Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1999-11-03 ACTIONS Board of Supervisors Meeting of November 3, 1999 November 4, 1999 AGENDA IT'EM/ACTION ASSIGNMENT 1. Call to order. Meeting was called to Order at 9:00 a.m., by the Chairman. All BOS members present. 4. Others Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public. Board Service Recognition. Plaques were presented to Charlotte Humphris, David Bowerman and Walter Perkins for their years of service on the Board. 6.1. Proclamation proclaiming November 8, 1999 as World Town Planning Day. · Chairman presented. 6.2. Commission on Children and Families- Reappointment/ Agreement Amendment. · APPROVED 6.3. Resolution to accept Peter Jefferson Parkway in Peter Jefferson Place Subdivision, into the State Secondary System of Highways. · ADOPTED 6.4. Resolution to accept roads in Foxcroft Subdivision, Phase 2, into the State Secondary System of Highways. · ADOPTED 6.5. Resolution to accept roads in Redfields Subdivision, Phase lA, 1 B, 2A, 2B, 2C and 3A, into the State Secondary System of Highways. * ADOPTED 6.6. Appropriation: Education, $567,915.18 (Form #99039). · APPROVED 6.7. Appropriation: Education, $105,696.60 (Form #99040). · APPROVED 6.8. Appropriation: Earlysville Meadows Subdivision, Summer Lane, $10,410.57 (Form *[99041). · APPROVED Transportation Matters. Ms. Tucker provided an update on the following outstanding issues from previous Board meetings: · Ms. Thomas had requested, on behalf of a constituent, that VdoT looking into signage at Barracks Road and the Route 250 Bypass for a left turn from the westbound direction. VdoT's review of the intersection indicated that a lot of signs were dull, faded and needed updating. VdoT has scheduled the replacement and update of several signs which they feel should mitigate the situation. If the Board wants to pursue street lighting at that interchange, the request needs to go through the County's Engineering Department. · Another issue had to do with the relocation of the stop bar at the BellairARoute 250 Business intersection. VdoT plans to adjust the stop bar and move it back slightly to enhance the sight distance coming out of Canterbury Road. Clerk: Acknowledge comments. None Clerk: Forward to Wayne Cilimberg Clerk: Forward to City for signature. After signatures forward copy to Saphira Baker. Do appointment letters and update Boards & Commissions sheets. Clerk: Forward resolution and signed SR5(A) form to Glenn Brooks. Clerk: Forward resolution and Signed SR5(A) form to Glenn Brooks. Clerk: Forward resolution and signed SR5(A) form to Glenn Brooks. Clerk: Forward signed form to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. Clerk: Forward signed form to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. Clerk: Forward signed form to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. Clerk: Forward in separate letter to Angela Tucker. . Mr. Perkins had requested that VdoT meet with County staff to discuss the Route 240/250 connector road. A meeting has been scheduled for November 10th to discuss funding of the road. She will advise the Board of the results of that discussion. Ms. Humphris had made a request regarding the Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads pedestrian crossings and sidewalk connections from asphalt to the concrete sidewalks. VdoT is in the process of reviewing that now. The signal at Hydraulic and Georgetown is the old type span wire system and all signal systems should be upgraded to mast arms. When it is upgraded, VdoT will install pedestrian crossings and will follow through with the appropriate crosswalks and check the sidewalk system to make sure that it is properly in place. · Mr. Perkins asked VdoT to look into moving up the priority for paving of Dickerson Road in the Six Year Road Plan. · Ms. Thomas mentioned a telephone call she received concerning the intersection of Route 240 and Route 810 in Crozet with regard to increased traffic activity with the new development that is occuring. Ms. Tucker responded that VdoT conducted a formal signal analysis several months ago, but the analysis did not currently meet any of the warrants for a signal. As development occurs, VdoT will continue to monitor the area to see if a change in conditions occur. · Ms. Thomas mentioned the paving of Wyant Lane and expressed concern that the issues surrounding this road may occur in the future on other roads. Following some discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that staff bring back criteria that could be applied for roads where the residents may change their minds about paving the road. The information should take into account the number of signatures required for a change, how a chance may affect donation of right-of-way, a time limit to allow a change, etc. · Mr. Cilimberg mentioned a request from the MPO regarding Hillsdale Drive. Mr. Tucker and Mr. Cilimberg to draft response for the Chairman's signature informing the MPO of the history and status of this project in the County's process. Mr. Tucker/Mr. Cilimber.q: Prepare letter for Chairman's signature. 9. Presentation: Department of Engineering and Public Works. None. · RECEIVED 10. Presentation from the Strategic Planning Work Group of the None. Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention. · RECEIVED 11. School Board Report. None. · RECEIVED 12. Public Hearing to amend Section 15-1101 of the County Code to include antique motor vehicles in the category of Personal property exempt from taxation. · ADOPTED ORDINANCE 13. Presentation: Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission's Draft Legislative Packet. · APPROVED the Draft 2000 TJPDC Legislative Program, including the five items listed in the Executive Summary with the understanding that any suggested changes from the Board Clerk: Forward copy to Finance and County Attorney's office for inclusion in next update of County Code. Clerk: Forward letter to David Blount. will be reflected in the final version of the regional legislative program. Also note the Board'S interest in the "Five for Five". .... I.egislation, but it may need ,.some work. 14. Report: AcquisitiOn of conservation Easements (ACE). · Schedule work session for the December 1~ Board meeting at which time staff to provide comments. 15. Membership in Chamber of Commerce, Discussion of. Directed staff to outline the bener~s of the County not being a member, but providing a stipend. Include comments about County's relationship with other nonprof~ groups. 16. Appointments. · There ~were none. 17. Closed Session: Legal Matters. · At 12:39 p~m, the..B°ard went into Closed Session. 18. Certify Closed Session. · At 4:05 p.m., the Board reconvened in open session. (Mr~ Marshall and Mr. Perkins were absent.) 19. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the BOARD. · There were none. 21. Reconvene at 4:00 P.M. - Room 235 - Joint. Meetine with S ooi,l a d; 23. Presentation: 2000/2001 Salary Recommendations. .... · Put on November 10th agenda for further discussion and staff guidance. 24~ presentation: FY 2000/2001 Budget Guidance. · Approved the proposed FY 2000/2001 allocation of new revenues to the School Division and General Govemment as recommended bY staff. 25. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda. · None. 26. Adjourn. · The meeting, was adjourned at 5:35 p.m. C!,erk: Include on agenda foFDecember 1=. Qounty E~ecutive/,Planning, staff: Prepare comments. Clerk; Include on agenda for December 1". County Executive,; Prepare report. None. clerk: "Include on Nc;v~mber' 10TM agenda. CI,e~,; Include in memo to Melvin Breeden and copy appropriate persons. Note: Copies of all attachments are on the following pages. A signed copy is forwarded in the regular mail to the responsible individual. If you need a signed copy: please let me know~ and I will forward one to you. Atlachment I - Peter Jefferson Parkway Resolution Attachment 2 - Fo~,rott Subdivision Resolution Affachment 3 _ Redf'~Jds Subdivision Resolution Attachment 4 _ Ordinance to amend Section 15-1101 of the County Code On behalf of the citizens and local government staff of Albemarle County, I would like to recognize Waltevlv. Pedn'as for his outstanding efforts in serving on the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors for the past twelve years, a truly significant and impressive milestone. We are. most grateful.for the time, energy and dedication you have committed to imuring the efficient and effective operation of county government. ~ Your tireless devotion to the well-being of our community truly has made our county a better place to live and work. With sincere appreciation, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. On behalf of the citizens and local government staff of Albemarle County, I wouM like to recognize David Bowerman for his outstanding efforts in serving on the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors for the past ten years, a truly significant and impressive milestone. We am most grateful for the time, energy and dedication you have committed to insuring the efficient and effective operation of county government. Your tireless devotion to the well-being of our community truly has made our county a better place to live and ~V°rk. With sincere appreciation, Robert ~ Tucker, Jr. Virginia Chapter American Planning Association September 1, 1999 Plonning Director County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Dear Planning Director: November 8, 1999, is the 50th Anniversary of World Town Planning Day (WTPD). As the Public Relations Director for the Virginia Chapter of the American Planning Association, I am asking you to have your local government recognize this anniversary by adopting the enclosed resolution. This special day was founded in 1949 by the late Professor Carlos Mafia Della Paolera of the University of Buenos Aires to advance public and professional interest in planning, both locally and abroad. The celebration now includes 30 countries on four continents, and continues to grow. WTPD is promoted internationally by the International Society of City and Regional Planners headquartered at The Hague in The Netherlands. WTPD intends to draw attention to the aims, objectives, progress and ideas of urban and regional planning within the profession, and with a global public. International partnerships for WTPD will help to highlight world development as it stands today, and will provide a broad overview of varying planning methods and models worldwide. The American Planning Association and the American Institute of Certified Planners are supporting domestic activities in support of WTPD including a WTPD Proclamation for adoption by legislative bodies such as City Councils, Boards of Supervisors and County Commissions. We would like to see every jurisdiction in Virginia adopt the enclosed resolution as part of our efforts to celebrate WTPD. If you have questions please feel free to contact me at (804) 748-1050 or e-mail me at gdmslm~vcu.org. Thanks for your support!! Sincerely yours, Gary Mitchell, AICP Public Relations Director CHAPTER OFFICE: 13813 Village Mill Drive * Midlothian, VA 23113 · Tel: (804) 794-6225 · Fax: (804) 379-5262 'wHeEqi~EJ~S, Hovember 8a, 1999 is the $0a Anniver.~ary of WOP~D TOg4~ PLAHHIHG ~A~ and WHtE. qifF. AS, Hovember 8'~ of each year has been celebrated as World Town Planning ~oay in many countries since its inception in 1949; and WHtE.~ The American Institute of Certified Planners (AIOP) acting for the 11,000 members of the planning profession in America, a component oft he 30, O00-meraberAmerican Planning Association, endorses World Town Planning ~Day as an opportunity to higfi£~ght the contributions sound planning mal~s to the quality of our settlements and environment and to celebrate American accomplishments in mab4ng coplective decisions concerning our cities and regions that bring quality and raeaning to our lives; and WHiP, AS, the cele6ration of World Town Planning ~Day gives us the opportunity to pub~cly recognize the participation and dedication of the members of planning commissions and other citizen planners who have contributed their time and expertise to the improvement of the (State, City, County,} and gVHtE.~, We recognize the many valuable contributions made by professional community and regionalplanners of the (State, City, County) of. and extend our heartfelt than~ for the continued commitment to pubic service; HOW,, clHtE.~ P~, ~BcE. IT RBSOL q, tI~D rOfAT, Hovember 8a, 1999 is hereby designatedas COMM'OHITOI'AHCl) q~ G I OHAL PLAHgvIHG cDA ol' In the (state, City, County)of worldwide celebration of WOP~L~D TOg4OI PLAHHIHG in conjunction with the Adopted this ~Day of .1999. Chief Blected Offidal (s Ac) David P. Bowerman Chaflott~ Y. Humphris J~k Jou~tt Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. COUNTY OF ALBEMA~I F. offi~ of Bo~d of Sul~r~o~ 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Vh'ginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 November 23, 1999 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkim Sally H. Thomas Ms. Saphira Baker Commission on Children and Families City Hall PO Box 911 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dear Ms. Baker: At the Board of Supervisors' meeting on November 3, 1999, the Board approved changes to the to the agreement establishing the Commission on Children and Families. These changes were approved by City Council at its October 4~ meeting. Enclosed please find a copy of the fully executed agreement. Sincerely, ~~W. Carey, ~ler~CMC /ewc Enclosure CC: Roxanne White Kimbefly Wolod Printed on recycled paper AMENDMENT OF AGREEMENT ESTABLISHING THE COMMISSION ON CHILDREN AND FAMILIES This 3rd day of November ., 1999, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and the Charlottesville City Council have entered into an agreement to amend and modify their previous agreement forming the Commission on Children and Families. WHEREAS, the parties mutually desire to amend and modify their previous agreement forming the Commission on Children and Families (hereinafter, "Original Agreement"); NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual premises set forth herein, the parties do hereby agree as follows: A. Structure of the Commission. Paragraph 1 of the parties' Original Agreement is hereby amended and modified, to read: "1) With respect to the STRUCTURE OF THE COMMISSION, the City and the County agree that: a) The Commission shall consist of seventeen voting members. A ma]ori .ty of the board~shall be .citizens who are not emplo, yed by government or service agencies and Whoare .not ~elected government: officials. Nine of the votin~ members shall be citizen representatives OCitizenMember?):~ fourappointed by the County,-four app0intedbythe City and one jointly appointedprivate service provider. Of the nine citizen members, at least one appointee from' each jurisdiction must be a parent, and at least one appointee from each iurisdiction must be.a youth under the age of eighteen years at the time his or her appointment takes effect, e ........ ~. ...... :- ~. .... ~.~: ......... .~:-:~,-~,^-~ . ,~= r,~...~.;~o;..~ l,i,,~, of the voting members shall be as follows {"Agency Members"): the Superintendent of the Charlottesville Ci.ty School division; the Superintendent of Albemarle County School division~ the Director of the Charlottesville Department of Social Services~ the Director of the Albemarle County Department of Social Services; the Director of the Sixteenth District Court Services Unit~ the Director of the Thomas Jefferson. Health District; theDirector ~of Region Ten Community Services Board, and a representative of the Universi .ty ~of Virginia,~ In addition to the seventeen voting members, the Co. mmissionshall include three non-voting members, an Albemarle Assistant County Executive; a Charlottesville AsSistant City Manager; and .the President of the United Way - Thomas Jefferson Area. ' b) may beo,,eo~, ~* ...... ~,A ,~,c ...... ~--,-,--~;'"; ...., Terms of Appointment. Each voting Cit~en Member of the Commission shall be appointed for a term that shall expire three years from the first day of July of the year of appointment~ excep.~ the youth cit~en members shall be appointed for a term that shall expire one year from the first day of July of.the year of appointment. With the exception of the private se~iee provider representative~ each voting eit~en member shall be eligible for reappointment to one additional term of the same length as the initial appointment. The private semite provider shall not be eligible for reappointment to a second term. No~ithstanding the ~re~oJn~, any voting citizen member~ including the private se~wice provider~ who is initially appointed to fill a vacancy may se~e an additional successive term. Appointments shall be staggered~ for eontinui~. Each voting Agency Member of the Commission shall be appointed for a term that will expire five years from the first day of July of the year of appointment. Each voting Agency Member shall be eligible for reappointment to one or more successive terms. Manner of Appointments. Each appointment~ whether for voting or non- voting positions~ shall be made by having the City Council and/or County Board of Supervisors (as may be applicable) name the .specific individual who will serve on the Commission and by identi .lying the date upon which that individual's appointed term will expire. No title, position or agency shall be appointed to the Commission." B. Other Terms. Other than those amended and modified as provided herein above, all other terms and conditions of the parties' Original Agreement shall remain in full force in effect. NOW, THEREFORE, WITNESS the following signatures: ALBEMARI.,E COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS By: Its Chairman CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE By: The Mayor County Attorney (Approved Os to Form) City Attorney (Approved as to Form) David P. Bowerma~ Charlotte Y. Humphris J~:k Joueff Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. COUNTY OF Al REMA~I F offi~ of Bo~d of Supe~i~m 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Vh~g~nia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 November 10, 1999 Charles S. Martin Wzlter E Perkins Sally H. Thomes Ms. Jeanne Cox Clerk, Charlottesville City Council City Hall PO Box 911 Charlottesville, VA 22902 Dea3 Jeanne: At the Board of Supervisors' meeting on November 3, ! 999, the Board approved changes to the to the agreement establishing the Commission on Children and Families. It's my understanding that City Council approved these changes at its October 4~ meeting. Endosed please find the original agreement forwarded for the Mayor's signature. After the Mayor has signed the agreement, please retain a copy and return the original to me. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me. Sincerely, -'El k . Carey, Clerk, C~C / /ewc Enclosure cc: Roxanne White Printed on recycled paper COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Commission on Children and Families Reappointment /Agreement Amendment SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of original Commission agreement and reappointment of Commission members. STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: Recently the Department of Juvenile Justice (D J J) notified our Commission on Children and Families that funding under the Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act would be withheld unless the Commission changes the manner in which it makes its appointments (see attached Memo, dated June 2, 1999, from Sue Ann Morgan to Saphira Baker) DISCUSSION: Specifically, DJJ has established regulations which provide (1) "no title, position or agency shall be appointed..." and (ii) "...Board members shall be appointed for a term of no less than three years and not more than five years...". Unless the Board of Supervisors takes action to re-appoint its Commission members by name (as opposed to appointment by position, e.g. "Director of Social Services"), and to specify specific terms of appointment for each appointee, DJJ will withhold state funding from the County to operate the Commission. There are no budgetary impacts, if the Board agrees to these proposed changes. If the Board declines to accept the changes required by D J J, the Commission will lose approximately $55,000 ($27,500 County share) in operational revenues. Attached is a list of the proposed re-a ppointments and a proposed revision of the original agreement establishing the Commission. The City approved this requested change at their October 4th meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Board approval of the required changes. cc: Saphira Baker 99.201 Reverend Gerald O. Glenn DIRECTOR COMMO W ,AL TH o£ VZR GIJVZA Department o f Juvenile Justice Region Il Office Thaddeus F. Aubry, Jr. REGION Il ADMINISTRATOR lll50Main Street, Suite 500 Fairfmx, Virginia 22030 (703) 934-1579 Fax(703) 934-5130 TO: FROM: DATE: Saphira M. Baker, Director, Charlottesville/Albermarle Commission on Children and Youth June 2, 1999 This m to confirm receipt of your Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act Grant Renewal. The renewal cannot be approved until two issues are resolved. The Youth Services Citizen Board Composition on page 3 is incomplete. Please provide the date of the currem appointment and the expiration date of that appointment for all members of the Commission. The Youth Services Citizen Board is not in compliance with the Minimum Standards of the Board of Juvenile Justice, specifically standard 35-60-50 relating to the appointment of the members of the Youth Services Citizen Board. In order for the grant to be renewed, the program must be brought into compliance. Please send this information to the regional office as soon as possible. CC: Thaddeus Aubry o o COUNTY APPOINTMENTS Meredith Strohm Gunter. Meredith Strohm Gunter's March 4, 1998 appointment to serve as a County citizen member of the Commission on Children and Families is ratified, and Ms. Gunter shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2001. Larry Miller. Mr. Larry Miller's March 4, 1998 appointment to serve as a County citizen member of the Commission on Children and Families is ratified, and Mr. Miller shall continue in his appointment through June 30, 2000. Sterling Robinson's July 1, 1999 appointment to serve as a County citizen member of the Commission on Children and Families is ratified, and Mr. Robinson shall continue in his appointment through June 30, 2002. Bryson Grover. The January 2, 1999 appointment ofBryson Grover to serve as a County citizen youth representative of the Commission on Children and Families is ratified, and Mr. Grover, a person who was under the age of eighteen years on the date of his appointment, shall continue in this appointment through January 31, 2000. Jeffrey Sobel. The March 18, 1998 appointment of Mr. Jeffrey Sobel to serve as the joint City/County private service provider representative on the Commission on Children and Families is ratified, and Mr. Sobel shall continue in his appointment through June 30, 2001. Martha Carroll. Ms. Martha Carroll is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and she shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2004. Ms. Carroll is the Director of the 16th District Court Services Unit and will represent that agency on the Commission. Dr. Kevin Castner. Dr. Kevin Castner is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and he shall continue in his appointment through June 30, 2004. Dr. Castner is the Superintendent of the Albemarle County Schools, and he will represent the County Schools on the Commission. Dr. Susan McLeod. Dr. Susan McLeod is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and she shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2004. Dr. McLeod is the Director of the Thomas Jefferson Health District, and she will represent that agency on the Commission. James Peterson. Mr. James Peterson is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and he shall continue in his appointment through June 30, 2004. Mr. Peterson is the Director of the Region Ten Community Services Board and will represent that agency on the Commission. 10. Katherine Ralston. Katherine Ralston is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and she shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2004. Ms. Ralston is the Director of the Albemarle County Department of Social Services and will represent that agency on the Commission. 11. Martha Snell. Martha Snell is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and she shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2003. Ms. Snell, who is a professor at the Curry School of Education, will represent the University of Virginia on the Commission. 12. Roxarme White. Roxanne White is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and she shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2004. Ms. White is the Assistant County Executive and will represent the County Executive's Office on the Commission. 13. Cathy Train. Cathy Train is appointed to serve as a member of the Commission on Children and Families, and she shall continue in her appointment through June 30, 2004. Ms. Train is the President of United Way for the Thomas Jefferson Area, and will represent that agency on the Commission. To: From: Subject: Date: Glenn E. Brooks, Senior Engineer Department of Engineering & Publitc~rks Ella Washington Carey, Clerk, ~,b Road Resolution November 8, 1999 flEHORAHDUH At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the Board of Supervisors adopted the following resolutions: (i) to accept Peter Jefferson Parkway in Peter Jefferson Place Subdivision, into the State Secondary System of Highways. (2) to accept roads in Foxcroft Subdivision, Phase 2, into the State Secondary System of Highways. (3) to accept roads in Redfields Subdivision, Phase IA, IB, 2A, 2B, 2C and 3A, into the State Secondary System of Highways. Attached is the original and four copies of the adopted resolutions. /EWC Attachments cc: Bill Mawyer The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 3rd day of November, 1999, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the street in Peter Jefferson Place Subdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 14, t999, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add Peter Jefferson Parkway in Peter Jefferson Place Subdivision as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 14, 1999, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded vote: Moved by: Ms. Humphris. Seconded by: Ms. Thomas. Yeas: Nays: Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Ms. Thomas. None. A Copy Teste: ~Board of County/S~upervisors The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 3rd day of November, 1999, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the streets in Foxcroft Subdivision described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 27, 1999, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street .Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the roads in Foxcroft Subdivision as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 27, 1999, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded vote: Moved by: Ms. Humphris. Seconded by: Ms. Thomas. Yeas: Nays: Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Ms. Thomas. None. A Copy Teste: ~Eiia-W. Carey/Cler~, CMC Board of Couhty_Su~ervisors The roads described on Additions Form SR-5(A) are: 1) IGfSo Foxvale Lane fron~t~e~intersection of Foxchase Ridge and Foxcrest Way (Station .~ ~'(~ ~'~ion ~ as shown on plat recorded 12/16/97 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 1662, pages 352-355, with a 50- foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.069 mile. 2) Running Fox Lane from the intersection of Foxvale Lane (Station 10+00) to the end of the cul-de-sac (Station 15+91.97), as shown on plat recorded 12/16/97 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 1662, pages 352-355, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.112 mile. 3) Running Fox Court from the intersection of Foxvale Lane (Station 10+00) to the end of the cul-de-sac (Station 11+71.60), as shown on plat recorded 12/16/97 in the office the Clerk of Circuit Court of Albemarle County in. Deed Book 1662, pages 352-355, with a 50-foot right-of-way width, for a length of 0.033 mile. Total Mileage - 0.214 mile. The Board of County Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, in regular meeting on the 3rd day of November, 1999, adopted the following resolution: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the streets in Redfields Subdivision, Phases lA, lB, 2A, 2B, 2C and 3A, described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 11, 1999, fully incorporated herein by reference, are shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the streets meet the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transportation to add the roads in Redfields Subdivision, Phases lA, 1 B, 2A, 2B, 2C and 3A, as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 11, 1999, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to §33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of- way, as described, and any necessary easements for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. Recorded vote: Moved by: Ms. Humphris. Seconded by: Ms. Thomas. Yeas: Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris, Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins and Ms. Thomas. Nays: None. A Copy Teste: .... Ella W. Carey, Clerk, ~I~IC mm m m m m 0 -,4 .H .H 0 0 -H ,el :> .H O4 0 0 0 .~l 0 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Department of Engineering & Public Works MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors Glenn E. Brooks, Senior Engineer ~ 14 October 1999 Peter Jefferson Parkway, road acceptance resolution The road serving the referenced subdivision is complete and ready for VDOT acceptance. At the next opportunity, I request the Board of Supervisors to adopt a resolution for the roads specified in the attached VDOT SR-5(A) forms. After the adoption of the resolution, please provide me with the original of the signed and dated resolution and SR-5A. Thanks for your assistance. Please contact me if you have any questions. Copy: construction file File: Highlands 1 c. ResolutionRequest.doc BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Depammmt of Engineering & Public Works MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Ella Carey, Clerk, Board of Supervisors Glenn E. Brooks, Senior Engineer 27 October 1999 Foxcrot~, phase 2, road acceptance resolution The roads serving the referenced subdivision are complete and ready for VDOT acceptance. At the next opportunity, I request the Board of Supervisors to adopt a resolution for the roads specified in the attached VDOT SR-5(A) forn~ After the adoption of the resolution, please provide me with the original of the signed and dated resolution and SR-5A. Thanks for your assistance. Please contact me if you have any questions. Copy: construction file File: I~ghlandslc. ResolutionRequest~doc COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance Ella W. Carey, CMC, C~(3L/ November 8, 1999 Board Actions of November 3, 1999 At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the Board of Supervisors approved the following: 6.6 6.7 6.8 Appropriation: Education, $567,915.18 (Form #99039). Appropriation: Education, $105,696.60 (Form #99040). Appropriation: Earlysville Meadows Subdivision, Summer Lane, $10,410.57 (Form #99041 ). Attached are the signed appropriation forms. Agenda Item No. 12. Public Hearing to amend Section 15-1101 of the County Code to include antique motor vehicles in the category of personal property exempt from taxation. ADOPTED the attached ordinance. Agenda Item No. 23. Presentation: 2000/2001 Salary Recommendations. CONTINUED until November 10, 1999. Agenda Item No. 24. Presentation: FY 2000/2001 Budget Guidance. APPROVED the proposed FY 2000/2001 allocation of new revenues ($6.37 million) to the School Division (60% or $3.82 million) and General Government (40% or $2.55 million) as recommended by staff. /ewc Attachments pc: Anne Gulati Kevin C. Castner Tom Foley Robert Walters Jackson Zimmerman Bill Mawyer FY 00/01 Albemarle County General Operating Fund Preliminary Revenue & Expenditure Projections Change in Revenues over FY 99/00 FY 99~00 Approp * Property Taxes Other Local Taxes Other Local Revenues State Revenues Federal Revenues Fund Balance Projected Revenue Increase LESS: 3% Transient Tax to Toudsm LESS: Revenue Sharing Net Projected Local Taxes 66,173,400 26,165,300 92,338,700 (684,720) (5,853,794) 85,800,186 Committed New Non-De_Dartmental Expertditure~ Capital Outlay (Transfer to CIP) Debt Service - School Division Debt Service - General Government Revenue Sharing Board Reserve Fund Refu n ds Total Committed New Non-Departmental Exp. 2,157,930 8,450,OOO 310,688 5,853,794 50,000 26,000 16,848,412 Total Available Net Tax Revenue Proposed Preliminary_ Distribution: Schools & General Government Available Revenues to School Division Operations @ 60% Available Revenues to General Government Operations @ 40% FY 00/01 Estimated 71,928,085 28,305,800 100,233,885 (881,820) (6,093,101) 93,258,964 2,397,000 8,850,000 750,000 6,093,101 50,000 34,300 18,174,401 $ Increase 5,754,685 2,140,500 7,895,185 (197,100) (239,307) 7,458,778 239,070 400,000 439,312 (See Above) 8,300 1,086,682 Inc Over FY 99~0O 7,458,778 (1,086,682) 6,372,096 3,823,258 2,548,838 FY 2000/0'1 Operational Budgets School Division (Ongoing Local Transfer) General Government Operations FY 99/00 Ap_~rop 51,435,564 39,431,010 FY 00/01 Estimated 55,258,822 41,979,848 $ Increase 3,823,258 2,548,838 % Increase 7.4% 6.5% * Reflects July 1, 1999 appropriated budget. 10/27/993:29 PM budget guidance.xlsSummary APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 99/00 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X 99041 ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? YES NO X FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: COMPLETION OF SUMMER LANE ROAD WITH BOND PROCEEDS. CODE 1 1000 41000 EXPENDITURE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 950109 ENGINEERING EARLYSVlLLE MEADOWS $10,410.57 CODE 2 1000 19000 TOTAL $10,410.57 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 199900 OTHER RECOVERED COST $10,410.57 TOTAL $10,410.57 REQUESTING COST CENTER: ENGINEERING APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE DATE OCT. 22, 1999 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 99~00 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? FUND: PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR VARIOUS SCHOOL PROGRAMS. CODE 1 3211 61102 160300 1 3211 61102 210000 1 3211 61102 580500 EXPENDITURE DESCRIPTION SPEC. ED.-SILVER 1 3305 61236 601300TRAFFIC SAFETY NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW YES NO SCHOOL/VARIOUS X X 99040 AMOUNT Stipends-Curr Dev $7,758.00 FICA $643.00 Staff Dev $14,816.00 Inst/Rec Materials $1,000.00 1 3135 60605 580500 GOALS 2000 Staff Dev $981.80 1 3135 60605 800100 Mach/Equipment $47,197.92 1 3104 60211 312500 ARTISTS IN EDUC. 1 3104 60253 312500 1 3104 60252 312500 UPTON FOUNDATION I 2215 61411 580000 MURRAY ELEM. 1 2302 61102 601300 PILOT CLUB 1 3204 61311 601300 G.E./ELFUN SOCIETY 1 3206 61311 601300 BARNES & NOBLE 2201 61101 601300 2202 61101 601300 2203 61101 601300 2204 61101 601300 2205 61101 601300 2206 61101 601300 2207 61101 601300 2209 61101 601300 2210 61101 601300 2211 61101 601300 2212 61101 601300 2213 61101 601300 2214 61101 601300 2215 61101 601300 2216 61101 601300 Prof Svc Consultant Prof Sv¢ Consultant $2,370.00 $1,682.66 Prof Svc Consultant $6,500.00 Miscellaneous Exp $145.00 Inst/Rec Materials $100.00 InstJRec Materials Inst/Rec Materials $4,132.02 $16,788.84 InstJRec Material s $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 I nst/Rec Materials $65.85 InslYRec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 I 2251 61101 601300 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 I 2252 61101 601300 InstJRecMaterials $65.85 1 2253 61101 601300 Inst/RecMaterials $65.85 1 2254 61101 601300 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 1 2255 61101 601300 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 I 2301 61101 601300 Inst/RecMaterials $65.85 1 2302 61101 601300 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 I 2303 61101 601300 Inst/RecMaterials $65.81 1 2304 61101 601300 Inst/Rec Materials $65.85 CODE 2 3211 24000 240357 SLIVER Grant 2 3305 24000 240771 Traffic SafetyGrant 2 3135 24000 240324 Goals2000 2 3104 24000 240355 AIERES-Stony Point 2 3104 24000 240356AIERES-Jouett 2 3104 18000 181221 Upton Foundation 2 2000 18100 181109Donation 2 2000 18100 181109 Donation 2 3204 51000 510100 GE ElfunSociety 2 3206 51000 510100 GE Foundation 2 2000 18100 181109Donation TOTAL $105,695.60 REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT $23 217.00 $1 000.00 $48 179.72 $2 37O.OO $1 682.66 $6 500.00 ;145.00 ;100.00 $4,132.02 $16,788.84 $1,580.36 TOTAL $105,695.60 REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE / DATE OCT. 22, 1999 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 99~00 TYPE OF APPROPRIATION: ADVERTISEMENT REQUIRED ? FUND: PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR VARIOUS SCHOOL PROGRAMS. CODE 1 2304 61105 601300 EXPENDITURE DESCRIPTION MONTICELLO 1 2252 61101 160300 HENLEY 1 3207 61190 160300 1 3207 61190 210000 1 320X 61190 580500 CARL PERKINS GRANT 1 3300 61238 601300 INJURY PREVENTION I 3104 60216 601300 MJHS CHILD HEALTH 1 3107 61101 312700 DRUG FREE SCHOOLS 1 3000 60209 600200 1 3000 60216 600200 1 3000 60252 600200 1 3000 60253 600200 1 3000 60302 600200 CHILD NUTRITION PRO 1 3300 60201 119400 1 3300 60203 119400 I 3300 60204 119400 I 3300 60205 159400 I 3300 60206 580000 I 3300 60209 119400 I 3300 60211 159400 I 3300 60212 119400 1 3300 60215 119400 1 3300 60216 312700 1 3300 60253 119400 1 3300 61235 331500 I 3300 61238 132100 I 3300 63300 115000 I 3300 63300 119400 I 3300 63300 271000 COMMUNITY EDUC. NUMBER ADDITIONAL TRANSFER NEW X YES NO X SCHOOLNARIOUS 99039 AMOUNT Ed/Rec Supplies $750.00 Stipends-Staff-Curr Dev 2,500.00 Stipends-Staff-Curr Dev 7,000.00 FICA 535 50 S~ff Dev 15,754.97 EdlRec Supplies 2,000.00 Ed/Rec Supplies 1 000.00 Prof Svc Consultant 7,920.71 Food Supplies 20,000.00 Food Supplies 30,718.00 Food Supplies 67,211.00 Food Supplies 46,484.00 Food Supplies 61,041.00 Salaries-Teacher Salaries-Teacher Salaries-Teacher Sub Wages-ASEP Misc Expenses Salaries-Teacher Sub Wages-ASEP Salaries-Teacher Salaries-Teacher Prof Ser Consultants Salaries-Teacher R&M Equip-Vehicles PT Wages-Teacher Salaries-Ofc Clerical Salaries-Teacher Self Insured 16,503.30 9,748.30 10.359.98 17 673.84 8 242.84 12,067.00 10,219.14 11,432.25 15,092.24 26,238.50 8,172.50 11,186.47 14,759.94 27,807.70 38,620.64 20,000.00 1 3300 63300 800300 Comm. Equipment 11 640.00 1 3300 61237 312700 ProfSerConsultants 2,658.25 1 3300 60301 132000 PTWages-Proflnst. 1,842.78 1 3300 60201 231000 Health Ins 3,232.78 1 3300 60201 312700 ProfSerConsultants 2,027.53 1 3300 60203 159400 SubWages-ASEP 6,398.61 1 3300 60204 119401 Salades-TeacherAides 5,503.43 1 3300 60204 159400 SubWages-ASEP 6,512.87 1 3300 60204 231000 Health lns 7,059.11 TOTAL $567,915.18 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 2000 18100 181109 Donation $750.00 2 2000 18100 181109Donation 2,500.00 2 3207 33000 330107 Carl Perkins 16,041.00 2 3207 51000 510100 ApprFundBalance 7,249.47 2 3300 24000 240305 Injury Prev. Grant 2,000.00 2 3104 18000 181234 MJHS Child Health Grant 1,000.00 2 3107 24000 240500 Grant Rev-State 7,920.71 2 3000 33000 330004 Fed Lunch Pgm 78,245.00 2 3000 60209 161204 Sch Cafeteria Sales 37,369.00 2 3000 60216 161204 Sch Cafeteria Sales 109,840.00 2 3300 16000 161201 Tuition-PrivSources (3,418.57) 2 3300 16000 161209 DrivEd-Motorcycle 19,225.00 2 3300 16000 161229 Tuition Prior Year 33,561.16 2 3300 16000 161240 ASEP-Spanish Class 3,896.00 2 3300 16000 161250 ASEP Reg Fees 36,061.34 2 3300 16000 161251 Middle Sch ASEP Tuition 33,852.84 2 3300 16000 161254 Driver Ed Fees Monticello 14,426.50 2 3300 19000 190800 Ins Recoveries 6,300.00 2 3300 24000 240770 DMVVa. Rider Train Pgm 3,871.00 2 3300 24000 240771 State Reimb-Driver Ed 22,400.00 2 3300 33000 330610 US DeptofAgriculture 13.944.77 2 3300 60206 161201 Tution-PrivSources 12,280.42 2 3300 60210 161201 Tuition-PrivSources 4,714.20 2 3300 60216 161201 Tuition-PrivSources 25,618.00 2 3300 60301 161201 Tuition-PrivSources 78,267.34 TOTAL $567,915.18 REQUESTING COST CENTER: EDUCATION APPROVALS: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS SIGNATURE DATE OCT. 18, 1999 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #99039, in the total amount of $567,915.18, for various education donations, projects, and programs. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Castner, Breeden; Ms. White AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: · Donations Monticello High School has received a donation in the amount of $750.00 from R. Hilton Patterson. donation is to be used for Field Hockey. This Henley Middle School has received donations from the Henley Middle School Parent Teacher Support Organization in the amount of $2,500.00. These donations will be used for salaries for their At-Risk Program and their Library Night. · Carl D. Perkins Vocational Fund Final figures for Cad D. Perkins Vocational funds have recently been made available to localities. Federal funding cuts were anticipated during the preparation of the FY99-00 budget. However, rather than being reduced, funding was increased by $16,041.00 over the prior year level. In addition to the increased funding, the Carl Perkins Vocational Grant for FY98-99 was not fully expended and has a fund balance of $7,249.47. These funds will be for stipends and staff/curriculum development. · Injury Prevention Proiect Grant At the April 12, 1999 meeting, the School Board accepted funds for the Injury Prevention Project Grant from the Virginia Department of Education's Secondary Services Unit, for the Monticello High School's Driver Education Program. Since these funds were not expended in the 1998-99 fiscal year, it is requested that the grant funds be re-appropriated for the 1999-00 fiscal year. These funds will be used to purchase traffic safety instructional resources for Monticello High School's Driver Education Program. · Child Health Improvement Initiative Grant Martha Jefferson Health Services (MJHS) awarded Murray Elementary School a grant to fund the Child Health Improvement Initiative Grant for Preschool. A preschool teacher at Murray Elementary School will coordinate the program of learning about healthy food choices. · Grant Title IV of the Safe and Drug Free School and Communities Act of 1994 provides funding to local school divisions for operating substance abuse programs to students. The Albemarle County program provides funding to (1) the Albemarle County Police Department for the purpose of providing student instruction for substance abuse prevention (DARE Program and School Resource Officers); (2) Region 10 Community Services Board for the purpose of providing assistance to students. There is a fund balance retained by the State of $7,920.71 from AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education November 3, 1999 Page 2 the 1998-99 fiscal year grant budget to appropriate. This money will be used as a partial payment to Region Ten Community Services Board to counsel students referred by the guidance departments for conflict resolution, anger management, and drug prevention groups. Also the funds will help to pay for the examination and analysis of the Youth Risk Behavior Survey to be administered through the Health and Physical Education classes. · Child Nutrition Pro,qram The Albemarle County Schools Child Nutrition Program is a self-sustaining fund that operates from the fees generated by the sale of school lunches and federal funding for the National School Lunch and Breakfast Program. Sales for this program have been increasing very quickly. In FY98-99, both the expenses and the revenues for this program has exceeded the app-ropriated budgeted amounts. Preliminary revenue estimates for FY98-99 exceeded expenses by more than $100,000.00. Request Board of Supervisors to appropriate funds for the Child Nutrition Program in the amount of $225,454.00. · Department of Community Education The Department of Community Education provides a wide range of programs and services to the general student population and to the general public as well. The department includes the Extended Day Enrichment Programs (EDEP), OPEN DOORS continuing education courses, Ddver's Education programs at Albemarle, Western Albemarle, and Monticello High Schools, and the Virginia Motorcycle Safety Program. The Department of Community Education was funded in the school budget for fiscal year 1998-1999 in the amount of $1,450,708. Expenditures exceeded appropriated funds by $ 305,000. This request represents revenues collected beyond the appropriated budget, expected collections of past due accounts, and appropriation of all available fund balance. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the Board of Supervisors approve the appropriations, totaling $567,915.18, as detailed on Appropriation #99039. 99.196 Ella and Laurie - When the Board was discussing the Consent Agenda on Wednesday, I said I wanted to bring Item 6,6 up when we got to John Baker's School Report later in the meeting. However, when we got to that point, we were running late and the chairman wanted to move along quickly, so I decided to take care of my questions/discussion on that item with school people outside the meeting, which I have done. I don~ know how you deal with something like that in the minutes, but didnt want you left hanging with my saying I would take it up later and then not being able to report that it was taken up. Thanks. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation: - Earlysville Meadows Subdivision, Summer Lane SU BJ ECT/PROPOSAL/REQU EST: Request Approval of Appropriation #99041 in the Amount of $10,410.57 for Completion of Summer Lane in Earlysville Meadows Subdivision with Bond Proceeds STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Foley, Mawyer, Gulati AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ITEM NUMBER: IN FORMATION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: In October 1992, the County cashed a read/subdivision bond in the amount of $8,000 for completion of Summer Lane in Earlysville Meadows Subdivision (AKA Keatsway). This bond was cashed since the developer failed to complete his obligations and the Letter of Credit securing the bond was expiring. DISCUSSION: The Department of Engineering & Public Works has been unsuccessful in having the developer complete the work required to have Summer Lane accepted into the State Secondary Road System. Therefore, the Department intends to hire a contractor to corn plete the work necessary for acceptance of the road into the State Secondary Road System. This request would appropriate $8,000 in bond proceeds, plus accrued interest, into an expenditure account to fund completion of the road work. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #99041 in the amount of $10,410.57. 99.200 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Request approval of Appropriation #99040 in the amount of $105,695.60 for various Education related donations, grants, and programs. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Castner, Breeden; Ms. Gulati AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ITEM NUMBER: IN FORMATION: ACTION: X INFORMATION: BACKGROUND: · Special Education Local Improvement Grant ATTACH M E NTS: REVIEWED BY: Albemarle County Public School's Special Education Department has received a Special Education Local Improvement Grant (SLIVER) from the Virginia Department of Education in the amount of $23,217.00. Sliver funds will allow Special Education teachers to be involved in the LANGUAGE! Program. This staff development program is the first step in a system wide attempt to implement an effective intervention strategy targeting special education and at-risk youth in the school system, ranging from beginning decoding skills to the study of vocabulary development, spelling, grammar, literature and corn position. Participants will receive all the necessary materials to implement the LANGUAGE! Program in their classrooms. Traffic Safety Resource Grant Albemarle County Public Schools have received a Traffic Safety Resource Grant award from the Virginia Department of Education's Secondary Services Unit for Western Albemarle High School's Driver Education Program in the amount of $1,000.00. These funds will be used to purchase traffic safety instructional resources for Western Albemarle High School's Driver Education Program. Goals 2000: Educate America Grant Albemarle County Public Schools have received two grant awards from the Goals 2000: Educate America Grant. The first is Classroom Computers and Related Technology in the amount of $47,197.92 and the second is Pre and/or Inservice Training in the amount of $981.80. This funding is to be used for the purchase of new networked classroom multimedia computers and inservice training of staff and teachers in support of efforts to improve education in our school division through provision of computers and related technology. Artists in Education Residency Grant Two Albemarle County Public Schools have received Artists in Education Residency Grants (AIERES) from the Virginia Commission for the Arts. Stony Point Elementary School has received $2,370.00 for a project entitled Afdcan Culture: Connections to America's Past, Present and Future; and Jack Jouett Middle School has received $1,682.66 for a project entitled History of Printmaking. The AIERES grant will enhance existing arts by integrating the musical arts, visual arts and academic curricula. Grant from the Frederick S. Upton Foundation Henley Middle School has received a grant award from the Frederick S. Upton Foundation in the amount of $6,500.00. This grant will fund three artists in residences: Sculptor, Storyteller, and Educational Drama Consultant. The project will involve interactive activities to include hands on learning experience for students with performing, visual and musical arts. AGENDA TITLE: Appropriation - Education November 3, 1999 Page 2 Miscellaneous Donations/Projects Murray Elementary School has received donations in the amount of $145.00. Laura and Barton Weis donated $20.00, David and Kelly Haslup donated $100.00, and Michael Santulli donated $25.00. These donations will be used to purchase miscellaneous supplies for the school. Western Albemarle High School has received a donation from the Pilot Club of Albemarle/Charlottesville Virginia District in the amount of $100.00. The funds will be used for the books on tap program offered through the special education department. Since 1992, the GE Foundation and The Elfun Society has partnered with Albemarle County Schools in a Math & Science Mentoring Program. This project is on going and has a fund balance of $20,920.86. These funds will be used to continue the educational partnership, involving not only educators and students, but also parents, GE volunteer scientists, and other science mentors in our community to increase opportunities for students who have a high level of interest in math and science. The Albemarle Education Association and Barnes and Noble sponsored a Bookblast in March, 1999. This was a one-day event where individuals purchased books at Barnes and Noble and Barnes and Noble would donate a percentage of sales. As a result of this event, Barnes and Noble has made a donation of $1,580.36 to be distributed equally among each school library. RECOMMEN DATIO N: Staff recommend s the Board of Supervisors approve the appropriations as detailed in Appropriation #99040. 99.199 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: FY 1999/00 Revised and FY 2000/01 Estimated General Fund Revenues SU BJ ECT/PROPOSAL/REQU EST: Discussion of Revised FY 1999/00 and Estimated FY 2000/01 General Fund Revenues STAFF CONTACT(S): AGENDA DATE: ITEM NUMBER: November 3, 1999 ACTION: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: IN FORMATION: ATTAC. H M .ENT.__~S: Ye~j~_..~...__~ REVIEWED BY:~~' / X Messrs. Tucker, Breeden, Walters, White, Gulati BACKGROU ND: The November revenue estimate for the current and next fiscal years is the first step in the annual budget process for both the operating and capital budgets. Revised revenue projections are provided by the Department of Finance in late October after the second cycle property tax bills have been processed. DISCUSSION: Attached for your information are the revised projections for FY 1999/2000 and estimates for FY 2000/2001 General Fund revenues. The revised projections for FY 1999/00 exceed the appropriated budget by $2,050,963, 1.9%. The excess revenues are due to increased real estate, personal property, sales and use, business license, lodging and meals taxes, offset by decreases in other local revenues, state ane federal taxes. The decrease in other local revenue reflects reductions in interest income, due to lower cash balances and an accounting adjustment that allocates these revenues to the proper funds. Reduced state and federal revenues reflect the fact that Virginia Juvenile Community Crime Control Act (VJCCCA) funds now will be collected by the City, as well as lower than anticipated social services revenues, as reported by the Department of Social Services. The estimated revenues for FY 2000/01 exceed the current year budget by $6,673,270, 6.2%. Real estate tax represents 46% of the ~ncrease, due to an anticipated 7% reassessment increase and approximately $100,000,000 in new construction. Personal property tax revenues increase 11.8% ($2.4 million) over the FY 99/00 adopted budget, based on October tax bills. Additional revenues also are expected from sales and use, business license, lodging and meals taxes. The decline in other local revenue reflects the aforementioned reduction in interest income, as well as a decrease in E-911 reimbursements for one- time planning costs funded in FY00. Projected state and federal revenues reflect the aforementioned loss of VJCCCA revenues, as well as anticipated social services revenues, as reported by the Department of Social Services. The Social Services projections may be revised upwards as more accurate revenue data is received from the State. RECOMMENDATION: This report is presented for the Board's information only and does not require any action. County of Albemarle Preliminary General Fund Revenue Projections Description Property Taxes Real Estate Current Public Service Current Personal Property Current Mobile Home Current Machinery & Tools Current Other than Current Subtotal Property Taxes Other Local Taxes Sales & Use Tax Food & Beverage Tax Transient Lodging Tax Other Subtotal Other Local Taxes Other Local Revenue Subtotal Local Revenues State Revenue Federal Revenue Subtotal Revenues Transfers & Fund Balance GRAND TOTAL REVENUES & TRANSFERS Appropriated Revised Budget Projection FY 99100 * FY 99/00 $ InclDec 41,487,700 42,026,156 538,456 1,706,600 1,701,629 (4,971) 20,465,000 21,477,000 1,012,000 67,000 65,700 (1,300) 1,060,200 1,083,559 23,359 1,386,900 1,439,100 52,200 66,173,400 67,793,144 1,619,744 8,476,400 8,900,000 423,600 3,098,500 3,217,800 119,300 1,141,200 1,426,800 285,600 13,449,200 13,735,400 286,200 26,165,300 27,280,000 1,114,700 5,096,973 4,918,408 (178,565) 97,435,673 99,991,552 2,555,879 6,887,847 6,426,739 (461,108) 2,986,826 2,788,225 (198,601) 107,310,346 109,206,516 1,896,170 654,640 809,433 154,793 107,964,986 110,015,949 2,050,963 * Reflects July 1, 1999 Appropriated General Fund Budget Prelim. Estimate $ FY 00101 Inc/Dec % Inc/Dec 44,569,600 3,081,900 7.4% 1,744,200 37,600 2.2% 22,873,000 2,408,000 11.8% 71,400 4,400 6.6% 1,121,800 61,600 5.8% 1,548,085 161,185 11.6% 71,928,085 5,754,685 8.7% 9,366,500 890,100 3,314,400 215,900 1,469,700 328,500 14,155,200 706,000 28,305,800 2,140,500 4,708,525 (388,448) 104,942,410 7,506,737 6,614,813 (273,034) 2,799,604 (187,222) 114,356,827 7,046,481 281,429 (373,211) 114,638,256 6,673,270 10.5% 7.0% 28.8% 5.2% 8.2% -7.6% 7.7% -4.0% -6.3% 6.6% -57.0% 6.2% 10/27/994:35 PM FY01 revenue projections attachment.xlsSheetl James S. Gilmore, III Governor John Paul Woodley, Jr. Secretary of Natural Resources COMMONWEALTH o{ VIRQINIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY Valley Regional Office Street address: 4411 Early Road, Harri$onburg, Virginia 22801' Mailing address: P.O. Box 1129, Harrisonburg, VA 22801-1129 Telephone (540) 574-7800 Fax (540) 574-7878 http://www.deq.state.va.us Dennis H. Treacy Director R. Bradley Chewning, P.E. Valley Regional Director October 14, 1999 Mr. Charles Martin, Chairman Albemarle County Board of Supervisors County Office Building 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22901 Re: Reissuance of VPDES Permit No. VA002551.8, Moores Creek Regional STP Dear Mr. Martin: In accordance with the Code of Virginia, Section 62.1-44.15:01, I am enclosing a copy of a public notice regarding the referenced proposed permit action. If you have any questions re'garding this proposed permit, please give me a call at (540)574-7800. Sincerely, Louise Finger Environmental Engineer Enclosure CC: Permit Processing File BOARD OF SUPERVISORS PUBLIC NOTICE REISSUANCE OF A VPDES PERMIT TO DISCHARGE TO STATE WATERS AND STATE CERTIFICATION UNDER THE STATE WATER CONTROL LAW First Public Notice Issue Date: (to be supplied by newspaper) The State Water Control Board has under consideration reissuance of the following Permit and State Certificate: Permit No.: VA0025518 Name of Permittee: Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Facility Name: Moores Creek Regional STP Facility Location: 200 Franklin Street, Charlottesville, VA Permittee Address: P.O. Box 18, Charlottesville, VA 22902 Discharge Description: Existing Municipal discharge; Flow: 15.0 MGD; Total Outfalls: 2. Receiving Stream: Moores Creek; Stream Mile: 0.19; Basin: James (Middle); Subbasin: N/A; Section: 10; Class: III; Special Standards: None. This proposed reissuance is tentative and consists of limiting the following parameters: pH 6.0 s.u. min., 9.0 s.u. max.; CBODs 22.5 mg/1 max.; Ammonia 3.4 mg/1 max.; Suspended. Solids 33 mg/1 max.; Effluent Total Residual Chlorine 0.010 mg/1 max.; Dissolved Oxygen 6.3 mg/1 min.; Fecal Coliform 200 N/100ml monthly avg.; Zinc 77.5 ~g/1 max. Sludge management includes anaerobic digestion, drying by belt press, and composting. On the basis of preliminary review and application of lawful standards and regulations, the State Water Control Board proposes to reissue the permit subject to certain conditions. This permit will maintain the Water Quality Standards adopted by the Board. Persons may comment in writing to the Department of Environmental Quality on the proposed permit action within 30 days from the date of the first notice. Comments shall include the name, address, and telephone number of the writer, and shall contain a complete, concise statement of the factual basis for the comments. Only those comments received within this period will be considered. The DEQ Director may decide to hold a public hearing if public response is significant. Requests for public hearings shall state the reason why a hearing is requested, the nature of the issues proposed to be raised in the public hearing, and a brief explanation of how the requester's interests would be directly and adversely affected by the proposed permit action. Ail pertinent information is on file and may be inspected, and arrangements made for copying by contacting Louise Finger at: Department of Environmental Quality Valley Regional Office 4411 Early Road P.O. Box 1129 Harrisonburg, Virginia 22801 Telephone No. (540) 574-7800 Following the comment period, the Director will make a determination regarding the proposed relssuance. This determination will become effective unless the Director grants a public hearing. Due notice of any public hearing will be given. To: Members, Board of Supervisors~ ~1~ From: Ella Washington Carey, CMC, C~ Subject: Reading List for November 3, 1999 Date: October 29, 1999 February 22(A), 1997 March 5, 1997 March 26(A), 1997 - June 4, 1997 October 28, 1997 March 17(A), 1999 September 8, 1999 - S~ptember 15, 1999 - Ms. Humphris I.-' Ms. Thomas / Ms. Humphris ~' Mr. Perkins Ms. Humphris ~" Mr. Martin ~/ Mr. Marshall ~ Mr. Bowerman /ewc David P. Bowerman Charlotte Y. Humphris Forrest R. IVl~,~h~ll, Jr. COUNTY OF ALBEMA~I Or, ce of Bom~i of Supervisors 401 Mclnfire Road Charlottesville, V'~jinia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296-5800 November 8, 1999 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkins S~lly H. Thomas Ms. Angela G. Tucker Resident Engineer 701 VDOT Way Charlottesville, VA 22911 Dear Ms. Tucker: At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the Board of Supervisors made the following comments regarding transportation matters: · Adopted the attached Resolution to accept Peter Jefferson Parkway in Peter Jefferson Place Subdivision, into the State Secondary System of Highways. · Adopted the attached Resolution to accept roads in Foxcroft Subdivision, Phase 2, into the State Secondary System of Highways. · Adopted the attached Resolution to accept roads in Redfields Subdivision, Phase lA, lB, 2A, 2B, 2C and 3A, into the State Secondary System of Highways. · You provided an update on the following outstanding issues from previous Board meetings: ·Ms. Thomas had requested, on behalf of a constituent, that VdoT looking into signing at Barracks Road and the Route 250 Bypass for a left turn from the westbound direction. VdoT's review of the intersection indicated that a lot of signs were dull, faded and needed updating. VdoT has scheduled the replacement and update of several signs which they feel should mitigate the situation. If the Board wants to pursue street lighting at that interchange, the request needs to go through the County's Engineering Department. · Another issue had to do with the relocation of the stop bar at the Bellair/Route 250 Business intersection. VdoT plans to adjust the stop bar and move it back slightly to enhance the sight distance coming out of Canterbury Road. · Mr. Perkins had requested that VdoT meet with County staff to discuss the Route 240/250 connector road. A meeting has been scheduled for November 10n to discuss funding of the road. She will advise the Board of the results of that discussion. · Ms. Humphris had made a request regarding the Georgetown and Hydraulic Roads pedestrian crossings and sidewalk connections from asphalt to the concrete sidewalks. VdoT is in the process of reviewing that now. The signal at Hydraulic and Georgetown is the old type span wire system and all signal systems should be upgraded to mast arms. At the time of the upgrading, VdoT will install pedestrian crossings and will follow through with the appropriate crosswalks and check the sidewalk system to make sure that it is properly in place. · Mr. Perkins asked VdoT to look into moving up in the Six Year Plan the paving of Dickerson Road. Printed on recycled paper Ms. Angela Tucker November 8, 1999 Page 2. Ms. Thomas mentioned a telephone call she received concerning the intersection of Route 24Oand Route 810 in Crozet with regard to increased traffic activity with the occurrence of new develop- ment~ Ms. Tucker responded that VdoT conducted a formal signal analysis several months ago, but the analysis did not currently meet any of the warrants for a signal. As development occurs, they will continue to monitor the area to see if a change in conditions occur. · Ms. Thomas mentioned the paving of Wyant Lane and expressed concern that the issues surround- ing this road may occur in the future on other roads. Following some discussion, it was the consensus of the Board that staff bring back criteria that could be applied for roads whereby the residents may change their minds about paving the road. The report should take into accotmt the ntunber of signatures required for a change, how a change might affect donation of right-of-way, a time limit to allow a change, etc. · Mr. Cilimberg mentioned a request from the MPO regarding the extension of Hillsdale Drive. Mr. Tucker and Mr. Cilimberg to draft a response for the Chairman's signature letting them know the history and status of this project in the County's process. /EWC Sincerely, ~!.C~arey~, ~1 Ce , ~MC CC: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Tom Foley V. Wayne Cilimberg Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization c/o Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission PO 'Box 1505, 300 East Main St 1s~ FI, Charlottesville, Virginia, 22902; www. avenue.org/tjpdc 804-979-7310 (phone); 804-979-1597 (fax); tjpd@state.va.fis (email) VA Relay Center (hearing impaired): 800-828-1140 (voice); 800-828-1120 (tdd) TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Charlottesville City Council, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Meredith Richards, Chair, Charlottesville-Albemarle MPO October 19, 1999 Proposed Study of Hillsdale Drive Extension I am writing to urge you to include funding for an engineering and environmental study of an extension to Hillsdale Drive in your FY2001 local transportation programs, and in your requests to VDOT for FY2001 Six Year Improvement program funds. Periodically over the past several years, the MPO and local governments have considered possibilities for extending Hillsdale Drive beyond its current terminus near the Senior Center on Greenbrier Drive, continuing behind the Pepsi plant and the Post Office rear parking area and connecting to a north entrance of Seminole Square Shopping Center. The proposed two-lane road, envisioned with bicycle lanes and sidewalks, is included in the CATS 2015 with a recommendation that a design be developed. It crosses the City-County boundary, and thus must be supported by both localities. The concept has always been supported in theory by the localities, but concerns over the estimated costs and engineering issues associated with the topography and drainage in this area have kept it from moving forward. Yet support for this concept continues to grow from the public and private sectors, and opportunities are emerging that could be explored to mitigate the engineering problems. The MPO Technical Committee did some research on this concept in the 6arly 1990's, and . developed three alternatives which could be further considered. The County included the project in its local six-year secondary road program, but not at a high priority. The City did not in,lude the project in local fimding programs or its VDOT program. Recent activities to consider in light of this proposed project include the following: Grantwriting efforts by the TJPDC (so far unsuccessful) to improve facilities to clean and protect Meadow Creek in this vicinity, where it is particularly vulnerable to nmoff from existing development. The TJPDC is interested in exploring the possibility that a drainage system for a new road could also provide the improved systems already needed to protect the creek. B ©!~.,:t,~ OF SUPERVISORS Changes in the private sector which might affect traffic in this study area, such as: The expansion of K-Mart adjacent to the Seminole Square Property, and its influence on regional traffic patterns in that area, especially relative to the congested Hydraulic Road/Route 29 intersection; Possible eventual development of the property along Hydraulic Road west of Route 29, which drains through a pipe under the road to Meadow Creek; and Possible changes in traffic patterns at the Post Office back lot, given the new major distribution center which recently opened at Airport Road. Enclosed by way of background is a compilation of correspondence among City, County, MPO, and Great Eastern Management Corp (which owns Seminole Square) regarding the project. Also enclosed is a petition submitted to the MPO this summer from a coalition of neighborhood associations near the proposed road, strongly supporting its development. In addition, the Chair of the Charlottesville Federation of Neighborhood Associations wrote the MPO this summer suggesting that the concept for the proposed extension be continued all the way down to Michie Drive, which could relieve pressure on the Hydraulic Road/Route 29 intersection area. Also enclosed are minutes of two discussions this spring by the MPO Technical Committee on this topic, including one with Don Wagner of Great Eastern Management. The project is very consistent with the goals of the City, County, and MPO to develop a balanced network of urban streets which is designed to support vehicle, transit, bicycle, and pedestrian modes, offer more choices to local travelers, and relieve pressure on key arteries, particularly Route 29. The unflagging interest shown by the private property owners most affected by the road, and the support from the nearby neighborhoods should encourage localities to seriously consider moving this project up in priority. We feel it is critical for the City and County to work with VDOT to conduct a detailed preliminary engineering and design study as soon as possible, which includes consideration of environmental issues related'to Meadow Creek. With a better understanding of the project,s costs, benefits, and opportunities for improving the regional transportation system and for improving the health of Meadow Creek, the local governments and VDOT could then make an informed decision whether to proceed with building it. We request that you include an engineering and environmental study of a Hillsdale Drive connector as a high priority in your local FY2001 transportation programs and in preparing your requests for FY2001 VDOT Six Year Improvement funds. Should the project be appropriate for federal funds, the MPO is willing to endorse it in the TIP. CC: Carter Myers, Culpeper Representative, Commonwealth Transportation Board Don Wagner, Great Eastern Management Corp. Jay Jessup, Pepsi Corp. Don Lyons (representing coalition of neighborhood associations) FROM: . ..S~Y.~ndra Singh Huja, Directo5 of p[a~ng & Co~u~ty D¢.yelopment~.~. ~. DATE: 'October 2, 1995 ~ . HILLSDALE DRIVE CONNECTION TO SEMINOLE SQUARE I. INTRODUCTION II. For several years now, the City and County through the M]PO have discussed the possibility of a connection to Seminole Court in Seminole Square Shopping Center from Hillsdale Drive. This connection would provide a parallel route for local traffic from Rio Road to 29 North at Seminole Cot~rt. You had asked for some background and current status information on this issue. We have discussed this again with County staff and looked at the materials we have on file regarding previous comments and positions. A summary of this follows. BACKGROUND In 1990 representat/ves of Seminole Square and several businesses in that area requested that the City and County consider cormecting Hillsdale Drive from Rio Road to Hydraulic Road. This would have involYed the connection of Hillsdale Drive at Greenbrier Drive to Hydraulic ROad east of the Pepsi Plant. At that time, staff considered existing conditions .east of the Pepsi-Cola'Bottling Plant and determined that construction o£ a Hillsdale Drive'extension could have significant adverse impacts on the flood plain and the Meadow Creek stream. This was particularly due to the notion of extending Hillsdale at its present location east of Seminole Square Shopping Center. It involved slopes 30 to 50 feet high and filling in the flood plain and possibly the floodway in addition to destruction of mature vegetation. In 1993, the ~¥fPO was again asked to consider some type Sf connection to Hillsdale Drive and 29 North. The County staff working with the City and VDOT did a Small analysis of a cormection bebveen Greenbrier Drive and Zan Road or Seminot.~.~,~j~%.~rt. They considered alternatives that wo~fld run both east and west of the Pepsi PtanL It ~'as determined that appro~mately 3,000 ve~cle trips ~vorfld be carried daily on such a co~.ec~or and the cos~ to co~ruct i~ would be in excess of 5350,~0, Flus ihe land acquisition. Ces~ esgmate may be lov.' by 30% to 40%. It v.'as not consldered to be cost beneficial For a co~ection that would o~Sy carry 3,000 daily ~rlos. .,.Acting ..Gi, ty Manager~::~.:.._.....'Z ~ '.-. During the City's deliberalSons on the 29 Ngr. t~ interchanges in early 1995, it was suggested that parallel routes.6f some'type may be beneficial in order to take some of the local traffic off of the 29 North corridor. Great Eastern Management Company again has raised the issue of a connection between Seminole Court and Hillsdale Drive. This would be intended to offset some of the traffic using 29 North to get into Seminole Square. Since the 1993 analysis, some regrading has occurred immediately east of the Pepsi Plant which could pro~dde an access out of the flood plain from Pepsi Place off of Greenbri'er Drive and Hillsdale Drit)e to the end of Seminole Court.' However, this would involve some significant disruption to the Pepsi CoIa Bottling Plant property, particularly to their north parking lot and their truck parking area at the Seminole Court entrance, and may still impact the flood plain depending on how the construction occurs. III. CONCT ,17 TF3TN!'~ C'_ O_~.~_~..,fEb.t~', ~ Based on the information to date, we feel that such a connection on a smaller scale, between Greenbrier Drive and Seminole Courb should be explored and studied in more detail. Hofvever, we are still concerned aboUt the potential cost/benefit of such a connection and the possible negative impa. cts on the flood plain and Meadow Creek. You Should note that up to 90% of this connector would be within the City which would reqtdre the City to provide some percentage of matchi.ng funds. This could possibly affect the City's current highway priority funding. -" If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or R0n Higgins at 971-31.~2 and we will be happy to help you. Thank you.' RLH:sdp Attachment cc: City Council Jim Gahres JudiLh Mueller GREAT EASTERN MANAGEMENT COMPANY ' '~EL~COP~ER " {8~) 293-51 g7 ,.~ ., February 7, 1995 satYendra Sing Huja ... Director of Planning and Communit~ Development City of:..Charlottesville P. O. Box 911 -...:.,... . Charlottesville,' VA 22901 '.~"- Dear Huja: On JanOa.ry 12, 1995 I wrote a letter.(incorrectly dated 1994) concerning a connector road from Hil-lsdale Drive in the County to Seminole Court in the City. · I suggested th~s as a project which would support that portion of the City's Draft Comprehensive Plan which calls for improvements in the U.S. 29 North~: corridor. The letter concluded with a suggestion that study of the connector be specifically listed in the Comprehensive Plan, and an offer to meet with the City to further discuss the situation. The letter was written subsequent to the January 10 joint public hearing on the grade separated interchange at Hydraulic Road, but before the Planning Commis- sion work session and Council action on thatmatter. The City's position on the interchange was under active consideration, and my letter was addressed'directly to Mayor Toscano and Chairman Caraviti because oF the possibility that the improvement to the U.S. 29 North corridor offered by the proposed connector road might have a direct impact on the interchange decision. Copies went to other City Council and Planning Commission members,-.to the City Manager and to you. In addition, the City has received expressions of interest ,.in this connector from Giant Foods and perhaps other tenants oF Seminole Square. On a 'suggestion of this type we wouldnorma'~lY"e~Pect'it~ initially Corfefpond · and work with-Staff, and notwithstanding the fact that we have already~.K~quested that this idea be considered,-.the purpose of this letter is.to ask staff for guidance as to what we should'be doing to-pursuelour suggestion. Specifically, a recent legal notice indicated that on February. 14,-:1995 the City Council and ' Planning Commission will hold a joint public hea~ing On a recently completed traffic study which includes some entrance corridor considerations. Would this public hearing b~ an appropriate time to make a presentation on our proposed connector? Also, the same legal notice soliciting comments on the Capital ImProvement Program, (CIP), including transportations items. Please advise whether it would be appropriate to.make a specif4c CIP r~quest. :"'~' VerY't~uly yours, CC' D B C Toscano. Caraviti Hendr'ix Donald J. ~agner "' :"GREAT EASTb'RN:'MANAGEI(4ENT David'Toscano, Mayor, city of Charlottesville Blake Caravati, Chairman, Planning Commiskion City Hall Charlottesville, Va. Subject: Recommendation re Transportation Section of the city's Comprehensive Plan Dear Mayor Toscano and Chairman Caravati: The transportation section of the City's Draft Comprehensive Plan, speaking of U.S. 29 North, recommends that the City "give priority to improvements' to the corridor to improve traffic flow." We support that goal, and have a specific recommendation. We are acutely aware of the problems with access to.the Seminole Square area. Some years ago, we arranged and financially participated in a public/private joint venture with VDOT to construct dual left turn lanes from the southbound lanes of Route 29 into Seminole Court. This provided increased "storage" of left turn vehicles clear of the through travel lanes on Route 29, and effectively doubled the number of vehicles that-~an make the left turn into the Seminole Square area on each traffic light cycle. At present, it is convenient for city residents to exit th~ City on Rio Road and then utilize Hillsdale Drive to access a number of County businesses along the eaSt side of 29 North without ever going onto Route 29. This maneuver will become even more convenient for downtown City residents when the first segment of ~eadowcreek Parkway is built. The. same access, completely clear of Route 29, is also readily available to County residents.in all of the subdivisions and apartments east of Route 29 and both north and south of Rio Road. For some years, there has been some discussion and a ~ery limited amount of. study devoted to the possibility of a conneCtion between Hillsda!e Drive in.the County and Seminole Court in the City. Such a connection would provide a Continuation of the existing alternate access to the benefit of all area residents, to City businesses in the Seminole Square/Hydraulic Road area and to city tax revenues. $~uch .ac:ess ..would :be a::mi, rror~'image ~o'f- the :access currently ~be~ng afforded by..the cou~t~'.s _recent extension of Serkn, ar Dr'ire.. ~ u~ing Georgetown Road; Hydraulic 'Road and the Berkmar Extensi~':h.i,"~all City and County residents west of 29 North can access Rio Hill .Shopping Center and 'Lowe's without going onto Route 29. ~ This 'has':b&en a major cause of. increased sale~, at' Kroger in Rio' Hill and of reduced sales at 'Kroger on Hydraulic ROad, and to a lesser ext'&nt reduced sales .at Giant in Seminole Squ'are. The next extension of Berkmar, to Sams and Walmart, is under construction. Enclosed is a copy of June 18, 1993 letter from the Chairman of the local ]{PO supporting study of the Hillsdale/Seminole connection. Not much has been done since that time, but the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors currently has under consideration a Capital Improvements Project Budget which includes funds for County support of the study of such a connection... Great Eastern was one of the two "businesses leaders" mentioned in the MPO letter, and both of us are still interested in finding an equitable way to make the proposed connection a reality. Also, we have recently been contacted about this connector road by Giant Food, the highest volume retailer at Seminole Square. The City has either received or will shortly receive a letter from Giant expressing interest in this matter. While the proposed connection certainly falls under the broad Draft Comprehensive Plan goal quoted in the first paragraph of this letter, we suggest that it ~s sufficiently important to be specifically listed for study, just as a n,~mber of other projects listed elsewhere in the Transportation section of the Plan. Over the years, we have amassed a file on this subject, and would be happy to meet and discuss our ideas with City Staff and/or members of City Council or the Planning Commission. I will look forward to hearing from the City as to private discussions or public hearing to further explore this possibility. Very truly yours, Donald J. Wagner Encl. CC: City Council & Planning Commission members C. Hendrix S. Huja J. Jessup : -.- Charl ttesvflle Al en ar le Mr..RiChard C. Lockwood "' ..... Trahsportation Planning .Engineer Virginia .Department' of Transportation 1401 East Broad Street Richmond, VA 23219 ~ 'Organization June~ 18, 1993 Dear Mr. Lockwood: The Charlottesville-Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO), in response to a request from Albemarle County and several interested citizens, has conducted researck into the possibility of constructing an extension of Hillsdale Road east of Route 29 North. This proposed extension would complete an alternate route parallel to Route 29 between the city and Rio Road. The N_PO .feels this is a construction project very worthy of consideration' by..the city, county, and VDOT because of its ability to provide an important alternative to ROute 29 for local travelers. Two major business leaders in the affected area have supported the MPO's consideration of the project and have helped staff research alternatives. They have indicated their support and may be approached to discuss a public-private partnership to fund the construction. We respec~ful!y reqmest the City Council, the Board and Supel-visors, and the Virginia Department of Transpo.rtation. consider the information available to date (see the enclosed memo from HPO staff) and consider action to move to the next stages of design, engineering, costing, and, if it is found to be feasible, construction. Thank you for your early consideration of this request. ~e believe this could be a major step fo~ard in the ongoxng efforts to provide relief to Route 29 North in an economical and efficient manner. Sincerely, Chairman CC: HPO Technical Com=mittee Mr. Don Wagner, Great Eastern Management Mr. James Jessup, Pemsi-Co!a Bottling Company info~mationa! memo frcn NPO staff ' ' ' 22902 e , '7>. .~ ;. i:~. 413 East ?,Inrkc Street, Suite I02 C[:arIot,cs;iI.o. V:s, (o0-,) 9._ 1720 (voice) 972-~ CITY OF , · ,'~., .. ,~, ~i~ :'... ' ' ' ' ' '" ' "~,7 ~.- ~ ~'~ '..., CHARLOTTESVILLE cc,,-/ -.- ~; " · ~..':o~ ,~" .: ., . .. ~-. . .¢~¢,,, MEMO., TO: FRObi: DATE: Ron Higgins, Department of Community Development Cole Hendrix~ City Manager May 23, 1991 RE: Extension of Hillsdale Drive. I am attaching a letter from Bob Tucker .regarding the extension of Hillsdale Drive which cohceivab!y could connCm~ Fashion Square with Semi~uZ~ Squ~re.. :.Would you please read the letter, take a look at the situation.and advise me what you think our position ought to be on'.this.:~a'~t~:.* ' ;!. '~ ,. ?.-.'.., . . ..::: · . . ~..-' f-.v..' '.. .:~.~.i : ' · -: .... . 3; '. .::....~, .,,.: Attachment ':' / ' q:i73A QUALITY-RESPONSIVENESS-FAIRNESS-CREATIVITY-DIGNITY EMP OWEP~IENT-CObL~IUN ! CAT I ON- I NTEGR I T Y ~OU~TY bF ~LBEMAR~iE Office of County Executive C h~lott~sv[lle,-V'irg[n~a 22901-4596 - (804} 2~6-5841 .~..F~ .(804). 979-1281 Cole Hend~ix, Manager :City-,.of Charlottesville POB 911 Charl°~t%s~itle'VA '22902 -e', R~'~~' Extension of'Eil~dale Drive' ...... Dear Cole: .,. . .... .. S~veral months ago Ch~ck Ro~kin requested that the City and County consider the extension of..Hillsdale.Drive connecting Branchlands and Seminole Square Shopping Center. You.will-:~e~al! that we 'requested'the MPO to look into this"matter and pr'ovide recommendation.' My discussion with Wayne Ciiimberg indicates :.that nothing of.any significance'has-occurred on this matter. · .: _ Recently the B6a~"6~.sup~visors reque~ted,~:that I 'lobk into .... "this matter again, i would suggest that we direc.~ our respective planning-departments .to look:at'the feasibility;:of this extension and a cost es.timate. If you concur.with-this'suggestion please let me-know and I will ask Wayne'..'Ciiir6berg to contact Huja~ahd begin staff work on this matter for our~ review. I look forward to hearing from you soon. sincerely, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. County Executive R%,;?Jr/bat 91-1.54 CITY 01:: CHARLOTTESVILLE -'-' VIRGINIA . TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Cole Hendrix, City Manager "'.--: Satyendra Sin§h Huja, Director 'of Planning and CommunitY Degelopment September 26, 1990 - EXTENSION OF HILLSDALE DRIVE TO SEMINOLE SQUARE SHOPPING CENTER TO HYDRAULIC ROAD You '~hared with me a letter from Mr. Chuck'Rotgin 'to Mr. Bob Tucker about the possibility of such connec.t, io.?~between Rio Road and Hydraulic Road. · .' :.:.~"~,"'~"' ": ':~" '. "" It was suggested '~h~t this"':ex{:'ensi'~'i~ ~'~' done on the east side of the Pepsi Plant to extend Hillsdale'Drive. to...Seminole Court next to Bradlees. To do this, it will :'~'e' ex'tr~'m'~ly"'~tifficult because there is about a 40 foot drop to the cre~k.which,wi.ll, h.ay.<~'.to be filled in. All of the involve the destructi6~ .o'f':~a'i""~i'~n'i'fi. can:i:::.'aniount of mature vegetation. For this road to 'cpnh, ect:~to-S.e'minb.l.e.:Square, it will also result in the elimination of 20-40 parking spaces'in the shopping center. To further extend this road from Seminole Squ~re to Hydraulic Road, it would also have to deal with a drop off of 30-50 feet and again w:ll involve filling in the flood plain and flood way and destrq, ction of mature vegetation. This may require possible piping and rechannelin9 of the stream and may also involve some wetland areas. Furthermore, the road will be within 30-40 feet of the back doors of apartments at Hearthwood. Please also note that any alteration or relocation oF the strea~ bed in the City, will require a special permit. It is not likely to be very acceptable to adjacent neighborhoods or to people who are environmentally oriented. Let me indicate that I personally have been in favor of such a connection from Rio Road to Hydraulic Road for many years. But when Fashion Square Mall was proposed, Planning Commission and City Council voted against such a road for reasons mentioned above and due to possible adverse impacts on the Greenbrier Neighborhood to the east. Cole Hendrix, City Manager-- RE: Extension of Roads September 26, 1990 Page Two Bob Tucker has asked 'Wayne Cilimberg to bring this issue to the Metropolitan Planning Organization~meeting to J-incorporate it into the long range overall transportation plan. It is my view, that given the nature of existing development, the'~nd e×isting natural setting, it will be extremely difficult to justify building such a road in spite of its apparent merits for traffic improvement and the connection of shopping ~treas, Thus, it is my recommendation that the City oppose this 'idea of an extension from Rio Road to Hydraulic Road, especially the part from Seminole Court to Hydraulic Road. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions or need further information: Thank you. SSH/sdp COUNTY oF ALBENiARLE Office of Co,pry Executive 401 Mclntire Road C h~,rlot~esville. Virginia, 22901-4596 (804) 296-5841 September 25, 1990 Mr. V. Wayne Cilimberg Director, Planning and Community Development County of Albemarle 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 Extension of Millsdale Drive to Seminole Square Shopping Center Dear Wayne: Attached is a letter from Chuck Rotgin regarding a connector road between Greenbrier Drive and Seminole Square~ Shopping Center (Hillsdale Extension). As you know, this extension was.at one time part of a long-range plan to connect Rio Road and Hydraulic Road.on the east side of Route-29 North and has just reqently been recommended to the Virginia Department of Transportation as a part of'the U.S. 29 EIS. '~ I would appreciate your bringing this matter before th~? Metropolitan Planning Organization's Technical.Committee.for discussion and possible inclusion'in th~ Uniform Planning Work Program or as a joint City/County preliminary roadway alignment project for additions to our respective comprehensive plans. me. Should you have any questions, please feel free to contact Sincerely, Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Deputy County Executive RWTJr/gs 565 GREAT FASTERN,.M.ANAGEMENT COMPANY C-~NE'~,AL O¢'FIC£ fS,O4J 2.96.4141 -.: .... P~O~"E.RTY ~NAGEMENT (8.O~ 296-A log '~[£LECO~'I£R ( ~-O..4 ) 293,.5197 Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Deputy County Executive County of Albemarle County Office Building 401 McIntire Road Dear Bob: ....... . :"September 7, 1990 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE 2 2 ~ 01 - - E.XECUTi.VE OFFICE, This letter is in follow up to our telephone conversation earlier 'today. As I indicated to you, following our Barclay Place meeting earlier this week in the Planning Staff conference room, I spoke with Rom Keeler while' looking at one of the maps on the wall showing the urban Growth Areas. I particularly noticed a blue dotted line connecting the new Branchlands Road with the road network at Seminole Square. R.on said that the construction of this connector road was envisioned several years_ ago as an important'step in reducing traffic on U.S. Route 29N. He further indicated that the County was very surprised to learn, after the fact,.that the City had approved the relocation of ~he Pepsi-Cola plant in an area which appeared to block this proposed connector road. -' Subsequent to the Barclay Place meeting with you-all, Z had l~nch with Jay Jessup on another matter and I brought up the subject of the connector-road between Branchlands and Seminole Square. .Jay was extremely interested in the concept. He took the time to drive me around the Pepsi plant and also in and around the Post office to l°ok at potential alignments. From the dotted line on the County map, an alignment west of the Pepsi plant and behind the Post Office was a possible connector road location. In viewing that alignment with Jay, it appeared that he would lose some of his bottling plant which could cause some problems. However, we then looked at the area to the east of the plant. In spite of this area being potentially located in the Meadowcreek flood plain, we thought that there was sufficient land available to construct the connector road from Branchland$ uo connect with Seminole Square just north of the Bradlees building. ~oDer= September 7,' 1990 :'"" ' ' Page .2 From th~' layman s standpozn~, ,~o.~h. Jay and I feel thtt ~ direct link between Seminole' Squ~re' i.nd Rio Ro~d ~ould be very instrumental in ~llevi~ting tr~ffio ~long ~oute 29 North. In ~ddition to linking, shoppers from Fashion Square Nall ~nd Seminole Square, this ro~d .w0uld~se~e s v~ry l~rge popul~ti6n living' on ~nd no'rth and soUth of Rio Rotd e~st of Rt..29, including the significant am6unt of new development currently underway in these ~re~s. Pepsi-Col~ ~nd our group ~ould certainly b~ willing to eoopertte in ~king ~equisition of right- of-way very ' p~lat~ble. As you and I discussed, I would appreciate very much your calling this matter to the attention of the County Planning Staff and, perhaps, even to the staff of the Hetropolitan Planning Organization. I am taking the liberty of sending a copy of this letter to Cole Hendrix (who I sa~ at lunch today and briefly explained the situation) with a similar request that he ask his planning staff to review this road alignment alternative again. Best regards, CRj r/lyh cc: Cole Hendrix Charles Rotgin, Jr. · PCJB 1505, Cha{lott~svill~:9~ ~2'90~i'(86~) 9~9~'7§1~J;'!}i~ .~d04) 97~21~97 ' ~ 2v.'5' Virginia Relay Center for being impaired: (800) 828-1140 (gbice); ~8~)'8~8-1 i'20 ~D~ ~ - email: tjpd~state.va.us; website: http://avenue.org/~jpdc .~. MPO Technical Committee Meeting Minutes ~ Present .. Dennis Ro0ker, Acting Chair David Benish,' for Way'ne Cilimberg Bill Mawyer Mike Fontaine Eldon Wood Charles Petty Shirley Baldwin Mary Hughes Wayne Woodcock. Nancy O'Brien Guests arid Staff Don Wa.~er - Ron Higgins Juandiego Wade David Roberts Albemarle County Albemarle County City of Ch~irlottesville ": .... City of Charlottesville CTS JAUNT University of Virginia VDOT TJPDC Great ~stem ?.2nagement City of Charlottesville Albemarle County TJ'PDC Hannah Twaddell TJ-PDC Matters From the Public: Paul Grady, following up from his discussion with the committee on the Rio Connector the previous month, said he distributed his proposal at the public meeting on the Meadow Creek Parlovay called by Delegate Paul Harris. He talked with Frank Stoner of Hauser construction, who had interests in the Garnet property and the Meadow Creek treatment plant. He said there was no problem with the treatment plant property, but the Gamett property would be bisected by.h.'is proposal. Mr. Stoner also acknowledged there was a problem with the regional traffic and said he was"interested.in any information form the Eastern Planning Initiative. Mr. Grady also noted the comparison between the Meadow Creek Parkway and the Rock Creek Par~vay (which was t~vo lanes, both set to one direction during ru~.h hour) was not useful because the traffic flowed through the region in both directions equally all day. Mr. Mawyer noted the County was partnering ~vith VDOT to hire a consultant to determine an alignment and conduct an environmental review for Phase II of the Meadow Creek Partcway; an RFP was now in the newspaper, and he hoped the plan would be complete in two years. Hillsdale Drive Update: ~fr. Wagner distributed maps which showed the layou.~ and possible alternatives for extending Hillsdale Drive. He noted a decision would need to be made about whether to zigzag behind the Pepsi plant or go in front of/t; zigzagging could be a natural traffic calming feature, but Pepsi would need to be comfortable with the proximity of the road to its parking and loading areas. tn= cit.5' linai:s. Nit'. Rooker asked if the City would suppo."r the concep:, since almost all of the road ,,,,'as inside ' = Mr. Higgin.~ sai'd.t-he city's concerns were water quality ancl floodplain impacts, but if those isstles were resolved he i:.!:o(:~h!~ there ,.'o,.t!c! b...-' s,_.p?::': f~:' the r,_,9, c! · ~., ~ .... I~ II .. Mr: .Wood.co.c. k said the va, l. ues of~the, .'CO .mmuni,ty, were det.ermlfie, d by th!~olitic~l P'ibsesh ~/iid the planners should not dictate those. Ms. 0 Bnen said this was not the intent, but she kl~d not want to pass the buck just because she was a staffperson. , - - - Mr. Cilimberg said part of the problem 4,~as the riced for politlcal will to ~arry ~ut what the MPO had akeady .adopted. This pleaneed, ed to be made at the Poli~y Board. M~. O'Brien said she realized this, but that the Technical Committee's advice mattered to that Board. Mr. Cilimberg noted the values of the community were not unified enough to be clear criteria on which to decid, ewhat.to do in every case based on those criteria. Ms. O'Brien a~eed, ~nd said maybe this was not the best phrase to use. Mr. Cilimb'ergsaid it was important to keep looking at the basis for decisions during the planning process. Mr. Higgins observed that values changed over time, and pointed to the Fontaine Avenue experience as a good example ofreassessing a proj oct with new values during the design; in that case, the road was changed from the original plan for four lanes with turn lanes to two lanes plus a center turn lane. Ms. O'Brien a~eed to draft a proposal for the Technical Committee to examine at the next meeting and then put forward to the Policy Board. _~dates on Area Studie~ Regarding the proposed Hillsdale Drive extension, Ms. O'Brien said she had not ~been able to secure funds yet for a study to upgra~ie the retenti0h ponds behind Seminole Court so that all of Meadow Creek could be better protected by whatever system was needed for the new road. Ms. Twaddell brought up the suggestion e-mailed to the Committee sent by City resident Kevin Lynch that the new road be built all the way to Michie Drive. The committee noted this had been considered before and presented topographic and flood plain problems. Mr. Higgins said another option was to extend it behind Seminole Court, which could be done but was expensive. Ms. O'Brien said she would continue to pursue these.funds and asked anyone interested in this to work with her. Mr. Cilimberg said it was also a. funding issue; the County had committed to funding, and asked the City to do so, but the City had not. Mr. Benish noted the existing Hillsdale Drive had bike lanes and the County had recently gotten approval for bike lanes on the areas north of the existing section, as well as on Berkmar Drive Extended. Minutes of May 6, 1999: Upon motion by Mr. Higgins, seconded by Mr.'Wood, the minutes w~e approved. Other Business: Ms. O'Brien said there was to be a major congestion'management strategy accompanying the Rio Road Closing. She complimented JAUNT, CTS, and RideShare on their efforts to educate the public in advance of the closing, noting the Rio Road experience was a golden opportunity to promote transit. She also said the joint marketing that was being done was a great improvement over past years. She suggested the TIP include a.policy that congestion management strategies be considered for every construction project. Upon motion by Ms. Poore, seconded by Mr. Wood, the Committee recommended the Policy Board include this policy in the TIP. There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned. .. ._.,,~ ~.;,~ .;...~ :~ ...... .. ..... ~.,D2blFT,,:g4PO Techni, cal Committee Meeting, February4, 1999 Page2 . .Donald Lyon, a rgpresentattve of the Ramtree Homeo~mer s Assoc~atton ~d ~ ~soc~atmn of the subd~ws~ons beBveen Htllsdale Drive and ~o Road, commented on the Co~ector proposal. H~s ~oups were in total suppO~ of this endeavor as it would give residents a ve~ usehl alternative to Route 29. Ms. ~e~~eadow Creek was the m0s~: polluted~rem in the ~v~a watershed, and said the ' Pl~~.was applying fpr a ~ant t~water ponds to cle~ stomwater flowing into the cr~~St°fing }omc of the ~cos)stem. :8'~6 ~uggested the road project could be desired to achieve this goal as well. Ms. O Bden a~eed to discuss this proposal fu~her with ~. Wa~er, the Pepsi o~mers, ~d the City engineer. Route 29 Pedestrian Study: Upon motion by Ms. O'Bfien, seconded by ~. Benish, the Co~ittee reco~ended the Policy Board approve the Route 29 Pedestrian Study given the following suggestions ~d notes: · . It would be useful to include data about the effect of the reco~endations on vehicle Level of Se~ice at the inters'ections. The consultant did consider this as pa~ of the pla~ing process, and sites for pedestrian crossings were chosen based in pan upon the goal of impacting intersections as little as possible. · It will be impo~ant to plan the pedestfi.~ sisals to blend with the tec~plogicaI up~ades being considered by the City, County, ~d VDOT which will improve the coordination and timing of the lights t~ough both jurisdictions ........ · Pedestrian crosswalk lighting is included in the plan and the cost estimates; it would appear.similar to low-profile runway lights. · Grade separated pedestrian hcilities (crossovers) are proposed only. as a long r~ge solution. Much can be done first to 'improve the safety and convenience of existing hcilities. · County staffhas some suggestions for mino'r co~ections which would make the repo~ more closely reflect cu~ent pla~ing activities; thsy would not substantively change the reco~endations. For example, comments on the area around Ai¢o~ Road need to be made more g~neral because the proposed interchanges, have not been approved by the County to date. ~ addition, references to plans for the Meadow Creek Par~vay and Route 29 B~ass as parallel roads should be replaced with a more general statement about plans for parallel routes, since there was considerable local controversy over both these roads. Staffhas a~eed to send these co~ents to ~OT. " · The No~h Charlottesville Business Council reviewed the dra~ plan at a meeting in mid-~anua~ and was generally suppo~ive of its concepts, including the ideas of making parking lots mor[ ~endly to pedestrians. They hace not gone so hr as to co--it funds, but may weil'be willing to work with the MPO and localities on it. · It might be helpRd to include a footnote that the sidewalk cost estimates ($150,000 per mile) are based on the average urban sidewalk in this area. The County has sometimes used estimates of much higher costs per mile, depending on howmuch sto~water management is needed, while Ci~ costs ~e more in line ~vith this estimate. · The Committee commended VDOT PrQect Manager Je~ifer DeBmhl, and c6nsultant Joe Springer for an excellent job engaging pla~ers and the public. One commi~ee member said the workshops were the most c[~dlized, producfi~'e, and useRtl workshops she had ever attended on traffic engineering. Draft FY2000 Work Program: The comn,,ittee had no major comments on the draft other than to note that RAY D. PETHi~EI~ COMMISSIONER " DEPARTMENT OF. TRANSPORTATION 1401 EAST .B. ROAD STREET . .. ' RICHMOND, 23219 - July 15, 1993 :'" " H!!!~'daie Road Ext~ns. jon Mrs. Charlotte Humphris, Chairman Metropolitan Planning Organization c/o Mrs. Nancy O'Brien, Executive Director Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission 413 East Market Street,' Suite' 102 Charlottesville,"VA 22901 '-"' . Dear Mrs. Humphris: .- RICHARD C, LOCKWOOD TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ENGINEER We have revieWed your letter dated June .18, i993, reques'dng City C°uncil,. the Board of Supervisors and VDOT to consider action on extending Hillsda.le Road. The Technical Committee considered Alternative A as shov~r~ on'the attached aerial photograph to be the most feasible alternative to extend Hillsdale Road. Alternative A begins at ~he cul-de-sac at the end of Pepsi Place and.ends the end of Seminole Court. It appears'that this entire alternative lies. Wi!hi'~i~.t.'l~e CiW limits. Hillsdale Road is classified as a'local road. Local roads are not eligible to be placed in the CATS Plan. Therefore, it does not appear thal; the Hillsdale Road Extension would be eligible for VDOT urban funding. " Sincerely; - Attachments C~ Mr. Thomas Vandever, Mayor, City of charlottesville--./-' ....... .:.....- Mr. David Bowerman, Chairman, A~bema'rl~ Boa}d of SOpervisors " Rio Hill Neighborhood AsS'o6ititi°n .... Charlottesville, Virginia 22901 ..... ; March 4, 1999 Sally Thomas Charlottesville Alb~ma;le Municipal Planning Office P.O. Box 1505 Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 We the undersigned representatives of our local communities strongly encourage you to explore the option of extending Hillsdale Drive to the Seminole Square Shopping Center. We believe that this extension will benefit the citizens of the county, local btisinesses and promgte a cooperative effort between the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County. Safety is a major reason for this road construction. This road extension will divert local traffic from Route 29 for those individuals living or traveling in the northeastern area of the urban belt. It provides a more direct route to the shopping areas north of the Route 250 by-pass. It will reduce traffic demands on Route 29, It is especially beneficial to residents of the retirement communities living behind Fashion Square Mall. Great Eastern Management Company and the owner of the Pepsi plant have both expressed an interest in the cost sharing of this project. Each will share the benefit of the project in both developments of the newly opened land as well as additional .revenues from increased sales at Seminole Square shopping center. The City of Charlottesville will likewise benefit from the '~.. additional tax revenues generated by increased sales in this retail area. KainTree Homeowner's P/ssociation Westmoreland~Homeowner's Association Date: Tue, 29 Jun 1999 1i:34:04 -0400 ~- ..-.:; .iv-;;-';' :-"'~' From: Kevin Lynch <klynch~rlc.net> To: Hannah Twaddell <htwaddell.tjpd@stat.e.va.us> ; Subject: [Fwd: comments for MPO meeting]'. Hannah, I regret that I wont be able to make the meeting for the MPO te~hnicaI committee on Thursday. However I would like to forward some suggestions. I submit these as my own suggestions, but similar suggestions are also being developed by STAMP. The STAMP web page is at http://www.earthsystems.org/stamp The transportation vision and alternative transportation solutions pages may be of interest to the MPO. 1) Determine the feasibility of an eastern service road, from Hydaulic Road, East of the Kmart, to connect with Hillsdale drive, with a connection at Greenbriar. This road could begin at Michie drive, although it may also. be possible to start it further to the ~Vest, if there is an objection to making Michie drive a through street. I believe that storm'water retention facilities for such a road could possibly even improve upon the current condition of the Meadow Creek, and the road would relieve pressure on Hydraulic mad, Which is a major regional bottleneck 2) Revisit interchanges on Rt 29, particularly at Hydraulic, Greenbriar and Rio. Rt 29 is the regional traffic corridor and traffic should be encouraged to use this corridor, rather than creating pressure for the destruction of City and County parks and neighborhoods. 3) Determine the feasibility of removing some of the lights on rt 29, diverting the business traffic that uses these lights to adjacent lights, using side streets. Three potential candidate's would be the light just South of Angus road, the northernmost light at Fashion square and the light by the Better Living building. ! would very much like to see the MPO make a p.e. rmanent commitment of no net increase of lights on rt 29 within the City and County boundaries. Ifa new light is absolutel7 required in the future, then I think that there are several less necessary lights that could be removed. ... Regards, Kevin Lynch. Nov-03-99 08:17A FERRINO USA 804 984 0862 P.02 1155 Fifth Street SW, Suite D Charlottesville, VA 22902 Tents, Backpacks and Sleeping Bags i 1/03/99 To: Sally Thomas David P. Bowerman Charlotte Humphris Forrest R. Marshall, Jr. Charles S. Martin Walter ?erkins Larry, W. Davis, Esq. Ella W. Carey, CMC From; Kelly J. Pugh 449 Laurelwood Lane Charlottesville, VA 22903 (804) 823°2447 Greetings: This is to inform you of my strong su_t~port for the pav'mg of Midway and Wyant Ro..a. ds. On two separate occasions, I have nearly collided with a school bus full of children at the blind curve where Midway and Wyant roads meet. Only through quick action and sheer luck were these accidents avoided. I understand that the proposed VDOT paving plaa also includes modification to this area, which would improve visibility and widen the road surface. Sally Thomas received a more detailed letter from me a few weeks ago stating my position on this matter. I would be happy to provide any further assistance; if needed, m help reach a positive resolution to this process. In the meantime, please add my name to the tong list of supporters tbr the planned paving project. T'hm~ you for your time, Sincerely, Kelly J. Pugh Phone: 804-984-0195 Fax: 804-984.0862 e-ma#: ferrinousa~aol.¢om ~N~v;O~-99 10:48A Wolf Property Corporation P.O1 $498 Wyant I,ane Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 November 2, 1999 Board of Supervisors Albemarle County 401 M¢lntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902 via Fax: (804) 296-5800 Dear Members: Attached is a copy of a letter addressed to Mrs. Sally Thomas on 21 September, 1999. It sets forth some &the long and tedious history of our efforts to have a one-half' mile stretch of Wya~t Lane paved. Although th/s proj~t received final approval and funding a year ago by your Boaxd and the VDOT, it appears threatened by a tiny minority &the daily users &the road. We urge the Board to permit this worthwhile and finaliz~l project to proceed 'to a prompt completion. Sincerely, Lois L. Wolf .~v:?02-99 10:¢8A Wolf Property Corporation P.02 5498 Wyant Lane Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 21 September, 1999 Mrs. Sally Thomas Supervisor Albemarle County Board of Supervisors 859 Leigh Way Chgrlottesville, Virginia 22901 We were surprised to receive a memorandum from you, indicating that some significam number of residents along Wyant Road (State Route 791) might possibly be opposed to its paving. The memorandum concluded by saying "Let me know what you think." We have lived on and owned property m the end of this half mile-Ion8 unpaved road since t974. Shortly after moving there we sought to start action to have the road paved. With no. help available flora the State Highway Department or the County our family members took action we were told was necessary to help secure the required rights of way. During the course of communicating v, fith our neighbors ~long the road we never encountered a single one using the road for access to their homes who did not strongly I~vor its paving. In 1978 we completed the development of Laurelwood, 33 houses at the end of this road, which we continue to own. There is presently a total of 43 occupants in Laurelwood. Given the interest the residents of Laurelwood have expressed, I feel sure that almos~ every one ofthem can be counted as a proponent of the paving. This is fat more than half of the residents, or the residences, served by this road. If there are any of the occupants of houses along this road who do not want to see it paved I am certain that they are vastly outnumbered by those who do. We are both 82 years old. When we received advice from you nearly a year ago that the road had finally reached the top of the six year list we thought we might survive to see i~ paved. When it was staked out by I~ghway Department engineers early last Spring we felt somewhat encouraged. Unfortur~ately Spring and Summer have gone with no work whatsoever done on the road. Calls to the Department of' Transportation office brought the same old "Don't know when" r~ly, To answer the invitation ending your memorandum we and the 43 residents of Lauretwood most definitely want the road paved. Our question is: "What more do we have to do to gex this bus~', potentially dangerous, half mile-long, dead end road paved?" Sincerely, John F. Wolf Lois L. Wolf Nov-02-gg lO:07A Wolf Property Corporation P.01 5664 Wyant Lane Charlottesville, Virginia 22903 November 2, 1999 Board of Supervisors Albemarle County 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville. Virginia 22902 Via Fax: (804) 296-5800 Dear Members: We have been recently informed by Mrs. Angela Tucker, VDOT Resident Engineer, that paving of all of Wyant Lane and a portion of Midway Road is scheduled to go out For bids in February 2000, and that this project has been placed on the November Third Board of Supervisors meeting for discussion. a) As long-time resident property owners on Wyant Lane, and b) having ceded land and granted easements to thcilitate this improvement, we respectfully urge your continued support in going forward with the project as already approved by VDOT and according to the agreed time schedule. Sincerely, Althea A. Wyam Ellen S Wyant COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Teen Pregnancy Prevention Report SUBJECT/PROPOSALIREQUEST: Report from the Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, White AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: X INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes,/~ REVIEWED BY: / BACKGROUND: Over two years ago, a large group of diverse and concerned citizens came together to review the community's current approach to teen pregnancy and to suggest steps for a concerted effort to address the problem. The report documents many hours of consensus building on a community problem that is often ignored due to the sensitive nature of the subject and widely differing religious and moral views on the solutions. The result of their impressive data collection and analysis and nationwide research on other successful programs has produced a vision and recommendations for a community wide effort to reduce teen pregnancy. This attached report is a brief summary of a larger report that was sent separately to each Board member several weeks ago DISCUSSION: This comprehensive look at the serious problem of teen pregnancy provides the community with a number of Very specific recommendations, which are directed at different community agencies and programs, i.e. schools, United Way, Commission on Children and Families. Since the Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention was officially recognized and endorsed at the outset by the Commission on Children and Families, this final report will be reviewed by the Commission at its November 3rd meeting. RECOMMENDATION: Jack Marshall and Steve Stern, the primary coordinators of this community wide effort, will present their report to the Board. This report requires no action from the Board at this time, but may form the basis of future recommendations on program implementation and associated budget costs from the Commission on Children and Families. 99.206 Strategic planning Work Group of the Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention Small Group: John F. (Jack) Marshall, Ph.D., Chair Joseph Allen, PkD. Dyan Aretakis, FNP/MSN Cfi Kars-Marshall, Ph.D. Steven Stern, Ph.D. Mary Sullivan, M. Ed. MEMORANDUM Albemarle To: _ County Board of Supe~,isors t~'~les Martin, Chair Sally Thomas, Vice Chak David Bowerman Charlotte Humphris Forrest Marshall, Jr. Walter Perkins From: Jack Mar~c,~ Date: October 17, 1999 On behalf of the Strategic Planning Work Group, I'm pleased to enclose with this memo a copy of A Community Strategic Plan for Preventing Teen Pregnancies and Sexually Transmitted Diseases. The document is the product of two years of study and analysis by a group of some 30 volunteers interested in teen pregnancy and STD prevention - with significant help from staff of civic and youth-serving organizations in the community. We believe this Strategic Plan (a) provides a realistic definition of the current situation in Charlottesville and Albemarle County, (b) proposes feasible and effective steps for dealing with the problem, and (c) demonstrates that devoting additional resources to reducing teen pregnancy and STD rates is cost-effective. We hope you'll read the Plan carefully. If you don't have time now to examine the entire document, the highlights of the Plan are covered in the Executive Summary (pages vii-viii), the final chapter (pages 64-71), and the Preliminary Action Agenda (Appendix N, pages 97-103). We have asked to be placed on the agenda of the November 3 meeting of the Board of Supervisors, when we will propose to you that this Strategic Plan serve as the foundation for a new, forward- looking public policy and as a guideline for increased funding for teen pregnancy/STD prevention. Please don't hesitate to give me a call (974-6390) or e-mail me (crijack~cville. net) if you have any questions or suggestions for strengthening the Strategic Plan, for to remain viable it must be a constantly evolving document. l~Stracts Ir°ot: A COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN FOR PREVENTING TEEN PREGNANCIES AND SEXUALLY TRANSMITTED DISEASES Prepared by the Strategic Planning Work Group Of the Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention Charlottesville and Albemarle County, Virginia SEPTEMBER 1999 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements ............................................ iii Table of Contents .............................................. iv Mission Statement ............................................. vi List of Abbreviations ........................................... vi Executive Summary ........................................... vii I. Introduction .................................................. 1 mo Purpose of this strategic plan .................................... Background ................................................. The need to prevent teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases .... 1. The statistical picture: Teen pregnancies .................... 2. The statistical picture: Sexually transmitted diseases .......... 3. 1 2 4 4 9 The human situation ................................... 12 II. Lessons from national research on teen pregnancy prevention programs ..... 15 A. Roots of the teen pregnancy/STD problems: Risk factors ..............15 B. Findings from program evaluations .............................. 16 III. Overarching issues and recommendatiOns ............................. 19 A. Setting the tone ............................................... 19 B. Adjusting the mix of programs ................................... 23 IV. Issues and recommendations by sector ............................... 28 A. Families .................................................... 28 B. Schools ..................................................... 31 C. Community Organizations ...................................... 37 D. Health Care Services .......................................... 40 E. Religious Organizations ......................................... 44 F. Business Community .......................................... 47 V. Financial and administrative support ................................. 50 A. Economic costs of current and proposed programs ................... 50 B. Economic benefits of current and proposed programs ................. 50 C. Administrative support and overall program coordination .............55 VI. Evaluating local efforts ........................................... 59 VII. Conclusions ................................................... 64 Bibliography ....................................................... 72 APPENDICES A. Members of the Strategic Planning Work Group ........................ 76 B. The Strategic Planning Process ..................................... 78 C. Teen female population by age, Charlottesville and Albemarle County, 1990.. 80 D. Number of pregnancies among girls aged 10-19 and 10-17 years, Charlottesville and Albemarle County, by year, 1988-1997 ............... 81 E. Calculating teen pregnancy rates .................................... 82 F. Pregnancy rates for gifts age 15-19, Charlottesville and Albemarle County, by year, 1990-1997 ........................................ 83 G. Number of teen pregnancies by age group, Charlottesville and Albemarle County, 1997 .................................................... 84 H. Pregnancy, birth, and abortion rates for females aged 15-19, by race, Charlottesville and Albemarle County, 1996 ........................... 85 I. Percentage of teen pregnancies ending in abortion, Charlottesville and Albemarle County, by year, 1990-1997 ................................ 86 J. Percentage of public high school students in Virginia who have had sexual intercourse, 1992 ............................................... 87 K. Percentage of students nationally who have had sexual intercourse, by age, 1995 .......................................................... 88 L. Summary descriptions of local programs, projects, and organizations involved with teen pregnancy/STD prevention ................................ 89 M. Calculating the economic benefits of current and proposed programs ........ 95 N. Preliminary Action Agenda ......................................... 97 List of Figures and Tables: Figure 1: Pregnancy rates for girls aged 15-19 in 1997, Albemarle County, Charlottesville, Virginia, and the USA ....................... 4 Figure 2: Outcome of all 250 pregnancies in 1997, Charlottesville and Albemarle County ...................................... 5 Figure 3: Birth rates for girls aged 15-19 in 1996, Albemarle County, Charlottesville, Virginia, the USA, and France ................7 Figure 4: Graph representing hypothetical distribution of local teens' motivation to avoid becoming a teen parent ................... 66 Table 1: Costs of current teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs and proposed expansions ..................................... 51 Table 2: Total costs and estimated benefits of current teen pregnancy/STD Prevention programs and proposed expansions ................ 52 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Teen pregnancies, particularly those that result in teen parenthood, extract a high price -- from the adolescents themselves, their babies, and society. In addition to the personal costs, conservative economic estimates place the financial cost to taxpayers for each teen birth at $37,000 over the lifetime of the mother and child. Although local teen pregnancy rates have shown a modest drop during the 1990s, paralleling a national trend, American teen pregnancy and teen birth rates remain by far the highest in the industrialized world. In 1995 the birth rate for girls aged 15-19 was 54.7 in the United States overall, 45.4 for Virginia, 58.5 in Charlottesville, and 19.7 in Albemarle County. In France, as a comparison, the teen birth rate that year was 7. In addition, national statistics show that 3 million American teens each year are diagnosed with sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). that cost our nation huge mounts more to diagnose and treat. The analysis and proposals in this document are the product of the Strategic Planning Work Group, created in direct response to the May 30; 1997 town meeting on "Partners in Teen Pregnancy and STD Prevention" sponsored by a consortium of local organizations. This strategic plan presents the Work Group's review of approaches that have been demonstrated in other communities to reduce the rates of teen pregnancies and STDs. In this document the Work Group concludes that Charlottesville and Albemarle County can and should strengthen efforts to decrease teen pregnancy and STDs, and that investing in these tested prevention programs can be cost effective. It advances some 50 specific recommendations for meeting current needs, proposes which local groups could assume responsibility for implementing each recommendation, and includes a summary "Action Agenda". Because no single factor marks those most at-risk for teen pregnancy or STDs, the most successful prevention efforts address the teen as a whole person, including social, emotional, intellectual, biological, and individual aspects. National research indicates that the most effective prevention programs include youth development, volunteer service, and skills-training components. Less comprehensive efforts, however, can also have an effect on teen pregnancy/STD prevention; the plan suggests steps that should be taken by families, schools, community organizations, health care providers, religious organizations, and the business community. Local prevention programs are supported through a combination of public, private, and not-for-profit funding sources. Currently, prevention programs in Charlottesville and Albemarle County that directly address teen pregnancy and STD prevention cost approximately $230,200 annually. These prevention vii programs are highly cost-effective; conservative estimates suggest that each dollar spent on teen pregnancy prevention returns nearly 2 to 4 times its value to the community. This report consequently recommends expanding the budget for teen pregnancy and STD prevention programming to approximately $550,000 per year. The success of local programming for the prevention of teen pregnancies and STDs has been restricted by limited financial resources, by reluctance to initiate potentially controversial programs, and by the absence of a community vision that articulates priorities in the fight against teen pregnancies and STDs. This strategic plan offers nine highest priority recommendations for improving the Charlottesville/Albemarle community's prevention efforts: · Build on proven interventions by expanding good local programs and initiating programs shown to be effective in other localities. · Focus on each adolescent as a whole person by offering programming that addresses social, emotional, intellectual, individual, and biological aspects. · Improve communication about sexuality and reproductive health by encouraging adults and the media to provide clear, constructive, consistent support of the prevention message. · Increase spending on prevention programs by public, private, and not-for-profit sectors, recognizing the cost-effectiveness of such efforts. · Coordinate community prevention efforts by funding a professional, who will also assist with special events, information dissemination, program evaluation, and grant applications. · Strengthen parents' ability to communicate with theft children of all ages about developmental issues and to articulate their own values about sexuality by offering support and educational oppommities for parents. · Expand existing highly effective programs to provide a seamless continuum of services for youth of all ages in our community. · Improve the implementation of Family Life Education curricula in schools by, among other things, adding skills building and enhancing teacher training. · Expect health care providers to play a more active role in educating youth and parents about reproductive health and prevention of teen pregnancy and STDs. This plan acknowledges that deep-seated differences in values and beliefs will preclude consensus on some issues. To succeed, we must seek common ground on which to build effective teen pregnancy and STD prevention efforts in our community. We must treat our differences with respect, encouraging and supporting all groups to develop prevention programs consonant with their beliefs. We must strive for unity of principle while respecting the diversity of means. VIII CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION I. A. Purpose of this strategic plan The Charlottesville/Albemarle County conununity~ has long been concerned about pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases (STDs) among our adolescents,2 despite the virtual absence of public policy on the issue. During the last 40 or 50 years, residents have increasingly perceived teen pregnancies with misgivings, in large part because the personal, social, and economic costs have grown. The teen pregnancy rate today is about the same as in the 1950s, but now a much smaller percentage of teens get married when they get pregnant. Single-parenting teens too often drop out of school, qualify only for low-paying jobs, and not infrequently, end up on welfare. Moreover, since the 1950s, the abortion rate among teens has increased, and, with the spread of AIDS since the 1980's, alarm about STDs among teens has grown. Parents' apprehensions about teen pregnancy and STDs have been paralleled by disquiet expressed by many sectors of the society: schools, local civic and youth- serving organizations, health care providers, religious groups, the media, etc. The concern, however, has been manifest in only a handful of local programs that reach only a small proportion of the youth who need them; the following chapters will discuss these efforts. With a few laudable exceptions, our community's ventures into teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs that have demonstrable impacts have been limited by inadequate funding and/or paralyzed by fear of controversy. Both of these problems -- the inability to find resources to sustain needed programs and the unwillingness to initiate a program that may provoke challenges from some sector of the community -- are linked to a third problem: the absence of a common community vision that articulates what we will do about teen pregnancies and STDs, and what our priorities are. The strategic plan outlined in the following pages attempts to fill this gap in our community vision. It is intended: (a) to raise awareness about the need to deal more effectively with teen pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases in our community; ~ The City of Charlottesville in central Virginia has an estimated population of 38,100, of whom teens aged 15-19 comprise 6%. By race, 74% of the population is white, 23% black, and 1% Hispanic. The average family income is $40,050. Albemarle County, 750 largely rural square mile surrounding Charlottesville, hasa population of 80,200; 8% are 15-19. By race, 84% is white, 11% black 2% Hispanic. Family income averages $50,442. 2 In this document we will use the terms "adolescents", "teens", and "youth" interclmngeably, all referring to boys and girls age 10 through 19 unless more narrowly defined. (b) to provide a broad perspective that helps coordination of efforts and cooperation among agencies; (c) to review the strengths and weaknesses of our current efforts; (d) to advance specific recommendations for meeting current needs, and to suggest priorities; (e) to propose institutional responsibilities for implementing, or for monitoring the implementation of, the proposed tasks; and (f) to stimulate discussion that may lead to new policies and programs in the public, nonprofit, and private sectors. This report contains hundreds of implicit and explicit ideas for improving our community's teen pregnancy prevention efforts. From among the many ideas, some fifty specific recommendations emerged using three criteria: the probability that the program/activity/policy will have an effect in reducing teen pregnancy and STD rates in our community, based on reliable evaluations of experience elsewhere; the cost, in terms of money, people, and time; and · the cultural and political acceptability in our community at this time: is the activity consonant with overall community values? Because local teen pregnancy rates have shown a modest drop during the 1990's paralleling a national trend (see I.C. 1., below), there is a risk that we as a community will relax our efforts to deal with the problem. Such complacency would be ill-advised. American teen pregnancy and teen birth rates are by far the highest in the industrialized world; the small recent declines do not change this picture. Moreover, every year in Charlottesville and Albemarle County unintended teen pregnancies number in the hundreds; each represents personal anguish and social costs that might have been avoided. We have a continuing responsibility to devote to this issue the attention it deserves. I. B. Background The need for strategic planning for teen pregnancy and STD prevention in our area has been evident for some time. In the 1990's alone, three major efforts were launched to identify overall needs in the Charlottesville/Albemarle community and to develop projects and programs in the context of the "big picture". During 1993-1994, the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth (CACY) Commission - now merged with the local Community Policy Management Team (CPMT) and given expanded responsibility as the Commission on Children and Families (CCF) -- convened a series of forums and working groups with over 50 local citizens to develop a "Community Action Plan." The plan, presented to the community at a March 1995 "Roundtable Discussion," identified three top-priority issues: character education in elementary schools, greater parent involvement in teen pregnancy prevention, and focussed programs aimed at small groups of high- risk children aged 8-11. Though working groups met to deal with all three issues, only the third topic led to tangible results. The group developed and obtained initial funding for the "Beating the Odds" program at the Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA), currently serving 63 children in the city and county (described in Chapter IV.C. and Appendix L). In 1995, a needs assessment report by the Council on Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention (CAPP) reviewed strengths and weaknesses in local teen pregnancy/STD prevention activities. One of CAPP's conclusions was that teen pregnancy/STD efforts would continue to be fragmented and inadequate until a systematic strategic plan was developed by the community. Without such a plan, scarce resources were unlikely to be allocated optimally. On May 30, 1997 a town meeting on "Partners in Teen Pregnancy and STD Prevention" was sponsored by a consortium of local organizations (see Appendix B). The 60 concerned citizens who participated reviewed the community's present approach to teen pregnancy prevention and suggested the next steps for concerted effort. Participants urged that four topics be addressed immediately: parents' communication with their children about sexuality and other subjects (echoing a theme from the 1995 Roundtable Discussion); after-school activities for teens; expansion of existing teen pregnancy prevention projects into more schools; and strategic planning. A working group was established to deal with each issue. The strategic plan presented in this document was created in direct response to the Town Meeting consensus recommendation. The Strategic Planning Work Group began meeting in the summer of 1997, and over the next two years a small group collected data, reviewed literature, and drafted sections of the Plan. These drafts were then critically reviewed by a larger group more representative of the community's diversity. The Strategic Planning Working Group's membership and its operations are detailed in Appendices A and B. I.C. The need to prevent teen pregnancy and sexually transmitted diseases 1. C. 1. The statistical picture: Teen pregnancies Approximately 4 in 10 girls in the United States become pregnant at least once before turning 20 years old (National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 1997b, p. 3). A million teenage girls in America got pregnant in 1997. Of that number, our share was 128 girls in Albemarle County and 122 in Charlottesville (Virginia Center for Health Statistics, 1998).3 Over the past ten years, local figures on teen pregnancies have varied somewhat; Appendix D graphs the data for all teens (i.e., age 10-19) and for teens age 10-17. The meaning of these numbers is easier to understand when translated into rates representing the number of pregnancies per thousand teen girls (see Appendix E for steps in calculating a rate)? Rates can be compared among different groups or to show changes over time. For example, Figure 1 shows that the pregnancy rate for girls aged 15-19 in Albemarle County is lower than the rate for all teen girls in the state of Virginia, 120 100 ................................ 92.~ 80 ..~7~5 Albemarle Ch'ville Virginia USA Figure 1: Pregnancy rates for girls 15-19 in 1995, Albemarle County, Charlottesville, Virginia, and USA 3 Appendix C shows, for each age, the total number of gifts between ages 10 and 19 for both Charlottesville and Albemarle in 1990 - the most recent census year. The total is about 7000, and the number of boys in this age group is roughly the same. 4 A pregnar~cy rate requires reliable data for both the number of pregnancies in a particular group in a given year (the numerator), and also the total number of females in that group in that year (the denominator). Only in census years - once every ten years in the USA ( 1970, 1980, 1990, etc.) - is the denominator highly reliable. Between censuses, we must rely on estimates that become less trustworthy as the decade progresses. and the pregnancy rate for Charlottesville teen girls is higher than the state average. Focussing on 15-19 year old girls, who are responsible for 98% of teen pregnancies, both the city and county rates show a modest and irregular drop over the past eight years (see Appendix F) that parallels a state and national trend. Though the overall numbers and rates help describe the situation, they tend to obscure the fact that each teen pregnancy is unique. So, of course, are the impacts on the teens and their families. The age at which a teen pregnancy occurs, for example, can make a tremendous difference. In both the city and the county, three of the pregnancies in 1997 were to girls aged 14 or below - still in junior high - but most of the pregnancies were to 18 and 19 year olds, some in college (see Appendix G). A small proportion of the girls were married (18% in Albemarle, 11% in Charlottesville); most were not. There are also differences in teen pregnancy rates by race, which may be primarily a function of the overall socio-economic disparity in our community between blacks and whites. As Appendix H shows, in Charlottesville the 1996 pregnancy rate for black teens aged 15-19 was more than twice that of white teens, and the birth rate of black teens was nearly four times higher. In Albemarle County these differences are considerably less apparent, and the rates for both black and white teens far lower. Figure 2 shows the outcome of the teen pregnancies in 1997. Most now result in live births, and nearly all teen mothers choose to keep their children rather than Live births births // 69 '~ / X / s2 Miscarriages Abortions A~rt~n~ 40~ 32% Miscarriages 4%' Figure 2: Outcome of teen pregnancies, 1997, Charlottesville and Albemarle place them for adoption.5 Until 1995 the majority of adolescent pregnancies ended in abortions and miscarriages. The change in the proportion of teen pregnancies that end in abortion over the last eight years is shown in Appendix I. Teen birth rates, rather than teen pregnancy rates, have in recent years become preferred by many authorities as a useful way to measure adolescent reproductive health and behavior. This is mainly because data on teen births are far more reliable (some teen pregnancies, particularly those ending in an early miscamage, are unreported), and because a birth is more likely than a pregnancy to be a life- changing event for a teen. The current pattern of teen birth rates, shown in Figure 3, is similar to that of teen pregnancy rates - except that the Charlottesville rate is greater than the national rate. For teens age 15-19 in 1996, the birth rate in Charlottesville is nearly three times that of Albemarle County, and about 30% higher than the state. To provide a sense of perspective, Figure 3 includes the comparable teen birth rate for France: it is about a third that of Albemarle County.6 The birth rate among American teenagers aged 15-19, after increasing sharply in the 1980's, declined consistently between 1991 and 1996 a total of 12.4%; the rate in Virginia during the same period dropped 15% (Venmra et al., 1998). Local birth rates, analyzed by the Strategic Planning Work Group for this report, have fluctuated over the same six-year period because of our relatively small population. When these normal variations are smoothed out with a regression line, the results reveal that birth rates for 15-19-year-old teens in our community declined at an even faster rate from 1991 to 1997. In Charlottesville, the drop in the teen birth rate was 21%; in Albemarle County, 24%. ~ Data are not available to indicate the proportion of teen births that led to adoption in our community, but nationally in 1988 only one percent of babies born to never-married African American women and three percent of babies born to never-married white women were placed for adoption (Bachrach 1992). 6 Teen birthrates are on average nearly six times lower in France, Germany, and the Netherlands than in the U.S. Rates of STDs, including HIV/AIDS, are four to seven times lower than in the U.S., and adolescents in these countries become se~omlly active later than American teens (Berne and Huberman, 1999, p. 7). One expert 0tuberman 1999) suggests that the reasons are because in Europe: (a) Sexual health and responsibility are public health issues, not religious issues; emphasis is on ethical behavior of individuals, rather th_a_n church doctrine or collective force; (b) Sextmlity education is not necessarily a course, but is often integrated throughout school subjects, through all grades. The focus is on giving complete and acowate information. Sexuality education promotes the values of respect, responsibility, and committed relationships. (c) National health insmance gives sexamily active youth free and convenient access to contraception and emergency contraception. (d) Young people generally believe that it is "stupid and irresponsible" to engage in sex without protection. There is, of course, variation in teen pregnancy and STD rotes among the full range of European countries. Until we better understand they muses of the differences, we must be cautious in using Europe as a model. 120 - 100 56.5 .......................... '54;7 ................................. t 19.7 oi Albemarle Ch'ville Virginia USA France Figure 3:Birth rates for girls 15-19 in 1996, Albemarle County, Charlottesville, Virginia, USA, and France A look at all 150 teens who gave birth in 1990 in Charlottesville and Albemarle County revealed that 29 gave birth to their second child and 8 gave birth to their third or fourth child (Kars-Marshall and Marshall, 1992). These figures show that one in four (24.7%) already had at least one birth. Since the number of live births and the number of abortions for teens were about the same in that year, probably another quarter had been pregnant but ended the pregnancy with an abortion. This suggests that roughly half the teens in our community who get pregnant have already been pregnant once before. Data on teen sexuality - knowledge, attitudes, or behavior -- are not available for our community, an absence that makes it much more difficult to identify local needs and to tailor our own solutions for preventing pregnancy and STDs.7 As a proxy, we can look at studies of the state and national levels to suggest the situation in the Charlottesville/Albemarle community. One important item of information, for example, is that the average age of puberty for American girls is now under 13, and the average age of marriage is 26. Though parents may not wish to believe it, roughly half the teens in high school have had sexual intercourse. In a 1992 study of public-school students in Virginia,8 half of all ninth and tenth graders - both boys and girls -- reported already having had sexual intercourse (Department of Education, 1992). Among 7 Data on a small group of local teens and young adults has recently been collected but not yet fully analyzed for two studies through the UVA Depm-h.ent of Psychology (Whitten 1999; Whitten and Mitchell, in press). s Charlottesville and Albemarle County schools participated in the survey, but chose not to ask the questions about sexual activity. 7 CHAPTER V: FINANCIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT We begin this .chapter by examining present and proposed costs of our direct community teen pregnancy prevention programs. To help put the expenses in perspective, we also estimate the programs' financial benefits in terms of averting births. The chapter concludes with a discussion of the need for a coordinator for the various teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts, and for a Steering Committee. V. A. Economic costs of current and proposed programs Table 1 (on the next page) summarizes the economic costs of the community's programs that have had significant direct effects on teen pregnancy/STD prevention.28 These programs, also discussed in Chapter IV.C. (page 37), consist of Beating the Odds, Camp Horizon, Reach, Teensight at FOCUS, and Young Guys of Distinction.29 The unshaded rows in Table 1 represent the current five programs, whose total annual cost is $230,200. Of this, $170,400 comes from city and county public funds, and $59,800 from foundations and private-sector sources. The proposed extensions of teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs, as suggested by the agencies, are indicated by the shaded rows in Table 1. In brief, they consist of expansions of the current activities into additional city and county youth populations of high-risk children, and total an additional $319,300. For example, Beating the Odds presently exists in four neighborhoods (identified in the table) at a cost of $46,000 per year. To expand Beating the Odds into the rest of the city elementary schools would cost $46,700 more per year, and to expand it into four more elementary schools in the county, another $52,000. V.B. Economic benefits of current and proposed programs Direct teen pregnancy and STD prevention programs in our community now consume $230,000 per year, and this Strategic Plan proposes increasing the _amount to about half a million dollars. Is it worth the money? 2~ We have deliberately not included in this table the youth programs - such as the Boys and Girls Club, Boy Smuts, or 4-H Club - that may have indirect effects on teen pregnancy prevcntio~ Nor have we included FLE, estimated to cost $98,600 per year in thc city and county (see Chapter IV.B., page 32), bemuse we can not estimate its economic effects. 29 The costs of Steppin' Up, a small program at MACAA, arc represented in the figures for Beating the Odds and Camp Horizon. 5O Cost per year Program Description Existing , Proposed Govern- Other ment Beating the Odds City and County at present (1 FT MACAA,. 1 PT (MACAA & Region Ten; 63 children ~ Garrett Sq/Clark, $30,700 $15,300 Region Ten) Jackson-Via/Blue Ridge Commons, Yancey/Esmont, Greer/Whitewood Village) Carap Horizon City at present (1 FT; 60 children) $38,000 -0- (M~CAA) Reach City and County at present (3 PT; 35 Children, 40 $67,700 $12,500 (FOCUS) Parents, 20 others throughout city and county) Teensight County and city at present 0 PT, 58 teen moms @ 6 (FOCUS) city and county high schools; travel, materials, and $34,000 -0- supplies) Young Guys of City and County at present (1 FT; 35 children at Distinction Walker, Buford, Westhaven) -0- $32,000 (MACAA & Total Costs of Existing Programs $170,400 $59,8001 Total Costs of Both Existing Programs and Proposed Expansions $230,200 $319,300 Grand Total $549,500 Table 1: Costs of currem teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs and proposed expansions 51 In short, the answer is a resounding yes. The analysis below shows that the measurable economic benefits of the current direct teen pregnancy prevention programs in our community, though the estimates are rough, can be calculated conservatively at almost twice the costs of the programs. ,4 more realistic estimate yields benefits almost four times the programs' costs (see Table 2). It should be emphasized that these figures represent the financial benefits only of preventing teen pregnancy; they do not take into account the likely sizable benefits Cost per year Estimated Benefits per vear Existing Proposed Conservative I Realistic Total Costs and Benefits of Existing Programs $230,200 $420,900 $855,900 Grand Total Costs and Benefits of Existing Programs and Propose~l Expansions (for which $549,500 $860,200 $1,766,300 benefits can be estimated) Table 2: Total costs and estimated benefits of current teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs and. proposed expansions in preventing STDs, or the other collateral beneficial effects of the programs (for example, volunteer-service programs have as large an effect on school dropout rates as they do on teen pregnancy rates). Nor does this calculation include the benefits to the mother or child - only to society. Our method of calculating a program's economic benefits consists of first identifying the impact of the program in terms of averting teen pregnancies, and then assigning an economic value to that impact (ignoring, for this analysis, other impacts). To measure a program's success, if any, in averting teen births, we compare (a) the pregnancy rate of teens in a program with (b) the pregnancy rate of comparable teens not in the program. In the following paragraphs we illustrate our approach with respect to Camp Horizon. Full details of our assumptions in assessing each of the other programs listed in Table 1 appear in Appendix M. 52 VII. CONCLUSIONS In several ways, our review of the teen pregnancy/STD situation in Charlottesville and Albemarle County offers encouragement. The rates of teen pregnancies and teen births in both the city and county show modest declines in the past eight years, and the rates in Albemarle County are significantly below the state and national averages. Clinical services for teens seeking reproductive health care - including contraceptives - are very good. Both city and county public school systems have Family Life Education courses that reach nearly all students. The commtmity boasts a few good pregnancy prevention programs aimed at small groups of high-risk children; some of these programs have recently expanded. We should also be encouraged to know that local teen pregnancy and STD rates can be lowered further, as our review of the research literature shows, and the examples of European countries should give us hope. Often, though, the picture painted in these pages is disturbing. In 1997 - a fairly typical year - 250 Charlottesville and Albemarle County teens got pregnant. Of these, 90 ended with induced abortions and 151 in live births. Albemarle County's teen birth rate is approximately three times greater than that of western European countries, and the Charlottesville rate is three times higher than the county's. Most sexually active teens do not take advantage of local clinical services. Only about 15% of pregnant teen girls are married, and more than 80% of teen pregnancies are unintended. Every year about 1 in 4 sexually experienced teens acquires an STD, three times the number of teens who get pregnant. The teen pregnancy prevention programs in our community simply do not have the resources to deal with the needs of ordinary adolescent boys and girls, much less the needs of all high-risk children. A number of youth-serving organiTations with access to many children avoid direct involvement in pregnancy or STD prevention. For some readers, the most unpleasant element in this document may be the observation that many teens in the community - our children - are sexually active. We know they have had sexual intercourse because the youth themselves tell us, in national and statewide surveys, and because their statements are confirmed by the patterns of reported abortions, miscarriages, and births among girls aged 10-19. The positive side of this disclosure is that most youth before age 17 are NOT sexually active; 8 in 10 girls and 7 in 10 boys are virgins at age 15. This fact suggests one of the most important strategic goals for our community teen pregnancy and STD prevention effort: For teens who are not sexually active, we must provide clear support for their decision to remain abstinent, along with the knowledge and skills needed to maintain this stance. For those not yet sexually active, and for ali younger teens, this should be the main pursuit of pregnancy prevention efforts. Of 15-19 year-olds, however, more than half of both males and females are sexually active, a proportion that rises to three-quarters of 18- and 19-year olds. For teens who are sexually active, we must ensure that they have worthwhile life options, help them recognize that a pregnancy or STD may interfere with personal goals, and provide access to information and reproductive health services so they have the means to avoid STDs and unintended pregnancies. The 250 teens each year who get pregnant constitute a third group that deserves special attention, Whether the pregnant teen (with or without her mate) decides for abortion, adoption, or parenthood, she may feel that just when she is the most vulnerable, she has the least access to a network of caring and counseling. Pregnant teens need special support to make the appropriate decision about the outcome of the pregnancy, to continue in school, to comply with prenatal health care guidelines, to prepare for parenting an infant, and to deal with other decisions in a life complicated by the pregnancy. Though this document deals with pregnancy and STD prevention, it is likely to be parenthood, ~more.than pregnancy, which provokes the most critical life changes. For this reason a fourth category of teens deserves attention: Teen parents should be provided support and counseling that increases the probability that they will be good parents and decreases the probability that the role of parenthood will shut off other possibilities for personal growth. Each of the four strategic goals proposed above focuses on a subgroup of the adolescent population; a fifth needs to be added. This last strategic goal encompasses all teens - indeed, all pre-teens as well. It builds on the recognition that (a) all children will, as part of normal healthy development at some later point in life, become sexually active, and (b) whenever that point comes, many are unprepared and unprotected against STDs and pregnancy. We should equip ali our youth before their first sexual experience with the capacity to make responsible decisions about reproductive health 65 and behavior, and provide them with age-appropriate knowledge and skills to avoid STDs and unintended pregnancies. These five broad strategic goals provide a comprehensive vision for teen pregnancy/STD prevention in our commumty. As we seek realistic strategies for reaching these goals, it is important to remind ourselves that tremendous variation exists within the population of adolescents. Of particular relevance for this discussion, teens differ in their motivation to avoid becoming a parent while still a teen. It is interesting to imagine a continuum of this motivation, along which any adolescent could be placed. At one end would be a teen who has a powerful, paramount, desire to keep from giving birth and becoming a parent. She or he is likely to be abstaining from sex, or, if sexually active, using effective contraceptives, and in the event of an unintended pregnancy, would consider an abortion. Very high Neutral Ven Low Figure 4. Graph representing hypothetical distribution of local teens' motivation to avoid becoming a teen parent At the other extreme would be an adolescent who wants to get pregnant (or cause a pregnancy) and become a parent. Many teens exist in a world that offers little hope: hope of a worthwhile education, for example, or a satisfying job, a stable and loving family, affordable housing and health care. Without hope, teen parenthood is not seen as an obstacle to achieving future goals, as it is among more advantaged adolescents. Instead, for many youth with few other life options, pregnancy appears a realistic way to satisfy basic needs for recognition, status, nurturance, respect, prestige, and independence. If we could somehow measure each teen in our community, we could distribute the entire population of local youth along this continuum according to his or her 66 motivation to avoid giving birth and become a parent while still a teen. An entirely hypothetical distribution, based on speculation, is suggested in Figure 4. Most teens in the Charlottesville/Albemarle area would probably cluster at the "very high motivation to avoid" pole, according to the observations of members of the Strategic Planning Work Group who deal every day with local youth. But some (how many? who?) would be in the middle of the scale, with weak or ambivalent motivation, somewhat indifferent to - or in denial of-- the risk of teen pregnancy or parenthood. Yet other adolescents (is this a small but growing number? a declining number?) would fall at the "very low motivation to avoid" end, representing their wish to become teen parents. The conjectural distribution in Figure 4, by illustrating that teens' motivation to avoid becoming a parent varies, suggests that prevention strategies must also vary. For planning community efforts to prevent pregnancies and STDs, the strategic implications for youth who want to be a parent are obvious. In addition to whatever other more short-term interventions are proposed, in the parts of Charlottesville and Albemarle County where hope is elusive among teens, we should be working more intensively on systemic community changes through job training and decent-paying jobs, insuring safe and affordable housing etc. Improving the socio-economic context in which teens make decisions about risk is difficult, expensive, and' controversial. But without adjustments in the underlying situation, community teen pregnancy prevention programs - at least for less advantaged youth -- cannot be expected to have their optimal effect. Simultaneously, many immediate things can be done to modify teens' attitudes, beliefs, knowledge, and behavior in ways shown to reduce teen pregnancy and STD rates. In previous chapters we proposed roughly fifty specific recommendations (see Chapter I.A. for the selection criteria). From among those proposals, nme priority recommendations have been selected on the basis of their cost-effectiveness. In addition, a new recommendation is offered after consideration of community consensus on the topic of teen pregnancy/STD prevention. Build on proven interventions: Ensure that the design of new teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts, as well as the continuation or modification of existing efforts, takes advantage of the results of reliable evaluation research. Focus on each adolescent as a whole person: Recognize the value of broad- spectrum efforts, with interventions that involve parents and other family members, help with school work, provide sports, boost self-confidence, 67 monitor physical health, offer after-school activities, and provide reproductive health information and services. In addition to reducing pregnancy and STD rates, such a well-rounded approach has other benefits for teens. Normalize and increase communication about sexuality and reproductive health, including teen pregnancy and STD prevention: Inspire adults in our community to develop greater knowledge, skills, and confidence for communicating constructively with teens and pre-teens - and each other - about reproductive health and sexuality. Encourage the media to provide consistent and long-term public education campaigns about teen pregnancy/STD prevention, and establish and maintain a bureau of speakers to talk knowledgeably with local groups about the topic. Spend more on teen pregnancy/STD prevention: To a greater degree, base the amount of public-sector money spent on teen pregnancy and STD prevention efforts on the public-sector costs of teen pregnancies and STDs. Our community should recognize the cost-effectiveness of good teen pregnancy- STD prevention programs, and expect the public sector, the private sector, and the not-for-profit sector to contribute more to the solution of this problem. Provide coordination for communi _ty teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts: The community should recruit a professional to coordinate the various teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts, to serve as a clearing house for information, to stimulate special events, to help with program evaluation, and to assist in the drafting of grant applications. The position, filled at least half-time, should be initially funded for a minimum three year period. Strengthen parents' ability to communicate with their children of all ages about developmental issues, including responsible sexual behavior, and to articulate their own values. Although formal programs may assist in this process, the primary responsibility here lies with the parents. Expand existing highly effective programs that prevent teen pregnancy and STDs to provide a seamless "continuum of services": Charlottesville and Albemarle County have already begun to implement effective programs that reduce pregnancies and STDs, and should now establish a long-term goal of expanding these programs so that all eligible youth have access to them. For high-risk youth, Teensight at FOCUS, Reach, and Camp Horizon appear highly effective, yet serve only a small fraction of those likely to benefit. For more typical youth (who are also at substantial risk of pregnancy and contracting STDs), volunteer community service programs have shown 68 striking effects in reducing pregnancy rates (along with other problem behaviors) in national evaluations, yet also serve only a small fraction of those local youth who are likely to benefit. Expansion of these programs is not only likely to be effective, but also cost effective, bringing a rapid return on our community's initial financial investment as well as numerous long-term social benefits. Improve the implementation of Family Life Education in schools: Simply offering fact-based FLE, however controversial, is not enough to reduce pregnancy rates. But enhancing this education with skill-building activities (such as assertiveness and decision-making skills) in the context of providing basic factual and age-appropriate information has been shown to be effective in preventing pregnancies. This broadened approach, together with improved teacher training, should be the basis for FLE education in local schools. Expect health care providers to play a more active role in educating youth - and their parents - about reproductive health and pregnancy/STD prevention: Health care professionals should promote positive messages about sexual development throughout the lifespan of their patients. Age-appropriate sexual information should be part of normal anticipatory guidance in health care visits from birth through adolescence. This strategic plan begins by observing that teen pregnancies, particularly those that result in teen parenthood, extract a high price - to the adolescents themselves, their babies, and society. So, too, do sexually transmitted diseases among adolescents have high costs. The document goes on to review strategies that have been demonstrated, through objective evaluations in other communities, to reduce the rates of teen pregnancies and STDs. Further, this plan argues that we in Charlottesville and Albemarle County can - should -- strengthen efforts to deal with teen pregnancy and STDs, and that investing in these tested prevention programs can be cost effective. But agreeing on a common vision - on this (or any) strategic plan - is not an easy first step. A review of the lessons learned from recent program evaluations around the country (Pbilliber and Namerow 1995, p. 3) points out that in some communities, work on teen pregnancy has become a virtual battleground, where adults argue over program approaches and even question each other's morality. As a result, programs to prevent teen pregnancy have often been selected because they make adults comfortable rather than because they are effective. 69 Conversely, programs of demonstrated effectiveness have been rejected because small groups have opposed them on moral or religious grounds. For any community to effect change, some degree of consensus is required about both the problems and their solutions (Kotloffet al., 1995, p. 6). We can probably reach consensus that adolescence is a time for education and growing up, not for pregnancy and childbearing (National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 1997a). But it may be more difficult to fred agreement in our community for this document's definition of the problems and, even more formidable, to reach consensus in favor of the solutions proposed in this strategic plan. In the past few years this inability to fred unanimity has derailed proposals for teen pregnancy programs here as elsewhere, a problem well summarized in the title of a thoughtful publication by the National Campaign to Prevent Teen pregnancy (1998): "While the adults are arguing, the teens are getting pregnant." One way through these differences is for all sides to embrace a new ethic of"unity of purpose, diversity of means" (National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 1997b, p. 14): This perspective stresses the importance of reducing teen pregnancy and STDs, but allows each group to take action in its own arena and in its own way without opposition. It also tacitly recognizes that America is an increasingly diverse country requiring respect and tolerance for differing points of view. We will never reach 100% agreement on what to do about teen pregnancies and STDs, and we should not expect to. There will always be people who insist that community leaders are moving too fast or too slow, or that the proposed actions are counterproductive or even immoral. But the lack of total concurrence must not be allowed to paralyze the community's ability to take meaningful steps. In this regard Tillamook County, Oregon, provides an instructive model. The essence of their approach was to take action in an atmosphere of tolerance, with all sides "agreeing to disagree" ( National Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy, 1997a, p. 2): When in 1990 state data showed that this rural county of 23,000 citizens had one of the highest teen pregnancy rates in the state, the county health department proposed creating a school-based clinic that would provide contraception, provoking intense community conflict. The proposal was defeated by the school board, but the community agreed that something had to be done. They decided the only consensus they needed was that the teen pregnancy rate must drop. Various 70 segments of the community developed intensive initiatives - ranging from creating new church-based abstinence education programs, to improving access to family planning clinics, to expanding YWCA programs for girls - and agreed not to fight each other's efforts. By 1994, the county teen pregnancy rate had dropped by 70 percent, becoming the lowest in the state. Those of us in Charlottesville and Albemarle County who are concerned about our teen pregnancy and STD rates may not believe it is realistic here to aspire to a 70 % reduction in four years. But we can, working with planners and program developers, seek to avoid simplistic solutions, to implement programs with the greatest evidence for success, and give attention to the broad array of risk factors that reduce motivation to avoid pregnancy (e.g., poverty, lack of opportunity)(Kirby 1997). Even more important, we can agree not to fight each other's efforts. In the public sector particularly, we can agree to include "opt out" mechanisms that allow teens (and their parents) to not be subjected to any programs they find objectionable on the basis of religion or conscience. So, for a fmal recommendation: Seek common ground on which to build effective teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts in the community, but recognize that deep-seated differences in values and beliefs will preclude consensus on some issues. Treat these differences with respect, while encouraging and supporting the groups who espouse them to develop prevention programs consonant with their beliefs. Strive for unity of principle (i.e. the importance of reducing teen pregnancies and STDs) while respecting diversity of This strategic plan represents a modest, mainstream approach to teen pregnancy and STD prevention. Surely a community with the wealth of resources that Charlottesville and Albemarle County enjoys can find the will to implement it. 71 APPENDIX N: PRELIMINARY ACTION AGENDA This Action Agenda is simply a reorganization of the recommendations in the body of the Strategic Plan, proposing who should do what with whom to reach the strategic goals. It is not intended to usurp organizations' autonomy by assigning them work, but rather to begin a process of turning this plan into action. This Agenda is tentative; it can and should be revised as leaders of local agencies examine the Strategic Plan in terms of their own organizational goals, objectives, and capabilities. Some activities - those requiting only administrative decisions, reallocation of existing resources, and/or political will -- could be initiated immediately. Others - those needing additional resources, organizational adjustments, or new leadership -- will necessarily be delayed until funding or infrastructure is in place. All proposed actions can be undertaken immediately unless otherwise noted. Teen Pregnanc¥/STl) Prevention Steering Committee is to be a new group composed of the existing Strategic Planning (Small) Work Group of the Task Force on Teen Pregnancy Prevention and/or a new Study Group of the Commission on Children and Families. Guide the effort to obtain support for the Strategic Plan from organizations and leaders in the Charlottesville/Albemarle community, and encourage implementation of the Plan's recommendations. Prepare grant requests to fund (a) a part-time position of Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Coordinator, (b) social marketing campaigns, (c) educational materials to be used by schools, religious groups, business, civic groups, etc., (d) other activities proposed in this Strategic Plan. Assist local agencies in preparing grant requests to expand their programs or develop new ones. [If funds are available for the Coordinator position] Provide support and guidance to the Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Coordinator. Assess progress toward achieving the strategic goals. A year from the date of distribution of the Strategic Plan - in September 2000 - and again in September 2001, the Steering Committee should examine the degree to which the recommendations in this Strategic Plan have been implemented. Needs should be reassessed, priorities revised, and the Action Agenda updated. 97 Commission on Children and Families Create a "Work Group" to focus on teen pregnancy/STD prevention. Consider asking this Group to become, or be part of, the Teen Pregnancy/STD ~ Prevention Steering Committee (see above) that will operationalize and guide the implementation of the recommendations in this Strategic Plan. Collaborate with other community organizations to design and implement public awareness/social marketing campaigns for teen pregnancy/STD prevention. Consider in the future establishing teen pregnancy/STD prevention as one of the organization' s "Priority Issues." Serve as a focal point of leadership and advocacy for teen pregnancy/STD prevention activities in the community. Parents · Assume greater responsibility for the sexual behavior of one's children. Strengthen the ability to communicate with children about developmental issues, including responsible sexual behavior, and to articulate one's own values. · Ensure that children receive yearly comprehensive preventive health-care checkups which include reproductive health. Scho'ois, School Boards, and School Health Advisory Boards (city and county) Re-examine and improve the Family Life Education (FLE) programs -- Ensure that there is a clear locus of responsibility and advocacy in each school system. -- Increase the number of hours children are exposed to FLE (whether through schools or in other community programs), and extend FLE to the eleventh and twelfth grades (within existing financial constraints and the demands created by state SOL accreditation requirements). -- Update the content and teaching methods for FLE, incorporating techniques and resources that have been demonstrated to actually lead to reductions in teen pregnancy/STD risk behavior; most importantly, include more skill-building exercises. -- Provide for refresher training and support for FLE teachers (in collaboration with specialists from local agencies). 98 Evaluate the quantity, content, and quality of individual FLE teaching; encourage peer coaching among FLE teaching. Involve parents more in the schooling - including FLE - of children at all ages; build in parent-child homework assignments. Strengthen teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts omside the FLE curriculum -- [if funds become available] Encourage the expansion into schools of existing pregnancy/STD programs aimed at high-risk students (e.g. MACAA's Beating the Odds; Teensight at FOCUS's Reach) -- Continue to provide students with access to trusted professionals (counselors, psychologists, health care professionals, etc.) who are knowledgeable about youth-related reproductive health issues. -- Consider introducing student peer-education programs designed to counter misinformation about sexuality among students; collaborate with local agencies for technical assistance and funding. -- Increase student involvement in volunteer programs. -- Facilitate students' access to off-campus health-care clinics, and investigate the possibility of establishing school-based health clinics. -- Permit carefully selected social science research on teen pregnancy/STD prevention to be carried out within the student population. Monticello Area Community Action Agency (MACAA) Continue current programs (i.e. Beating the Odds, Camp Horizon, and Steppin' Up); in conjunction with the Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Steering Committee, seek funds to expand these programs. Teensight at FOCUS Continue current programs (i.e. Teensight and Reach); in conjunction with the Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Steering Committee, seek funds to expand these programs. Youth-Serving Organizations (Boys and Girls Club; Boy Scouts; Girl Scouts; YMCA; 4-H Club; etc.) Strengthen activities and programs that contribute to teen pregnancy/STD prevention; seek guidance from national organizational headquarters, and from local specialists. 99 Religious urouos · Address issues of teen pregnancy and STD prevention more explicitly, in accordance with denominational and congregational beliefs. · Seek educational support from national church headquarters and from local specialists. Regional employers · Strengthen efforts to provide a "family-friendly" environment that encourages parents to be involved in children's lives. · Expand oppommities for employees to participate in volunteer youth programs. Consider establishing/expanding links with a school or community youth project (particularly volunteer programs), and work with the Charlottesville Area School Business Alliance. Help fund teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts in the community; for businesses with a special link to teens, help provide information about pregnancy/STD prevention. Local governments (i.e. City of Charlottesville and Albemarle County) Provide funding for (a) expansion into schools of existing pregnancy/STD programs aimed at high-risk students (e.g. MACAA's Beating the Odds; Teensight at FOCUS's Reach); and (b) new and expanded youth volunteer activities. If, at the end of the initial three-year trial period for the position of Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Coordinator, an evaluation suggests that the Coordinator has been cost-effective, assume responsibility for funding the position. Community foundations and other local donors Provide funding for (a) the new part-time position of "Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Coordinator" for an initial three-year period; 100 (b) social marketing campaigns (e.g. to reaffima community values discouraging teen pregnancy; to encourage parent-child communication); (c) educational materials to be used by schools, religious groups, business, civic groups, etc.; (d) local research that would contribute to teen pregnancy/STD prevention. Share with local governments responsibility for funding for the expansion of existing prevention programs for high-risk youth of MACAA, Region Ten, and FOCUS, both in and out of schools, and for new youth volunteer programs. Health care providers: General · Stay current about adolescent reproductive health issues, including relevant laws. When dealing with teens and pre-teens, follow the AMA guideline promoting age-specific messages about sexual development, and devote more attention to reproductive health during check-ups of youth. Ensure that teens know where to confidentially obtain reproductive health care information and services. · Increase local educational outreach on adolescent reproductive health issues; volunteer to participate in the Speakers' Bureau organized by CAPP. · Test adolescents more frequently for STDs. Martha Jefferson Hospital · Continue to provide funding to direct teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs and the CAPP Transportation Fund. [If funds are available for the Coordinator position] Provide office space, supervision, and administrative support (not necessarily secretarial assistance) for the proposed Teen Pregnancy/STD Prevention Coordinator. [If funds are available for the Coordinator position] Administer grants for selected teen pregnaney/STD prevention activities, such as donations for sexuality education in the community. 101 Planned Parenthood of the Blue Ridge (PPBR) Continue to provide confidential reproductive health information and clinical services to teens and pre-teens; devote greater effort to informing local teens about the availability of services. Continue and expand the outreach program that provides educational specialists to local schools and orgamzafions to speak about teen pregnancy/STD prevention; work with the proposed new CAPP Speakers' Bureau. Renew the "Educating Children for Parenthood" program at Clark Elememary School or another school in Charlottesville; if evaluation shows it to be effective, offer to expand the program to other schools in the city and county. · Continue to make available the PPBR Resource Center (with books, brochures, audiovisual materials, etc.) to teens and local groups. Collaborate with other community organizations to design and implemem public awareness/social marketing campaigns for teen pregnancy/STD prevention. Teen Health Center Continue to provide confidential reproductive health information and clinical services to teens and pre-teens; devote greater effort to informing local teens about the availability of services. Continue and expand the outreach program that provides educational specialists to local schools and organizations to speak about teen pregnancy/STD prevention; work with the CAPP Speakers' Bureau. Thomas Jefferson Health Department Continue to provide confidential reproductive health information and clinical services to teens and pre-teens; devote greater effort to informing local teens about the availability of services. Continue and expand the outreach program that provides educational specialists to local schools and organizations to speak about teen pregnancy/STD prevention; work with the CAPP Speakers' Bureau. 102 Council on Adolescent Pregnancy Prevention (CAPP) Continue current activities that support teen pregnancy/STD prevention efforts in the community, including (a) the Transportation Fund (through a grant to CAPP from Martha Jefferson Hospital); (b) support to FLE teachers to attend training workshops and receive subscription to "Family Matters"; (c) annual production and distribution of the "Teen Help Card" and brochure describing local family planning services for teens; and (d) other support programs (e.g. speakers, seminars) and networking activities (e.g. monthly meetings, newsletters) to help local leaders exchange ideas and information. · Provide encouragement and assistance to faith groups interested in developing teen pregnancy/STD prevention programs. Establish and maintain an active Speakers' Bureau, arranging opportunities for local teen pregnancy/STD specialists to speak to community civic groups, parent and school organizations, faith communities, etc. Collaborate with other community organizations to design and implement public awareness/social marketing campaigns for teen pregnancy/STD prevention. United Way · Continue funding MACAA's Beating the Odds and Teensight at FOCUS's Reach; consider increasing funds to help the programs expand. Assist businesses in identifying oppommities for collaboration in youth volunteer programs and other activities that serve to help prevent teen pregnancies and STD (in conjunction with the Chamber of Commerce and caPP). · Take the lead in developing standardized data collection and evaluation strategies for community programs that serve youth. Local Media · Keep teen pregnancy and STD issues - both nationally and locally - in the public eye. · Assist with local social marketing/public awareness campaigns regarding teen pregnacy/STD prevention. 103 November 3, 1999 -10:00 to 10:15 a.m. A Monthly Communications Report from the Albemarle County School Board to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Philosophy and Purpose format will be the same for each monthly presentation. School Board Brief, - October 11, and October 25, 1999 (Attachments 1 & 2) Report from the Superintendent of the 1998-1999 Progress Report was made at the October 25, 1999 meeting. Copies are available upon request. Second monthly meeting with area legislators held on October 8, 1999. Excellent dialogue and exchange resulted. The new Ivy Creek School was dedicated on October 20, 1999. Special thanks to Supervisors Thomas and Humphris and the County Executive, Mr. Tucker for attending the ceremony. The opening of this facility represents a significant milestone in the educational alternatives for Albemarle County students. The Albemarle County Schools representatives discussed SOL test scores, Charter Schools, and the School Budget Cycle at a meeting with Albemarle Supervisors and the County Executive at the Chamber of Commerce meeting of October 27, 1999. Present ~ The last Superintendent's Roundtable for this calendar cycle is tonight, November 3, 1999, at Stone-Robinson Elementary School beginning at 7:00 PM. Future } Newly elected School Board members and candidates are invited to a special orientation by the current School Board on November 10, 1999. Successful candidates have also been invited by the~Virginia School Boards Association (VSBA) to attend the state conference November 17-19, 1999. The VSBA is picking up the cost of registration for newly elected School Board members. October I1 BoardB 'e A Certificate of Appreciation was presented to each of our principals in recognition of their excellent contributions to the education of our children. The year 2000 Legislative Positions will be discussed further at the November 8, 1999 Board Meeting. They will be presented to you for your comment and also presented to our Richmond legislators. The Computers4Kids program received a grant for $349,000. A decisive factor in gaining the grant was the $7,000 Albemarle School's contribution. The Computers4Kids program is seeking to expand and strengthen its Advisory Board and will be coming to the Board of Supervisors to ask for the participation of one supervisor as an Advisory Board member. The Budget calendar was adopted. tober Boa ._. Br f The staff presented a report for the establishment of an alternative education program for the School Division. The staff presented a proposal to extend the school year for grades K-8 in the Southern Feeder Pattern. With School Board approval the proposal will be included in the budget process for January and February. Discussion of the FY 2000-2001 Budget. 1999 Albemarle County Schools Progress Report. Summaries are shown for Demographics, Academic Achievement, Areas that need focus & attention, and Responsible Citizenship. ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS BOARD BRIEFS Also available at http://k12.albemarle.org "WE EXPECT SUCCESS" SCHOOL BOARD MEETING: October 11, 1999 BOARD ACTIVITY There was Board consensus to draft a Certificate of Recognition to school principals, honoring them as a part of Virginia School Principals' Week, October 17-23, 1999. The Board expressed its appreciation of the excellent work that principals do in educating children. There was Board consensus for staff to provide an Akernative Education Program Report at its October 25, 1999 meeting. There was Board consensus to schedule Policy AE: School Division Goals and Objectives on the October 25, 1999 Board agenda and asked staff to revise Goal 5: Extended School Community. The Board approved education-related policies adopted by the General Assembly in 1999. The policies affected are as follows: CM (School Division Annual Report); GCG (Licensed Staff Probation and Tenure); GCM (Supervision of the Education Process); IGAI (Character Education); IGAJ (Driver Education); IGBB (Programs for Gifted Students); IGBF (English as a Second or Other Language); IGBH (Alternative Schools); JEC (School Admission); JFC (Student Conduct); LC (Charter Schools). DISCUSSION: 2000 LEGISLATIVE POSITIONS The Board's legislative positions are based on information provided from groups such as the Virginia School Boards Association O/SBA), The Virginia Association of School Superintendents O/ASS), and the Thomas Jefferson Planning District. The Board has discussed limiting the number of legislative positions to ones of high priority, and it provided preliminary direction to staff concerning the content and structure of the Legislative Position Paper, with the following categories noted: Revenue and Funding Specific Program Support Governance There was Board consensus that its recommendations be incorporated into the report, which will be presented to the Board at its November 8 meeting. On December 10, the Board will present its legislative positions to local legislators. ACTIVITIES AND NOTES The Board met with Senator Emily Couric and Delegates Paul Harris and Mkch Van Yahres at its monthly joint meeting on October 8, 1999. The agenda included the Standards of Learning for Language Arts and Math. The next meeting will be November 12, 1999, 12:00 to 1:30 p.m., in Room 235. The agenda will include the Special Education Program, the Extended School Year, and Remediation/Social Promotion, The Ivy Creek School Dedication is October 20, 1999, 10:30 a.m., at Ivy Creek School, located on Lambs Road. The Joint CATEC Board meeting wkh the City and County School Divisions originally scheduled on October 28 has been moved to November 11 at 7:00 p.m. at CATEC. The October 25, 1999 Joint Board Meeting with the Board of Supervisors has been canceled and rescheduled on November 3, 1999 at 4:00 p.m., in Room 235. r-~'-%The Computers-a-Kids program received a $300,000 grant to )~et up and maintain a computer lab where needy children ~---/will be trained and mentored in the use of computers. Each child will also receive a high-caliber computer and printer setup. The Division's $7,000 contribution to the program was one of the factors that enabled the program to receive major funding because community partnerships was one of the requirements for the grant. All County Schools Day held at Western Albemarle High School provided an opportunity for the division to set goals for the school year. Approximately 1,300 people, including teachers, administrators, central office staff, School Board members, and others attended the morning event. TEXTBOOK SELECTION AND ADOPTION: VOCATIONAL EDUCATION School Board Policy ILAA: Textbook Selection and Adoption, specifies that the Board is empowered to adopt textbooks for use in the Division based upon recommendations presented by. the Superintendent. Textbooks have been purchased through local vocational education funds for the past seven years. Vocational enrollment at the high school level has doubled with the expansion to a seven-period day and with the opening of Monticello High School. With increases in enrollment, it is difficult to keep up with textbook purchases due to technology changes. Computer software and hardware have been upgraded through federal grants every two to five years and, with each upgrade, there is a requirement for new textbooks to supplement teaching in the vocational programs. Keeping up with technology is critical to our students to assure that they acquire the knowledge and skills needed to be informed and productive members of society. Therefore, it is requested that Vocational Education textbooks be added to the approved textbook list in the middle and high schools to be purchased as needed by schools for the respective programs. The goal for the 1999-2000 adoption is to recommend textbooks and teaching materials to provide consistency in all core elective vocational courses and exploratory' classes in the County. A committee, consisting of department heads from each high school and teachers from specific program areas, evaluated textbooks from five of the major publishers of career and vocational material. All textbooks will be on exhibit at the Albemarle Resource Center (ARC) beginning October 11 for 30 days. This item will then be Scheduled on the Board's November 22 meeting for public testimony and possible action. To view the textbooks, please call ARC at 972-4021. 2000-2001 BUDGET CALENDAR The Board adopted the FY 2000-2001 Budget Preparation Calendar, which reflects the major public phases of the Board's budget development process, and is also designed to meet the deadlines related to providing the necessary information for the Local Government budget process. The proposed Budget Development Calendar includes the following: · Presentation of the Superintendent's Proposed Budget on Tuesday, January 18. · Budget Work Sessions scheduled separately from normal Board meetings so that the Board can continue to conduct other business. A Saturday Work Session on January 22 is included to allow the Board time for more in-depth review of specified issues. A date for a Public Hearing is included for February 2 to coincide with one of the Work Sessions: · Three Public Discussions on the Budget are also scheduled to allow additional opportunity for citizen involvement. These sessions will be held at the three comprehensive high schools. The dates shown below have also, for the most part, been included in the division's Calendar/Handbook. October · Monday, October 25 - General Budget Overview November · Wednesday, November 3 - Joint Board Meeting- Revenue Projections and 2000-2001 Salary Recommendations · Monday, November 22 - Budget Direction to Superintendent December · Monday, December ~3 - Additional SchoolBoard Discussion of Budget (if needed) January · Tuesday, January 18 - Special Meeting- Superintendent's Budget Presentation · Wednesday, January 19 - Public Budget Discussion at Monticello High School · Saturday, January 22 - School Board Budget Work Session · Tuesday, January 25 -Public Budget Discussion at Albemarle High School · Wednesday, January 26 - School Board Budget Work Session · Thursday, January 27 - Public Budget Discussion at Western Albemarle High School February · Wednesday, February 2 - Preliminary School Board Budget Presentation to Board of Supervisors and Public Hearing on Preliminary School Board Budget/Board Budget Work Session · Wednesday, February 9 - School Board Budget Work Session/Possible Adoption of Preliminary Budget · Wednesday, February 16 - School Board's Preliminary Budget Delivered to County Executive March Wednesday, March 1 - Presentation of County Executive's Proposed Budget to Board of Supervisors · Wednesday, March 8 - Public Hearing on County Executive's Proposed Budget · Monday, March 13 - Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session · Wednesday, March 15 - Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session and School Board Chairman's Budget Presentation to Board of Supervisors · Monday, March 20 - Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session · Wednesday, March 22 - Board of Supervisors Budget Work Session April · Wednesday, April 5 - Public Hearing on Board of Supervisors Budget · Monday, April 10 - School Board Budget Work Session during Regular Meeting · Wednesday, April 12 - Adoption of Board of Supervisors Budget · Monday, April 24 - Possible Adoption of School Board' Budget during Regular Work Session. · Wednesday, April 26 - Additional School Board Budget Work Session (if needed) 0 0 To: From: Subject: Date: Marsha Davis k,~~ Ella Washington Carey, Cler Ordinance Adopted by Board on November 3, 1999 November 9, 1999 The attached ordinance was adopted by the Board of Supervisors on November 3, 1999. The ordinance is forwarded to you for inclusion in your next update of the County Code. · to amend Section l 5- I 101 of the County Code to include antique motor vehicles in the category of personal property exempt from taxation. /EWC Attachments (I) ORDINANCE NO. 99-15(1) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 15, TAXATION, ARTICLE XI, PERSONAL PROPERTY--IN GENERAL, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDAINED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of'Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 15, Taxation, Article XI, Personal Property--In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 15-1101, Exemption of certain personal property from taxation, as follows: See. 15-1101 Exemption of certain personal property from taxation. The following household and personal effects are hereby exempted from taxation: A. Bicycles. B. Household and kitchen furniture, including gold and silver plates, plated ware, watches and clocks, sewing machines, refr'igerators, automatic refrigerating machinery of any type, vacuum cleaners and all other household machinery, books, firearms and weapons of all kinds. C. Pianos, organs, phonographs and record players and records to be used therewith and all other musical instruments of whatever kind and all radio and television instruments and equipment. D. Oil paintings, pictures, statuary, curios, articles of virtue and works of art. E. Diamonds, cameos or other precious stones and all precious metals used as ornaments or jewelry. F. Sporting and photographic equipment. G. Clothing and objects of apparel. H. Antique motor vehicles as defined in Va. Code § 46.2-100 that are not used for general transportation purposes. I. All other tangible personal property used by an individual or a household incident to maintaining an abode. family or The classification set forth above shall apply only to such property owned and used by an individual or by a family or household incident to maintaining an abode. (Code 1967, § 9-1; Code 1988, § 8-1; Ord. of 2-5-92; Code 1988, § 8-67; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 15(1), 11-3-99) State law reference-Provisions authorizing county to exempt certain personal property from taxation, Va. Code, § 58.1-3504. This ordinance shall be effective on and after January 1, 2000. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a tree, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of six to zero, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on November 3, 1999. Aye Nay Mr. Bowerman Y Ms. Humphris Y_ Mr. Marshall Y Mr. Martin Y Mr. Perkins Y Ms. Thomas Y CClerk, Board of Co/mty Sup~sors COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Amendment of Personal Property Tax Exemptions SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Amendment of Section 15-1101 of the County Code to add antique motor vehicles to exempt class of personal property. STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker/Davis/Breeden, Ms. White AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: X CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes Draft Ordinance REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Virginia Code § 58.1-3504 provides that household goods and personal effects is a separate class of personal property for tax purposes and provides that the governing body of a county, by ordinance, may exempt all such personal property from taxation. Albemarle County adopted such an ordinance exempting such household and personal effects in Albemarle County Code § 15-1101. Recently, Virginia Code § 58.1-3504 was amended to add "antique motor vehicles" to the list of separately classified household goods and personal effects. The County Code has not been amended to reflect this change. DISCUSSION: Because Virginia Code § 58.1-3504 requires that if a locality elects to exempt any household goods and personal effects, it must exempt "all" of the classes of household goods and personal effects identified by Section 58.1-3504, the County must amend its Code to include antique motor vehicles to conform to the Virginia Code's definition of personal and household goods eligible for exemption. ' RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board adopt the attached Ordinance amending and reordaining Section 15-1101. 99.197 DRAFT: October 13, 1999 ORDINANCE NO. 99-15( ) AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN CHAPTER 15, TAXATION, ARTICLE XI, PERSONAL PROPERTY--IN GENERAL, OF THE CODE OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA. BE IT ORDA/NED By the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, that Chapter 15, Taxation, Article XI, Personal Property--In General, is hereby amended and reordained by amending section 15-1101, Exemption of certain personal property from taxation, as follows: Sec. 15-1101 Exemption of certain personal property from taxation. The following household and personal effects are hereby exempted from taxation: A. Bicycles. B. Household and kitchen furniture, including gold and silver plates, plated ware, watches and clocks, sewing machines, refrigerators, automatic refrigerating machinery of any type, vacuum cleaners and all other household machinery, books, firearms and weapons of all kinds. C. Pianos, organs, phonographs and record players and records to be used therewith and all other musical instruments of whatever kind and all radio and television instruments and equipment. D. E. Fo Oil paintings, pictures, statuary, curios, articles of virtue and works of art. Diamonds, cameos or other precious stones and all precious metals used as ornaments or jewelry. Sporting and photographic equipment. Clothing and objects of apparel. Antique motor vehicles as defined in Va. Code § 46.2-100 that are not used for general transportation purposes. t4. I_. All other tangible personal property used by an individual household incident to maintaining an abode. or a family or The classification set forth above shall apply only to such property owned and used by an individual or by a family or household incident to maintaining an abode. (Code 1967, § 9-1; Code 1988, § 8-1; Ord. of 2-5-92; Code 1988, § 8-67; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98) State law reference-Provisions authorizing county to exempt certain personal property fi.om taxation, Va. Code, § 58.1 ~3504. This ordinance shall be effective on and after January 1, 2000. DRAFT: October 13, 1999 I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing writing is a true, correct copy of an Ordinance duly adopted by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, by a vote of to __, as recorded below, at a regular meeting held on Clerk, Board of County Supervisors Mr. Bowerman Ms. Humphris Mr. Marshall Mr. Martin Mr. Perkins Ms. Thomas Aye Nay David R Bowerman Charlotte Y. Humphtis ~ Jou~ Formst R. Mm*shall, Jr. COUNTY OF AI REMARI E Office of Board of Supervisors 401 Mdntim Road Charlottesville, Vkginia 22902-4596 (804) 296-5843 FAX (804) 296*5800 November 8, I999 Charles S. Martin Walter E Perkins ~flly H. Thomas Mr. David Blount Legislative Liaison Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission PO Box 1505 Charlottesville, VA 22902-1505 Dear Mr. Blount: At its meeting on November 3, 1999, the Board of Supervisors approved the Draft 2000 TJPDC Legislative Program with the inclusion of the following five items: 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Include Albemarle County in the "Photo-red" traffic light program. The program would allow Albemarle County to establish "photo-red" traffic light signal enforcement programs. The County supports and endorses the provision of passenger rail service from the Washington, DC and Richmond, VA areas to Bristol, VA with links to communities along the way. As a cost reduction strategy for localities, we support the expanded operation and enhancement of early intervention and prevention programs that make a difference in children's lives, such as the Child Health Partnership and Healthy Families. We also support the renewal of the Comprehensive Services Act Trust Fund dollars that support early intervention and prevention projects in Virginia. We support the State's joint juvenile detention committee's recommendation to increase the per bed reimbursement rate for construction of juvenile detention-facilities (changes the language of the current item on bottom of page 10). Support the "Five for Five" initiative being considered by VACO and others. This proposal would return five percent of the net Virginia individual income taxes collected in each city and county in Virginia to the locality, and in return, each locality would reduce its real estate taxes by five percent. (With regard to this initiative, Board members recognized that there may need to be some work on the legislation.) /EWC Sincerely .... ~, f.:..:.; i Carey, Clerk, C cc: Roxanne White Printed on recycled paper COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: TJPDC Draft Legislative Program SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ITEM NUMBER: Approval of the draft TJPDC Legislative Program ACTION: X INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes STAFF CONTACT(S): ,~t./~'-~ Mr. Tucker & Ms. White REVIEWED BY: , BACKGROUND: The Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission works with the County and other Planning District members each year to develop a legislative program for the General Assembly session. The attached draft of the 2000 TJPDC Legislative Program is before the Board for approval and will form the basis of the County's discussion with our local legislators next month. DISCUSSION: The Draft 2000 Legislative Program follows the same format as in prior years, with ten broad categories of general policy and legislative requests followed by a section highlighting some of the most important issues. The ten broad sections have been marked to show the changes from last year, with the new information being underlined. The County's major issues recommended to VACO aro included within these 10 sections (the County's VACO submittal is also attached for reference). The approved TJPDC Legislative Program will be sent to our local legislators prior to our meeting with them on 12/1. In addition to the items identified in the TJPDC package, staff with Board input has identified five other items for inclusion in the package: 1) Include Albemarle County in the "Photo-rod" traffic light program. The program would allow Albemarle County to establish "photo-rod" traffic light signal enforcement programs. 2) The County supports and endorses the provision of passenger rail service from the Washington, DC and Richmond, VA areas to Bristol, VA with links to communities along the way. 3) As a cost reduction strategy for localities, we support the expanded operation and enhancement of early intervention and prevention programs that make a difference in children's lives, such as the Child Health Partnership and Healthy Families. We also support the renewal of the Comprehensive Services Act Trust Fund dollars that support early intervention and prevention projects in Virginia. 4) We support the State's joint juvenile detention committee's recommendation to increase the per bed reimbursement rate for construction of juvenile detention facilities (changes the language of the current item on bottom of page 10). 5) Support the "Five for Five" initiative being considered by VACO and others. This proposal would return 5% of the net Virginia individual income taxes collected in each city and county in Virginia to the locality, and in return, each locality would reduce its real estate taxes by 5%. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Draft 2000 TJPDC Legislative Program, including the five items above, with the understanding that any suggested changes from the Board will be reflected in the final version of the regional legislative program. Mr. David BIount will provide a brief presentation and will be available to address any of the Board's questions if needed. 99.202 Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission 300 East Main Street, 1st Fi. Mall Entrance PO Box 1505, Charlottesville VA 22902-1505 (804) 979-PD10 (7310) + FAX (804) 979-1597 City of Charlottesville Meredith M. Richards Kenneth Schwartz Albemarle County Walter E Perkins Sally H, Thomas Fluvanna County Thomas E. Pavne Stafford M. Pace Greene County Kenneth Lawson Phillip Arms Louisa County Fitzgerald A. Barnes Jane H. Poore Nelson County Harry S. Harris Fred Boger, Chair Executive Director Nancy K. O'Brien October 8, 1999 TO: Members, Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Albemarle County Administrator FROM: RE: David C. Blou~Legislative Liaison TJ-PDC Legislative Program Enclosed you will find a draft of the 2000 TJPDC Legislative,Program. PDC Commissioners and staff developed five position papers this year which address the following issues: 1) School Construction/Renovation Funding 2) Growth Management 3) Taxing/Revenue Authority 4) Human Services 5) Transportation Funding As in years past, the legislative program draft also contains ten sections that highlight ongoing local government positions. Locally-requested items may be found largely in these sections. New language in these sections is underlined, while language proposed for deletion is stricken. I will plan to attend your December 1st meeting and will be available at that time to receive any suggested changes or additions to the TJPDC draft. I look forward to seeing you in December. Thank you. Recommended Action: Approve the TJPDC draft legislative program by a motion of the board, understanding that suggested changes to the draft may be incorporated into the final copy. E-Mail: tjpd@state.va.us + Web Site: http://avenue.org/tjpdc Virginia Relay Center (800) 828-1120 (TDD) 2O00 Thomas Jefferson Planning District Legislative P Representing the Local Gc of: Albemarle C City of Fluvanna Louis Nels~ 999 er, Chairman O'Brien, Executive Director 2. Blount, Legislative Liaison Thomas Jefferson Planning District 2000 LegislatiVe Program '- Positions of TJPDC, Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson [Action Items II School Construction/Renovation Funding ............................................................. ~.1 Growth Management .......? ........................................................................................ 2 ~,~.es~-' Tax ,,.,~- ..~'^~',,,,,~ Taxing/Revenue Authoritv ....................................................... 4 Human Services ......................................................................................................... 5 Transportation Fundin~ ......................................... ' .................................................. 6 I[Areas of Continuing Concern Ii Land Use and Growth Management ....................................................................... 7 Finance .................................................................................................................. 7 Education .............................................................................................................. 8 Environmental Quality ..................................................................................... , ....... 8 Local Government Structure and Laws ............................................... , ............... 9 Housing ................................................................................................................ 10 Public Safety ............................................................................................................ 10 Transportation .................................................................................................... 11 Health and Human Services ................................................................................... 11 Economic Development .......................................................................................... 12 SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION/RENOVATION FUNDING Legislative Position bf TJPDC, Charlottesville and'the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its memb er localities support continued and increased state funding of school construction and renovation costs; We appreciate the General Assembly's effort to assist in funding school infrastructure costs and urge the legislature to establish a permanent funding formula and revenue sources for these needs; We also support maintaining the lottery "hold harmless" funding contained in the current budget. Backgrounck For the first time in nearly 50 years, the state, in the current biennial budget, designated funds for local school construction, renovations, additions and debt service. The Virginia Public School Construction Grants Progam, established in 1998, allots $110 million over two years for these purposes, while the 1999 General Assembly approved dedicating lottery proceeds for both recurring (operational) and non-recurring expenditures, which includes capital outlay and debt service. However, these programs are enacted only in the 1998-2000 budget due to expire June 30, while there continues to be a great facility needs backlog estimated to cost between $2.1 billion and $8.2 billion statewide. Localities in the Planning District have nearly $100 million in estimated school construction and renovations on the books through FY 2001. The lack of prior state funding, coupled with ever-g-rowing debt service, increasing student enrollments and continued efforts to lower class sizes, make significant funding a high priority. The amount of"hold harmless" funding (total of $29.7 million ) appropriated to 52 localities in the current budget ensured that no locality received less lottery funding than was proposed in the 1999-2000 introduced budget. ILottery"Hold Harmless" Funding, 1998-2000: Albemarle County ................... $1.03 million Charlottesville ...................... $ 275,000 Fluvanna County .................... $ 3,700 Louisa County ...................... $ 370,000 Nelson County ...................... $103,000 Recommendation: Support continuation of and increases in state funding for school construction, renovations, additions and debt service, and establishment of a permanent funding formula and revenue sources for school infrastructure needs. Support continued funding in the amount of the "hold harmless" provision contained in the current two-year budget. GROWTH MANAGEMENT Legislative Position Of TJPDC, Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities support efforts through enabling legislation to provide high-growth jurisdictions with management tools for coping with increasing residential development. Such enabling legislation includes authority to impose school and road impact fees and authority to adopt adequate public facilities ordinances. We support various amendments to the vested rights legislation approved by the 1998 General Assembly. We support statewide funding for a Purchase of Development Rights (PDRs) program for localities who establish and locally fund such a program. Background: The Code of Virginia defines "high-growth locality" in § 15.2-2298 as any locality which has had population growth of ten percent or more from the next-to-latest to latest decennial census year, any city adjoining such city or county, and any county contiguous with at least three such counties. According to the above definition, our region has five high-growth localities (Albemarle, Fluvanna, Greene and Louisa counties and the City of Charlottesville). The Code currently permits these jurisdictions to provide for voluntary proffering as a part of a rezoning or amendment to a zoning map when certain conditions are met. Voluntary proffers can include the dedication of real property or payment of cash. PDR Program: The Open-Space Land Act contained in the Code (§ 10. i-1700-1705) enables any public body to acquire real property for the preservation of open-space land. Land cannot be acquired through eminent domain and the use of the real property must conform to the Comprehensive Plan. Currently, Virginia Beach has the only operational PDR program in Virginia. Part of the difficulty in implementing this enabling legislation is financing such a plan. We support statewide fund. ing for a Purchase of Development Rights program to provide matching funds. Funding would be available to any locality that has established and funded such a program. Impact Fees: Currently Northern Virginia localities are the only ones in the Commonwealth authorized to impose road impact fees. We support enabling legislation that would allow all high-growth localities to impose such fees. We support impact fee legislation providing for a sliding scale cap based on square footage with the ultimate cap of $5,000 per unit. Adequate Public Facilities: We support enabling legisIati*n granting high-growth localities authority to enact adequate public facilities ordinances. Such legislation would provide that the approval of~ rezoning, subdivision or site plan for development be contingent UPon whether public facilities are adequate to support the services which will be required by a proposed subdivision. Vested Rights: I The.' General Assembly passed vested rights legislation in 1998. We support amendments to this legislation that would strike a balance between development projects that are in the pipeline and the necessity of local governments to amend land use ordinances when there has been mistake, fraud or simply a change in circumstances. · What vests?: There is some question under the act as to what vests. Changing the language to specify that use, floor area ratio and density are what vests would clarify the act. This is consistent with the vesting legislation which passed in 1990. · Prospective framework: We support further amendments to make the bill prospective in nature, applying only to governmental acts that occur after July 1, 1998. Localities could not have predicted that approvals issued years ago would be made irrevocable by the General Assembly. · Variances: We support an amendment to exclude variances from those affirmative governmental acts which may be relied upon to create vesting as variances can involve such small matters as a setback requirement for a tool shed. · Due Diligence: A last amendment would clarify that an approved preliminary subdivision plat, site plan or plan of development is only vested if the landowner submits a final plat or plan within 12 months after initial approval. This would replace the current language which creates a vague standard of"within a reasonable period of time." Recommendation: The above measures attempt to strike a balance between public and private interests. Residential development is occurring at unmanageable rates in most high-growth areas. This development does not generate enough local tax revenue to cover the added costs for public facilities and services, primarily schools. In addition, loss of farmland, forest land and operi-space is occurring in Virginia at an alarming rate. Therefore, support these growth management tools for high-growth localities and state funding to create effective implementation of Conservation Easement (or PDR) Programs across the state. TAXING/REVENUE AUTHORITY Legislative Position of TJPDC, CharlotteSville and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities support amendments to the phased-out repeal of the sales tax on food approved by the 1999 General Assembly. We recognize there must be a balance between the regressive nature of the tax and local revenue raising capacity. The General Assembly should broaden revenue sources available to localitieS, rather than capping, removing or restricting taxing authority or user fees. Should the legislature preempt or remove local tax or revenue authority and sources, then localities must be provided replacement revenue that both produces the same level of revenue growth over time and is not the subject of future state reductions. Background: During the 1999 General Assembly session, legislators approved HB 1601 to repeal part of the sales tax on food (by one-half percent a year for four years, beginning January 1, 2000). The 1 percent returned to localities based on point of sale and the 1 percent earmarked for education are not subject to the repeal at this time. The measure included a provision that prohibits local governments, as of July 1, 2000, from imposing the meals tax on items meeting the federal Food Stamp Act definition of "food," thus preventing localities from collecting the tax on items such as cold sandwiches, salad bar items and fountain drinks routinely purchased in grocery store dells and convenience stores. This restriction could mean significant revenue losses for local governments imposing a meals tax beginning in FY 2000-2001. For example, Albemarle County estimates losses of approximately $300,000, while projected impact could total $200,000 in Charlottesville and $35,000 in Nelson County. Today's tax structure is based on an industrialJagrarian economy that bears little resemblance to today's technology-driven economy. This notion should drive the work of the commission to study Virginia's state and local tax structure for the 21 st century, established by the 1999 General Assembly. It has two years to examine the proper division of revenues and responsibilities for services between state and local governments. It ultimately may be asked to consider the yarious income tax revenue sharing proposals have been raised in recent months, several of which call for sharing income tax revenues in exchange for freezing or reducing local real property taxes. Recommendation: The General Assembly should amend HB 1601 to eliminate the provision that the local meals tax must be administered in accordance with the Food Stamp Act. If further reduction in the sales tax occurs, thus affecting the sales tax returned to localities on point of sale and for public education, then rep lacement revenue must be provided. The newly-formed commission on state and local tax structure should devise a tax structure that provides reliable and stable sources of revenue, while broadening the revenue sources available to localities (e.g. local option sales tax, local option income tax, reducing the number of sales tax exemptions) to reduce local governments' reliance on the property tax. 4 HUMAN SERVICES Legislative Position of T.]PDC, Charlottesville and the Counties of Albemarle, Fluvanna, Louisa, and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities believe the state should meet its funding commitments for all human services programs and not decrease its funding of service or administrative costs in order to meet state management savings goals. Specifically, full funding of Comprehensive Services Act (CSA) costs should be included in the state budget with base allocations based on realistic anticipated levels of need, calculated on a three-year rolling average. The General Assembly should allow local flexibility in the use of Medicaid and other funding sources to maximize the services provided through CSA. Further, the state should not expand the definition of mandated populations without providing necessary funds. Concerning funding for Community Services Boards (CSB's), we oppose efforts to replace the current local government match with a maintenance of effort requirement. Background: The direction of human services is increasingly toward community-based programs, an ~approach that may have merit from a service delivery standpoint, but one that requires carefully addressing significant long-term issues of local versus state roles and requirements for administering and funding those programs. The system appears to be evolving from a grant-based, locally determined system to one where the state ;vill focus funding and performance expectations on specific populations and services at the community level. An example is the Comprehensive Services Act, whose recent requirements, including mandatory uniform assessments and utilizati on management, have eroded the original philosophy behind CSA, which was to provide localities with the funds and the autonomy to respond to local population needs. In addition, CSA has been provided with insufficient funds since its inception earlier this decade, because allocations are not based on previous years' expenditures. Changing the statutorily-defined local match requirements, based on caseload, for community services boards to a local maintenance of effort based on a CSA-like formula that considers local ability to pay would be costly to local governments. While local governments pay a 10% march rate for CSB services, the CSA local match rate ranges from 12-45%. In addition, the CSB population is much larger than the CSA population and CSB's are funded up front, while CSA expenses are reimbursed. Recommendation: Support full funding of Comprehensive Services Act base costs calculated on a three-year rolling average and a return to local flexibility in designing and delivering services according to local needs. Oppose efforts to replace the current local government match with a maintenance of effort requirement for funding Community Services Boards. TRANSPORTATION FUNDING Legislative Position of TJPDC, Charlottesville and the Counties of Alberna~'le, Fluvanna, Louisa, and Nelson The Planning District and its member localities support efforts by the state to increase its funding and commitment to transportation, as adequate funding is essential for a viable transportation system that is responsive to the varying needs of all areas of the state. The General Assembly should consider adjusting its funding sources and imposing appropriate increases in state transportation related taxes and fees to ensure adequate funding and planning for the state's transportation needs. Background: Studies of Virginia's transportation needs continue to show that the state's current transportation program does not keep up with diverse and growing needs in urban, suburban and rural areas and that there is a widening gap between needs and funds to meet those needs. Despite the recent passage of TEA-21 that is funneling more federal dollars to states for transportation, significant revenue shortfalls for transportation will continue. A pair of commissions, one legislative anti one gubernatorial, are studying transportation issues. The legislative panel has expressed dissatisfaction over delays in the state road building program and discussed possible ways to increase transportation revenue. The governor charged his commission to "think outside the box" when exploring solutions to the state's transportation problems, but he has rejected proposals that would increase transportation taxes. Various solutions to address Virginia's transportation needs have been proposed. The plans propose varying schemes of borrowing and using general fund and tobacco settlement dollars to fund transportation programs. Recommendation: Support increased state funding for new construction and maintenance, with consideration given to increasing taxes and fees (e.g. motor fuels tax, road use tax, motor vehicles sales and use tax) and more options for using long-term financing for major transportation projects. Also, support increased funding for the costs of developing and operating modes of. public transportation. ILAND USE AND GR 0 V/TH MANAGEMENT The Planning District and its member localities oppose any preemption or circumvention of local authority to regulate land use. · We support legislatio.n to preclude the ~irginia Department ofTransPortatiori (VDOT) from its ability to allow the construction of commercial, -. - mobile and land-based telecommunications facilities, such as monopoles or towers, without prior approval of the affected locality's governing body. · We oppose legislation that restricts a locality's authority to develop, modify and enforce its comprehensive plan or to regulate land use. · We recognize the importance of a mix of vibrant growing urban areas and preservation of rural areas. In order to maintain this balance, we support expanded authority through enabling legislation to give local governments the tools to manage growth, including transfer development rights (TDR), impact fees and adequate public facilities ordinances. · We support legislation and incentives to encourage localities to work together on a regional basis where effects of decisions are felt beyond the local level. · We support state funding of local purchase of development rights (PDR) programs. _~ We support legislation that enables localities to delineate zoning overlay districts to protect and enhance the quality of scenic areas established in the local comprehensive plan, for use in making land use decisions. · _ We support legislation to restore the requirement that proposed sewage treatment plants, as part of the state permitting process, receive certification from the local government of compliance with local ordinances. FINA N CE The Planning District and its member localities recognize that financing government projects should be a partnership between the state and localities. Ho~vever, wc arc ..... ,,,~ at the '~ ...... :-- ,~,,,,, ,,,o,.~ level of support from the state is not keeping up with thc, wlx'11c demand for services incrcascs. With our limited ability to raise funds, we often are unable to meet services required by our residents and those mandated by the state. The state should permit local governments maximum flexibility in their sources of local revenue. The erosion of local revenue sources increases local governments' reliance on the property tax. · The General Assembly should not cap, remove or restrict any revenue sources, taxing authority or user fees available to localities. · The General Assembly should not extend the state appeals process created for the business, professional and occupational license (BPOL) tax to other local business taxes (i.e. machinery and tools tax, business tangible personal property tax, and merchants capital tax). · The state must broaden the revenue sources available to localities in the form of a local option sales tax, a reduction in the number of sales tax exemptions, a local option income tax or a portion of lottery revenues to reduce local governments' reliance on the property tax. Counties should be granted taxing powers equal to those granted cities. For example, counties that have a meal tax should enjoy the same tax code provisions granted cities (58.1- 3840). The state must honor its promise to fully reimburse localities fo'r the administrative costs associated with imple~menting the personal property tax relief program. The state must ensure that implementation of electric utili _ty restructuring is revenue neutral to localities and that any necessa _ry stop-gap appropriations to adversely-affected localities are fully funded. We O_oppose federal and' state efforts to preempt the ability to tax electronic commerce sales. The Planning District and its member localities share the state's interest in educational excellence. Funding for education is a top priority for this region. · We support full funding of the state's share of the actual costs of the SOQ and full funding of all categorical educational mandates. · We support a study of the methodology for calculating the costs of the SOQ, focusing on whether the methodology truly reflects the actual costs of meeting the standards. Most localities fund education beyond their state-required share. · We recognize that proper infrastructure is essential to a good education system. We support an increase in the state's funding for school construction costs and the establishment of a permanent funding formula for the Virginia Public School Construction Grants and lottery. proceeds Pl/rograms. Capital improvements should be factored into the SOQ and the composite index formula should be revised to account for the costs of school construction and renovation borne by each locality. We support increased state funding for the at-risk four year olds program, so that ~ants are available for 100%, rather than the current 60%, of those unserved children. · We oppose any legislation that limits the authority of local school boards and local governing bodies to finance and manage their schools. [ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The Planning District and its member localities are committed to the protection and enhancement of the environment. This commitment recognizes, hoxvever, the need to achieve a proper balance between environmental regulation and the socio-economic health of our communities. Environmental quality should be promoted through a comprehensive approach and address issues of air and water quality, solid waste management, protection of sensitive lands and sound land use policies. Such an approach requires regional cooperation due to the interjurisdictional nature of many environmental resources and adequate state funding to match local efforts. The state should be a partner o~ and advocate for localities in water supply development. The state should undertake water supply Planning, not just simple inventory of resources. The planning should encompass water conservation, a determination of needs and how they can be met, including emerging technologies. The state should develop, with local government involvement, fair and objective- criteria concerning corrective action for or closure of landfills. The state should not establish an arbitrary_ date for closing all "HB 1205" landfills. The state should enact legislation that provides counties with the authority to operate farmers markets. ILOCAL GO VERNMENT STRUCTURE AND LA WS II The Planning District and its member localities believe that since so many governmental actions take place at the local level, a strong local government system is essential. Local governments must have the freedom and tools to carry out their responsibilities. · We support legislation to relax the Dillion Rule to the extent necessary, in order to enhance the ability of local governments to provide services required by their citizens and to allow local governments to meet their responsibilities in state/local partnerships. · We oppose intrusive legislation involving purchasing procedures, local government authority to establish hours of work, salaries and working conditions for local employees, matters that can be adopted by resolution or ordinance and procedures for adopting ordinances. · We oppose ch~,,~,,o L,~ '~'^ Virginia Freedom of Information Act provisions which ...... unrca3c, nably limit a local governing body's ability to meet in cxccutivc closed session or to rconfer privately w~th ~ts counsel ~~gatmn._, or opcn We also oppose hm~t~n~ the list o frecords currently exempt from disclosure under FOIA. Wc ~pposea,,~,,~,,~,,,~-- ~- ":- - ~c'*,.,.~^ [,, ,,,,4,,,,,- and requiring creation of customized computer records for commercial and other uses. Any requirements of FOIA should be applicable to local government, state government and the General Assembly. Further, we believe that, though probably not necessary, any state FOIA office that is created should issue, upon request, only informal, advisory/non- binding opinions. · We oppose any change in the current sovereign ~mmunity laws seeking to narrow county or municipal corporation immunity. · We support legislation to allow localities to pass on to property owners the cost of the removal or repair of graffiti or other defacement undertaken by the locality. IIHo USING il The Planning District and its member localities believe that every citizen should have an opportunity to afford decent, safe and sanitary housing. Th.e state and local go'~emments shouldwork toward expanding and preserving the Supply and improving th~ quality o faff0/:dable housing for the elderly, the disabled and low-income and moderate-income households. Regi6nal h6hsing solutions and planning should be implemented whenever possible. · We support continued funding of the Virginia Housing Partnership Fund from both the general fund and VHDA,. creation of more local-option funding sources such as tax increment financing and real estate transfer taxes. · We support promotion of new tools for affordable housing such as limited equity housing cooperatives and community land trusts. · In addressing the lack of input that local governments have concerning housing issues, we support local government notice provisions for all proposed low and moderate income housing projects seeking federal tax credits, including VHDA. · We support VHDA criteria for funding which encourages rehabilitation of existing housing and discourages new construction in close proximity to existing subsidized housing. [IPUBLIC SAFETY The Planning District and its member localities recognize that the prime responsibility for law enforcement, criminal justice activities, emergency medical care and fire services rests at the local level. However, these needs can be met only with continued state and federal support. · We c..i1 ........ :^~ ^C ' support .~,. ~,~o~,,,-[~,. ,,: continued state funding for the 599 law-enforcement program d.~et. (' as restored in the FY 1999-2000 state bu ~n FY "° '~' ................ : .......... We support local governments' existin~ authority to levy and collect a local tax for enhanced emeraency telephone service (E911). · We support full funding for state-mandated law enforcement officers, local correctional officers, court security officers, and communications personnel training provided through certified academies. · We support legislation to increase court fees to pay for courthouse maintenance, renovation and construction. These costs should not be placed on the general population. · The state should pay 50% of the costs to construct regional jails and juvenile detention facilities with timely state reimbursement payments. The state should also increase its share of the operational costs of such facilities. 10 1 TRANSPOR TA TION The Planning District and its member localities support the development of a comprehensive statewide transportation plan that recognizes diverse transportation needs in urban, suburban and rural areas. · We support transportation plans that are consistent with and supportive of minimizing the effect on the natural environment. · We support a comprehensive approach to transportation that is balanced and multi-modal, integrating all forms of transportation in a manner that is economically efficient, energy efficient, environmentally sound and promotes economic development. · State transportation planning must be better coordinated and conform with local land use planning, especially in rapidly growing areas. We urge state legislators to implore the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) to work with local officials to address concerns about VDOT's public information meeting process, especially regarding timeliness and availability of environmental documents for public review and input. · We support a relaxing of state standards to give localities more flexibility regarding road construction in neighborhoods and traffic calming measures. · We support state funding for public transportation capital and operating costs on par with the level of support for road construction and maintenance. AND HUMAN SER VICES The Planning District and its member localities recognize that special attention must be given to developing circumstances under which people, especially the disabled, the poor, the young and the elderly, can achieve their full potential. In achieving this end, however, the limits of government must be recognized. The delivery of health and human services must be a collaborative effort from federal, state and local agencies. · We oppose any changes in state funding that result in an increase of the local share of costs for human services. · We oppose any new state or federal entitlement programs that require addition~l local funding. · We support state funding for local Disability Services Boards. · We support the state assuming 100% responsibility for funding the auxiliary_ grant pro,am. Welfare Reform. We support Virginia's welfare reform program and encourage efforts to promote family preservation and work requirements. We support a Temporary Assistance to Needy Families Plan (TANF) that takes into account and fully funds state and local implementation and support services costs, focuses on private sector employment, gives local governments maximum regulatory and funding flexibility to meet particular community needs, and does not burden local governments ~vith paying emergency assistance costs for those who are cut off from federal/state public assistance 11 programs. We support initiatives to help former VIEW participants maintain continuity in child care and oppose any initiatives to shift traditional federal and state child care administrative responsibility and costs to local govemments. The federal and state government should work together to create transitional health benefit options for those making .the transition from VIEW to the private sector in the event that employers do not provide adequate health care benefits and Medicaid is no longer an option. Comprehensive Services Act. The state should allow local governments to use other funding sources such as state funds fi:om the Virginia Juvenile Community Crime ControlAct for CSA needs in order to minimize the local dollars that are spent on CSA. Local governments should be given the option of using Medicaid funds for case management but should not be responsible for the cost of any child eligible for Medicaid funds unless the local government has identified the child as CSA eligible. The state should not undertake any cost-containment measures without the means to pay for them. As such, the state should provide more technical assistance to local govemments. State and local governments must work together to ensure the greatest degree of coordination between Individual Education Plans and CS A service plans. We support full state funding in the state's base budget for the costs of CSA. The current distinctions between base and supplemental budgets should be eliminated and replaced with allocations based on a realistic anticipated level of need, reserving supplemental funding for unforeseen emergencies. Finally, state agencies should collaborate and ad. opt common procedures and guidelines before instituting local administrative requirements. I[ECONOMIC DE VEL OPMENT Il The Planning District and its member localities recognize economic development as essential to the continued viability of the Commonwealth. The state needs to clarify its positions on growth and development by enhancing the state economic development plan to more clearly define the responsibilities of the state and of local governments. We support the development of the state Economic Development Strategic Plan for the Commonwealth that includes new tools for local governments to use in attracting economic development opportunities such as a capital pool to construct improvements for ne~v or expanding businesses, tax increment financing, a grant or loan program dedicated to enhancing local infrastructure systems and an expanded Enterprise Zone Program. The state needs to recognize the disparity in rewards of economic development between the state and localities, as well as between host locality and surrounding localities. Regional Competitiveness Funding. The Regional Competitiveness Act enacted in 1996 provides local governments an opportunity to ~vork regionally to find solutions to problems that negatively. affect Virginia's competitiveness in economic development. We support additional funding for the Act to provide meaningful opportunities for regional projects to move forward. Fair and proportional funding should be provided to all regions of the state. 12 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Year 2000 Legislative Proposals SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Legislative Proposals to Submit to VACO STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Davis, Blank AGENDA DATE: July 14, 1999 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: × ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: Yes BACKGROUND: As a continuation of our discussion last Wednesday, staff is providing you with some additional information regarding potential VACO legislative submittals. Specifically, the "Five for Five" initiative being considered by VAC© and others. This proposal would return 5% of the net Virginia individual income taxes collected in each city and county in Virginia to the locality, and in return, each locality would reduce its real estate taxes by 5%. As you will see in the attachment from VACO, Albemarle's net new revenue under this proposal would be $2.336 million based on the 1996 income tax collected and the 1998 real property taxes. DISCUSSION: Albemarle County potential VACO legislative submittals: Request legislation to provide Counties with enabling language to operate farmers' markets. There has been local interest in exploring the possibility of operating a farmers' market in Albemarle, but a recent Attorney General opinion ruled that counties do not have the expressed legislative authority to do so. Request enabling legislation to provide for a scenic protection and tourist enhancement overlay district. As the County pursues options to protect the visual quality of land as an aesthetic and economic resource, this legislation would provide localities with a method to ensure full consideration of visual resources and scenic areas when the County or State makes land use decisions in designated areas. Request legislation to preclude VDOT from erecting towers in the right of way without permission from the locality. Currently, VDOT allows cellular companies to erect towers on their right of way with rental fees accruing to the state. VDOT also uses these towers for their own equipment, such as cameras and road monitoring equipment. GROWTH MANAGEMENT: Provide high-growth jurisdictions with management tools for coping with residential development. Such enabling legislation includes 1 ) the authority to impose school and road impact fees 2) the authority to adopt adequate public facilities ordinances and 3) provide statewide funding for a Purchase of Development Rights program for localities who establish and locally fund such a program AGENDA TITLE: Year 2000 Legislative Proposals AGENDA DATE: July 14, 1999 Page 2 of 2 · Request legislation from the state to broaden the revenue sources available to localities such as a local option sales tax, a reduction in the number of sales tax exemptions and a local option income tax. (NEW) etc. Increase state revenues to localities for such joint services as jails, juvenile detention facilities, schools, RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that we submit those items listed above including the "Five for Five" Plan to VACO for inclusion in their legislative proposals. 99.119 ACQUISITION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS' PROGRAM FOR ALBEMARLE COUNTY FINAL REPORT 3 November 1999 INTRODUCTION In a purchase of conservation easements program, landowners voluntarily enter into agreements with a public agency or private organization to sell the development potential of their properties. In turn, the agency pays the landowners the difference between the value of the land for agricultural, forest, open-space or estate (i.e. rural) use and the value of the land for its "highest and best" (generally residential) use. The owner sells the right to convert the land to a non-rural use. The legal mechanism used to restrict development is a conservation easement. There is increasing recognition that farm and forest land, dean water and airsheds, scenic vistas and rural character have public value as well as private value. The Acquisition of Conservation Easements Program proposed in this report provides a method of attaining a balance between landowners' rights and responsibilities, between the private and public values of rural land. STATEMENT OF NEED In the last decade, an increasing number of programs, federal, state, and local, have been created to purchase conservation easements that protect farmland, forest land and other open-space lands. There has been increasing interest in such programs because of the accelerating rate at which farmland and other open-space is being lost. In the period between 1959 and 1992, for example, 37% of Virginia's farmland was lost. In Albemarle County, 25,000 acres of farmland were lost from 1974 to 1992, and 12,898 acres in the decade from 1982 to 1992. At present, 31.7% or 89,208 acres of the 283,652 acres of forest land in Albemarle County is considered by the Department of Forestry to be too densely populated for long term timber production. The TJPDC Build-Out Analysis indicates that at the build-out permitted by the present zoning ordinance, only 4% of the Rural Areas of the County will have a density of less than one housing unit per 21 acres. Regulatory land-use planning tools acceptable to citizens and elected officials have not been able to stem the tide of land conversion. The purchase of conservation easements represents an alternative to reliance solely on regulation, while keeping the land in private ownership and on the tax rolls. The Purchase of Development Rights Committee and its work: On April 9, 1997, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors appointed a ten member Purchase of Development Rights Committee to develop a purchase of development rights program consistent with the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan. The Committee met monthly and in sub- committee over a two year period. The Committee presented its initial report outlining recommendations for an Acquisition of Conservation Easements Program to the Board of Supervisors on 2 September 1998. At that time, the Board approved the concept of the program as outlined in the Phase I Report and directed the Committee to continue developing a program as outlined in that Report and to proceed to community outreach and comment. The Committee then spoke to many interested groups and citizens and sought to encourage public comment. In addition, the Committee has tested the ranking sheet with specific sample parcels of land and developed a recommendation for the valuation of easements to be purchased. The Committee reported on its public outreach efforts and presented its Phase II report to the Board of Supervisors. The Board directed the Committee to move forward with completion of its work. The Department of Planning and Zoning Department have aided the Committee in developing a methodology for determining the number of usable development rights on a given parcel. Consultation with the County Attorney and Director of Finance have assisted in preparing a funding recommendation consistent with Virginia law. The Planning Department has also assisted in providing comment on the selection criteria as they relate to the Comprehensive Plan. The Committee has worked with the County Assessor, Director of Finance, and County Attorney in developing a process for assessing the value of easements to be purchased. To fulfill its charge to develop public consensus, the Committee has held the following meetings: I. Landowners' meeting: In conjunction with the Farm Bureau and the Extension Service, the Committee is presently organized a landowners' workshop on the concept of purchase of development rights and use of such programs elsewhere. At that meeting, Bill Powel, dairy farmer and Program Administrator of the Carroll County, Maryland, purchase of easements program described his experience as participant in a purchase of easements program and discussed existing programs such as Carroll County's. II. Public Worksession: The Committee held public work session on the program to receive comment on the proposed program before finalizing this report. 2 The Committee suggests that the Board hold a public hearing on the program. The Committee is available to assist staff in the presentation of the program for that hearing if desired and is available to assist with a work session if desired. The Committee wishes to express special and heart-felt thanks to Diane Mullins in the County Executive's office for her cheerful assistance through- out its work. Her help has been vital to the completion of our task. Committee Members: Sherry Buttrick, Chairman; Edward Bain, Vice-Chairman; Walter Perkins, Board of Supervisors' liaison; Gregory Edwards, Wayne Elliott, Daniel P. Jordan, Babette Thorpe (replaces C. Timothy Lindstrom), Ioe Jones, Stephen McLean, Joseph Samuels, William Finley (replaces David A. Tice). 3 1. DESCRIPTION AND PURPOSE OF ACQUISITION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS Description: The acquisition of conservation easements may be described as the purchase of perpetual conservation easements which have the effect of extinguishing development rights on parcels of land. The easement is offered voluntarily by the landowner. The locality is not legally obligated to accept any application for purchase. The landowner is not obligated to accept the County's offer to purchase. The Board of Supervisors makes the final determination to accept each proposal to purchase made by a landowner and the individual purchase must reflect the goals of the Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time of acceptance of the proposal to purchase an easement. Legal Authority: Existing legislation, The Open-Space Land Act (1966) (Code of Virginia Sections 10.1-1700-1705), gives authority for a county or its Public Recreational Facilities Authority to purchase conservation easements on land for conservation purposes. A conservation easement is the legal document used to purchase development rights. More specifically, the Open Space Land Act enables any public body to acquire title to, or any interests or rights of not less than five years' duration in real property that will provide a means for the preservation of open-space land. Acquisition may be by purchase, gift, devise, bequest or grant, but not by eminent domain. The use of the real property for open space shall conform to the Comprehensive Plan. No further enabling legislation is needed. Purpose and Application: The purpose of Albemarle County's program to acquire conservation easements is to serve as one tool among the several tools available to the County to protect and efficiently use County resources by emphasizing the importance of protecting those open-space elements outlined in the Open-Space Plan, a part of the Comprehensive Plan, and in the Comprehensive Plan in effect at the time. Use of an Acquisition of Conservation Easements' program to protect diverse natural resource elements rather than exclusively farmland immediately sets apart the ACE program from many PDR programs around the country. Most PDR programs focus exclusively on preservation of agricultural lands. Albemarle County's history of according weight in its public policy to protecting a broad spectrum of natural resource values as outlined in the Open- Space Plan leads the PDR committee to recommend a broader open-space protection program rather than a program directed solely at farmland. The Comprehensive Plan's emphasis on the importance of agriculture and forestry in the rural areas suggests, however, that protection of agricultural and forestal lands will be a major component of the program. 4 It was a governing assumption that an Acquisition of Conservation Easements Program will always be one arrow in the quiver of arrows available to protect the rural areas of Albemarle County. It is intended to supplement rather than replace protective planning efforts of the Comprehensive Plan and Zoning Ordinance, Agricultural and Forestal Districts, donation of conservation easements, and acquisition of park land and natural areas. Acquisition of conservation easements can never do the job alone. Program's Relation to the Comprehensive Plan Among the goals of the Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan are protection of the County's natural, scenic and historic resources, promotion of the continuation of a viable agricultural and forestal industry and resource base, and protection of the County's surface water and ground water supplies. The Albemarle County Open-Space and Critical Resources Plan (1992), a part of the Comprehensive Plan, lists Purchase of Development Rights as a Potential Technique recommended for further study or implementation. The Ranking System for establishing order of priority for participation in the program is intended to reflect the natural resource values as outlined by the Comprehensive Plan. The Ranking System therefore will need to be updated by the ACE Commission when revisions to the Comprehensive Plan occur. 2. ELIGIBILITY AND RANKING OF LANDS FOR ACOUISITION OF CONSERVATION EASEMENTS' PROGRAM Eligibility: Minimum criteria for eligibility to participate in the ACE program are: 1) the property's remaining in permanent open space is consistent with Albemarle County's Comprehensive Plan; (This requirement of the state Code suggests that lands eligible for the program will be lands in the Rural Areas and lands specifically designated for long-term open-space within the Growth Areas) 2) The proposed easement terms are consistent with the ACE Criteria for Easement Terms. Information and Application: The program administrator located within the Department of Planning answers landowners' questions about the program and supplies information. The landowner applies to participate in the program by filling out an application form containing basic information to include name, address, acreage, tax map parcel number and zoning of parcel. Ranking:_ The ranking of properties applying for purchase of conservation easement is achieved through a point system. The point system ranks the 5 natural resources of the property and the development potential and pressure on the property. The ranking system favors the protection of land owned by landowners of modest income. At present, the gift of easement program provides substantial tax incentives for donation of easements, but provides little financial incentive to landowners of modest means. The ranking system provides a minimum overall total point score to be eligible for the program in order to assure significant natural resources and open space. See Ranking Sheet in Appendix. 3. ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE OF ACE PROGRAM Easement Holder: The Albemarle County Public Recreational Facilities Authority is recommended as the legal holder of easements generated through the ACE program. This entity was created by the Board of Super- visors for the purpose of holding easements on December 13, 1989. The Public Recreational Facilities Authority has indicated its willingness to hold such easements if requested by the Board of Supervisors to do so. In some cases, it may be advisable for easements to be jointly held with the Virginia Outdoors Foundation or another entity. The Open-Space Lands Preservation Trust Fund, for example, is enabled to re-imburse for expenses and/or purchase easements which are jointly held with the Virginia Outdoors Foundation and a co-holder such as the Public Recreational Facilities Authority. Acquisition of Conservation Easements' (ACE) Commission: The follow- ing organizational structure is recommended. The Board of Supervisors appoints an Acquisition of Conservation Easements' Commission of approximately 10 citizens to serve without compensation. This Commission is similar to the Agricultural Advisory Commission in the Virginia Beach Agricultural Reserve Program. The ACE commission will have general oversight over the ACE program and should include members knowledgeable in relevant areas such as farm/estate real estate professional, rural land appraiser, farmer or forester, representatives of easement holding agencies and conservation organizations. It will review the program's criteria for eligibility and ranking on an annual basis and recommend to the Board of Supervisors any changes needed to maintain consistency with the Comprehensive Plan or, based on the experience of the previous year, to make the program more workable. The ACE Commission will also review the prioritization of applications for acquisition of conservation easements developed by staff and foreword its recommendation to the Board of Supervisors. The ACE Commission will work with staff to develop methods to promote the program. 6 Role of Board of Supervisors: The Board of Supervisors approves the list of prioritized applications presented by the ACE Commission. In addition, the Board approves the expenditure of funds once offers have been accepted by landowners on the above list. The Board appropriates funds for the ACE Program in its annual budget. Valuation of Easement for Purchase: The County Assessor performs appraisals on those properties identified for purchase by the ACE Commission through the ranking system. The County then makes the resulting offer to the landowner. If one or more landowners decline the offer, the property or properties ranking just below these are appraised and offers made. An Assessment Review Committee will be established that includes three real estate professionals, the County Assessor and at least one member of the ACE Commission. The ACE Commission may reserve the right to establish guidelines for maximum individual payments in any given year. Administration of Pro~ram: The program is recommended to be housed within the Planning Department of the County government for at least the first two years of the program. The program administrator should explore ways to move the program toward maximizing private participation and investment in this public program. Additionally, staff should research ways to use State or Federal programs to leverage County funding. The citizen ACE Commission assists with increasing this participation. Administrative duties of the ACE Program include day-to-day operations such as responding to inquiries from landowners, educating and informing landowners of the program, processing applications, and marketing the program. Additionally, staff should be prepared to educate landowners about other land protection tools such as Agricultural and Forestal Districts, the tax benefits of donationand bargain sale of conservation easements and riparian and wetlands easement programs offered by state or federal agencies. Determination of number of usable development rights contained on applicant properties will be made by the Department of Planning. Staffin~ Level: It is anticipated that one part-time position will be required to serve in the position of Program Administrator. Virginia Beach reports that they hired one additional staff person to administer the program and that the program does not demand 100% of that position's time. That program is experiencing two to three new inquiries per month. Following the model of the Virginia Beach program, the Committee anticipates that the legal work of preparing a letter of offer, performing the title search and handling the easement closing would be handled by the County Attorney's Office. Administrative Process: Steps a landowner follows to participate in program: 1. Landowner learns of Acquisition of Conservation Easements' program available through newspaper or private organization 7 newsletter, outreach programs conducted by staff and ACE Commission members. 2. Landowner completes application prior to semi-annual deadline. 3. ACE staff completes ranking sheets on applicant properties and submits a prioritized list of easement proposals to ACE Commission. 4. Board of Supervisors approves priorities for easement proposals. 5. The County Assessor performs appraisals of properties and easements on those properties in order of priority, and offers are made to the landowner. 6. Board of Supervisors approves funding for easement proposals. 7. The landowner decides whether to accept the County's offer. 8. The landowner and County sign an easement which is recorded in the Clerk's Office. Easement Terms: Easements funded with public money should be perpetual in their duration. This policy is consistent with the philosophy of the Internal Revenue Service and federal government to grant tax deductions and exclusions only for easements that are perpetual in duration. A word about perpetuity: Under the terms of the Open-Space Land Act, the enabling legislation, easements of any duration may be released and other land substituted, if in the future it happens that the development of the particular parcel under easement becomes essential for the orderly growth and development of the locality. The county's investment in open-space is protected by the requirement that land of greater value as open-space and at least equal market value be placed under easement instead. Guidelines for permitted subdivision of a property under the terms of an easement: Under 100 acres: no subdivision. 100-200 acres: no more than one subdivision into a maximum of two parcels, one of which shall be at least 100 acres. 200 to 300 acres may be divided into three parcels, two of which must be at least 100 acres each, etc.. The remaining terms follow the sample easement (See Appendix) which is based on substantially the language of the Virginia Outdoors Foundation in areas of the use of property, improvements, forest management, easement inspections, etc.. 8 Recommended Guidelines for Allocation of Funds: In order to ensure the pubic benefit and fiscal responsibility of the ACE program, the following targets are recommended to guide the allocation of funds: 1. Strive to protect at least 1,000 acres per 1 million dollars of funding. 2. Strive to fund at least three separate projects in any one year. 3. Strive toward geographic diversity of properties protected. If the natural resource values of a single property are sufficiently compelling, the ACE Commission should be empowered to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that these Guidelines be overridden by the overwhelming public value attained in the single property. 4. FUNDING OF PROGRAM Financin~ Plan: The Committee initially recommended that Albemarle follow the same installment purchase financing plan developed by Howard County, Maryland, and adopted by Virginia Beach. This program was developed by Evergreen Capital Advisors, Princeton N.J., as consultant to Howard County, Md., and adapted by them for Virginia Beach. The Albemarle County Attorney's Office has determined that this method of funding is not available to a county in Virginia, for the reason that Virginia counties are not enabled to incur long-term debt which the annual interest payments to landowners comprises. A lease-purchase arrangement was determined by the County Attorney to be inappropriate for the purchase of conservation easements because such agreements must contain "non-appropriations clauses." Such a clause provides for the return of the item being financed, such as a voting machine, should the Board of Supervisors decide not to appropriate funds for the annual payment. An easement once granted cannot be returned for lack of payment in the way that a voting machine can be returned. It is therefore contemplated that the purchase of easements would be on a cash payment basis until other options become available to Virginia counties. In the initial two years of the program, this constraint should not be a significant obstacle, in that the newness of the program will likely mean that participation will grow over time. The Committee did not, for that reason, foresee the need for a bond referendum in the initial years of the program. Studies have shown that referenda prove more successful once a program has been in existence and developed a track record. Fundin~ Level: The Committee has presented to the Board of Supervisors its recommendation to begin funding the ACE program at the level of one million dollars per annum. It must be understood that the program needs to be securely and adequately funded in order to be attractive to landowners and to be effective in its purpose. 9 Sources of Fundin~: The Board of Supervisors has determined that funding for the upcoming year should be derived from the Fund Carryover Balance and the Lodging Tax. The Virginia Beach City Council member who met with representatives of the ACE Committee in Virginia Beach emphasized that an identified source of funding was crucial to a successful program. Without a predictable source of funding, the program is subject to annual changes in political climate and is not conducive to the predictability that makes the program able to achieve its goals. It is therefore the recommendation of the Committee that a designated source of funding within the budget be pursued during the first two years of the program. It is further recommended that the County continue to pursue the increased funding and award of funding grants to the County from state and federal sources which may provide for the leveraging of County funds. 5. MARKETING OF PROGRAM Marketing of the program will be the responsibility of the staff administrator and the ACE Commission. The Farm Bureau and Extension Service have assisted in the educational effort and are willing to continue to develop additional informational meetings for landowners. It is hoped that additional organizations may volunteer to assist in spreading the word to their members. The County staff and ACE Commission in cooperation with the. County's public relations personnel will generate publicity and design educational workshops. 6. PURCHASE OF DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS' PROGRAMS IN OTHER VIRGINIA LOCALITIES AND OTHER STATES A 1998 survey, "Purchase of Development Rights Through Permanent Conservation Easements," (Jane C. Koontz, Richmond, Va.) indicates that 21 states have initiated state or local PDR programs. The first such program began in Suffolk County, New York, in 1977. Neighboring Maryland has the most well-established PDR programs in the country and serves as a model to states and localities developing programs. Enabled in 1977, the Maryland Agricultural Land Preservation Foundation has purchased easements on 1,052 farms comprising 152,288 acres. Like Virginia, Maryland also has an active gift of easement program administered by the Maryland Environmental Trust. Ann Arundel County, Baltimore County, Carroll County, Harford County, and Howard County are the most active local programs. These programs work in conjunction with the state program and receive state funds to augment local funding. Pennsylvania made its first easement purchase in 1989 and has protected 123,500 acres as of August 1998. In the appendix isa list of counties in other states containing PDR programs and the funds available for those programs. 10 Purchase of Development Rights ProErams in Virginia Open Space Lands Preservation Trust Fund: In 1997, the General Assembly created the Open Space Lands Preservation Trust Fund. The fund's purposes are to assist landowners with costs associated in giving an easement and to purchase all or part of the value of an easement from an individual landowner. The program is designed to re- imburse individual landowners who apply for cost re-imbursement. It does not make grants to localities. Virginia Beach Agricultural Reserve Program: Begun in 1995, this program has protected 400~0 acres and an additional 2800 in process with a budget of $ 3.5 million annually. Virginia Beach is the first locality to develop a PDR program. Their goal is to purchase the vast majority of the 20,000 acres still in farming use south of the city. The purchase price of their easements is proportionately higher than Albemarle is expected to experience because there is little demand for estate parcels. Virginia Beach has been extremely helpful to Albemarle and has expressed willingness to continue to do whatever they can to assist this locality. Albemarle's committee has worked extensively with staff at Virginia Beach and is extremely grateful to Louis Cullipher, Director of Agriculture, and members of City Council for their time and assistance. Representatives of their program have twice come to Albemarle and members of Albemarle's committee have taken a field trip to learn the details of their program and to tour several farms and meet with their owners in the program. Virginia Beach serves as a model to other localities in Virginia developing programs and has been generous in its assistance. Virginia Localities in the process of developin~ PDR Pro~rams: A number of other Virginia localities, responding to similar citizen interest in reducing sprawl development associated with rapid growth pressure, are in the process of developing PDR programs. Loudoun Coun .ty: Report of PDR Committee to be presented on July 7th will recommend implementation of PDR Program. Fauquier County: Board of Supervisors has passed resolution authorizing public opinion poll preparatory to considering development of PDR Program. lames Ci.ty County: A County Committee is in process of developing public consensus on a program designed in concept. The Board of Supervisors has earmarked $500,000 as seed money for the program. Henrico and Hannover Counties are also exploring the feasibility of PDR programs. 11 ACE PROGRAM RANKING SHEET TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR THE ACE PROGRAM, A PROPERTY MUST MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERA: Eligibility for ACE Program: Land in permanent open space is consistent with Albemarle County's Comprehensive Plan yes__ no__ The proposed easement terms are consistent with The ACE Criteria for Easement Terms yes__ no__ Minimum score for eligibility: 15 points. RANKING PRIORTY POINT SYSTEM I. OPEN-SPACE CRITERA: Points Points Avail Earned Land adjoins an existing permanent conservation easement, National, State, local park or other protected open space (one point for every 500 ft. of boundary) 2. Size of property: (1 point for each 50 ac.) II. THREAT OF CONVERSION: 1. Property is threatened with forced sale: Other hardship (explain) 5 3 2. Number of usable development rights on the property: * 1/2 point for each development right, incl. 21 ac. Rights minus those development rights retained. * Albemarle County Planning department will provide number of usable development rights by determining with Zoning Department the number of theoretical development rights and estimating potential for loss as result of slope or wetlands. Applicants may provide alternative documents from a Certified Land Surveyor. Pg. 2 ACE PROGRAM RANKING SHEET III. NATURAL/CULTURAL RESOURCE CRITERA 1. Mountain protection afforded: (One point for each 1000 ft. of Mountain Ridge) As designated on Alb. Co. Mountain Overlay maps Points Points Avail. Earned 2. Working family farm (includes forest): At least one family member's principal occupation (income) (51% or greater) is farming this farm/forestland At least one family member is producer of farm products 5 3 3. a. Designated Scenic road protection (State or Entrance Corridor): (One point for every 600 ft. of road frontage) or 3. b. Frontage on public road: (One point for every 1000 ft. of public road frontage) Historic resource protection: Within a National or Va. Rural Historic District: Individual structure on or eligible for National or Va. Register Land lies in primary viewshed of Monticello (maximum possible points for # 4.: 5 points) 3 5. Natural habitat protection: Land contains an occurance of a plant or animal species as listed on Va. Natural Heritage Inventory as rare or endangered* 5 6. Soils 1 point for every 50 ac. of acreage in class I-III soils (NRCS Classifications) *This Inventory provides a good proxy for biologically diverse habitat. A County Biological Inventory may supply additional data and categories for ranking in the future. Pg. 3 ACE PROGRAM RANKING SHEET 7. Public Drinking Water Supply Watershed Protection a. Property in the Watershed b. Riparian frontage: Ivy Creek, Mechum, Moormans, Doyle, Buck Mt. Creek, & Rivanna R., Jacob's Run frontage (one-half point for every 1000 ft. of river boundary) 8. Designated Scenic Rivers protection: Property contains frontage on State Scenic River (one-half point for every 1000 ft. of river boundary) points Avail. points Earned 3 IV. FINANCIAL CONSIDERATION: If you would like financial need to be considered and your income is equal to or below the current median income for Albemarle County in previous tax year: If your income is less than median income minus 20% If your income is less than median income plus 20% 10 15 5 V. LEVERAGING OF COUNTY FUNDS State, Federal, or Foundation funding exist to assist landowner with funding of purchase of easement (ex's: Open-Space Preservation Trust Fund, CREP, Farmland Protection Program, Forest Legacy) The following extra points are given to those applicants who make use either of one of the above options or of bargain sale (partial gift) to provide leverage for the County's funding: For each 10% of leveraged funds: 1 point: total available pts: 10 Total Points in this Ranking sheet: points This Ranking Sheet provides a priority ranking among the Applicants for Albemarle County's consideration. Notes for tabulation: Fractional points to the first decimal rounded should be tabulated. CHARGE TO COMMITTEE: To develop a draft policy consistent with existing legislation and authority regarding purchase of development rights for the Board of Supervisors' possible implementation. The Committee's scope of work should include: *develop program goals consistent with Albemarle County's Comprehensive Plan. Identification of resources that it would be desirable to protect by means of this program. *develop criteria for eligibility to participate in the program and ranking system(s) for such lands. *develop possible funding mechanisms, including State, federal and private sources. *develop consensus among local interest groups and interested citizens. *develop recommendations for administration of the program. *develop informational literature on the program for the public's use. *develop recommendations to encourage voluntary sale and gifts of conservation easements and to maximize the effectiveness of the program and the protection of identified resources; and *provide periodic progress reports to the Board of Supervisors. AI~P~NDIX D SAMPLE FORM for Deed of Easement ExemDted from recordation tax under the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended, Section 58.1-811 (A) (3), 58.1-811 (D) and 10.1-1803 THIS DEED OF GIFT EASEMENT, made this day of _,1999, between ........ herein called the Grantors, the ALBEMARLE COUNTY PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AUTHORITY,, herein called the Grantee, whose address is 401 McIntire Road, Virginia, 22903, and , herein called the Bank. WHEREAS, the Open Space Land Act of 1966 (Chapter 17, Title 10.1, SS 10.1-1700 to 10.1-1705 of the Code of Virginia, as amended) declares that the preservation of open-space land serves a public purpose by promoting the health and welfare of the citizens of the Commonwealth by curbing urban sprawl and encouraging more desirable and economical development of natural resources, and authorizes the use of easements in gross to maintain the character of open-space land; and WHEREAS, {INSERT CODE CITATION FOR PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AUTHORITY} WHEREAS, [INSERT DESCRIPTION OF RESOURCES AND SIGNIFICANT PUBLIC VALUES]; WHEREAS, [INSERT OTHER STATUTORY REFERENCES OR REFERENCES TO CITY OR COUNTY PUBLIC LAND USE PLAN, IF APPLICABLE] WHEREAS, the Grantors are the owners of the fee of real property hereinafter described which they desire preserved as open space land in the public interest. NOW THEREFORE, in recognition of the foregoing and in consideration of the mutual covenants herein and the acceptance by Grantee, the Grantors do hereby grant and convey to the Grantee an open-space easement in gross over, and the right in perpetuity to restrict the use of the real estate consisting of acres described below and located in Magisterial District of County, Virginia, near and fronting on state route(s and hereinafter referred to as the "Property:" [PROPERTY DESCRIPTION] AND SUBJECT, HOWEVER, to the restriction that the Grantee or its successors and assigns may not transfer or convey the open-space easement herein conveyed to the Grantee unless the Grantee conditions such transfer or conveyance on the requirement that (1) all restrictions and conservation purposes set forth in the conveyance accomplished by this deed are to be continued in perpetuity, and (2) the transferee is an organization then qualifying as an eligible donee as defined by section 170(h) (3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and the applicable Treasury Regulations promulgated thereunder. This conveyance is further made subject to all matters of record which may affect said parcel of land. Restrictions are hereby imposed on uses of the property pursuant to the public policies set forth above. The acts which the Grantors, their heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns, covenant to do and not to do upon the Property, and the restrictions which the Grantee is hereby entitled to enforce, are and shall be as follows; Accumulation of trash, refuse, junk, or any other unsightly material is not permitted on the Property. Display of billboards, signs, or other advertisements is not permitted on or over the Property except to state the name and/or address of the owners, to advertise the sale or lease of the Property, to advertise the sale of goods or services produced incidentally to a permitted use of the Property or to provide notice necessary for the protection of the Property and for giving directions to visitors. No such sign shall exceed three by three feet in size. Subdivision of the Property in any manner is prohib- ited. (See Guidelines for variations based on parcel size.) o Management of forest resources shall be in accord with a forest management plan approved by the Grantee. Best Management Practices, as defined by the Department of Forestry, shall be used to control erosion and protect water quality. o Grading, blasting or earth removal shall not materially alter the topography of the Property except for dam construction to create private conservation ponds or lakes, or as required in construction of permitted buildings and connecting private roads described in paragraph 6, below. Mining on the Property is prohibited. No permanent or temporary building or structure shall be built or maintained on the Property other than (i) a single family dwelling and non-residential outbuildings commonly and appropriately incidental thereto, (ii) secondary dwellings and non- o o residential outbuildings commonly and appropriately incidental thereto, and (iii) farm buildings or structures. Farm buildings or structures exceeding 4,500 square feet in ground area may not be constructed on the Property unless prior written permission for said building or structure is obtained in writing from Grantee. (add if appropriate: In the event of subdivision of the Property as provided in Paragraph 3, above, permitted buildings and connecting private roads may be constructed on each subdivided parcel.) Industrial or commercial activities other than the following are prohibited: 1. agriculture, silviculture or horticulture, 2. temporary or seasonal activities which do not permanently alter the physical appearance of the Property and which are consistent with the conservation values herein protected, 3. activities which can be and in fact are conducted within permitted buildings, without material alteration to the external appearance thereof. Temporary outdoor activities involving 100 people or more shall not exceed seven days in duration unless approved by the Virginia Outdoors Foundation. [Optional additional language: Notwithstanding any other provision of this easement, no commercial recreational use (excep~ for de minimi$ commercial recreational uses) shall be permitted on the Property.] Representatives of the Grantee may enter the Property from time to time for the purpose of .inspection and enforcement of the terms of this easement after permission from or reasonable notice to the owner or the owner's representative. o Grantors, their heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns shall notify Grantee in writing prior to closing on any proposed transfer or sale of the Property. In any deed conveying all or any part of the Property, this easement shall be referenced by Deed Book and Page Number in the deed of conveyance. · herein, the Bank, is the Note holder under a certain Deed of Trust dated and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of County, Virginia in Deed Book at page which subjects the Property to the Bank's lien. The Bank and the Trustee (under the Deed of Trust), hereby consent to the terms and intent of this Easement, and agree~that the lien represented by the Deed of Trust shall be held subject to this Deed of Gift of Easement. Although this easement in gross will benefit the public as described above, nothing herein shall be construed to convey to the public a right of access to or use of the Property. Grantors, their heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns hereby retain exclusive right to such access and use, subject to the terms hereof. Acceptance of this conveyance by the Grantee is authorized by Section 10.1-1801 of the Code of Virginia and is evidenced by the signature of its Executive Director hereto. Assignment of this easement is governed by Section 10.1-1801 of the Code of Virginia. WITNESS the following signatures and seals. , Grantor ,Grantor Bank: By: Its: ,Trustee Accepted: PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AUTHORITY, By: ( SEAL ) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, CITY/COUNTY OF , TO WIT: I, , a Notary Public for the Commonwealth aforesaid, hereby certify that .. , Grantor, personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal this day of , 1999. Notary Public My commission expires: (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, CITY/COUNTY OF , TO WIT: I, , a Notary Public for the Commonwealth aforesaid, hereby certify that · , Chairman, Public Recreational Facilities Authority, personally appeared before me this day and acknowledged the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal this ,1999. day of Notary Public My commisszon expires: (SEAL) COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, CITY/COUNTY OF I, Commonwealth aforesaid, hereby certify that , TO WIT: , a Notary Public for the , as of day and acknowledged the foregozng instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal this of ,1999. personally appeared before me this day My commission expires: (SEAL) Notary Public COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA, CITY/COUNTY OF I, Commonwealth aforesaid, hereby certify Trustee, personally , TO WIT: , a Notary Public for the that .................. as appeared before me this day and acknowledged the foregoing instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal this day of ,1999. Notary Public My commission expires: (SEAL) November 3, 1999 CLOSED SESSION MOTION I move that the board go into closed session pursuant to section 2.1-344(a) of the Code of Virginia · Under subsection (.1) to consider appointments to boards and commissions; · Under subsection (3) to consider the acquisition of property for a school site; and Under subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding pending litigation relating to the transition of Charlottesville to town status, regarding specific legal matters relating to an interjurisdictional agreement, and regarding probable litigation relating to two claims against the County. BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Compensation Study, Consultant's Report SU BJ ECT/PROPOSALIREQU EST: Consider consultant's compensation recommendation and provide direction to County Executive and Superintendent STAFF CONTACT(S): Messrs. Tucker, Castner, Morgan, Thompson, Ms. White AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTION: x CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: One of our Vision Statements for Albemarle County adopted in 1994 is to have "A highly recognized, satisfied and well-compensated workforce...". Our ability to attract and retain top-quality staff is directly linked to our ability to offer corn petitive compensation and benefits. In FY 1996-1997 the Boards adopted and implemented many of the changes recommended by the independent consultant, Mr. Charles Hendricks of Hendricks' & Associates. The most significant changes were (1) move from a 15-step to a 30-step teacher pay scale, (2) move from a traditional step system to an open range pay system for classified and administrative employees, and (3) move from a Career Ladder program for teachers to an Academic Leadership Stipend program. The new pay structures (scales) for teachers and classified employees were competitive when implemented for FY 1996-1997. Based on a staff report presented to the Boards In August 1997 regarding classified salary compression, the Boards directed staff to develop a salary decompression plan for inclusion in the FY 1998-1999 budget. A three-year plan was implemented July 1, 1998. The third and final decompression increment is slated for July 1, 2000. Since the adoption of the Hendricks' recommendations, the Boards have approved the following changes to our salary structures and merit programs: Classified/Administrator Teacher @ T15 Fiscal Year Scale Adjustment Merit Pool ** Scale Adjustment Scale + Step '96-'97 New open ranges 4.50% New 30-step scale New 30-step scale '97-'98 -0- 3.50% 2.00% 3.50% '98-'99 1.00% 2.75% 1.17% 2.75% '99-'00 3.00% 4.00% 2.36% 4.00% ** No across-the-board increases, only new employees and those below the new minimum salary received an increase from the scale adjustment. Maintaining competitive compensation requires two separate, but related, actions. First, ensure the pay structure (scales) are competitive to ensure we can compete in the recruiting market for new staff. Second, to ensure current employees are rewarded for performance and the acquisition of new skills by maintaining both internal equity within their pay range and also maintaining market competitiveness for similarly situated talent. AGENDA TITLE: Compensation Study, Consultant's Report November 3, 1999 Page 2 One way to assess the competitiveness of one of our pay structures is to look at how our teacher pay scales compare to the other 133 public school division's in Virginia. Ranking of Albemarle County Teacher Pay Scale Bachelor Degree Teacher @ Various Years Of Experience Fiscal Year 0 10 20 30 Maximum '95-'96 ** 52 12 28 96 101 '96-'97 56 20 34 42 46 '97-'68 50 22 34 41 47 '98-'99 58 27 34 46 48 '99-'00 70 30 38 46 57 ** Scale prior to implementation of new 30-step scale. Data from annual Virginia Education Associate surveys This data indicates our teacher scale adjustments have ranged from 1.17% to 2.36% over the past three years. However, these have not kept pace with other school divisions as reflected in our entry-level teacher ranking dropping from 56 to 70. This competitive erosion in our scale will continue to impact our ability to attract teachers. Similar ranking data is not available for the classified pay scales however the market analysis by the consultant indicates the classified pay scales have become less competitive over the same period of time. DISCUSSION: Since 1997 the County has been using the firm of Slabaugh Morgan White & Associates (SMW) to assist us with our medical and dental insurance programs, as well as assisting the County in developing a 5-year strategic plan for compensation and benefits. Although this comprehensive work on the County's Total Rewards programs will continue over the next five months, the budget schedule requires us to provide only one element of the longer range plan at this time, which is the annual recommendation of current pay scales and merit. SMW has assisted in reviewing the competitiveness of our salary structures. This study was not designed as a reclassification study but rather as a study to refine the structure already in place. SMW analyzed selected benchmark positions in order to: v' determine the market com petitors.and geographic areas of com petition v' determine market competitiveness of our pay scales v' make recommendations concerning salary structure adjustments and merit for FY 2000-2001 Study Methodology 60 benchmark positions in Albemarle County were chosen for review. SMW analyzed the job descriptions for these positions, related organizational charts, and salary administration policies and guidelines. SMW then used a number of professionally published labor surveys of private and public sectors to match these positions in terms of skills, tasks, responsibilities, knowledge and experience. The most appropriate labor market for some positions is the private sector, while for other positions it is primarily the public sector. Moreover, the relevant labor market for some positions is local, while for others it is regional, statewide or national. Study Recommendations Ms. Julie Lewis, Principal with Slabaugh Morgan White, will present the report findings and recommendations. These recommendations are presented to both Boards to consider for FY 2000-2001 budget preparation. It should be noted that all final recommendations are subject to and based upon available state and local revenues. SMW recommends that the Boards consider the following recommendations for the FY 2000-2001 budget based on available local and state revenue: AGENDA TITLE: Compensation Study, Consultant's Report November 3, 1999 Page 2 A. Adjust the teacher pay scale by 5.7% B. Adjust the classified/administrative pay scale by 4.0%. Only new employees and those below the new minimum will receive a salary increase from the adjustment. All other employees who are above the new minimums will receive increases only through participation in the merit program. C. Establish a merit pool for classified/administrative employees of 4.0%. D. Establish a 2% annual salary pool for each of the next five years to provide resources to address classified/administrative shortfalls and structural issues through the five-year strategic planning process. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors and School Board consider accepting these recommendations for budget guidance in preparing the upcoming FY 2000-2001 budget. The recommendations ultimately included in the budget will be based on proiected local and state revenues. 99.208 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Members of the Board of Supervisors Laurie Bentley, Senior Deputy Cler October 27, 1999 Vacancies on Boards and Commissions I have attached the updated list of vacancies on boards and commissions through January 31, 2000. cc: Bob Tucker Larry Davis Ch'ville Regional Chamber of Commerce COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE MEMORANDUM TO: FROM: DATE: RE: Laurie Hall, Senior Deputy Clerk October 13, 1999 Members of the Board of Supervisors Vacancies on Boards and Commissions I have attached the updated list of vacancies on boards and commissions through December 31, 1999. (REVISED.) cc: Bob Tucker Larry Davis Ch'ville Regional Chamber of Commerce 0 0 0 T-- 0 0 0 0 0 COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGEN DA TITLE: FY 2000/2001 Budget Guidance SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Proposed Distribution of New Revenues to General Government and the School Division for FY 2000/01 STAFF CONTACT(S): Messers Tucker, White, Gulati AGENDA DATE: November 3, 1999 ACTI O N: X ITEM NUMBER: INFORMATION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: INFORMATION: ATTACHMENTS: Yes BACKGROUND: In October of each year, the Department of Finance prepares preliminary revenue projections for the upcoming fiscal year, which form the basis for the recommended budgets to come before the Board of Supervisors in March. In November, the Board of Supervisors traditionally allocates these revenues to committed expenditures, and then to General Government and School Division operations. DISCUSSION: Based on recent revenue projections from the Department of Finance, property tax revenues are expected to increase by approximately $5.75 million over the current year. This increase reflects an anticipated 7.0% reassessment increase and approximately $100,000,000 in new construction values, as well as increased personal property tax revenues. Other local taxes are projected to increase by $2.14 million, reflecting increased sales and. use, business license, lodging and meals tax revenues. The attached sheet allocates these new revenues to committed expenditures, General Government and the School Division. The $7.90 million overall increase in local tax revenues is shown at the top of the sheet, followed by the reductions required to fund revenue sharing and the transfer to the Tourism Fund, for a net increase of $7.46 million. Increases in committed expenditures are presented next, and total $1,086,682. These committed expenditures include a $239,070 increase in ClP transfer, a $400,000 increase in school debt service, a $439,312 increase in general government debt service (reflecting debt service on the 800MHz radio system,) and an $8,300 increase in refunds. Based on the remaining $6.37 million in uncommitted revenues, 60%, or $3.82 million, is allocated to the School Division, and 40%, or $2.55 million, is allocated to General Government. This allocation provides an increase of approximately 7.4% in local revenues to the School Division, and a 6.5% increase in local revenues to General Government, to address baseline costs, fixed costs and additional operating costs associated with capital projects. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed FY 2000/2001 allocation of new revenues to the School Division and General Government. ~j-?.f/-~ ?.?C4:~.1 RCV? 99.203