HomeMy WebLinkAbout2001-03-14COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AGENDA I I~ LE:
Road Name Assignment
SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST:
Road Name Assignment Request
STAFF CONTACT(S):
Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Cilimberg, Morgan, Weaver
AGENDA DATE:
March 14, 2001
ACTION:
ITEM NUMBER:
INFORMATION:
CONSENT AGENDA:
ACTION: X
INFORMATION:
ATTACHMENTS:
REVIEWED BY:
BACKGROUND:
No
Per the Albemarle County Road Naming and Property Numbering Ordinance, road names are required for all public roads
designed to serve three (3) or more addressable structures. This standard is applied county-wide to facilitate efficient
emergency response. The Ordinance does not provide for deviation from this standard without approval by the Board of
Supervisors.
When road name signs were first instal ed county-wide, road signs identifying the name of each school were placed at their
entrance so that they could easily be located by emergency service providers. The road name signs were for location
purposes only and did not correspond to the address that was assigned to the school.
DISCUSSION:
Staff has received a request from the Albemarle County School Board to assign the name of Proffit Lane to the road that
will be used to access the new Baker-Butler Elementary School as well as a Proffit Lane address for the school. It has
been dbtermined that the road in question will not serve three (3) addressable structures.
RECOMMENDATION:
Approval of this request would be a departure from the County Ordinance. Should the Board approve the new road name
as requested, the Board should grant staff the authority to coordinate/implement the above referenced road name and
property number assignment.
01.048
FY 2001/02
County Executiv ·
es
Recommended ~Operating Budget
Albemarle County, Virginia
Budget Summary
March 14, 2001
Budget Calendar
March 7 - County Executive's Recommended Budget Sent to Board of Supervisors
March 14 - Public Hearing on Recommended Budget
March 19 -Board Work Session
March 21 - Board Work Session
March 26 '- Board Work Session
March 28 - Board Work Session
April 11 - Public Hearing on Board of Supervisors' Proposed Budget & Tax Levy
April 18 - FY 2001/02 Budget/CIP Adoption, Calendar Year 2001 Tax Levy Set
Budget Process
Why do we budget?
The major purpOse of budgeting is to formally convert the
County's long range plans and pohcies into services and pro-
grams. The budget provides detailed financial information on
the costs of services and the expected revenues for the up-
coming fiscal year. The budget process also provides a forum
for a review of progress made in the current year and for a
review of the levels of service provided by local government.
What is the budget?
The budget is divided into three major parts, each with sepa-
rate documents and public hearings.
The operating budget is the total and complete budget used
to finance all of the day-to-day operations of local govern-
mem. It consists of several major sections including general
government operations, the transfer to school OPerations,
school debt service, capital outlay, and the City-County reve-
nue sharing payment. Funding for this budget is derived pri-
marily from taxes, fees, licenses, f'mes, and from state and
federal revenues.
The school budget is used to completely describe the opera-
tions of the County's schools. It is prepared by the Superin-
tendent's office and is approved by the School Board. The
schools have their own budget calendar which is separate
from that of other budgets. Funding for the school budget is
derived mainly from transfers from the General Fund, fees,
and inter-governmental ~venues (i.e. state and federal fund-
ing.)
The CapitalImprovements Program (CIP) is used to pur-
chase or finance the construction of capital goods from th~
building of schools, parks, and roads to the upgrading of com-
puter and phone system equipment. Funding for these proj-
ects is obtained primarily from bond issues (long term debt
which is typically borrowed for the building of school proj-
ects) and from transfers from the operating budget.
What are the State Requirements?
The Commonwealth of Virginm requires that all localities
meet certafn budget guidelines, as outlined in Sections 15.2-
2500 to 15.2-2513 of the Code of Virginia (1950), as
amended. According to these guidelines, all localities within
Virginia must have a fiscal year beginning on July 1 and end-
ing on June 30 and must approve a balanced budget. The
School Board must approve the School Budget by May 1 or
within 15 days of receiving estimates of state funding, which-
'ever shall occur later. The Board of Supervisors must approve
the operating budget and set the tax rate by July 1 of each
year. The adoption of the operating budget and the tax rate
requires the Board to hold a public hearing and to advertise
this hearing no less than 7 days in advance. Although these
are the minimum state requirements, the County traditionally
has adopted the budget by April 15 in order to establish
teacher contracts and to set the personal property tax prior to
the tax bill mailing date. The official appropriation of funds
takes place prior to July 1 of each year.
When are the Budget Decisions Made and How can I
Participate in the Process?
The County's FY 2001/02 operating budget schedule began
on October 18, 2000, with the preliminary projection of reve-
nues for the coming year. On November 8, the Board pro-
vided the County Executive with financial guidelines for the
development of the budget. On.November 17, the County
Executive's Office sent budget guidance letters to alt depart-
ments. In the middle of December, departments submitted
budget requests to the County Executive's Office.
From the middle of December to the middle of January, the
executive staff reviewed budget requests and developed
budget-related questions. From these discussions, the execu-
tive staff developed recommendations ranging from the fund-
ing of new programs to the reduction of funding for current
programs. In mid-February, the School Superintendent sub-
mitted the school budget to the County Executive and the ex-
ecutive staff reviewed the school budget. At the end of Febru-
ary, the County Executive made the necessary adjustments to
balance the budget and staff printed the County Executive's
recommended budget. This budget was presented to the
Board of Supervisors on March 7, and a public hearing on the
County Executive's recommendation is scheduled for March
14.
After the public hearing, the Board begins a detailed review
of each area of the budget and recommends specific cuts or
additions to the County Executive'9 recommended budget.
After all of the budget changes are agreed upon, pubhc hear-
ings on the Board of Supervisors' proposed budget and the
tax rate are held. The FY01/02 public h~arings will be held
on April 11, 2001. On April 18, the Board adopts the operat-
ing and capital budgets and sets the tax levy for the coming
year. The budget is legally enacted through passage of a
Resolution of Appropriation prior to July I
Budget Objectives & Highlights
Fiscal Planning Goals:
The following goals were used:to design this FY 01-02 oper- ·
ating and capital budget and FY 01/02-05/06 Capital Im-
provement Plan:-
The Personal Property tax rate is maintained at its current
level of $4.28/$100 assessed valuation. The Real Prop-
erty tax rate for calendar (tax) year 2001 is proposed at
$0.75/$100 of assessed valuation. The $713,020 resulting ·
from a proposed $0.01 decrease over the 2000 rate is be-
ing held in reserve for Board of Supervisors' determina-
tion;
Basic services are maintained;
· Current fiscal planning policies are maintained;
· Education and public safety continue to be priorities for
the provision of services;
Employee compensation and benefits are a major priority
of the budget in order to ensure our salaries are market
competitive;
Local revenues are not automatically used to replace or
eliminate federal or state programs;
· Fiscal stability is maintained through an appropriately ·
funded General 'Fund Balance; and
· Necessary infrastructure improvements are programmed °
for implementation.
Budget Highlights:
Using the previous goals as a guide, the budget was balanced
with the following items included:
Total revenues for FY .2002 increased by $10.1 million
(6.2%) over the current year, reflecting a significant in-
crease in real property taxes;
Real estate property taxes increased by $4.9 million due
primarily to our biennial assessment (average 12% over
two years) and new construction;
Local personal property taxes decPeased by $3.5 million
due to the reclassification of personal property revenues
as state revenues, rather than local taxes; without ihe re-
classification, personal property revenues would have in-
creased by $2.4 million (10%o);
State and federal revenues increased by $6.8 milton
(13%) over the current year, again reflecting the reclassi-
fication of the personal property revenues as state reve-
nue, rather than local taxes. It .is unclear at the time of
this writing whether additional funding can be expected
from the General Assembly;
School Division revenues increased by $0.227 million
(0.7%) from state and federal sources, and by $3.9 mil-
lion (7%) from the General Fund;
The Revenue Sharing Agreement with the City of Char-
lottesville provided the City with an additional $0.390
million f0t a total payment of $6.5 million;
Debt Service of $8.5 million for school construction,
renovation and major maintenance projects has been
funded. The General Fund transfer to the capital program
has increased by $2.5 million (79%) to help fund a pro-
posed $113 million dollar FY02-FY06 Capital Improve-
ment Program;
A 13% contingency reserve averaging $2.8 million per
year has been maintained in the five-year capital pro-
gram;
Community agencies are proposed to receive an average
funding increase of 3%;
With the cons~'uction of the new Blue Ridge Juvenile De-
tention Center underway, Albemarle's share of this new
operation is $266,210, an increase of $121,210 (84%);
General Government operating base budgets are level-
funded;
Compensation recommendations from the consultants of
Palmer and Cay are implemented by moving positions to
market, adjusting the salary scale 4.5% and providing a
3~9% pay-for-performance pool;
A Board of Supervisors contingency reserve in the
amount of $200,000 has been provided. School Board
reserves total $50,000.
General Government Priorities
County Executive's Funded Priorities
Administration
Community Education Publications-Community Relations
8 new voting machines- Voter Registration/Elections
Judicial
Digital Court Recording System - General District Court
Funding for Master Deputies - Sheriff
Public Safety
Local Funding for Crime Prevention Coordinator - Police Community Services
2 FTE Police Officers (One to be hired in January 2002) - Police Services
Additional overtime wages - Police Services
1 FTE Office Assistant - Fire/Rescue
Expanded Training Program - Fire/Rescue
SCBA Testing Equipment - Fire/Rescue
4 Thermal Imaging Cameras - Fire/Rescue
Tanker Taskforce Equipment Project - Jefferson Country (JCFRA)
. Medical Equipment Exchange - Jefferson Country (JCFRA)
Building Code Record Books - Inspections
Engineering & Public Works 1 FTE Civil Enginer II (to be hired January 2002) - Engineering
1 FTE CIP Project Manager ~Engineering
Human Development
1 FTE Assistant Director - Programs (to be hired January 2002) - Social Services
1 FTE Office Assistant - Social Services
Adoption Materials - Social Services
1 FTE Day Care Social Worker -Social Services
Expansion(Meal progams, home safety)- JABA
Woods Edge Elderly Housing -JABA
Teensight Child Care Assistance -FOCUS
Play Partners - Children, Youth Family Services
3 additional child care scholarships- United Way
P ark s/Re e re atio n/C ultu re
Esmont P ark Operating Funds - Parks and Rec
Athletic Field Maintenance Pilot Program -Parks and Rec
2 New Summer Playground Sites - Parks and Rec
Extended Operating Hours for Summer Playground Program - Parks and Rec
New Scoreboards for Middle School Gyms -Parks and Rec
Gypsy Moth Program
Part-time Assistant - James Madison Regional L~rary
Lewis and Clark Festival
Community Development
.5 FTE Planning Aide - Planning
1 FTE Senior Planner (to be hired January 2002) -Planning
.6 Expansion of Recording Secretary to 1.0 FTE - Planning
1 FTE GIS Specialist -Egl 1/Planning
2 FTE Zoning Inspectors (One to be hked January 2002)- Zoning
Riparian Buffers Program- TJ Soil and Water
Hope House -MACAA
Total County Executive Funded Priorities
* Total Cost Partially Offset by Anticipated Additional Revenues
15,000
44,000
8,735
7,006
39,969
125,775 *
32,823
31,298
15,000
14,000
72,000
40,000
10,000
4,000
36,304
66,028
38,718 *
36,497 *
2,100 *
46,307 *
16,898
40,000
2,495
22,146
9,360
46,010 *
74,634
27,390 *
7,350 *
8,715
16,840
4,196
2,500
24,509
37,025
28,901
48,224
109,503 *
7,680
2,278
1,222,214
Total County Budget
Self-Sustaining
5%
FY 2001/02 Recommended
Total County Revenues
$171,800,430
Local Property Taxes
38%
FederalRevenue
3%
State Revenue
32%
Carry-Over/Fund
Balance
1%
Other Local Revenues
21%
General Gov't
Operations
27%
.FY 2001/02 RecOmmended
Total County Expenditures
$171,800,430
General Gov't.
Miscellaneous
<1%
Capital Program
3%
Revenue Shadng
4%
Self-Sustaining
5%
Debt Service
5%
School Division
Operations
55%
Total County,Revenues
Self-Sustaining
5%
Federal Revenue
3%
State Revenue
32%
FY 2001/02 Recommended
Total County Revenues
$171,800,430
Local Property
Tax es
38%
Carry-Over/Fund
Balance
1%
Revenues
21%
TOTAL COUNTY REVENUE~
LOCALREVENUE
REAL PROPERTY TAXES
PERSONAL PROPERTY TAXES
OTHER LCCAL TAXES
OTHER LOCAL REVENUE
OTHER LOCAL - SCHOOL FUND
SUBTOTAL
STATE REVENUE
GENERAL
SCHOOL FUND
SUBTOTAL
FEDERALREVENUE
GENERAL
SCHOOLFUND
SUBTOTAL
SCHOOL SELF-SUSTAINING FUNDS
TRANSFERS/ FUND BALANCE
GOVT: CARRY-OVER]FUND BAL
GOVT:TRANSFERS
SCHOOLS:CARRY-OVER/FUND BAL
SCHOOLS:TRANSFERS
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL REVENUE
FY99/00
ACTUAl,.
43,357,015
15.764.301
4.213.953
33,630.082
627.695
97,593.046
12.944,595
28.879.097
41,823,792
2,927,385
1.218 777
4.146,162
8,082,771
0
2,664.816
1,328.916
150.000
4,143,732
155,789,503
FY 00/01 FY 00/01
ADOPTED REVISED
FY 01,/02
RI~OIJEST
FY 01/02
RECOMM
47,201.368 48.452.500 52,185.809 52,185,809 4.984.441 10.56%
12,477,800 12,970 160 8,954.200 8,954,200 (3,523,600) -28.24%
4.427,500 4.443,411 4.614.600 4,614,600 187,100 4.23%
34,038,905 34.764 ~661 35,496,200 34,977.850 938,945 2.76%
651.695 651.695 592.470 592.470 ~'59.225 ) -9.09%
98,797,268 101,282,427 101,843,279 101,324,929 2,527,661 2.56%
30.38%
5.21%
2.69%
20.36%
0.34%
58,98%
17.760.372 17,818,974 23,835.485 23.961,722 6,201,350 34.92% 13.95%
30.608 077 30.223 8~9 30.808.293 30.808.2~, 200.21{} 0.65% 17.93%
48,368,449 48,042,873 54,643.778 54,770,015 6.401,566 13.24% 31.88%
3,285.794 3.071.302 3,599,085 3.619.744 333,950 10.16% 2.1 1%
1.438.49~ 1.438.-458 1.465.000 1.465.000 26.532 I 84o/. 0.85%
4.724.262 4,509 770 5,064,085 5.084,744 360.482 7.63% 2.96%
7,898.449 8.578,048 8,546,557 8,546,557 650 108 8.23% 4.97%
1.130.465 0 0 533,774 (596.691) -52.78% 0.31%
168,355 8.237.547 167,000 576~411 408,056 242.38% 0.34%
590.000 590,000 590,000 590.000 0 0.00% 0.34%
74.000 74.000 374.000 374.000 300.000 405 41°/. 0 22%
1,962,820 8,901 547 1 , 131,000 2,074,185 111,365 5.67 % 1.21%
161,749,248 171,314,665 171,228,699 171,800,430 10,051,182 8.21% 100.00%
Total County Expenditures
General Gov't
Operations
27%
FY 2001102 Recommended
Total County Expenditures
$171,800,430
General Gov't.
Miscellaneous
Capital Program
3%
Revenue Shadng
4%
Self-Sustaining
5%
Debt Service
5%
School Division
Operations
55%
TOTAL C. OUNTY FXPENDITHRES
GENERAL GOVERNMENT FUNCTIONS
AC M IN ISTRATIO N
JUDICIAL
PUBLIC SAFETY
PUBLIC WORKS
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
PARKS, RECREATION & CULTURE
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
SUBTOTAL
SCHOOL DIVISION
SCHOOL FUND OPERATIONS
SELF-SUSTAINING FUNDS
DEBT SERVICE FUND
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM
SUBTOTAL
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
CAPITAL PROGRAM - GEN. GOV'T.
CITY/COUNTY REVENUE SHARING
DEBT SERVICE - GENERAL GOVT
DEBT SERVICE./ CAPITAL RESERVE
CONTINGENCY RESERVE
RESERVE
REFUNDS
SUBTOTAL
TOTAL EXPENDITURES
FY 99/00
ACTUAL
6,184,182
2,533,381
12,339,153
2.538,082
8,718,889
4.015,058
2.994,139
39.322,884
82,863,782
8,082,771
8.450,000
100 808
99.496,553
2,42t ,336
5.853.794
310,688
0
0
1.179,162
27.661
9.792,535
148,612,072
FY 00/01
ADOPTED
6.512,040
2.729~307
13.890,140
2,719.261
9,603,949
4,307,399
3.378.373
43,140,469
90,035.795
7,896,449
8,850,000
106.782,244
3.124,500
6,093,101
750,000
1.290 ~00
534,634
0
34 300
11.826,535
161,749,248
FY 00/01 FY 01/02
REVISED R EO U EST
6.994,474 7,004,959
2.799,369 2,650,446
14,358,421 16,717,102
3,029 754 3,099,277
9,707,851 10.603,958
4,345,146 5.220,675
4,210,200 4.551,165
45.445,215 49,847.582
90,035,795 96.899,154
8.578,048 8.546.557
8.850,000 8.532.000
107.463,843 113,977,711
8.147.041 5.590 188
6,093,101 6.482 712
750,000 91~.202
1.290.000 0
229.493 913.020
0 0
34 300 92.100
18.543.935 13.988.222
169,452,993 I 177,813,5t5
FY 01/02
I~ECOMM
6,959,073
2.571,513
15.118.920
2.954,332
10.452.915
4,305,306
3,876,304
46,238,362
94.495,289
8,546.557
8,532,000
111,573,846
5,590,188
6,482.712
910,202
0
913,020
0
~ 100
13,988,222
17t,800,430
447.033
(157,794)
1,228,780
235.071
848,966
(2,093)
497,931
3.097,893
4.459.494
850.I08
(318,000)
4.791,602
2,465.688
389,611
160.202
(1,290,000)
378.386
O
57 800
2.161.687
1.0,051,182
6.86%
-5.78%
8.85%
8.64%
8.84%
-0.I~ 5%
14.74%
7.18%
4.95%
8.23%
-3.59%
0 00%
4.49%
78.91%
5 39%
21.36%
100.00%
70.77%
0.00%
1§8 5t%
18.28%
6.21%
4_05%
1.50%
8.80%
1.72%
6.08%
2.51%
2.26%
26.91%
55.00%
4.97%
4.97%
0
64.94%
3.25%
3.77%
0.53%
0.00%
0.53%
0.00%
0 05%
8.14%
100,00%
. General Fu'nd Summary of Expenditures
FY 99/00 FY 00/01 FY 00/01
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES ACTUAL ~ REVISED
ADMINISTRATION
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS 316.959 331.467 332,267
COUNTY ATTORNEY 430.425 457,658 473,960
COUNTY EXECUTIVE 643,399 686,109 692,578
FINAN CE 2,549,346 2,696,821 3.045,815
INFORMATION SERVICES 1,678,230 1,638,572 1,647,809
HUMAN RESOURCES 326,786 477,626 530,459
VOTER REGISTRATION/ELECTION 239.037 223.787 271.586
SUBTOTAL 6,184,182 6,512,040 6,994,474
JUDICIAL
CIRCUIT COURT 68,370 76,510 83,010
CLERK OF CIRCUIT COURT 527,256 659,925 686,522
COMMONWEALTH'S ATTORNEY 515.058 546,220 547,379
GENERAL DISTRICT COURT 16,073 12,830 15,490
JUVENILE COURT 117,806 121,567 121,567
MAGISTRATE 15,201 18,995 18,995
SHERIFF 1.273.617 1.293.26(} 1.326.406
SUBTOTAL 2,533,381 2,729,307 2,799,369
PUBLIC SAFETY
EMERGENCY COMMUNIC. CTR 1,246,614 1,066,031 1,139,206
FIRE DEPARTMENT - CITY 666.535 654,427 654,427
FIRE DEPARTMENT - JCFRA 657,522 732,960 732,960
FIRE/RESCUE ADMINISTRATI ON 1.108,703 1,371,808 1,411,823
FIRE/RESCUE CREDIT 49,890 75,000 75,000
FOREST FIRE EXTINCTION 13,758 13,758 13,758
INSPECTIONS 717,202 726,564 748,064
JUVENILE DETENTI ON HOME 92,278 148,940 148,940
COMMUNITY ATTENTION HOME 0 0 0
OFFENDER AID & RESTORATION 42,507 52,400 52,400
POLICE DEPARTMENT 7,036,001 7,452,661 7,785,260
REGIONAL JAIL AUTHORITY 493,796 1,363,000 1,363,000
RESCUE SQUADS - JCFRA 189,919 192,096 192,096
SPCA 20,258 40,495 41,485.
TRANSFERS 4.170 0
SUBTOTAL 12,339,153 13,890,140 14,358,421
' PUBLIC WORKS
ENGINEERING 1,163,087 1,253,552 . 1,472,427
WATER RESOURCES MGNT. 109,681 118,769 118,769
PUBLIC WORKS 1.265.314 1.346.940 1.438.55~
SUBTOTAL 2,538,082 2,719,261 3,029,754
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
AIDS SUPPORT GROUP 3.260 3,260 3,260
BRIGHT STARS PROGRAM 223,460 268,030 268,030
CHARLOTTESVILLE FREE CLINIC 5,570 5,570 5.570
COMM. ON CHILDREN & FAMILIES 152.235 145,933 145,933
CHILDREN, YOUTH & FAMILY SVC,~ 39,080 50,440 50,440
FOCUS - TEENSIGHT 21,215 21,850 21,850
HEALTH DEPARTMENT 746,050 775,890 775,890
JAUNT 330,908 341.236 341 ,.236
JEFFERSON AREA BD. FOR AGING 151,039 168,780 168,780
JABA - WOODS EDGE PILOT PRGIV 0 0 0
LEGAL AID 19,510 20,095 20.095
MADISON HOUSE 7,200 7,415 7,415
(Continued on Next Page)
FY 01/02 FY 01/02 $ % %
REQUEST RECOMM INC INC TL
343,353 343,353 11,886 3.59% 0.27%
475,534 475,534 17,876 3.91% 0.37%
728,398 718,898 32,789 4.78% 0.56%
2,865,990 2,865,990 169,169 6.27% 2.21%
1,698,823 1,698,823 60,251 3.66% 1.31%
549,208 549,208 71,582 14.99% 0.42%
343.653 307.267 83.480 37.30% 0.24%
7,004,959 6,959.073 447,033 6.86% 5.38%
78,276 78,276 1,766 2.31% 0.06%
580,515 580,515 (79,410) -12.03% 0.45%
546,664 535,820 (10,400) -1.90% 0.41%
21,565 21,565 8,735 68.08% 0.02o/O
41~653 41,653 (79,914) -65.74% 0.03%
20.245 20,245 1.250 6.58% 0.02%
1.361_52{~ 1.293.439 179 0.01% 1.00%
2,650,446 2,571,513 (157,794) -5.78% 1.99%
1,191,756 1,191,756 125,725 11.79% 0.92%
735,185 735,185 80,758 12.34% 0.57%
880,246 782,960 50,000 6.82% 0.60%
1,826,896 1,588,250 216,442 15.78% 1.23%
40,000 40,000 [35,000) -46.67% 0.03%
13,758 13,758 0 0.00% 0.01%
802,292 762,292 35,728 4.92% 0.59%
266,210 266,210 117,270 78.74% 0.21%
43,614 42,205 42,205 100.00% 0.03%
54,493 54,493 2,093 3.99% 0.04%
8,172,361 8,021,395 568,734 7.63% 6.20%
1,383,775 1,383,775 20.775 1.52% 1.07%
192,096 192,096 0 0.00% 0.15%
1,114,420 44.545 4.050 10.00% 0.03%
0 0
16,717,102 15,118,920 1,228,780 8.85% 11.66%
1,570,500 1,425,555 172,003 13.72% 1.10%
133,179 133;179 14,410 12.13% 0.10%
1.395.598 1.395.598 48.658 3.61% 1.08%
3,099,277 2,954,332 235,071 8.64% 2.28%
3,586 3,358 98 0.00% 0.00%
278,751 278,751 10,721 4.00% 0.22%
5,570 5,570 0 0.00% 0.00%
131,295 126,066 (19,867) -13.61% 0.10%
86,578 78,882 28,442 56.39% 0.06%
25,001 25;001 3,151 14.42% 0.02%
762,174 762,174 (13,716} -1.77% 0.59%
389,335 389,335 48,099 14.10% 0.30%
212,491 175,910 7,130 4.22% 0.14%
40,000 40,000 40,000 100.00% 0.03%
49,123 20. §98 603 3.00% 0.02%
7,800 7,638 223 3.01% 0.01%
General Fund Summary of Expenditures
(Continued from Previous Page)
GENERAL FUND EXPENDITURES
FY 98/99 FY 00/01 FY 99/00
ACTUAL ADOPTED ~
MENTAL HEALTH - REGION TEN 312,170 358,435 358,435
MUSIC RESOURCE CENTER 1,000 5,000 5,000
PIEDMONT CASA 0 2,000 2,000
SEXUAL ASSAULT RESOURCE AG( 24,000 24,000 24,000
SHELTER FOR HELP IN EMGCY. 66,573 68.570 68,570
SOCIAL SERVICES 6,403,610 7,042,920 7,146,822
TAX RELIEF -ELDERLY/DISABLED 136,843 210,000 210,000
UNITED WAY SCHOLARSHIP PGM. 64.916 74.275 74.275
SUBTOTAL 8,708,639 9,593,699 9,697,601
EDUCATION
PIEDMONT VA. COMM. COLLEGE 10,250 10,250 10,25C
PARKS & RECREATION
ASH LAWN-HIGHLAND 0 8,000 8,000
ALBEMARLE COUNTY FAIR 0 0 0
BLUE RIDGE ESL COUNCIL 0 0
DARDEN TOWE MEMORIAL PARK 114,080 119,362 119,362
DISCOVERY MUSEUM 9,842 10,060 10;060
VIRGINIA FILM FESTIVAL 0 10,000 10,000
FIRST NIGHT VIRGINIA 0
JEFFERSONIAN THANKS FESTIVAl 0 0 0
LEWIS & CLARK FESTIVAL 0 ' 0 0
LIBRARY 1,861,454 2,001,300 2,001,300
LITERACY VOLUNTEERS 15,680 16,150 16,150
MUNICIPAL BAND 0 15,000 15,000
PARKS & RECREATION 1,176,944 1,310,857 1,348,604
PIEDMONT COUNCIL OF THE ART,~ 9,800 10,020 10,020
CITY - SKATEBOARD PARK 23,400 0 0
TRANSFER: TOURISM 796,858 475,398 475,398
VISITOR'S BUREAU 0 314,042 314,042
VIRGINIA FESTIVAL OF THE BOOK 0 10,000 10.000
YMCA 0 0 0
WVPT PUBLIC TELEVISION 7.000 7.210 7.210
SUBTOTAL 4,015,058 4,307,399 4,345,146
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
ALBEMARLE HOUSING IMPROV. 368,506 379,560 379,560
BUS SERVICE/ROUTE 29 104,500 155,565 155,565
CHRISTMAS IN APRIL 0 0 0
MONTICELLO COM M; ACTION AGC 96,129 142,220 142,220
OFFICE OF HOUSING 385,142. 430,915 430,915
PIEDMONT HOUSING ALLIANCE 85,000 91,050 91,050
PLANNING 1,160,669 1,268,197 2,084,094
PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSIOI~ 74,184 90,258 90,258
SMALL BUSINESS DEV. CENTER 0. 0 0
SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION 46,572 49,682 51,172
VPI EXTENSION SERVICE 157,892 164,586 165,664
ZONING 515.545 006.340 619~702
SUBTOTAL 2,994,139 3,378,373 4,210,200
TOTAL OPERATIONS 39,322,884 43,140,469 45,445,215
NON-DEPARTMENTAL
TRANSFER TO CAPITAL FUNDS 2,521,330 3,124,500
GENERAL GOV'T DEBT SERVICE 310,588 750,000
DEBT SERVICE/CAPITAL RESERVI 0 1,290,000
CITY/COUNTY REVENUE SHARING 5,853,794 6,093,101
BOARD CONTINGENCY RESERVE 0 534,834
SCHOOL DIVISION DEBT SERVICE 8,450,000 8,850.000
RESERVE 1,179,162 0
REFUNDS 27.661 34.300
SUBTOTAL 18,342,635 20,676,535
SUBTOTAL GENERALFUND
TRANSFER TO SCHOOL DIVISION
SCHOOLTRANSFER-ONETIME
SUBTOTAL
ToTALGENERALFUND
57,665,519 63,817,004
51,435,564 56,673,555
250.000 Q
51,685,564 56.673,555
109,351,082 120,490,559
FY 00/01 FY 00/01 $ % %
474,517 376,360 17,925 5.00% 0.29%
6,000 5,500 500 10.00% 0.00%
0 0 (2,000) 100.00% 0.00%
24,000 24,000 0 0.00% 0.02%
71,543 70,624 2,054 3.00% 0.05%
7,717,674 7,758,853 715,933 10.17% 5.99%
210,000 210,000 0 0.00% 0.16%
83.635 83.635 9.360 12.60% 0.06%
10,579,073 10,442,355 848,656 8.85% 8.07%
24,885 10,560 310 3.02% 0.01%
10,000 8,240 240 3.00% 0.01%
110,000 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
9,000 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
132,260 132,260 12,898 10.81% 0.10%
10,362 10,362 302 3.00% 0.01%
20,000 10,300 300 3.00% 0.01%
0 0.00% 0.00%
3,000 0 0 0.00% C ,00%
2,500 2,500 2,500 0.00% 0.00%
2,152,971 2,109,402 108,102 5.40% 1.63%
16,796 16,635 485 3.00% 0.01%
18,000 15,450 450 3.00% 0.01%
2,334,827 1,619,851 308,994 23.57% 1.25%
10,700 10,321 301 3.00% 0.01%
0 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
0 0 (475,398) -100.00% 0.00%
352,259 352,259 38,217 12.17% 0.27%
20,000 10,300 300 3.00% 0.01%
10,000 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
8.000 7.426 216 2.00% 0.01%
5,220,675 4,305,306 (2,093) -0.05% 3.33%
482,196 389 141 9,581 2.52% 0.30%
211,109 166,009 "2,444 8.00% 0.13%
10,000 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
179,494 150,210 7~990 5.62% 0.12%
444,327 444,327 13,412 3.11% 0.34%
241,050 92,132 1,082 1.19% 0.07%
1,715,681 1,570,649 302,452 23.85% 1.21%
98,621 98,393 8,135 9.01% 0.08%
35,000 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
94,393 60,732 11,050 22.24% 0.05%
176,991 169,273 4,687 2.85% 0.13%
862.303 733.438 127.098 20.96% 0.57%
4,551,165 3,876,304 497,931 14.74% 3.00%
49,847,582 46,238,362 3,097,893 7.18% 35.73%
8,147,041 5,590,188 5,590,188 2,465,688 78.91% ' 4.32%
750,000 910,202 910,202 160,202 21.36% 0.70%
1,290,000 0 0 (1,290,000) 100.00% 0.00%
6,093,101 6,482,712 6,482,712 389,611 6.39% 5.01%
229,493 913,020 913,020 378,386 70.77% 0.71%
8,850,000 8,532,000 8,532,000 (318~000) -3.59% 6.59%
0 0 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
34.300 92.100 92_100 57.800 168.51% 0.07%
25,393,935 22,520,222 22,520,222 1,843,687 8.92% 17.40%
70,839,150 72,367,804 68,758,584 4,94%580 7.74% 53.13%
56,673,555r 60,665,526 60,665,526 3,991,971 7.04% 46.87%
0 I 0 0 0 0.00% 0.00%
56,673,555I 60,665,526 60,665,526 3,991,971 7.04% 46.87%
127,512,705 1 133,033,330 t29,424,110 8,933,551 7.41% 100.00%
School Division Budget Summary
FY 99/00
SCHOOL DIVISION BUDGET ACTUAL
EXPENDITURES
SCHOOL FUND OPERATIONS 82.863,782
SELF-SUSTAININ(3 OPERATIONS 8.082.771
SUBTOTAL 90,946,553
REVENUES
GENERAL FUND TRANSFER 51,685,564
OTHER SCHOOL FUND REVENUES 32,204,485
SELF-SUSTAINING OPERATIONS 8.082.771
SUBTOTAL 91,972,820
OVER/UNDER 1,026,267
FY 00101 FY 00101
ADOPTED REVISED
90,035,795 90,035,795
7,896,449 8.578,048
97,932,244 98,613,843
56,673,555 56,673,555
33,362,240 32,978,062
7.896.449 8.578.048
97,932,244 98,229,665
0 (384,178)
FY 01/02 FY 01/02 $ % %
REQUEST RECOMM INC INC TI_
96,899,154 94,495,289 4,459,494 4.95% 91.71%
8,546~557 8,546,557 650,108 8.23% 8.29%
105,445,711 103,041,846 5,109,602 5.22% 100.00%
60.665,52~' 60,665,526 3,991,971 7.04% 58.87%
33,829,763 33,829,763 467.523 1.40% 32.83%
8,546.557 8.546.557 650,108 8.23% 8.29%
103,041,846 103,041,846 5,109,662 5.22% 100.00%
(2,403,865) 0
Budget Request
The School Board's requested budget of $105,445,711 includes $96,899,154 in regular School Fund operations and $8,546,557 in
Self-Sustaining Fund operations, for a requested increase of $7.5 million (7,6%) over the current year. This requested budget exceeds
available revenues of $103,041,846 by $2.4 million.
The General Fund Transfer to the School Division is $60,665,526, which is a $3.9 million dollar increase (7%) over the FY01 local
contribution.
State revenues have increased by $200,216~ a .7% increase over FY01.
The major components of the School Board's budget request include:
· Funding for Growth, including 4.98 regular education teachers, 5.5 Special Education
teachers, school based administrators, textbooks and mobile classrooms to support 134 new
students projected to em'oil in FY01.
· Funding to Maintain Competitive Compensation for teachers and staff members, based on
the recommendations of the Compensation Consultant;
· Start-up costs for Baker-Butler Elementary School
· Health and Dental Insurance annual cost adjustment
· Bus Replacement to support the maintenance of the bus replacement schedule
· Other Initiatives, including:
· High School Summer Guidance Support
· Textbooks
· English as a Second and Other Language teachers
· Comprehensives Services Act
· Partial year Support Analyst
· P. iedmont Regional Education Program
$831,508
$4,279,335
$170,000
$754,616
$431,003
C [P Summary
School
51%
FYOJI02 - 05106 ClP
Revenues
$113,060,000
24%
FY01102 - 05106 ClP
Expenditures
$113,060,000
Administration
& Courts
13%
Public Safety
Other Local 15%
2%
Tourism Funds
1% Hwys. &
School.' Transp.
State Funds 57% 7%
2%
Library
Gen Gov 1%
Borrowed ' Parks & Rec.
4%
20% ACE
Stomwvater 1%
2%
n thousands FY02-06 pY
FY01/02' FY02103 FY03104 FY04105 FY05/06 Total .,. FY06/07 FY07108 FY08/09 FY09110 FY10111 Out-Year
Revenues
Local Revenues - General Fund 6,890 5 960 5,012 4,665 4,331 26,857 5,442 4 485 4,559 4,314 4,830 23,6.30
CIP Fund Balance · 646 158 125 125 125 1,179 125 125 125 125 125 625
Toudsm Fund Revenues -ACE/( 658 58 92 93 94 995 343 96 97 99 67 702
Interest Earned 250 250 250 250 250 1,250 300 300 300 300 300 1,500
Courthouse Maintenance Funds 44 47 ~ 49 53 55 248 57 59 62 64 67 310
City Re mbursements 8 .9 . 17 .....
400
State Construction Funding 400 400 400 400 400 2,000 400 400 400 400 2,000
Borrowed Funds ~ General. Gov 465 - 13,537 4,738 3,982 22,721 11,097 1 ! ,453 12,038 1,062 6,118 41,768
VPSA Bonds - Schools 2b~332 10,319 10,622 ' 9 246. 7,274 ~ 2~803 6,760 724 15 315 959
29,693 17.200 30 08'~ 19,570 16,511 113,060 20,568 23,679 18,305 21,679 12,866
Total Revenues ~_
pro.iects
General Govemment 7,965 5,315 17,892 8,620 7,507 47,298 16,120 15,259 15,936 4,719 10,247 62,280
300 575 400 500 650, 2,425 650 650 650 650 650 3,250
Stormwater .
Schools 21,428 11,310 11 795 10,451 8,354 63,338 3 798 7,770 1 719 16,310 1,969 31,566
Total Projects 29,693 17,200 30,087 19,571 16.511 113,061 20,568 23,679 · 18,305 21,679 12,866 97,096
Cumulative Ooeratina Budoet Impact
General G~)vemm~nt - - 204 224 495 559 1,098 2,579 1,422 1,512 1,935 2,038 3,777 10,683
Stormwater 7 10 15 20 25 77 30 35 40 45 50 200
Schools 736 1,558 1,762 2,600 2,837 9,493 2,896 2,914 2,973 3,033 3,09; 14,908
.t-...l n .... finn R..-In.f Imn;ct 947 1.792 2,272 3,179 3,960 12,150 4,348 4,461 4,948 5,116 6,919 25,791
~pera
Before beginning the public hearing i would like to remind
everyone of the Board's guidelines pertaining to addressing the
Board:
I will call the first five names on the sign-up sheet. In the
inneres~ of time each speaker is asked to come down to the
microphone and be prepared to address the Board after the
previous speaker has finished his/her comments.
Each speaker will be given three minutes to speak.~
No one is allowed to give any portion of their time to another
speaker.
Please give a copy of any written s~atements to the Clerk who
will provide the Board members a copy.
Please address commenns to the Board as a whole.
debate is prohibited.
Back-and-forth
Please hold all applause and other forms of approval or
disapproval as a courtesy to each speaker.
Thank you for your time. The first five speakers are ....
PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON
The County Executive's Recommended Budget
'For FY 2001/2002
PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional
ci7 3---qoff o
PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON
The County Executive's Recommended Budget
For FY 2001/2002
PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional
37
38
39
4O
41
42
43
44
PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON
The County Executive's Recommended Budget
For FY 2001/2002
45 L..~¢~
48
PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional)
49
5O
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
61
62
63
64
65
66
March 14, 2(~0~t ~lar]orie Shepherd - President, Albemarle Education Association
A~A behoves the Supenntendent ?roposed budget is a maintenance budge~, and any cuts
be a step backwards. Therefore I am present~ng: Considerations for producing or conzerving
reven~e in Aibemarle County w~thout touching ~he School Budget:
1. Consider turning the heat down in this building - we did in the schools.
2. Consider extending the replacement rate for the county fleet by two years, as we did with school
buses.
3. Consider cutting the lunch hour for the County Office Building down by fifteen minutes, and then
shutting everything down earlier. We eat in 22 minutes so we know it can be done.
But don't consider cutting a thing from the proposed School Budget ....
4. Consider merg/ng departments w/th Charlottesville to save operational costs. I'd start with Social
Services. It would help our kids to not have to deal with new people and get new folders every time
they move.
5. Consider merging the county and city police departments, and the road maintenance crews, and the
Parks and Recreation departments. P~ple don't pay any attention to the city/county line when they go
to have fun.
6. Consider merging specialized Special Education classes with the city, like the multiple handicapped
class. Or the entire Special Education program.
But DON'T consider having us pay for your arrogance about cooperating with Charlottesville.
7. Consider selling banner advertising for local businesses on the County Web page, and ads in the
"Welcome to Albemarle County" booklet.
8. Consider putting Coke and Fru/topia machines in a prominent spot when you walk into the building.
9. Consider bake sales - you could have each department take a Friday lunchtime, and pit departments
for a little competition.
But DON'T even think about pitting essential personnel against essential programs in the budget.
10. Consider selling oranges, peanuts, wrapping paper, and those little pails of gummy worms... We've
done them all- been there, done that, sold the T-sh/rt
11. Consider selling magazines - set up some competition, set up some charts... Mr. Reno will come out
to get everyone fired up, and somebody's going home with a Razor Scooter.
12. Consider a raffle at the county fair - Crutchfield, Blue Ridge Mountain Sports, Shenanigan's are all
good for donations. We've all done it.
13. Consider a receptacle for used binders from steering committees, task forces, conferences, and focus
groups, to re-use for the ne,ct set of steering committees, task forces, conferences, and focus groups.
14. Consider getting free folders for meetings by allowing advertising on the backs.
But don't consider selling out the employees by ignoring work of the Compensation Committee.
15. Consider estabiis~ng a "wish list" on the Web page for needed equipment.
16. Consider putting a founta/n that people I/ko to throw money into/n one of the county parks.
17. Consider lobbying for impact fees so that developers have to share the costs of growth.
18. Consider allowing property taxes to be paid online.
19. Consider renegofiating the revenue sba,ring contract with the c/ty so that what we give them gets
counted for state revenues.
20. Consider regulations to discourage growth in the county. If you don't want to pay for them, why
encourage them to come?
21. Consider negotiating contracts w/th ~e city for better rates for senrices like Wash pickup and
insurance
22. Cons/der hav/ng H/gh School interns do some of the work and the research around here.
23. Consider a database of all the findings of all the studies and all the consultants, so we don't pay
someone else, to find the same information three years later - and require departments to check this
before even suggesting another study.
24. Consider giving rewards to people who come up with more ideas for saving or generating money in
the county, and then posting them.
There are many things to consider before you get out your scissors. The schools ha*ge been doing
them all for years, and we are all worn down to the nubs. We don't think you have even scratched
the surface. Don't point that scissors at our dir~fion, we are already cut to the quick.
SCORE.
Sponsored by the U.S. Small Business Administration
Service Corps of Retired Executives Association
"Counselors to America's
Small Business"
Central Virginia SCORE Chapte~ 494
1001 East Market Street, Suite 101
Charlottesville, VA 22902
January 16,2001
City Council of Charlottesville
Telephone 804-295-67 i 2
Facsimile 804-295-7066
Dear Council Members:
The Service Corps of Retired Executives Assodation (SCORE) is a national volunteer
organization of retired businessmen and businesswomen which provides free consulting to
small business start-ups and also established business owners.
SCORE has 400 chapters nationwide with a total of 13,000 members. The Central Virginia
Chapter, Number 494, is based in Charlottesville and has 22 members. We register
approximately 400 new clients every year, of which 100 are residents of the City of
Charlottesville.
Our chapter also conducts approximately 20 half-day seminars each year; normal attendance
exceeds 160 clients per year. The primary subjects are starting, planning, advertising, and
promoting a business.
Our chapter is strongly supported by the Small Business Devdopment Center. At their office,
1001 East Market Street, we receive office space, a shared Office Manager, a shared
conference room, utilities, and the use of the SBDC library and other informational materials.
If the SBDC support were ever stopped or severely reduced, I believe that our SCORE
operations would have to cease. We just do not have viable alternatives to the SBDC support
we already receive.
In sununmy, SCORE Chapter Number 494 trusts that you will recognize the importance of the
SBDC and SCORE to the local community and that you will fund the SBDC accordingly.
Yours very truly,
onald
~hairman, SCORE Chapter Number 494
Cc: City Manager
Fact Sheet 2000
Busiae, County of Albemarle
Development
Centers i eport (as of 3/5/01)
Core Services Pro¼ded
No-fee business consulting
Business and professional development training
Referral services
Business Resource Information & Library
Our Staff in 2000
Tanya Brockett, Director
Peter Dummett, Part-time business analyst
Teresa Mang'erere, Office & Info. Manager
Edna-Jakki Miller, Part-time business analyst
James Moore, Volunteer consultant
Our Bndget
The Small Business Administration (SBA--a
federal partner) and the Virginia Department of
Business Assistance (DBA--a state partner) provide
50% of our total budget as long as we can provide
local match, dollar for dollar. Fifty percent of each
local match dollar must be in cash, the other fifty
percent can be any combination of cash and in-kind
contributions.
In 2000, we had to leave $46,000 of grant funds
on the table because we could not raise sufficient local
cash match. The County has not provided any
funding to the Center despite the fact that the County
consumes 31% of our consulting resources and 17%
of our training resources.
rl~
12%
Our Clients
The Central Virginia SBDC served 112 unique County
chents in 221 one-on-one consultations. County client
demographics are as follows:
, Business Status: 62% Pre-Venture; 38% In Business
~ Business Type: 31% Retail; 48% Service; 4% Mfg
, Business Form: 30% Sole Proprietor; 6% C Corp.
, Gender of Owner: 48% Male; 47% Female; 5% Combo
~ Veteran Status: 10% Veteran
. Race: 20% Minority
The County consumed 31% of SBDC
consulting resources and occupied 17%
Our Clients~ Economic Impact
The Center is measured by the economic impact that we
help our clients to create within the community. This year,
our impact milestones were exceeded in every category by a
minimum of 97%.
Our clients help the regional economy by creating or
saving jobs, by investing in their businesses so that they can
or expand, and by raising local tax revenues through the
generation of increased sales dollars.
Our 2000 client impact in the County follows:
Jobs Created or Saved: 59
Dollars Invested: $1.09 million
Dollar Sales Increased: $907,900
Based on a figure provided by our state office, the job
impact reported above increased state tax revenues by over
$57,000 (as of 2/16/01).
In addition to direct economic impact in the community,
the Center educated 31 County residents through 10 training
sessions in 2000.
Support Your Local SBDC
an~l claim our success as your own
Sponsored by: US small Business Administration, Virginia Department of Business Assistance, Piedmont Virginia Community College, University of Virginia
Charlottesville Regional Chamber of Commerce, Bank of Ameriea, First Virginia Bank--Blue Ridge, and th~ counties of Fluvanna, Louisa, and Orange.
Supervisors' Budget
March 14, 2001
Marla Muntner
Good ~vening. My name is Marla Muntner, I teach at Stone-Robinson
Elementary School, and I'm Vice-President of the Albemarle Education
Association.
I'd like to tell yoU a story. Last week, a first year teacher in our school was
kicked repeatedly, elbowed, and head butted by a student. If you think
you're going to attract bright young teachers like him, ask them to put up
with abuse, to consistently work nights and weekends, and then expect
them to stay for 30 years to max out their pay at $47,000 per year, I've got
news for you. It's not going to happen.
According to this year's AEA Survey, within the next 5 years 51% of your
teachers are planning to either leave teaching for another career, transfer
to another district, retire, or leave for other reasons. This 51% total is up
11% from the 40% reported just last year. Clearlyj now is NOT the time to
reduce the competitiveness of our pay.
I served with two of you on the Strategic Plan for Compensation
Committee. Our plan is designed to attract, motivate, and retain countv
employees.
Part of the plan involves projecting what other Virginia districts will pay
next year so that we may keep up. I've attached a chart showing the 19
districts chosen for comparison and what we know about their teacher pay
plans.
As you can see, next year's increases range from about 4% to a whopping
16% increase in Loudon County. Clearly, now is NOT the time to reduce
the competitiveness of our pay.
So, let's look at class sizes. Here, there are many wonderful things
happening in my school. For example, this year our staffing plan allows us
to work with half of a math class at a time while the other children are in
other classes. Here are the benefits of this small math class according to
my stucie~ts:
· it's quiet,
· we get more work done,
· kids pay more attention,
· there's more time to think,
· the teacher can help more people,
· it's more fun,
· we learn more.
And, indeed, they do.
According to this year's AEA Survey dataj 50% of teachers say their class
sizes are also conducive to student success. This is up from 43% last year.
We are making real progress, and it's positively affecting student learning.
Clearly, now is NOT the time to increase class sizes.
In my profession, we are often asked to perform miracles, to do the nearly
impossible, and to do more with less. And now, I'm afraid, this I$ the time
for us to ask the same of you. In this time of high accountability teachers
and school employees are doing more than ever to ensure student success.
You must do the same. I understand the fiscal challenges you face,
however, we simply cannot afford NOT to aggressively staff our schools
and maintain class sizes and programs for students.
I urge you to,d~ fully fund the School Boards' funding request.
Thank you.
Albemarle County Strategic Plan for Compensation Districts
Teacher Salary C0~pafi~on~, 2001-2002
(as of March, 2001)
District % increase
Loudon 15-16%
Charlottesville 3.33-13.44%
Montgomery 7%
Nelson 6.84%
Lynchburg 5-7%
Harrisonburg 6%
Augusta 5.5%
Staunton 5%
Greene 4-6%
Louisa 4-5%
Williamsburg/
Rockingham 4.5%
Prince William 4.5 %
Orange 4.3%
Spotsylvania 4 %
Hanover 4%
Fluvanna 4 %
Madison not available
Roanoke Ci~ not available
notes
included in the budget by the Board
% increases up the scale
for 3 consecutive years; Board approved
$30,000 base
$30,000 base, $50,000 top
commitment to be at top 33% in state at
each step
Superintendent's estimate of outcome
likely outcome
Superintendent's estimate
likely outcome
Data provided by the Albemarle Education Association.
Albemarle County BOS address 3/13/01
I am here to discuss education issues. Yes, I know you are not the
school board, however, you are the power players! You hold the
purse strings.
"If it ain't broke, don't ftx it" This is a quote we will need to
reflect upon a decade from now when we look at the outcomes of
the Richmond-based education system.
There have been sweeping changes at our county's schools,
most of them expensive. -most of them due to the imposition of
SOL's. I will tell you right now that our own Albemarle County
public schools are not failing; they weren't 10 years ago, not 5
years ago and not now, either. The scare tactics of some
politicians who have much to gain by "doing something about it",
have, in fact, had a negative impact on this county, its finances and
even my children.
Historically, Albemarle County public schools have faired
well on national tests, in fact, above national averages. And,
Western Albemarle H.S. where my children attend, have some of
the best teachers in the country. And, while Richmond legislators
have failed to prove the point that all children will be losers
without them, pushing the SOL agenda, yours and my taxes will
need to be increased to pay for the experiment!
Let me give you some examples:
-Some of you have had children attend WAHS more than 5 years
ago and before SOL's. 5 years ago there were 6 periods, not 7 and
they met every day. Today, in order to accommodate the
Richmond agenda and graduate with an advanced diploma, 7
periods were required. Ask any teacher, if you dare, whether
meeting evew day or just two or maximum three days in a block
schedule is better.
Then, study halls were offered. Next year not- in order to utilize
teachers to teach SOL material.
Then, there were far fewer tests and therefore, more time for
teaching. The schools anO the state were not experimenting on
your children, like they are with mine, regarding the NEW
standards of learning.
-Differentiated funding, which translated into larger class sizes at
Western and loss of teachers for some subjects also did not exist
for your children.
-Growth has also had the impact of a later release from all
middle and high schools, thereby shortening the family time and
time to study but homework is increasing, according to recent
national surveys, due to the higher levels of requirements in areas
such as science and math and technology.
In other words, more is being asked of my children, and all
children than ever before and we are reducing the support
structures one by one-more courses, more tests, less time teaching
them, later release times, less family time, and less choices for
individuality.
All that being said, we must face the fact that the financial
pressure has been turned on the localities. This is indisputable
given our governor's latest proposals. Albemarle County has to
look out for its own. Teacher salaries need to be increased to
comparable levels so as to attract the best. Class size, as we have
structured it has been an attribute we can be proud of and should
never be increased. And, programs, like orchestra should be in our
schools, too; like in every decent school system in the country or
world.
If I had my way, Richmond would have made
recommendations, not requirements or imposed itself only where
the system was "broke". Our system wasn't broke, but we are
being asked to 'fix it' anyway and that is costing us a lot! For the
amount of money, I would have much preferred to raise salaries to
the highest scale and we would still have had more money for
reading specialists in every elementary school and art and
orchestra and foreign language labs at all three high schools and
swimming pools as I had at my former high school.
As has already been said, this budget requires 2 million
more, a requirement to not slip backwards from where we were 2
years ago or 5 or when your children were here. This county had
best take care of its own and face the truth that this is our
responsibility. We should pass the proposed, budget simply
because we do not have any other options, without imposing more
damage on an already stressed system.
By the way, keep the approximately $30 rebate you have
been discussing. It may seem like it is the principle of the thing,
but in this atmosphere, stop the discussion and use it in this next
financial cycle. Admit, we will indeed need it as compensation for
the depleted state funding. Thank you anyway. And, thank you
for your time.
Martha Redinger
Statement by Tom Olivier regarding the County Executive's Budget Proposal
14 March, 2001
Madam chair and members of the Board, my name is Tom Olivier. I am speaking to you this
evening as an individual.
Two years ago the Board of Supervisors adopted a new natural environment chapter for the
comprehensive plan. This chapter included a provision for creation of a.. standing county
biological advisory committee. Creation of this committee is urgent; we are in one of the great
extinction crises in the history of life on earth.
The update of the rural areas chapter of the comprehensive plan was to follow soon.
However, in the past two years only one work session has been held for the rural areas
update. Over and over we have been told that while the County cares deeply about
biodiversity and our rural areas, the County simply has lacked staff for timely pursuit of these
matters. Perniciously, staff hired for open space issues routinely have been diverted to
development tasks. The ACE program has been adopted to protect open space resources,
but is serves rather than develops policy. Indeed, the value of the ACE program is
compromised by the sorry state of open space policies and their implementation.
The Planning Department has requested support for a new planner position to work on rural
areas issues and to support creation of the county biodiversity committee. Analyses within the
Planning Department indicate insufficient staff to create this committee in the coming work
year unless the new planner position is created.
The County Executive's budget recommends against funding for this new planner. I counter
that two years of abstract commitments and warm words are enough. Now is the time for the
County to commit financial resources to the biodiversity crisis. I urge you to provide support for
the new planner requested by the Planning Department in your budget.
I note that the Zoning Department has requested funds for four new zoning inspector
positions and that the current budget proposal supports funding for two. I urge that new
zoning inspectors be funded in your budget.
:.ally, a~,y resi'~t~nts ~¢~o are',~orrified~at th,~. consent grck~h of ~e Co~tqty bu~lget r~gst
k'~h fa"Ct. Jhat~ qpuiati~grwledg he fa that p pulati groW~is thL%unde~y, ing ~se of"b~dget'~r~owth~q invl~
fiscal" ' eSide~ ~ in t~°effo~rt~o reduce ou~rate °~r°wth~.~'e,~ ~ '~' ~ "
I just have one question. Does anyone here believe that a 30 dollar
rebate, on average, per household from the surplus created by the tax rate
increase will really make a difference in anyone's life? Yet that $30 could
perhaps buy a textbook so sorely needed by our schools...and in that way
make a difference in a child's life. So please...keep my $30 and donate it to
the schools division. I also would like to ?xpress my support, once again,
· ~x r
for raises for our hard-working teaches and for continued support of the
strings programs implemented this year in some of the county middle
schools. For many children, music instruction through the schools, is the
only oppommity they may have for music lessons. And for those of us who,
for many years, have been driving our kids around to music lessons this
program is a godsend. I don't ever want county administrators to think that
music programs in the county schools are expendable because the parents of
music students simply would continue to pay for lessons and ensemble
experiences outside the school setting, because we can afford to do so. This
presumption ignores the "potential" music student...the child who may have
talent and interest, but whose family simply cannot afford it. The
presumption of personal affordability also ignores the fact that parents like
us are forced to make difficult financial choices impacting our entire family,
as we write checks each month for music lessons. Since kindergarten, my
husband and I have spent I~t~y $17,000 on music lessons, ensemble
programs, and instrument rental or purchase for our two children, one of
whom stopped taking lessons after the 4th grade. My youngest however,
now in the Henley strings program, continues. We have made fhis
commitment despite the fact that my husband, a full professor in the Curry
School at UVa, is in one of the two lowest paying schools in the entire
university. But then, there's never enough money for education .... is there?
Nevertheless, we set our priorities and make sacrifices. Our cars have
120,000 and 140,000 miles on them...probably due to all that driving to
music lessons. But I'd rather have a house filled with music than a garage
filled with new cars. So for anyone here tonight who may presume that
county parents who want music instruction for their children can always
afford to do so outside of school, think again.
But the larger issue here is, of course, that this county needs to
support music and fine arts Didn't you have strong programs in your
c2 - ,
schools when you were growing up. I d~d, and don t we ail want for our
children at least what we had...and ~ a lot better? I invite you to
attend our spring concert...to see how far a middle school strings program
has come in just one year...and what you have given...so far...to those
children who want music in their lives and to others who nee_d music to
change their lives.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
BUDGET PUBLIC HEARING
MARCH 14, 2001
My "Letter to the Editor" which was published in the Daily Progress
yesterday concerning the Compensation Committee's study is factual and was
confirmed by signatures of Paul Wright and Ken Boyd, both members of that
committee, before submission to the Daily Progress. I will contact each of
you individually to address comments made by Roxanne White in her memo
of March 13 to each of you.
Although the problems with the recommended compensation increases
of 4.2% by the schools and 3.9% by General Government are of questionable
validity, this costly area will need to be addressed in a different venue.
However, what Dr. Castner has identified as potential cuts from
the schools' "needs based budget" leads one to question his definition of
"needs". IS $32,000 for school board members' laptop
computers or $64,600 for a Web analyst or $60,000 for additional stipends for
coaches, or $74,900 for additional school based administrators, or $214,000+
for growth teachers for growth which if, like last year, doesn't materialize -
are these really "needs" that will affect positively the education of Albemarle
County children or the wish list of an administration that has little concern
for what it cost to operate the school system. If these are the type items that
are disclosed as possible cuts, it leaves one with doubt about what other
excesses are in the budget that are not disclosed. According to the February
21st Charlottesville Observer article from which I have just quoted, a 2 tiered
list of identified cuts totaling close to $2,000,000 was part of the budget
package presented to the School Board by Dr. Castner but was 'deleted from
the package delivered to you. What was the strategy for this?
I hope you will hold your allocation to the schools to the current
amount determined by County Executive Bob Tucker and require the same
fiscal responsibility of the schools as the taxpayers must face when paying
their tax bill.
MARTHA D. HARRIS
4615-Pelham Road
Hickory Ridge Farm
Earlysville, VA 22916
needs not so. basic
I OurV
What we have here is a failun
to communicate.
The Albemarle School
Board's "needs-based" funding
request to the board of
supervxsors -- a $97 million
budget that runs about $6 million
over last year's budget and $2
million more than anticipated
revenues asks-the county to
come UP-with the extra $2
million, otherwise the school
system's basic "needs" may not
be met.
Among the needs buried in
the school funding request are
$32,000 for new high-end laptop
computers for each school board
member, $65,000 for a new
website designer, and a dozen or
so other cash cows sacred to one
school board member or another.
School board members Ken
Boyd and Gary Grant were
critical of the budget. Said Boyd:
"Building a budget based on
needs without first defining
'needs' is an invitation to be
frivolous with the taxpayer's
money." Added Grant: "This is a
more-than-needs request." We agree.
However, the budget package
we have is a little different from
the one ultimately sent to the
board of supervisors. The
information we have the same
information Superintendent
Kevin Castner provided
members of the school board
includes fi-phge of budget
reductions to balance needs with
available funding.
The school board saw fit to
remove that information from
the budget before forwarding it
to the board of supervisors.
We're happy to provide that
information in graphic form on
this page.
We applaud Castner and his
staff for their efforts to work
within tight fiscal constraints,
and we appreciate their
willingness to produce what is
essentially a balanced budget.
Castner's budget actually
projects a $200,000 deficit, based
on a 1-cent reduction in county
real estate taxes and a list of
S
Recruitment initiatives/
Payment'for CourseWork
Needs-based budg{/t overage
Less first tier reductions
Remaining funding required
$ 86,106
$ 64,632
$1'0,000
$2,219,413
$1,022,309
$1,197,104
Second Tier Reductions - $954,263
Increase average baseline class (Grades 4-12)
$391,392
Reduce bus replacement
Eliminate Str!ngs~Pt-o~r~
Cut increase in coaches' stipends
Reduce cultural competence training
Eliminate 3 full-time teachers
Delay some textbook purchases
Needs2based budget after tier one reductions
$1,197,104
Less second tier reductions $ 954,263
Balance (deficit) - $242,841
Information in graphic compiled from Albemarle County School Board's packet -
Page A-10 titled "Possible Areas of Reduction to Meet Revenue."
$208,750
$ 38,000
$ 6O,O0O
. $ 35,000
$.130,464
$ 90,657
items 'that could be axed from the
school bo'drd's:%ish list. We're
confident the county could find
$200,000 in additional money
for schools:
'We're not so confident that
county officials are interested in
digging up 10 times that much to
meet the "needs" ultimately
submitted by the school board.
We aren't questioning the
importance of some items in the
school budget. We aren't
questioning whether every item
on the superintendent's "cut" list
should be saved. (We do
question how class size is treated
with equal importance as new
!aptops for board members.)
We're just, tired of education
-'being used as a political football.
When d01.fars come down to
the wire in April ~--~as theY~
always do; when teachers and
family groups organize to lobby
for more education funding for
the 'sake of our kids as they
always do; we can't help but
wonder how seriously county
supervisors will take last-minute
impassioned pleas for "critical
needs" from a school board
whose budget request not
much more than a cleverly
disguised wish list defines
disingenuous.
Mentor a child. Make a Difference.
~sident and Publisher Jeffrey M. Peyton · Executive Operations Director Kimberly S. Robbins
Advertising Account Executive Mary Wit.h. ers· Managing Editor Crystal Abbe Graham
Good evening! I am DeForest Mellon, Vice-President of Citizens for
Albemarle and am speaking for that organization this evening.
We note with concern that the Planning Department's Breakdown of
Task Areas' prospectus for fiscal year 2001/2002 does not include any
current staff members who will oversee either critical Resource
Inventory nor the Biodiversity Study provisions of the natural resources
section of the revised Comprehensive Plan. To rectify this
unsatisfactory condition, the Planning Departement has requested
funding for a new planner postion. The work of this new planner would
include biodiversity protection and some rural areas issues. The
proposed operating budget from the County Executive recommends this
position not be funded.
Citizens for Albemarle believes these critically important provisions of
the Comprehensive Plan to be absolutely essential considerations for the
furore of Albemarle County, and we urge you to appropriate sufficient
funds for the new planner position to deal With biodiversity and some
other rural areas issues. As we have argued before you on numerous
occasions during the past six years, we believe that considerations of
biodiversity are of critical importance to the economic, agricultural,.
aesthetic health of Albemarle County and its citizens. It is apparent that
present staff commitments at the Planning Department are heavily
burdened by acute, daily concerns with development issues that leave
little time for consideration of long-range but perhaps more important
issues that affect the county. The tyranny of small decisions and their
incremental impact must not be permitted to displace intelligent,
long-term planning strategies that will preserve the quality of life that
our citizens enjoy. Time is of the essence in these matters, because the
shadow of urbanization and.attendant loss of critical biological habitat
proceeds at an increasing pace.
Building Level Admim'strators Association
Larry Lawwill, Co-Chair
There are three major areas of concern for the Building Level Administrators with
Mr. Tucker~ proposed budget.
First, with a 1.7 million-dollar deficit, there are really only two areas where cuts
could occur to make up this large a deficit. These areas would be compensation
and staffing. The school board has stated that salaries are a top priority. We, as
Building. Level Administrators, are in full support of this. This would mean that
the other area, staffing, would need to be cut greatly. Due to State elementary
funding requirements, most of the staff cuts would have to come at the middle and
high school level. Cutting staff from the high schools and middle schools will
mean cutting some programs. There could be a negative impact on the efforts that
the schools are able to make in working with the students who will straggle the
most to be successful on the SOL's. Keep in mind that this year's ninth graders
are the first students who need to pass the SOL end of course tests in order to be
able to graduate from high school. Cutting staffwill also increase class size. We
believe cutting staff will be a step backward for quality education in Albemarle
County.
As you are all aware, I served on the task force that worked at developing
standards for compensation and benefits. The Building Level Administrators
understand the importance ofhav~xcellent educators in every classroom. To be
able to hire and retain these quality individuals, we need at a minimum to have
competitive salaries. I fred it interesting that there are those in this community
who believe the suggested salary increase is too large for current economic
conditions. If you were to compare the proposed salary increases for the other
school systems in our identified market, I believe you would find that the school
board's proposal is in the bottom third of proposed salary increases. The issue of
salary is going to continue to be a major concern for many years to come.
Finally, our last area of concern is the issue of lowering the tax rate for the start of
this fiscal year. If there is a need to lower the rate for six months then it needs to
be understood that the rate will go back up for the second half of the year. If the
tax rate is not returned to the current level, all areas of County government will be
affected. Education is the largest portion of the County's budget. This year' s
deficit will pale compared to the long-range affect of dropping the tax rate
permanently.
When it comes to funding education, I always like to think of the slogan from the
Fram Oil Filter commercial. That is the one that states, "you can pay me now, or
you can pay me later". Unfortunately, the problem with later is that it costs a lot
more money. Not fully funding the school boards needs will negatively impact the
quality of education for all students in this County.
Thank you.
Blue Bidge ESL Ceuncfl
408 Seventh Street NE · Charlottesville, Virginia 22902
Phone 804-977-7968 · Fax 804-979-7846 ~, Email esltuto~otmail.com
March 14, 2001
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Albemarle County Executive Office
401 Mclntire Road-
CharlOttesville, Virginia 22902
Dear Members of the Board,
Thank you for your Agency Budget Review Team recommendations for fiscal year 2001-2002 to
support Blue Ridge ESL Council's expanded commitment to tutor those who lack transportation,
childcare or time off'from work to learn English.
I respect your recommendation to not fund. us in a tight budget year, but I,hope that.you.would
look for some discretionary money to fund $1,000 to.this project so that we could strike while the
kon is hot. One of our learners, using'her knowledge gained from working on' the-2000 Census,
would be our coordinator speaking in Spanish to fred.the.new .learners who have not studied.
English or left their homes, because they don't know, how.to get alOng~ .We could save in the
long-term untold.money for services to them and we could, get them ready to.work_ m; enhance
theiremployability with some English. These are people.~ho do not fit in.normalclassrooms,
who are in danger of.falling through .the cracks;, and we are letting our resources-wither, while, .as
the Census results'will show, rapid growth .in[ow-income, nonEnglish-speaking residents has
come to Charlottesville.
In response to your cx>mments in the Agency Budget Review Team Recommendations,.the
BRESL students generally do not go to the Charlottesville-or Albemarle Adult..ESL classes
because they have child or transportation constraints~ or'time constraints..This is the same for lhe
City and the County, in that the classes don't help. if they are working day, and evening jobs. And
while education is considered a humanitarian-service in cases of. undocumented workers who are
tutored, they are afraid to go to public institutional buildings. For many, tutoring is the bridge to
the City and County ESL programs.
We are not asking funding for volunteer tutors 9r administrators, and BRESL does not absolutely
need to fund record-keeping administrators, either, though we would like to compile figures of
learning goals met. BRESL does need more administrative, help to keep. up. with over ninety
contacts yearly.. Employers who would defray the costs of. literacy services on their sites could
help by letting us come in. According to their.instructions, the cost involved for BRESL would
be materials copied and administration. At the present time, BRESL is only covering tutoring for
the requests we get; without going to solicit employers at their businesses. We would need extra
administrative help to do this.
BluellMge
408 Seventh Street NE · Charlottesville, Virginia 2_~J02
Phone804-977-7988 e Fax804-979-7846 · Email esltutors~otmai].com
For a loose-knit literacy group to tighten up their tutoring outcomes, it takesadditional office
staff and hired coordinators. LVA/C-A, with whom we cohabit our office, would be an ideal.
provider of literacy service to keep in touch with tutOrs and learners monthly, to manage the new
files and reports, and recorcanend more specialized teaching materials, assessments and referrals.
However, merger is not onlthe horizon while BRESL shows little income on the books, no
up-to-date software programs like Literacy.Pro tracking our learners' outcomes measurement.for
state funding, and-while BRESL tutors inlearners' homes or libraries instead of the tutoring
spaces available in the nice new officel Our two.national organizations are talking merger at the
moment, so we are hopeful; although, we .do not know how it would be .implemented.
Tracking tutees .after.they learn English, whether or not they remain in in. our. area, can be added
to the recordkeeping BRESL already does, and it'sa good recommendation. Particularly because
Adult Education teachers believe most of them continue to live and work in this area after they
learn English.
In the letter from:Albemarle County-giving the overview of funding BRESL?s request, the County
states, "Funds are .requested to hire staff to work with~the office manager :and, director to help
collect data on literacy progress.:' The.out~each is more than that.- The coordinating staffwe hire
to get to new learriers are former:learners.'who know how to machthose who ave.not being.
tutored, who are~difficult to find, and.the jobs' the coordinators are to be hired to. do is this: find
those otherwise not sewed..What data these.staffcan.cotlect on. where.these potential learners
are, what they succeed in learning, and whether or not-we'can get them into &dult Education
classes would be the~result-.ofthe coordinators' work. This data would be shared with Adult
Education.
This is a one-time .request .that.would test. the effects of our methodology; and. could be. applied by
Adult Education in the future at a higher amount of funding to deliver more of this help to our
area when BRESL could provide the'tutors to.go to the homes, In general, home. tutoring .is too
costly, but all your expenses in this case will go to. the coordinators for initial contacts, for making
meeting arrangements and.then periodic check-ups.
As you know, there are. over. 500 ESL students in Albemarle County Schools wkh families who
likely need to learn.English.
Sincerely,
Frances Lee-Vandetl
Project Director