Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-06-17 adjJune 17, 1987 (Afternoon- Adjourned) An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virgini on June 17, 1987, at 4:00 P.M., in Meeting Room 5, Second Floor, County Office Building, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Mr. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke (arrived at 4:14 p.m.), Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., C. Timothy Lindstrom and Peter T. Way (arrived at 4:03 p.m.). ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: Horne. County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr. and County Planner, John T. P. Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Fisher. The meeting was called to order at 4:03 p.m. by the Chairman, Agenda Item No. 2. Work Session: ued from June 10, 1987). 1987-88/1991-92 Capital Improvements Program (contin- Mr. Fisher called the meeting to order and said that the Board would continue its Work Session, from last week, on the Capital Improvements Program. He asked if the staff wanted to respond to requests from that meeting. Mr. Horne stated that the staff would respond to specific requests, and he said that the Board had just been given a project request form which show the planned financing on the Lickinghoie Creek Project. He said that since the last Board meeting, his department, along with Mr. Michael Armm's, and Mr. Bill Norris' help, have tried to come up with the best method to allocate the money to finance this particular project, based on the Board's discus- sion of a couple of weeks ago. Mr. Horne then turned the meeting over to Mr. Wayne Climberg, Chief of Community Development, to go through the description and the cost figures with the Board. Mr. ~imberg said that this is the staff's best estimate of the cost and a brief descri~ tion of the Lickinghole Creek project, itself. The first year shows a total allocation of $215,000 to cover engineering and planning, land acquisition, pre-monitoring of the stream, legal fees and some contingencies. Half of that amount is anticipated to be funded through the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). In the second year, 1988-89, just the construc- tion amount of $1,575,000 is shown. The rest of the EPA money, $192,500, is shown in that year. There would be an 1989-90 funding of $20,000 to cover post-monitoring after the facility is completed. He called attention to a note under "Description Justification." He said that one of the things that has been discussed is the opportunity with this facility to provide some associated passive recreation, such as fishing, picnicking and trails. The staff realizes that this kind of facility is available in several other places in that part of the County, but the Board may feel that the opportunity for recreation should be preserve~ for the future, and that additional land purchase might be desired at this time. Some additional land will be needed for proper road access, parking and any pedestrian uses near the facility. The staff does not have a cost figure for this, but he has talked with Mr. Pa~ Mullaney and the Engineering Staff about the possibilities of using the area for some recrea~ tional activities. Both feel that it is something that might, ultimately, be desired, but not something that is necessarily needed in the near future. There is also the question of how long the access road should be to provide proper access to the Lickinghole Creek area. Mr. Bowie asked how the staff had arrived at the $1,800,000 figure, and Mr. Cilimberg said that the $1,800,000 is representative of the $1,575,000 which would be the construction itself, plus all of the preparation and land acquisition that has to go into development of the facility. Mr. Agnor said the $1,200,000 figure is already two years old, and in terms of planning for the CIP, the staff knew that inflation was entering into the project and that the cost o~ grading would increase dramatically. The staff tried to use a figure that would be suffi- cient for a couple of years. Mr. Fisher stated that he does not think he is in favor of developing this facility for recreation in the near future because Of the recreational facilities already available. As far as how much land to purchase and where it should be purchased, it seems to him that this should be considered in order to see whether or not recreation can be provided at some future point. As fast as the County is growing, it could be a bad decision not to purchase 10 or 15 additional acres around the site that could make it usable for recreation. Mr. Horne responded that when and if the Board decides it wants to go ahead with land acquisition or construction, the staff will give the Board an estimate separate from what is listed in this report. Mr. Agnor pointed out that the County's and the City's sources of money are shown on separate lines. He suggested that the project be funded locally. He believes City Council should be approached for some participation because he considers this a protection project, since it will be protecting both the City's and the County's water supply. He has attempted to voice this a number of times to City staff, but has gotten negative responses. He thinks the answer should come directly from the City Council. Mr. Agnor also told the Board that there are some reimbursements expected to this project from development of land and contribu- tions being made for runoff control requirements. He stated that this is all lumped into what is called, "local sources," and it depends on how rapidly development occurs and how soon the dollars begin to be collected. There is no way this can be specifically calculated in terms of the time element. Mr. Fisher said that the real question is when this will happen, and Mr. Agnor agreed. He said it has to be funded, anyway, but the recovery may take years. (Mrs. Cooke arrived a~ 4:14 p.m.) , was held June 17, 1987 (Afternoon-Adjourned) (Paqe 2) 535 Mr. Horne said there was some discussion about the Bennington Channel project. He reminded the Board that this is a project submitted by the Department of Engineering for channel improvements in the Bennington Road area. It has also gotten into some effects on sewer facilities adjacent to that project. He said that the Planning Commission did place it on "urgent" list, however, the Planning Commission concurred with the County Engineer's recommendation that the additional money needed for relocation of the sewer facilities, come from the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Armm explained the channel improvement and pointed out the area on the map for the Board. He said that the stream has eroded to the point where the service laterals are exposed, and heavy rains have a potential for washing them out and breaking them which could cause a severe health problem. The estimate that was done several years ago did not include relocation of the sanitary sewer main that comes down through the back yards and picks up these laterals. In order to do the stream relocation, the armor plating, and putting in the rip-rap, it will be necessary to relocate the sewer. The staff has looked at other configu- rations to the rear of the property, but there is a problem in bringing in heavy equipment to do any kind of work. The sewer is quite shallow and is of brittle material. The staff believes that the work should not be done at all without replacement and relocation of the sanitary sewer line. He addressed some earlier correspondence that he had made to Mr. Bill Brent asking that the Albemarle County Service Authority take part in the funding of this project. Mr. Brent has responded that his Board of Directors feels that this is a project that the County should be taking on. He mentioned that this is not an adversarial position, but rather a matter of determining who is responsible for this matter. Mr. Armm stated that this is why the matter is being brought before the Board today. The staff has asked for extra funding, but it has also recommended that the funding source be the Albemarle County Service Authority. Mr. Brent was present and stated that the Albemarle County Service Authority Board considered the County's request for the authority to fund the sewer relocation and applied several simple tests to the problem. He said that the Authority has determined that the sewer is not the cause of the problem that the County is experiencing, and that the sewer does not contribute to the problem. The Albemarle County Service Authority does not feel that there is anything about its facility that is inadequate or deficient that would warrant taking customers' money to participate in this project. There is the potential for the individual sewer house connections to be washed out in a severe storm, but he pointed out that the sewer line from the house to the main sewer line, which the Authority owns, is the responsibility of the property owner. The house connections are not in the Authority's jurisdiction. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Brent if something is not done, will there be damage to the sewer line, and Mr. Brent answered that he thought it was probable. Mr. Fisher then asked Mr. Brent if he would be willing to invest something as insurance to keep that from happening, if handled as a shared responsibility between the County and the Albemarle County Service Authority, Mr. Brent answered that this could be considered. Mr. Fisher mentioned that maybe the Albemarle County Service Authority would help at this point, if it meant that costs could be prevented a few years from now. Mr. Brent asked Mr. Armm if he knew the location of the erosion that might necessitate some sewer rebuilding. Mr. Brent said that the only problem he is aware of is where the existing storm drain empties over the sewer line. Mr. Armm answered that downstream, behind the last houSe where there is the actual crossing of the main stream is also a problem. Mr. Fisher stated that the issue today is what goes in the Capital Improvement Program. He said that Mr. Brent can still see if the Albemarle County Service Authority can share in fixing the problem. Mr. Horne said that this project is not shown for an allocation now, so if the Board wants to put the money in, it will change the spread sheet. Mr. Lindstrom said it sounds as though it should be done promptly, and he thinks it should be put in so that it is clear that the project will move forward. He does feel that if there is some relocation of the line, etc., it is not unreasonable to expect the Albemarle County Service Authority to take care of that part of the cost. Mr. Henley asked if the $7200 is a realistic figure, and Mr. Armm answered that the staff believes, under current prices, that it is realistic, if it is done right away. Mr. Lindstrom said that he didn't understand, because a total cost of $27,000 has been projected, and now $7215 is being shown in addition to that. Mr. Agnor explained that $20,000 has already been allocated. Mr. Horne went on to say that last year the channel allocation was approved, and this year the staff discovered that the sewer line needed to be done, also. The $7215 is an additional allocation. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the $20,000 has been spent, and Mr. Agnor answered, "no." Mr. Armm explained that the staff would like to include the sewer work as part of the same bid, instead of bringing in two contractors. In answer to Mr. Lindstrom's question as to where the amount should be shown, Mr. Agnor said that $7215 needs to be put in the 1987-88 column. Mrs. Cooke said that this project has been discussed for a long time. She said the wor] needs to be done, so she moved that the additional funds of $7215 be restored to the project Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Brent, again, to try to give the County some financial help on thi~ project. Mr. Brent answered that he would take the matter back to the Albemarle County Service Authority Board. Roll was called at this time, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom, Way. None. 538 June 17, 1987-(Afternoon - Adjourned) (PaGe 3) Mr. Horne said that Mr. Lindstrom had a question about the Georgetown Road improvements and whether they would affect the asphalt pathway which was a prior County project. He stated that it is uncertain, but the staff does not feel that it will, at this point, affect much of that pathway. If so, it should not be a significant. However, the Highway Depart- ment cannot, until the project has been designed, commit to whether it will or not. Mr. C$~imberg stated that Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, has indicated, that if there is a necessity to relocate part of the pathway, the Department would not anticipate it before 1988-89. Mr. Agnor said right now the costs of relocating part of this pathway would be approximately $2000, which is not worthy of a CIP application. Mr. Agnor mentioned another item which has not been inserted, which is a request from the School Board for the Facilities/Planner Director Position to coordinate capital projects. This was requested by the School Board at a figure of $60,000. He said that he and Mr. Overstreet have discussed whether this should be a part of the CIP and also if there should be a continuation of that cost over a period of several years. Mr. Fisher asked for justification of putting a salaried position in the Capital Im- provement Plan. Mr. Agnor responded that this has been done only to relate this position to School capital projects. When the projects are finished, the position is expected to be discontinued. He said this is a cost-accounting approach to the financing of the position. In addition, there is no funding in the School Board's operating accounts for the position. Mr. Fisher asked what specific projects would be associated with this person? He said that there will always be projects coming on, and it seems to him that it will be hard to estab- lish a stopping place, unless the position is tied to specific projects. Mr. Agnor agreed and said the staff had talked about allocating the cost to the project so that there was a clear delineation of the assignment to the project. In broad terms, it would be the major projects which right now are the Meriwether Lewis, Burley and Stone-Robinson School projects. This position would last while the major projects are overlapping each other ~or the next several years. Mr. Andy Overstreet, Division Superintendent, was presented. He said that if it had been known how difficult it was going to be to manage these projects, he thinks the School Board would have included this position in its operational budget request for this coming year. Then, the position could have been reviewed and assessed on an annual basis, as a special assistant to the superintendent for construction management. However, this was not foreseen, and the CIP seemed to be the best way to reflect it. He believes the School Board would probably prefer, if handling the position in the CIP is too complex, to contribute certain portions of the job each year to particular construction projects. He stated that it might be better to handle this on an annual basis as part of the operational budget, with the two Boards and administrations making deci.sions annually. He mentioned that there are three major projects now underway, and by next year it looks as though the school system will either be building or planning six projects, but he does not think the position will be needed forever. Mr. Bowie asked if one person will handle all six projects. Mr. Overstreet responded that this person would work with Mr. David Papenfuse and himself. The person in this posi- tion would give the day to day supervision, coordination and control over the construction people, architects, engineers, etc. He said it is not working well now becausp different people are handling different things. Mr. Overstreet stated that if he could not add this position, some major reassignments would have to be made. He also hopes that the person in this position will help the school system get a better estimate of the school population projections. He mentioned that the County Planning Department works with the school system, but last year there were enrollment problems in some schools, especially in the kindergarten area. Projections are already being looked at for next year because it looks as though the same thing will happen again, with an even larger increase. The school administration believes that this will become a trend, and it is happening in areas that were considered to be in control. He gave Red Hill as an example of an area that was not considered to be a growth area, however, there will possibly be two trailers at that school next year. Mr. Overstreet sees the enrollment trend looming as a possible crisis and hopes that the facili- ties planner can help with this. He said that this position is needed, no matter how it is funded. Mr. Agnor reminded the Board that this is a position that it has been talking about for a number of months. He believes this position is going to be required. Mr. Overstreet added that he believes this is the kind of position that will pay for itself. Mr. Way commented that if this person had been hired earlier, it is possible that money could have been saved on the Burley School project. Mr. Lindstrom inquired if there was someone on staff who could fill this position. Mr. Overstreet replied that he believes someone from outside will be hired. His preference is not only for someone with technical experience and training, but also processing skills to help with the political network. Mr. Lindstrom asked next what kind of salary is being considered for this position. Mr. Overstreet answered that the $60,000 is a figure that was established, but he thinks the salary range for a directorship runs from $34,000 to $48,000. He said there would also be some fixed costs, but he thinks the rest of the costs could be absorbed. Mrs. Cooke asked where Mr. Overstreet is likely to find a person with the qualifications needed. Mr. Overstreet replied that it would be ideal if Albemarle County could "steal" someone from a larger school system who has already been through a heavy construction pro- gram. He said that systems that have experienced considerable growth have had to have these kinds of people on staff. Another option would be to go into the private sector for a construction manager and have that person work closely with him to learn the organizational processing skills. Mr. Horne mentioned that large scale engineering firms many times will have project managers that can be hired for the life of the project. Mr. Overstreet stated June 17, 1987 (Afternoon-Adjourned) ____/_P.aqe 4) 537 again that he would like to review the necessity for this position on an annual basis rather than automatically putting it in the CIP. Mr. Bowie commented that after having one year~s experience and seeing more projects on the way, he feels that the position is needed. It seems to him that it is more appropriate in the operating budget, and since the School Board has run a surplus the last two years, he cannot see appropriating funds before the first day of the new year. He thinks that the School Board should get on with funding the new position, absorb what it can, and then the Board of Supervisors make up the rest. Mr. Overstreet said that he would like to have the Board of Supervisors' endorsement before doing this, and then he thinks the School Board will fund it in whatever manner is best. Mr. Lindstrom agreed that the position is needed, and he is willing to help out if the School Board budget runs short. Mr. Fisher added that he believes Mr. Overstreet can conSider this an endorsement from the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Bowie then moved that the Board approve the creation of a position to manage school construction projects, that it be funded in the School operating budget, but that the posi- tion not be funded at this time. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion, with the understanding that if there are not enough funds to handle this position, the Board of Supervisors will appropriate the money to the School Board. Mr. Bowie agreed that this should be included in his motion. Mr. Lindstrom added that he understands that this is not a permanent position° Mr. Fisher said he believes that this position will likely be permanent unless the projects are carefully reviewed. Mr. Lindstrom said he would like to have a way to trigger the time period for review of this position. Mr. Way suggested that the Board of Supervisors ask that in review of the School Board's budget next year that this position be justified. This position-should be specifically earmarked to having this done on an annual basis. Mr. Bowie said he would like to include all three suggestions in his motion. Mr. Henley suggested a motion that would indicate that this Board thinks that such a position is needed, but the School Board should take care of it in its budget and not have any strings attached. Mr. Overstreet assured the Board that the School Board reviews annually with him the organizational set up of administration. At this time, roll was called in response to Mr. Bowie's motion and amendments, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mr. Fisher commented that he was glad this position was being created, and that his only concern is that it be at a high enough level that it is an undisputed central place for all of the kinds of things that will happen. With several people doing these things now, it may be hard to consolidate everything at this time. He believes that this position should be given the status and authority it needs from Mr. Overstreet. Mr. Agnor next spoke to the Board about its brief discussion about the Planning Commis- sion moving the Stony Point and Yancey School projects forward in time. Mr. Fisher said He had heard that the Planning Commission feared that these projects would be forgotten. Mr. Overstreet said he understands the concern was that the projects would lose their priority rating because of enrollment increases that are being experienced in other areas of the County. Mr. Fisher asked the reaction to the Rose Hill School project being moved forward in time. Mr. Horne responded that he thought the intent of the Planning Commission was that it thought the construction was logically located. However, given the pace of the anticipated development south of town, the Planning Commission wanted to put enough money up for 1988-89 to get a good type of construction plan and a good site and be prepared to go forward in 1990-91 without any possibility of delay. Mr. Papenfuse commented that if planning is done a year ahead of anticipated construction, its scope may change. Mr. Agnor explained that what the Planning Commission means is that this project will start in 1988-89, but the school system can time it in any way it chooses. Mr. Horne added that the statement by the Commis- sion is that it has adequate funds to start in 1988-89. Mr. Way said that he was under the impression that minor work would be done at the current Rose Hill Elementary School building which would make it more attractive for sale, if it had to be sold in the future. He inquired if all of that money has been taken out. He had understood that this money would include such things as air conditioning for the build- ing. Mr. Overstreet said that only general refurbishment at Rose Hill would take place, with no major investment. He stated that air conditioning would be a major project, and he did not feel that this money would be recovered when the building is sold. Mr. Way said he is not disagreeing, but he understood that improvements would be made, and he did not know that anything had changed. Mr. Papenfuse replied that what has changed is the actual commitment to go with a replacement school. Mr. Fisher commented that the major thing that has been added to this capital plan is the replacement school for Rose Hill. Mr. Bowie asked if the new position that has just been approved, will help so that a two year lead time is not needed° Mr. Overstreet said his experience over the last twelve months has been that there is always a crunch and the unforeseen always happens. He does not mind the extra planning time. He does not want to guarantee that the planning will be started at the beginning of the 1988-89 planning cycle, but if the money is available, he would be comfortable knowing that the plan could be started during that year with the next year to complete it. Mr. Fisher asked if he objects to the Planning Commission's position. Mr. 538 June 17, 1987 (Afternoon - Adjourned) ~ Page_~5~ Overstreet said he does not, and he thinks that it gives the school system more options as tc when it releases bids. Mr. Fisher mentioned the Stony Point School project next. Mr. Overstreet said his staff is confused about this because the plan shows both the planning and construction cycle moved forward by one year. But on the narrative format, it says that the staff recommends that funds for planning, only, be moved to FY 1987-88. Mr. Overstreet said that he may have a problem with this because of the overload. He thinks that parents are pleased and satisfied that Stony Point and Yancey Schools were included in the plan, that they will take place in the 1989-90 year, and that the planning for those projects will be in 1988-89. He mentioned that the only thing he had heard from his clients and the School Board was not to lose the projects, and not have the parity projects pushed aside because of enrollment problems. Mr. Papenfuse stated that the school staff had discussed with the Planning Department the future of the Hollymead area. He said that the ques~tion is whether Stony Point should bE accelerated, if that is the safety valve for growth in the Hollymead area. Mr. Lindstrom asked where the students come from at Stony Point Elementary School. Mr. Henley commented that a couple of years ago, there were discussions of closing down Stony Point School. Mr. Papenfuse said that Stony Point School students come from the Stony Point area with the district going to the railroad bridge on the~Proffit Road, and down to the Key West Subdivi- sion. Mr. Overstreet said that he does not mind having the planning accelerated, and maybe it is a good idea, but he thinks it might be a false expectation to accelerate the construction also to 1988-89. Mr. Bowie said that the parents that he talked to want the renovation of the school and the air conditioning. He thinks that this is what the Planning Commission is recommending. If the school can be renovated in 1988-89, he does not see why the project should be delayed. Mr. Agnor commented that he does not think it is practical, because there can only be sc many projects going on at one time. The spread of the first three years of the five year plan was intended to take two major projects a year into the cycle. He does not disagree that the parity program needs to be secured so that it doesn't get bumped, but the County administration has had involvement with projects in terms of coordination, and it is tough when the projects are loaded into the first two years of a five year plan. This plan would load them all into the first two years. Mr. Overstreet stated that if the Supervisors and the Planning Commission want the projects done on this schedule, the school system will make every effort to do it. Mr. Fisher brought out the fact that there is also Yancey project Which makes two projects that were to be done in 1989-90. Mr. Overstreet said this was the original plan that the School Board adopted and was part of the public hearing process. He feels sure that the people would like to have acceleration of any of the projects, especially at Yancey. He pointed out that Stony Point has had an addition and some assistance recently, but Yancey has not had any attention to its facility for a long time. He said it is a parity need and a modernization. Mr. Henley suggested that the construction and planning schedules for the schools be left the way the School Board originally had them. Mr. Fisher said he understands the problem, because the schools need work. But, the commitment to do all of these projects in a short period of time make it difficult to change the schedule. He thinks it should be left the way it was. Mr. Way asked if the Superintendent is suggesting that the planning money continue in 1987-88 and construction go to 1989-90. Mr. Overstreet answered that it is his recommenda- tion to have the money available for funding to get into the planning and that will allow enough time, but it will also show the people that work is being done on the projects. He suggested that the construction aspect be left where it was originally planned by the School Board. Mr. Lindstrom said he did not have a problem with that. Mr. Bowie said he supported the new planning position because of the workload. He feels that the first priority is parity and new schools if they are needed. He does not want things to slip back. Mr. Overstreet said that if this is left where it is now, and a person is hired, and the planning issue gets along well, an amended change request could be brought back to the Board to accelerate the Yancey and Stony Point projects next year. Mr. Way stated that he can see that if six projects are going on at one time, that they may not be done properly. He personally does not have a serious problem with a year's delay, especially since that was said originally. The projects could turn out in the long run more successful by doing that. Mr. Fisher explained that there will not be a year's delay. The question is whether these projects will be advanced a year. He said the Planning Commission is saying that it thinks these two projects can be moved up a year, but the school officials are saying they cannot handle it. He thinks the school officials are right. He thinks every effort should be made to keep things on track, with the same schedule as last year. Mr. Horne said that he does not think this is entirely inconsistent with what the Planning Commission is trying to do. He said that the Commission wanted everyone to be aware that these two projects are important. Mr. Lindstrom moved that the planning money be shown on the two projects in 1987-88 and the projects' construction in 1989-90, allowing for the opportunity to accelerate them if they can be accelerated consistent with being properly done. Mr. Henley seconded the motion. Mr. Bowie said he was going to oppose the motion only because he feels that the same thing can be accomplished without changing anything. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote June 17, 1987 (Afternoon-Adjourned) AYES: NAYS: Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. Mr. Bowie. Mr. Fisher then asked about the deferment of the Woodbrook Elementary School's electri- cal and mechanical projects. Mr. Overstreet said he did not see a problem with these projects being deferred. Mr. Horne commented that all of the electrical and mechanical things were recommended to be moved back one year, because it was uncertain as to exactly when they would need to be done. He believes it was the intent of the School Board to make sure that it was known that some projects were coming up in the future, but as of this year's discussion, there seemed to be no problem with holding the projects back. If something happens, he does not feel that the Commission would have a problem with sliding the project forward. Mr. Overstreet added that the County schools have no code violations. There was just the need to have them identified and get some work done before there is a major breakdown. Mr. Papenfuse pointed out that if the energy efficiency drops off or a new plan is developed, the school staff may come back to the Board of Supervisors with a project at that time. Mr. Fisher asked if the same thing is true for Henley and Greer, and Mr. Horne replied, yes, from the Commission's point of view. Since there was no further discussion on the school projects, Mr. Fisher said the Board should discuss the other items. Mr. Agnor recommended that funding for the Southern Regional Park be left as it was when the request went to the Commission. He said that the only thing that is delaying it is the completion of the bankruptcy proceedings dealing with the acquisition of land. If this is finished by this summer or fall, he thinks that the final design can be done, and it can be put out to bid by next spring. By putting the Park into the 1988-89 year, it would get into the late summer or fall construction season, and he does not think this is necessary. He understands that the Board has a concern that the Park is losing its position in the plan and is being deferred. Mr. Agnor said that he thinks this came up because the agency priority was shown as "urgent", but the Planning Commission reappraised it as a "necessary" project which took it out of the 1987-88 year. He agrees that it is not urgent, but it has been planned for over ten years and is moving along now. He sees no reason to change the sched- ule, other than the classification of priority. Mr. Lindstrom asked if Mr. Agnor had learned anything more as to the City's intent on the ball park. Mr. Agnor replied that the unofficial response is that there is no validity to the news that ball fields will be eliminated in McIntire Park. A consultant has been hired, and it is the same consultant who is working on the Rivanna Park. The consultant knows clearly what the Rivanna Park's agreements are, because he is participating in the whole process. He will get this information officially and give it to the Board in writing. Mr. Way made a motion to move both phases of the Southern Regional Park forward one year to 1987-88 and 1988-89. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mesrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mr. Fisher said the next item was the Lickinghole Creek project, and Mr. Lindstrom moved that it be put in the CIP according to the memo that was presented to the Board today. Mr. Bowie stated that he did not believe that this is the recommendation that had been presented to the Board previOusly. Mr. Armm replied that the consensus of the staff was that the plan presented at this meeting, is the most feasible. Mr. Bowie then asked if the City had been included, and Mr. Horne said the only thing his staff had done was change the titled "County" and "City" to '~local", and to have one line as recommended by Mr. Agnor. Mr. Lindstrom and Mrs. Cooke, as the maker and seconder of the motion, accepted this change. Mr. Fisher explained that this was the way to go forward with the project, but negotiations for the funding have not been resolved. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Lindstrom and Way. Mr. Henley. Mr. Lindstrom commented that he understood that the Whitewood Road Park was basically a phased project, with the first phase being jogging paths, etc. He inquired about the status of the project. Mr. Horne answered that there is no additional funding in the budget to further the park area, with the exception of the asphalt path across the front, which is really not in the park area. Neither his department, nor the Department of Parks and Recrea- tion, nor the Education Department have taken any initiative to further come to the Board with recommendations on development of that area. There are some discussions going on at the Planning Commission level, as part of the Comprehensive Plan, as to the long term status of that piece of property. The staff will be recommending that it does remain as a long-term recreational area. Mr. Lindstrom does not feel it is appropriate to make extensive improve- ments to that property because it is not clear what the long-term use of the property will be. He thinks that the other things that were in that plan are low intensity and low cost items that can be easily removed and used elsewhere. He thinks the Board needs to see some more information on this project. He mentioned that the area is very heavily populated. Mr. Horne said that he is glad Mr. Lindstrom brought this up. Because of approximately three 54O June 17, 1987 (Afternoon - Adjourned) :Pa._e - departments dealing with this project at the same time, no one has taken the initiative to plan for other things to take place there. Mr. Way stated that the expansion of utilities by the County has basically never been directly included in its capital budget. He will be working on this over the next few years, and there are a lot of citizens in his district interested. He said he realizes that a lot of this discussion should take place while reviewing the Comprehensive Plan, but he feels this is important. He hopes that some of these kinds of projects can be included in the future. Mr. Lindstrom mentioned that as the amount of secondary road money that the County has gets to be bigger, and as the County gets into the more innovative ways of dealing with secondary roads, he thinks that the Board needs to consciously and actively think of dove- tailing the road projects with the capital improvements budgeting process, which is much more closely aligned with the comprehensive planning process than the secondary road review is now. To have the Comprehensive Plan work, it will require a concentration on roads. He would like to see how it could be integrated into this process so that it is more directly with the Board's planning. Mr. Cilimberg replied that the staff has actively been discussing roads with the subcom- mittee of the Commission that is dealing with transportation and roads. He thinks that the staff is on the way to setting up a planning process that will allow the roads to be evaluated, based on the Comprehensive Plan, every two years and also interim years to fit into secondary road funding. Mr. Lindstrom said it would be good to actively identify the areas that are slated for growth, where the roads are needed and devise some strategy where the County can move in that direction. Mr. Cilimberg replied that it is a question of what the County wants the function to be for these roadS, and that is dictated in many cases by land use development that is anticipated to take place. Mr. Agnor next handed out a summary of revenues to the Board, and he said that he had already gone over this summary with Mr. Overstreet. He said the first thing that he would discuss would be Page 12 from the CIP recommended budget which lists the total resources available which add up to $6,590,000 over a five year period of time. He mentioned that the first line is a General Fund carry-over balance which has been traditionally used but has not shown as a resource to the fund. He said that $800,000 is a carry-over, and there is an allocation for the operating budget of approximately $300,000 of that, which leaves a net carry-over balance in the General Fund for next year of $500,000. He said this is an esti- mate. The second item that Mr. Agnor discussed was what he termed a "buy-in" from the School Fund. He thinks it is time for the schools, now that they have had a couple of years in the "black," to "buy-in" to the CIP program. He said that the carry-over balance would be an incentive for the school system to work for, and it should be used for CIP projects. He thinks it is dangerous for the school people to expect to use it every year in the operational budget. This is an estimate of what the school system has done over the past two year period. Over a five year period of time, it could amount to $1,500,000. Mr. Agnor next talked about the interest earned on idle funds. He said that the County has not put a lot of money in the Capital Fund. Last year, however, $6,500,000 was put in, and now the $1,000,000 General Fund allocation is being put in every year. This has been done in December when taxes are collected in order to let the money flow into the General Fund and not be put into the Capital Fund. The capability is there for moving it to the Capital Funds allocation by a July transfer, and let the $1,000,000 remain idle in the CIP fund to earn interest. This has never been done, but in terms of cash management, it could generate $1,350,000 over a five year period of time. This past year, almost $400,000 was generated in the CIP fund by putting the $6,500,000 in and letting it be invested and putting the interest earned back into the fund. The increase in the General Fund could occur, Mr. Agnor said, without raising taxes in 1989, when the reassessment occurs, and again in 1991 when that reassessment occurs, if the Board wishes to do it that way. It would go to $1,850,000 for two years and then to $2,750,000 in the fifth year. Mr. Fisher asked where the $1,000,000 is located that is being put in the Capital Fund. Mr. Agnor responded that the $1,000,000 is already in the total available funds. He called the Board's attention to Page 12 of the CIP booklet, and said that the first item in resources is $1,000,000 a year for five years. He continued to go over items on Page 12, and said that there are Rescue Squad repayments, Fire Department repayments (that are not a part of the $1,000,000 Revolving Fund), the proceeds of the money coming in from the sale of McIntire School, and an unallocated fund balance as of June 30, estimated to be $1,150,000. They make the total available funding that is shown on the first line of the sheet that he gave to the Board at this meeting. If there was $1,000,000 a year from the General Fund for five years, and the Board wanted to increase that, he would suggest that it could be done in a reassessment year. The $850,000 was calculated on one-half of the reassessment being retained for capital needs. The other one-half is being looked at for operational needs or possibly a tax rate decrease. Mr. Bowie asked what reassessment rate is being assumed, and Mr. Agnor answered that it would be an increase of a ten percent change in two years. This is well below what the County usually has which is 12 or 13 percent. Mr. Agnor said half of the money would go into the Capital Fund, and it would work the same way in 1990-91. He pointed out that this kind of increase on the total cost in five years would be approximately $3,500,000. The "Sale of Assets" represents a sale of some idle land. Mr. Agnor said he would prefer to go over this in detail at an Executive Session of the Board. He recommends that properties that are generating no use be referred to the Planning Commission for review in the comprehensive planning cycle. If it is concluded that they are not needed, they could be June 17, 1987 (Afternoon-Adjourned) (Paqe 8) sold and could possibly bring in $2,000,000 of income. ment being turned into an active investment. He said this would be an idle invest- "Retention of Debt Service" could be a source because this year the County has approxi- mately $2,000,000 of debt service. Mr. Agnor said that next year the Debt Service will drop by $70,000. He suggested that a level Debt Service be kept for the next five years. Mr. Fisher asked if Mr. Agnor meant that as notes are paid off an additional amount would be put in this fund for new projects. Mr. Agnor replied, "yes," but it is not the additional amount of the total payoff, but it is the additional amount of the drop in the~Debt Service that occurs as the payments are completed. In 1989-90, there will be a negative number. It will go up approximately $20,000, but in 1991, with no further long-term debt, the Debt Service will drop by $500,000. In rounded numbers, there will be approximately $650,000 if there is a level Debt Service kept for the next five years. The County will pay off over $1,000,000 during the next two years of its debt to the State Literary Fund dropping the total debt to about $9,000,000. If the State's rules governing borrowing from this fund remain the same, this will make the County eligible for a high priority ranking. The County could then be eligible to get $1,000,000 in 1989-90 and again in 1991-92 as a continuing source of school funding, if the Board wishes to continue using that source. Mr. Agnor said that the main number is $20,000,000 in possible resources of which $2,000,000 is being borrowed and $2,200,000 is from the sale of assets, starting off with $6,590,000 already being available. Mr. Agnor pointed out that there is $9,000,000 in additional sources without doing much except increasing General Fund appropriations in a couple of cycles. He reminded the Board that this is just a proposed plan. Mr. Agnor went on to explain that the staff then took $3,110,000 in 1987-88 as being available. He called attention to the quote from Page 11 of the total projects recommended, and said that this was before the money was shifted around this afternoon. The Planning Commission had recommended $2,890,000 in 1987-88. There is $3,110,000 in resources, so there is a carry-over of $220,000, which is the prior year's carry-over line right under the subtotal line. It shows only in this one year, and it is indicated that there is almost a quarter of a million dollars carried forward in 1988-89 as a resource for that column year. If the $220,000 or the $2,200,000 is added to the existing source of $3,930,000 in 1988-89, then there is slightly more than $4,000,000 in resources. There is also $7,540,000 in recommended projects, so there is a shortage of $3,610,000. Mr. Agnor proposes that this could be borrowed as a temporary loan of one year at a time. The temporary loans would be borrowed in 1988-89 and would amount to $3,610,000, and by law would have to be paid off the following year. The temporary loan could then be paid off, but because the 1989-90 resources are right at $4,000,000 and the recommended projects are only at $1,360,000, there are excess revenues that year that could be used to pay off the temporary loan. Only $980,000 would have to be borrowed in 1989-90 and it could be borrowed for that one year and then paid back. In 1990-91, there will be a short-fall again, because the revenues are $2,990,000 and the projects are $5~510,000. So, borrowing would have to be done for another year. The follow- ing year it recycles itself, and it is paid off. At the end of five years there are no outstanding loans other than the Literary Fund Loan or additional loans that may have been borrowed rather than selling assets. He said that in addition to project costs, interest would be incurring on these temporary loans. It amounts to $490,000 in five years. Mr. Agnor then told the Board that this started in 1977 with $17,600,000 debt and at that time it represented $467 per person in Albemarle. On June 30 of this year, that debt will be down to $15,478,000. By this five year plan, including the Literary Fund Loan, there will be a debt in 1992 of $11,900.000. Even if assets were not sold, there would still be approximately $14,000,000 less than where it is today by paying off debts in that five year period. Mr. Fisher went over the assumptions that were made in Mr. Agnor's plan, and said that this would have to be carefully done. Mr. Lindstrom said that as he sees it, as opposed to borrowing money and paying the loans back out of tax revenues, the projects will be paid for directly out of tax revenues. Mr. Agnor said that long-term borrowed funds could be changed, and it is the Board's decision before the point is reached where these commitments have to be finished. Mr. Fisher said it seems to him that the second year crunch may be helped a little bit with this plan. Mr. Lindstrom added that he is impressed with this plan, and he understands the assump- tions and the vulnerable points in it. He mentioned the growth of the County, the report on enrollment that Mr. Overstreet made to the Board and the major actors in the community, such as the University, with the power and. money to do significant things in terms of changing growth patterns. He feels strongly that preserving as this does the ability to borrow for those times that can't be anticipated, giving the ultimate in flexibility, but reserving that ability to borrow by not drawing on it when it is not necessary, is a significant planning strategy. He thinks the County has been very lucky in having a relative surplus of tax revenues to meet these projects. But, he can see a point where there will be a substantial change in the rate of growth and where the County may not be so lucky if it has to get money. In the same sense, postponing the possibility of going to a split year tax collection, and trying to make as much as possible out of the current budgetary process in terms of the capital improvements projects is wise for the same reason. Mr. Bowie agreed that this is a businesslike way to do it. He admitted that he is somewhat familiar with this plan because he started two months ago looking at funding the capital plan, but he looked at it through all the audits. It was very confusing, and then he found out the way the staff was going. This staff's plan leaves all of the ability to borrow at any time by funding the things that are of the lowest cost out of assets that the County has always had. It leaves all of the options open and provides the maximum flexibility over the next five years. He supports this plan, completely. Mr. Fisher said that he was astounded. He was almost certain, after looking at the school projects, that the County would have to borrow on the bond market. This plan does 542 June 17, 1987 (Afternoon - Adjourned) (Paqe 9) appear to be plausible, if the funds are committed. He thinks that everyone has to remember that the operating budget will have less money in it, and if this is committed to, it may put some real constraints on the regular budget process. He thinks the Board should propose this plan at public hearing. He asked for a motion to set the public hearing on July 15. Mr. Bowie moved that the public hearing on the Capital Improvements Program be set for July 15, 1987. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. Mr. Way added that he is very much impressed with the financial plan. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom, and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 3. adjourned at 5:53 p.m. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was - Ch~irm~n