and difficult job. He reminded those who wanted to
increase the tax rates that he receives 12 social security checks per year,
two go to pay the real estate tax on his three bedroom home with two acres of
land. This does not include all of the other taxes he has to pay each year.
Mr. Bob Baker, Home Safety Coordinator with the Jefferson Area Board for
Aging (JABA), said he feels JABA's Home Safety Program is one of the most
worthwhile programs it handles. He thanked the Board for funding JABA; but he
requested an additional $5000 to accommodate a backlog of approximately 16
Albemarle County residents. He said the additional $5000 is desperately
needed.
Dr. Robert Paskel, Division Superintendent, Albemarle County Public
Schools, said on behalf of the 10,580 students, 1500 employees and hundreds of
parents, volunteers and supporters, he would like to thank the Board of
Supervisors, Mr. Tucker and his staff for finding ways to fund the School
Board's request for fiscal year 1994-95. He expressed thanks to those people
in the community who support the public schools and who have helped establish
the high expectations for Albemarle County's schools and students.
Ms. Sara Reynolds, speaking on behalf of the Albemarle Education
Association, said she would like to thank the Board for its support of the
school system. She especially thanked Mr. Tucker and his staff for assistance
in preparing the budget document. Education of children is not an inexpensive
item and no price tag can be put on a child's future. She feels Albemarle
County does an extraordinary job with all it deals with. She encouraged and
invited everyone in the County to visit the schools and see all of the
exciting learning taking place.
Ms. Martha Harris, resident of White Hall District, said she would like
to clarify an article which appeared in the Daily Progress, on Sunday, April
3, 1994. There was an editing error by the Daily Progress which gave incor-
rect information regarding the four percent bonus reserve applying to teach-
ers. Ms. Harris gave her correct information and presented various statistics
to the Board.
Ms. Harris said when compensation surveys are made to establish how
Albemarle County ranks with other counties, total compensation should be
included, not as it appears in the survey provided to School Board members.
This only presents base salaries and does not include stipends, vestings or
bonuses. Whether this is deliberate or not, it is comparing apples to oranges
and stands to benefit the survey taker. It would also be quite helpful when
surveys are taken to ask the number of applications received for available
positions. In Albemarle County, statistics show that it does not have a
problem attracting applicants. It was also of interest when Mr. Robert
Brandenburger, Director of Human Resources, reported that the three lower
teacher pay scales were below average. In a recent survey published in the
Daily Progress, beginning salaries for 1994 graduates estimated teacher
salaries beginning at $22,685. The County's beginning salary was $23,900 in
FY 1993-94 and will probably increase to $24,498 in FY 1994-95. This data
does not support the statement that Albemarle County is below average for
beginning salaries. There is much which still needs to be scrutinized in this
budget process and compensation should be high on the list. Although she has
spoken about school personnel compensation, the same situation applies to
County government compensation and it, too, should be reevaluated.
April 6~ 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 21)
OOO±$7
Mr. Max Coble said he attended the budget public hearing last year and
complained about the school buses, police department and county cars but
nothing has changed. He thinks the Board has enough audits for controlling
the budget. Before this County tries to get to higher education in the lower
schools, the students have to be taught reading, writing, arithmetic and
respect. These students will not be able to do these other jobs, except art,
without the basics. He congratulated the Board on its budget.
There being no further comments from the public, the public hearing was
closed at 8:10 p.m.
Mr. Martin said he has heard a lot of comments about how bad Albemarle
County's school system is compared to other nations and countries, but having
served on the School Board for several years, those comparisons are based on
national averages which include large city schools in bad shape. He would be
willing to compare Albemarle County's school system to any country and feels
confident that it would rank high. He knows and believes that Albemarle
County's school system is better than most school systems. The rankings do
not mean much unless a comparison is made between equal entities.
Mrs. Humphris said she received a phone call from Mrs. Karen Powell,
School Board member, and she has done a tremendous amount of work on the
School Division's budget. When people say that no one on the School Board
knew what was going on with the budget, she begs to differ. Mrs. Powell said
that she wanted to be present tonight to make some comments but was unable to
do so. She asked Mrs. Humphris to make an important point. People continu-
ously say that the County should be using the projections of the Center for
Public Studies (CPS) at the University of Virginia as the enrollment projec-
tions for the future instead of its own. Mrs. Humphris said, on behalf of
Mrs. Powell, that she would like to make sure that everyone knows that if CPS
projections were used instead of our own, the projection would be 105 more
students in County schools for next year and in the year 2002, 769 more
students would be projected than under the current projection.
Mrs. Thomas said this is a frustrating process for people on both sides
because there have been very good comments and questions raised. She feels
there are answers to 99 percent of the questions raised, but this Board sits
silently, the citizens do not get the benefit of knowing what the answers are
and people leave feeling that those comments and questions were not acknowl-
edged because there is no response. She does not know how to address this
problem and she welcomes any suggestions. She thinks work sessions early in
the budget process should allow more give and take. There are things which
could make an improvement, such as better, more understandable words and a
better feeling for what is meant by having a "curriculum revision." The
budget is not done by a group of outside experts, but there is no feel for
this in a public hearing.
Mrs. Thomas said the question raised of whether public hearings should
be held in the evenings when it is difficult for senior citizens to attend or
in the daytime when it is difficult for people holding full-time jobs to
attend or whether they should be held on the weekends are all fair questions,
but she does not feel there is a perfect answer for any of them. She agrees
that the County needs long-range planning. The County's Comprehensive Plan
says almost nothing about education. This may be an opportunity for the
community to have some input about what education's long-range plans should be
and have these implemented in the Comprehensive Plan. She encouraged everyone
to attend and get involved in all Board meetings and not just the budget
hearings.
Ms. Martha Harris asked if she could make another short comment. Mr.
Perkins said "yes." Ms. Harris said she agrees with Mrs. Thomas about
citizens speaking before the Board and it listening attentively, but not
getting any feedback. She knows Board members have many demands. She thinks
that it is very important when citizens call the Board members that they take
time to listen. She applauded those members she spoke to for doing this.
Ms. Harris said she also agrees with Mrs. Humphris' comments about Mrs.
Powell who has worked diligently on this budget. Her initial impression when
the School Board approved this budget was disappointment in Mrs. Powell, but
she knows Mrs. Powell spent a lot of time going through the budget and had to
ask some very difficult questions.
Mr. Tucker said Mr. Strauss questioned the difference in the start-up
costs for a Sheriff's deputy versus a police officer. The primary difference
is in salary, but he also reminded the Board that a good portion of this money
is for one-time costs, i.e., vehicle and equipment costs.
Mr. Marshall said he is a small businessman. His business is big enough
that he is unable to run it by himself and has to rely on people who work for
him to give him the proper information to operate successfully. He must
insure job security for his employees. The same is true of this job on the
Board. He is a busy man and involved in a number of different activities. He
loves his work on this Board and wants to do good for the County. He is
concerned about the information received this year, particularly pertaining to
the school budget. He respects Mrs. Harris' remarks because she is a CPA and
an expert in her field. She raised questions that he is concerned about and
would like to have answers to before he votes on the budget. He does not know
why compensation has to be listed the way it is and does not understand it or
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 22)
000t.58
expect citizens to understand it. As a former School Board member he has
always supported the schools. He wants Albemarle County to have the best
school system possible, but also wants truthful reporting to the citizens so
they know what their money is paying for.
Mr. Bowerman said as he understands it, costs are associated with the
high enrollment figure because the children are actually in the system at the
beginning of the year and have to be educated. During the middle to end of
that school year a lot of students are gone. The State only pays the County
for the actual number of students in school in March. This is the reason one
figure is used for revenues and another for costs. The teachers, books, desks
and materials have to be in place in September because the students are there.
Mr. Bowerman said in response to Mr. Carter's statement, he is support-
ive of the budget that was brought to public hearing. He also feels there are
ways the budget process could be improved. He feels there are competent
people doing the budget, but perhaps there needs to be additional attention
paid to analysis of the budget within County government to help both the
School Division and General Government put together budgets that are under-
standable to all. There are things that can be done to improve this process
but he is satisfied that the budget before the Board is a correct document and
represents the needs of the County fairly.
Mr. Carter asked if he could respond to Mr. Bowerman's comments. Mr.
Perkins said "yes." Mr. Carter said Mr. Bowerman is willing to except nine
additional buses at $458,000, even though the buses are not needed; 34 extra
buses already exist. There are errors in the budget and he would like to see
the information to prove that these nine buses are needed. Mr. Bowerman said
he feels Mr. Carter should be provided with the information he has requested.
Mr. Perkins thanked the members of the public who were involved in a
different way during the budget process this year. The citizens have brought
a lot of good points to the attention of this Board and the School Board. The
citizens have also come up with some good ideas that he hopes can be incorpo-
rated into future budgets. He feels there are things that need to be reviewed
and one is the merit pay plan. He thinks some of the salary increases that
are proposed to be given are out-of-line. He does not know of anyone in the
private sector that is getting anywhere close to a 10 percent increase. He
feels the pay plan should be reviewed and made more realistic.
Mr. Perkins said he will probably not support this budget because he
thinks it contains a lot of "fluff." There are employees added to this budget
and someone said it seems like the County is still in the "growth" mode. He
does not feel it should be in that mode. He is not in favor of adding
employees which has been done the last several years and drives the budget
because it has a "snowballing" effect. There are a lot of good proposals that
have come to the Board but he has questions as to whether the County should
fund those things. There are a lot of things he does not feel the County
should fund. There are things that he would have liked to add to this budget
that Mr. Tucker had not proposed and he feels Mr. Tucker has to be commended
for the job he did in developing the initial budget because it took courage
and he had to make some tough decisions. He feels Mr. Tucker knows more about
what this County needs than anyone else and this Board should look very
closely at what he proposes. He feels this Board needs to have good reasons
for going beyond the County Executive's proposal and this is what has been
done this year.
Mr. Martin said the members of the Board and people in the audience are
all imperfect creatures and he does not feel anyone will ever design a perfect
budget. When millions of dollars are being discussed, he thinks some "fluff
and fat" can always be found. He also feels that at some point in the effort
to remove the "fat", the "lean" is also taken out. Since everyone is imper-
fect, the best that can be done is to strive to be perfect, realizing that it
will not happen. Each year, the previous year must be looked at so that
improvements can be made. After the budget has been scrutinized as much as it
has been this year, he feels comfortable in supporting it. He appreciates the
amount of effort that the participants in the audience have given to make this
a workable document and ongoing dialogue. He appreciates the dialogue and
feels it has made him closer to being perfect in his ability to make this a
better document, realizing that it will never be perfect.
Mr. Perkins said this Board will not vote on the budget until April 14,
1994. He also announced that the Board will not meet on April 13, 1994,
because it is Thomas Jefferson's Birthday. The next meeting will be held on
April 14, 1994.
Not Docketed: Mr. Perkins asked if the Board members had any other
items of business at this time.
Mr. Martin said the Board discussed, in Executive Session, its desire to
invite the McRavens to meet with it concerning the Outdoor Theater and the
disagreement between the Zoning Administrator and Board of Zoning Appeals. He
received a letter stating that their attorney, Mr. Fred Paine, would be avail-
able to meet with the Board on April 20, 1994. He would like to extend an
invitation for Mr. Payne to meet with the Board and it can decide whether it
needs to meet with the family and attorney at a later date.
000159
April 6, 1994 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 23)
Mr. Davis said he talked with Mr. Payne and was told that the McRavens
would be available on April 20th, but Mr. Payne would be inconvenienced on
that date due to a family obligation. Mr. Payne said he could attend the
meeting on April 20th if that is the Board's desire, however would prefer that
this discussion take place late in the meeting.
There was a consensus of the Board that the Outdoor Theater be discussed
at the April 20, 1994, meeting.
Agenda Item No. 21. Adjourn to April 11, 1994, 5:30 p.m., for Joint
Meeting with School Board.
At 8:35 p.m., Mr. Bowerman made motion, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to
adjourn to April 11, 1994, at 5:30 p.m., for a joint meeting with the School
Board. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Mrs. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris and
Mr. Marshall.
None.