Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-03-17 AfternoonMarch 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 1) An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on March 17, 2003, beginning at 1:00 p.m. in Room 235, County Office Building, Mclntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was adjourned from March 12, 2003. PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mr. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Dennis S. Rooker and Ms. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: Mr. Walter F. Perkins. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis, Clerk, Ella W. Carey, Assistant County Executive Tom Foley, and, Assistant County Executive Roxanne White. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 1:03 p.m. by the Chairman, Mr. Dorrier. Agenda Item No. 2. FY 2003-2004 Financial Plan Operating and Capital Budgets - Budget Work Session. Budget Overview - Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive. Mr. Tucker made a visual presentation of the proposed budget (copy of materials used for the presentation are on file in the Clerk's Office). He said that most of this information had been presented to the Board at its meetings on March 5 and March 12. However, he does have some updated revenue forecasts. Mr. Tucker said the updated revenue projections in March show: an additional $350,000 being added to Sales Tax, an additional $200,000 being added to Business Licenses, a decrease of $50,000 in State revenues, for a total of $500,000 in recurring revenues which were not included in the previous budget presentation. Using the standard 60/40 formula for distribution of these new revenues, this would give the Schools an additional $330,000 and Local Government an additional $220,000. Mr. Tucker said a potential revenue source is another increase on the vehicle license tax. The law allows the County to go to $28.50, so with an additional $3.50 the fee would bring in $227,500, giving the Schools $136,000 and Local Government $91,000. Mr. Tucker said funds available for the FY 2003-04 budget are: the $500,000 just mentioned above; an anticipated savings of $1.251 million in the current year; less a $290,000 shortfall in the Fund Balance; and, the Board's reserve of $117,000 which gives a total of $1.578 million. Then, there is the School Board's reserve, which is an unknown amount at this time. He will ask for that figure at Wednesday's work session with the School Board. Mr. Tucker gave the following Projected Available Resources: One-Time Funds Projected Revenue Shortfall -$1.361 Projected Expenditure Savings $2.612 Net Savings $1.251 Less Fund Balance -$ .290 Projected Available Carry-Over $0.961 Repeating Revenues Additional New Revenues $0.500 Board Reserve $0.117 Total Available Revenues $1.578 Recommended Uses FY '04 Operating - General Government (Includes the Board's existing Fund Balance) FY '04 Operating - Schools "Rainy Day Fund" - One-Time Expenditures $0.337 $0.330 $0.961 Mr. Tucker said these projected additional funds do not include any increases in fees or licenses. Mr. Martin said if this were being looked at from the School Board's perspective there would be $330,000 more in operating funds, plus over a million dollars in their fund balance. Mr. Tucker said staff does not have a number for their fund balance yet. Ms. White said staff knows they have $1.9 million in their fund balance, and have budgeted $400,000 of that in their FY '04 budget. Other than that, staff has not received any figure yet. Mr. Tucker said the School Division holds back funds each year and then releases part of them. Staff does not yet know the amount of the hold-back. They did use about $900,000 of that balance to cover the shortfall experienced in FY '03. Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance, said the Schools will be presenting several appropriation requests next month which will use between $500,000 and $600,000 of that fund balance. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 2) Mr. Martin said in General Government, it is routine to fund the salaries, etc. of all employees for the entire fiscal year. The School Board knows it will not have all budgeted employees for an entire fiscal year, so in the past decided to take the unused money and use it elsewhere in the budget. The Board of Supervisors has never done that. Ms. White said there is a number in the School budget for "salary lapse". She does not know exactly what that figure is, but thinks it could be as much as $300,000. After a lengthy discussion of the salary lapse theory, Mr. Tucker said staff will look into whether this idea would work for General Government. Mr. Tucker went on to explain that the adopted strategy for Compensation is to get to 100 percent of market for teachers and classified employees. This would require an increase of 4.08 percent for teachers and 3.8 percent for classified employees. His recommendation for General Government's classified employees is to fund a two percent scale adjustment on July 1, and, if possible, to fund the additional 1.8 percent on January 1,2004. Mr. Tucker said the School Board has already indicated to the Supervisors that it will be recommending that teachers' salaries be funded at 4.08 percent, and classified employees be funded at 3.8 percent beginning July 1,2003. Next, Mr. Tucker mentioned Health/Dental Benefits. The employer's share of health insurance is to increase to $4608. The employee's share was raised from $219 to $324 back in January, so there will be no further increase on the employees July 1. Mr. Rooker asked if the $768 increase per employee being paid by the County will cover current claims experience. He asked if there is an updated claims report. Mr. Melvin Breeden said the latest report was received just this morning, and it is not looking any better, and may be even worse. Ms. White said the Health Committee is looking at different options for health insurance coverage and one of those is changing the plan. Mr. Tucker said that is an option that would have to be investigated before October when the new plan year begins. Mr. Breeden said staff feels the present reserves will carry the plan through this plan year, but going into October some changes will have to be made in the plan. Mr. Dorrier asked if the carrier would be changed. Ms. White said "no". It would be a change in plan design, the benefits would not be as rich. Mr. Rooker said the last report from Human Resources about the insurance policy was that claims were rapidly using up the reserves. He asked if that problem is stabilizing based on the increase in premiums. Mr. Breeden said the increase in January was made to help reserves at a comfortable level, but the reports received this morning show a trend, which is using up those funds. Mr. Tucker said there are also consultants who work with staff on health insurance recommendations. Staff relies heavily on what they propose and the reserves they feel will be available. Of course, a couple of catastrophic illnesses can have an effect on the costs throughout the year. Mr. Breeden said that is the biggest problem at the current time. Mr. Dorrier asked if the health plans of other counties are studied to see how they compare to that of Albemarle. Mr. Tucker said "yes". Also, the consultant studied the plans of private sector businesses before he makes his recommendation. Mr. Tucker said that during these budget work sessions the Board should focus on long-term financial planning, strategic initiatives, operating costs associated with capital projects, a "Rainy Day" fund, and the five-year financial forecast which will be developed with the financial advisors. He said the Strategic Plan will be updated at a retreat with the Board in September and that will in turn set budget priorities for the 2005 fiscal year. Mr. Bowerman asked if this year there is a disconnect between long-term and short-term plans. Mr. Tucker said "no". Because of the present revenue picture, there are a lot of things that cannot be focused on, but a lot has been done. A lot of the requests not recommended for funding could always be reinstated by the Board. But, unless the Board can find new revenue that is greater than what he mentioned today, a lot of these things cannot be funded next year. Ms. Thomas said she thinks the County needs to put money into capital projects. She is distressed that on Page D-5 it shows $2.6 million less going into capital. She asked for an explanation. Ms. White said that is a decrease in the money going into capital, but there is an increase in debt service. It is not less money going into capital projects, but is a shift between debt and pay-as-you-go capital projects. Ms. Thomas said the Board was told that Moody's paid a lot of attention to the fact that money was being put into capital projects. She remembers that about five years ago, that did not happen, and it has taken every year since that time to get to the present situation. Even in an economic downturn, she thinks the projects should be funded. Mr. Martin said it seems that all the Board does is "take money offthe top" to put in capital projects, or split it with the schools. Ms. White said staff is still following the same formula. The number of pay-as-you-go projects is still high. That has not been reduced. The current policy says that three percent of the budget will go into capital, but debt service is climbing. Ms. Thomas said that is a switch because what goes into debt service does not go into March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 3) pay-as-you-go projects. She thinks the Board needs to be careful about that change in direction. Mr. Bowerman said Mr. Tucker has indicated that there is now $300,000 that can be used for non-recurring expenses, things that were not recommended for funding. Mr. Tucker said it is more like $100,000. Ms. Thomas asked if the County will hire in the future a person who specializes in writing grants. Mr. Tucker said the Office on Management and Budget will do that. Ms. White said staff is going to focus on "revenue maximization" next year. They will also look at fee recovery. Mr. Tucker said that office is not fully staffed at this time. Ms. White started the presentation of departmental budgets beginning a category entitled Management. This category includes the functions of Board of Supervisors, County Executive, Human Resources, County Attorney and Voter Registrar. Strategic issues addressed by this budget include: managing the implementation of the Strategic Plan; linking the Strategic Plan with long-range fiscal planning and an annual business plan; developing and utilizing a five-year financial forecast for long-term budgeting; continuing to utilize customer service data to improve and prioritize County services; expanding the use of web technology to enable citizens to do County business through the Internet; developing more effective communication systems for important community events and issues; and, revising the pay-for-performance plan to align compensation more fully with knowledge, skills and performance. Ms. White said there are no recommendations for increases in this budget for different types of programs or services, so staff will focus on funding changes (decreases): For Board of Supervisors' minute preparation, a decrease of $5000; the Neighborhood Grant Program was eliminated for a decrease of $6000; hiring a Strategic Management Coordinator was deferred for a decrease of $33,000; for Human Resources-Countywide benefits an increase of $46,323 (increases in Unemployment Insurance, VRS Life Insurance for part-time employees, an annuity, early retirement funding); for Human Resources Operations an increase of $59,646 (the County's share of operating expenses increased from 23 percent to 25 percent because of additional employees at the Juvenile Detention Center, the Jail, and firefighters. Human Resources requested funds for additional staff in the School's budget and additional funding over their baseline funding, but their operational budget was level funded.); and, capital reductions of $18,000. Ms. Thomas said she was interested in the items not funded in the Human Resources budget such as the Equity & Diversity Specialist and the Safety & Loss Control Manager. She does not know how important those positions are, but they were requested. Ms. White said staff would like to have funded a full-time loss control manager, and a part-time equity/diversity person (there is already such a person on the Schools staff). The Schools intend to increase the position of equity/diversity to full-time anyway. Mr. Rooker asked if Worker's Compensation Insurance is a shared plan. He said an insurance company will provide such a plan. Ms. White said General Government's plan is carried through VML, but the Schools have a different plan. Mr. Melvin Breeden said that has been looked at, but unless there is someone on County staff who is actively involved in the process, this is a better plan. Mr. Rooker requested that staff ask the insurer what it provides in that area and see what the vendor might do at their expense before hiring someone. Mr. Dorrier said there is great reliance on the real estate property tax. He said this Board has always taken the position that it would not become involved with business associations. But, things have changed. He thinks it is important that the County show that it is friendly to business. He is going to recommend that the County join the Chamber of Commerce, join the Thomas Jefferson Economic Partnership and join the Virginia VPTC Technical Council. He recommends this because he thinks a partnership with business would help improve the business climate in the community and give the County more revenue support than it has had in the past. He knows that in the past the Board has made it a policy of not joining such associations because it did not want to be seen as advocating business, but he thinks there needs to be competition. Also, there have been some problems with the business community in the past, and Albemarle County has a reputation of being unfriendly to business. This would go a long way to helping improve those relations, and it would be an important step for the County. He asked for comments from the other Board members. Mr. Martin said he was Chairman of the Board during two different votes on this question. Both times, it was a 3:3 vote. At that time, Forrest Marshall, Walter Perkins and himself all supported joining. Mr. Dorrier replaced Mr. Marshall on the Board, and the only other change since that time is Mr. Rooker's election to the Board. So, the vote is still 3:2 until Mr. Rooker gets a chance to vote. He suggested asking the County Executive to prepare a short written history of how this question got to the 3:3 tie, and then discuss it at another meeting. Mr. Bowerman preferred that the discussion take place during the strategic planning retreat in the fall. Mr. Dorrier said the climate has changed. There needs to be more of a united front on economic issues than in the past. This would show that the County is reaching out, and it is a small step. He does not see any reason to wait until September to decide. It needs to be done now. Mr. Rooker agreed with Mr. Bowerman. If this is to be a long-range strategic position of the County, the Board needs to deliberate the question and talk about how it might fit into a strategy. He does not think it is an appropriate matter to decide while working on the budget. It needs to have adequate deliberation. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 4) Mr. Martin asked how many staff members are in the County Attorney's Office. Mr. Tucker said there are four attorneys and two secretaries. Ms. Thomas said she knows that Mr. Perkins was going to ask about this office. He said the office staff was expanded during work on reversion, but it did not shrink back after that was finished, and he wondered why. Mr. Davis said that was several years ago, and since that time the Social Services Department has gone from .1 of an attorney to .9 of an attorney, land use matters have increased in volume and consumed the time of an attorney almost full time. The School Board has increased its use of an attorney, so basically the office is just holding on for the second year in a row by not asking for more staff given the growth of County operations. Mr. Rooker said he thinks that for a county of Albemarle's size, the total cost is in line. Legal costs just keep increasing. Mr. Martin said he had a question about voter registration. Two additional polling places are being funded, and he knows the County has always taken care of voter registration in terms of physical needs. He asked if the County is losing anything by not funding voting machines for those polling places. Ms. White said there was a request for new voting machines, but that request has been put on hold because there are new state regulations expected soon concerning voting machines. Mr. Martin asked if the two new polling places will be opened with equipment that is less than the norm because usually the equipment is state-of-the-art. Ms. White said the normal equipment will be used. Mr. Bowerman said when additional polling places are opened, it takes the stress off of some places so equipment can be transferred. Ms. Thomas asked if these new polling places can be opened without increasing funding. Ms. White said "yes". Mr. Rooker asked if the additional polling place in the Jouett District is included in this request. He said it is desperately needed. Ms. White said she understands it is part of this request. Before going to the next category, Ms. White noted that the County is a member of the VPTC. Mr. Dorrier said they can provide some valuable resources. Ms. White said the next category is Business Systems and Technology that consists of Information Technology and Finance. Strategic issues for this category are: Strengthening financial capacity by establishing a Rainy Day Fund; maximizing revenues through efficient and equitable cost recovery systems; using information from the Business Process Analysis to improve efficiency and effectiveness; upgrading or replacing key business systems, i.e., financial management, Human Resources, payroll, purchasing, etc.; and, maintaining a real estate appraisal system that keeps pace with changing property taxes. Ms. White said the only funding changes in these two departments are: one full-time equivalent position in Finance was reduced, reduced some line items, and made capital reduction costs in Information Technology. Moneys for replacement of different types of software and hardware have been reduced which may create a delay in responding to service calls when taking care of older equipment and software. Ms. White said the next category is Judicial. This category consists of the functions of Clerk of the Circuit Court, Commonwealth's Attorney, Sheriff, and the Courts (Juvenile and General District). Strategic issues are: Increased FY '04 support to all judicial offices to offset state funding reductions; Commonwealth's Attorney's office moved to County pay plan with two percent merit increase; and, temporary displacement of Juvenile Court and associated Court and Sheriff's parking during FY '04 construction. Ms. Thomas said the comment in the budget is that the County will not make up the state shortfalls, but it is recommended. Ms. White said that is correct, or substantial cuts would have been made in these budgets. Mr. Dorrier asked if the State is going to continue to do this to the localities, and "Are we just going to stand here and take it?" Ms. Thomas said she thought the County had made a great noise by belonging to the High Growth Coalition. Mr. Bowerman said the state continues to balance its budget on the backs of the localities, and that is the reality of the situation. Mr. Martin said he heard City Council discussing this situation, and they said they would not make up any of the lost funds from the state. He does not know if they were able to stick to that thought. Ms. White said these departments did cut their budgets, but the State funds were cut even more than the departments reduced their budgets. Mr. Dorrier said these local functions are important and should be supported, but a protest should be lodged with the state as to the way they are handling funding. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 5) Ms. Thomas suggested that a list of items be kept during these work sessions. Mr. Dorrier said that at the end of these budget sessions the Board might send a letter or resolution to the state. Mr. Martin said he has a question about the Commonwealth's Attorney's budget. He spoke with Mr. Camblos last week and Mr. Camblos indicated that his staffwill not be moved to the County's pay plan. Mr. Tucker said that at the end of the budget work sessions last year staff was authorized to work with the three constitutional officers to see if they wished to be added to the County's pay plan. Mr. Camblos was the only one of the three who agreed to do that. Staff has not been able to move all of his positions, but did include in this budget the same increase for his employees that will be provided to all General Government employees. Mr. Martin said that his employees have been included on the pay plan this year, but may not be on the scale where Mr. Camblos thinks they should be. Mr. Tucker said that is correct. He told Mr. Camblos that the employees would be moved on the pay scale over a period of two or three years because the County could not afford to do it all in the same year. Mr. Bowerman asked if the attorneys will have a position now that is a classified county position. Mr. Tucker said they will have. Mr. Martin said this is a huge step for the County. Mr. Rooker said that last year funds were provided to give them bonuses because their salaries had been frozen by the state for a couple of years. Mr. Foley said that was done to assure that they would get the same raise as other County employees. Ms. White said the funding changes for this category are: elimination of one-time bonuses in FY '03 for constitutional officers at $17,000; funding for conversion of microfilm records for the Circuit Court Clerk was reduced at $10,000; funding was delayed for replacement of two vehicles in Sheriff's Department at $21,000; and there is a reduction of $25,000 in capital/one-time items. Mr. Foley said the next category is Public Safety. This category consists of: Police Department, Fire/Rescue Department, Other Fire/Rescue Services, Inspections, Emergency Communications Center, Regional Jail Authority and public safety agencies. Strategic issues for the Police are: meeting the increase in overall calls for service countywide; workload allocation (there is a major study going on now to consider reconfiguring the sectors and beats. They are doing an extensive analysis with the GIS office to determine where the call load is located and how staffing levels may need to change in different areas.); and, technology issues (emergency communications is a significant issue for both fire/rescue and the police. Staff has been working for a number of years to get mobile data terminals in police vehicles so the officers may have information at their fingertips. It is still two years away from funding.) Mr. Foley said this budget was funded by freezing the replacement of three police officers for the full year at a cost of $90,000; delaying replacement of seven motor vehicles at $112,000; and, deleting $30,000 in capital one-time items. Ms. Thomas asked if staff had tried to replace the money lost for the COPS Program. Mr. Foley said there is an employee working almost full-time on grant applications. Some of the homeland security things have made moneys available, but that money is basically for equipment. Mr. Foley said the other part of the Safety program is in Fire/Rescue. Strategic issues are: Establishing adequate response system to meet changing needs (this includes meeting growth demands and urbanization of the County, and replacing the City response when the City fire contract expires in 2010. He said the growth demands are in areas beyond the reach of the City to service.); addressing need for additional career staffing to supplement volunteer efforts (He said this area has the most unfunded requests. The Scottsville Rescue Squad asked for a contingency for eight people to fill in the gaps, and the East Rivanna Fire Department has asked for five full-time fireflghters to cover daytime hours); future operational and capital funding for the volunteer system (there is a change being proposed in capital funding to have the County fund fire/rescue equipment replacement which will shift this from the allocation fund into the CIP. For operational expenses, a considerable amount of time has been spent over the last eight months deciding how to fund the volunteer system in the future based on need and actual information on expenditures. The operational funding formula is not yet completed. Staff has recommended that the existing funding formula be used for the proposed budget); the County's overall management of growing fire/rescue system (as additional stations are added along with career staff to supplement the volunteer system, it will have an impact on operations and the overall system); and, improvements in emergency communications system (this includes the 800 MHz radio system.) Mr. Dorrier said it should be pointed out that the County relies heavily on the volunteer firefighters. He asked that one of the volunteers speak at this time. Mr. Foley said Mr. Doug Smythers is Chairman of the Advisory Board and chief of the Seminole Trail Company. He is present today. Mr. Smythers introduced the members of the Finance Committee of the Advisory Board. They are Preston Gentry from Crozet, Lanny Moore from East Rivanna, Charlie Hanson, Monticello Fire/Rescue, Mike Johnson, Scottsville Rescue Squad, and Dan Eggleston, Fire/Rescue Department. He said the Committee put together a list of new and expanded requests for the budget this year. After being told about the financial situation the County faces, the Committee went over the list to determine the most needed March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 6) priorities and narrowed the list down to four items: 1) The eight people for the Scottsville Rescue Squad; 2) the contingency for five firefighters for East Rivanna; 3) $30,000 in additional funds for Seminole Trail; and, 4) $121,000 for a mechanic and helper. Mr. Mike Johnson, Scottsville Rescue Squad, said the squad has evaluated its members over the last year. They then asked the public how they wish to be served by the Squad. They came to the conclusion that they could no longer manage the squad solely with volunteer help. Therefore, they are asking the County for career staffing so they can provide 24-hour help to the public and advanced life support. With the help of fire/rescue staff, that need turned out to be eight FTEs. If this request is not approved, it could mean that the Squad would go three days a week without staffing. If they lost someone to illness, injury or burnout, they could lose more than the three days. Mr. Rooker asked Mr. Johnson what he meant by three days without staffing. Mr. Johnson said this would be three days a week without any coverage by volunteers in their station. Mr. Rooker said the request is for eight medic/firefighters for Scottsville. Mr. Johnson said the decision was made to hire cross-trained people who could be moved laterally throughout the fire/rescue system. That was deemed to be the financially intelligent thing to do. But, the people in their station would be used more for medical scenarios. Mr. Rooker asked how many calls they answered last year. Mr. Johnson said they had 853 in the last calendar year. That is the number of calls for service, but that does not include the number of responses. Often an automobile accident will require multiple responses. Mr. Dorrier asked if the Scottsville Squad answers calls outside of Albemarle County. Mr. Johnson said they do answer calls in three other counties, but those calls account for less than 25 percent of their call volume. Mr. Martin asked if companies in those counties reciprocate. Mr. Johnson said they do. There is a mutual aid type of agreement. Mr. Dorrier asked what type of financial support is received from those other counties. Mr. Johnson said that this past year they got $6000 from Fluvanna County. Nelson and Buckingham counties do not provide as much. Mr. Bowerman asked if companies in those counties provide assistance. Mr. Johnson said "yes". Mr. Rooker asked what happens if a call is not answered by the Scottsville station. Mr. Johnson said the system is designed so that if Scottsville did not respond, the call would go to the next closest responder. However, the three counties they rely on the most are in a similar situation for staffing and funding. Relying on them is not good. The Charlottesville Rescue Squad is called often. Also, the University Hospital has a transport program in the mutual aid system. Mr. Rooker asked about using the Monticello station. Mr. Johnson said they have been asked for assistance, but at this time they do not have a transport ambulance. They are in a first responder situation where a fire engine goes out. They have medically trained personnel on the fire engine, but they cannot transport a patient to the hospital. Mr. Dorrier said the Board understands the need. Mr. Lanny Moore said he would speak about the request for East Rivanna. He said they have asked for a contingency fund for personnel during the day hours. Daytime coverage has been a problem for a number of years. City coverage will also begin to be phased out starting in July. Over the last few years, East Rivanna has had a 20 percent increase in calls. A large percentage of those are to run first responder calls with the rescue squads. They decided to ask for funds now because it would be another 18 months before a request could be made again. By asking for contingency funding, it would be available if the need arises. Ms. Thomas said all of these people are presenting a very real need to the Board, so she is curious as to how they would respond if the Board had to raise the tax rate. Mr. Moore said if he lived way out in the County and his house caught on fire, who would come to help if there were not these volunteer fire companies? He sees the dire need for these services, especially in the Scottsville area where there might be a medical need. He is willing to pay a little more to get these services. Mr. Smythers said Seminole Trail requested more than $134,000 for full operational funding of the station. They felt that what the Monticello Fire Station was getting for the southern part of the County, they should get for the northern part of the County. They think they can continue to fund raise the hard way they did the past year and do so for another year until the new funding formula is worked out which should better balance the distribution of funds. They need $30,000 so they do not have to use their savings. For the last three years they have had to use such funds in order to fund operations. Part of that was due to renovations to the bingo hall, and also the addition of beds and bathrooms so the personnel who staff the station 24-7 have adequate facilities. Mr. Bowerman thanked Mr. Eggleston and Mr. Foley for working with the Advisory Board over the last year. It was the intent to get the operational needs of all the departments met so their entire operational needs could be funded in this budget. It was not possible to get that worked out this year, so it was agreed March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 7) to basically level fund the stations for FY '04. The Committee did not look at new and expanded requests in terms of operational needs. He said when a station has asked for paid personnel, he has done everything possible to get that request satisfied. That means the County supplements the volunteers who are not able to meet the need 24/7. Unfortunately the need has gone beyond what the County is able to fund. The County continues to urbanize. The volunteers have done an excellent job of keeping pace, but it is getting beyond them. He thinks that most of this should be dealt with in the strategic planning initiative. Mr. Bowerman said he would like to make some suggestions to the Board. The Seminole Trail Company requested an additional $30,000. They are running about 2000 calls per year, and he would like to see the $30,000 funded. Those are strictly operational costs. He would like to fund the contingency for the five firefighters at East Rivanna even though their Board has not yet formally asked for those funds. He would suggest that it be considered for funding on January 1 because it takes a while to get people trained. If East Rivanna does ask for personnel he believes it will be for calls they can answer that Seminole cannot answer, for calls the City cannot answer, and for calls being answered by Monticello now. He asked the minimum number of personnel that could be used at Scottsville to fill in the gaps. Mr. Martin said that in the past the Board has always made a list of unfunded requests to be considered at the last work session. He suggests that same thing be done for this budget. Mr. Bowerman said he believes there is a way to look at these requests which is somewhat different than what has been presented today. He asked that staff restudy these items. Mr. Smythers said that currently the personnel shortage at East Rivanna is being covered by the Monticello station. If it is a two-unit call and East Rivanna cannot send the second unit, that call is being covered by the City. When County staff looks at the need for personnel, the City engine would no longer be needed for a response so there could be savings from that change. Mr. Rooker said he thought Mr. Moore had said the East Rivanna Company had not asked for that additional personnel. Mr. Bowerman said that is correct, they have not made the request yet. But, the fact that they are willing to contemplate doing this is a giant step in development of the career/volunteer system. Mr. Martin said he backs Mr. Bowerman because a lot of the stations said they did not want career firefighters in their stations. When a station asks for these firefighters, he thinks the County should be in a position to provide them. Mr. Rooker asked if the Board were able to find extra funds in this budget, would it be possible to establish a priority for those funds? Mr. Foley said the list presented earlier in this meeting was the priority listing of the Committee. Mr. Tucker said if the Board was to find extra dollars in this budget that would go to the Advisory Committee to determine how to best use those funds. Mr. Foley said he thinks staff has a good idea of what the Board wants, and will talk with Scottsville about some number less than eight. A recommendation will be brought back for discussion at another meeting. He said he missed mentioning the strategic issues of "staffing for planned new stations". There are two or three new stations in the CIP over the next six years, and staffing for those would be an ongoing expense that should be discussed at the strategic planning session in the fall. Having a dedicated tax for fire/rescue needs and for an EMS Building has been discussed in the past. Mr. Foley noted that to run the Monticello Fire Station for a full year increased the budget by $327,000. In the current year there were eight flreflghters funded for one-half year, but this budget contains the full year of costs. During the year, the Board approved adding four more fireflghters so those two things account for the large increase. Mr. Foley said a fire plans reviewer will not be hired at a savings of $55,000, and cuts in capital/one-time items saves another $15,000. Mr. Rooker asks what a plans reviewer does. Mr. Foley said that is an inspector/plans reviewer who checks plans to be sure they comply with fire codes, etc. He then noted some other funding changes under Other Public Safety. First there is a decrease in funding of $116,806 for the City Fire Contract (this reflects a change in dispatch procedures to avoid false alarms for which the City was being paid, and some projected savings because of the Monticello Fire Station.); a reduction in funding of $24,499 for the Juvenile Detention Home; and, an increase of $216,660 for the Regional Jail because of the increase in population. Ms. White said there is an issue with the State funding reductions for the Regional Jail. Even though the Jail's funding was increased by $216,660, the County did not fund their full request, only their baseline request. The reduction in State funding was subtracted, so the County is not funding the reduction in State funding. Another $200,000 would be needed to fully fund their request. Mr. Martin said there may be a request from the County members of the Jail Authority to recover some of those funds. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 8) Ms. White said there is also an issue of the state funding reduction for the Juvenile Detention facility. She said the state reduced funding by about $400,000 this year. The state budget is based on opening three pods, not the four pods anticipated by the City/County. The state looked at the occupancy numbers from July, 2002 to September, 2002, and based funding for the facility on those three months of operation, while some of the delinquents were still being housed at the Shenandoah Valley facility. Ms. Thomas asked if the facility can be operated by only using three-quarters of the beds. Mr. Tucker said that is possible this year. Albemarle took the heaviest cut of any agency having its budget cut by 33 percent. The executive director and Mr. Tucker and others will be meeting with the state later this month to see if there can be some change in the formula. Ms. White said level funding for other public safety agencies such as OAR for their drug court and PAPIS program has made a great impact. Ms. Thomas said this is one place where the state should realize what they get for their money. They do not, and the County is paying more and more for the jail operation. The County is also paying for juvenile detention since the State is paying less. After a while, this Board needs to realize there is a more cost-effective way to do things. Mr. Bowerman said he believes that all the people who went through the drug court would be in jail if it were not for that program. Ms. Pat Smith from OAR was present. She said the Drug Court had requested $44,000. When the budget was drafted in November, both OAR and Region 10 put in an amount for the drug court. The request from OAR was about $36,000, but recently they combined everything into one total in order to make a unified appearance. She heard today that if the Governor gets enough support from the Republican Party he might still put in $45,000 out of the $110,000 request. They are still working on getting other sources of funding, but the drug court needs $44,000 from the County and $66,000 from the City regardless of other funding. Mr. Rooker asked what would happen if they received no funding. Ms. Smith said without some money, they cannot access Federal funds. Mr. Dorrier asked if the Drug Court is to continue in operation. Ms. Smith said that is the plan at this time. They think it is a state government program, but the state doesn't seem to agree. She understands the Board's position when having every kind of program come back to the locality for funding. Mr. Martin said that anything that will keep people out of jail is something the Board should support. The jail is serving twice the number of people it was built to serve, and its population continues to get bigger. Ms. Thomas said she thinks the Board should say they will not pick up the cost, and go to the Governor and talk to him, but she would actually like to add it to the list of items to be reconsidered. Ms. Smith said the Governor is supposed to have his budget before the Legislature on March 25. April 2 is the veto session. Perhaps by the time the Board adopts the County budget, there will be more information. She doesn't know if these timelines will stand, but OAR is working hard to have everything ready by March 25. If the Governor puts money in, they then have to get the leadership and the money committees to say the program can stay. Mr. Dorrier said the Drug Court is one of the few success stories the Board has heard. Mr. Rooker said it sounds foolish to let this program die. Ms. Smith said PAPIS is in the same funding position. They are trying to get the Governor to include funding so people don't go back to jail. Ms. White said that is another $12,000. Ms. Thomas said she is willing to include it on the list of items to be reconsidered. Ms. White said there was a large increase in funding to the SPCA. This is the second year of a phase-in contract to get up to the funding level the new contract requires. As for Community Attention, their request was funded. The Juvenile Court Assessment Center was level funded. Mr. Martin asked Chief John Miller if he would like to address the Police budget. Chief Miller said that originally he had requested four new officers, but now he would like a "quick thawing of his three frozen officers". Mr. Martin said a fair amount of money goes into replacement of vehicles. Every time a new officer is hired, a vehicle is added. He asked if it is possible to look at sharing. Chief Miller said that has been looked at several times. The problem is that an officer who works eight hours a day puts 35,000 miles on a vehicle, so if the car were used 16 hours a day, it would have to be replaced sooner. Mr. Martin said the question seems to be less controversial than he had thought. The Chief turned the question from controversial into plain mathematics in an instance. He keeps getting a lot of March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 9) calls about vehicles that set out near the Greene County line. car, in this environment, to run it 16 hours a day. Chief Miller said it would be really rough on a Note: At 3:18 p.m., the Board recessed, and reconvened at 3:24 p.m.) Mr. Dorrier said the Board would proceed with a review of the budgets for Engineering & Public Works and Human Development. Other budgets will be left for the next work session so the board can adjourn by 4 o'clock. Mr. Martin suggested dispensing with presentations and just letting Board members ask questions in order to speed the process along. Funding changes listed for Engineering & Public Works showed: deferring the groundwater study at a savings of $110,000; eliminating curbside recycling at a savings of $93,000; eliminating one bulky waste amnesty day at a savings of $18,000; reducing median mowing at a savings of $12,000; increased landfill costs of $600,000; and, an increased cost of $300,000 for operations at the County Office Building South. Ms. Thomas said she thought the groundwater study was to be completed this year because it was moving along faster due to the amount of money put into it last year. She asked what deferring this groundwater study does. Mr. Mark Graham, County Engineer, said the study will not be deferred. Last August they reported to the Board that they expected to have an ordinance ready for this summer, and they expect to keep to that schedule. However, they will not have any funds for a position to administer the program. There has been a lot of interest shown in the building permits for single-family homes, and they are still trying to determine if they can handle that without an administrative burden, because the department does not have the staff to support it at this time. He does not think they will be staffed in the future to administer a program concerning subdivisions and those requirements. Mr. Foley said staff had discussed studying just certain areas. Mr. Graham said that last August they reduced the complexity of the study and accelerated it to fit a proposed ordinance. At this time, they have basically completed the countywide study and are preparing a draft ordinance. They are concerned that without the staff to administer the ordinance, it will be shelved. Mr. Foley said the $110,000 reflects the original proposal that was to continue the study in phases. Mr. Rooker asked how much of that amount would be allocated to that position which is needed. Mr. Graham said it is about $65,000. Mr. Foley said the request for the new groundwater management program totaled $118,000. Mr. Graham said that was correct because he requested a watershed manager for the storm sewer permits program as well. Ms. Thomas said she thinks the water things are what the citizens expect the County to be doing in both the development area and the rural areas. She wished to add this position to the list of items to be reconsidered. Mr. Rooker agreed. He just thought that the $65,000 was for more than one position. Mr. Graham said the Rivanna Authority has said that it will no longer fund the Watershed Manager position. He said that Mr. Stephen Bowler who holds that position has not been providing much in the way of watershed management services for the past six months. He has been dedicated to the programs the Rivanna is pursuing, such as raising the bladder on the South Fork Rivanna Reservoir, and dredging operations. He said there has been an engineering position in his office that has been vacant for almost a year. He has proposed freezing that position and using those funds to keep the watershed manager position in the County. Ms. Thomas said she thinks this is very shortsighted of the RWSA. She also has lots of questions about the proposals for recycling and the bulky waste day at the landfill. Mr. Bowerman said they are basically landfilling these materials because nobody is buying anything. Ms. Thomas said she supports management trying to figure out a better plan for disposal of this material. Mr. Tucker said this County exceeded the state requirement for recycling. The blue bag type of curbside recycling only amounts to about six-tenths of one percent. That is why it was felt no money should be put into that type of program. Ms. Thomas said she has wondered if the program should be stopped sooner since it is losing so much money. Mr. Graham said that is a possibility. This item is so far over its budget that he is trying to figure out a way to keep it going. Ms. Thomas said the landfill budget for expenses is $600,000, and in the capital budget is another $400,000. Last year she had said the Board should add a penny to the tax rate and dedicate it to solid waste. A penny would not be enough now, but she is still going to make that suggestion at the end of these work sessions. A revenue source was closed that used to handle that expense, and now it is the real estate March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 10) tax that is paying for it. She thinks the public should know what the Board is doing; that is truth in taxation. Mr. Martin said if that were to be done, he thinks another penny should be added to the tax rate for the ACE program, and let the public comment. Ms. Thomas said she does not agree with that suggestion. The next category was Human Development. Mr. Martin said he had hoped to be able to serve on some program to limit the Comprehensive Services Act explosion. He talked with his director about it and they agreed it would be too difficult for him not to have conflicting interests, so he decided not to be a part of that group. He would suggest that a member of this Board do it. Mr. Dorrier asked for a volunteer, but there were none. Ms. Thomas said she was impressed by what JAUNT said at the public hearing about the service they would decrease if they were level funded. She regards them as one of the County's most important services, but does not know what the Board can do. Ms. White said staff could send the Board information about how level funding would affect JAUNT. Mr. Rooker said it was not clear in the presentation why JAUNT will have to substantially decrease service based on level funding from the County. Ms. White said Rural Demand Service has gone up. One issue to look at is the Big Blue service. The County is paying a lot for that service, and that ridership has not expanded to the level expected. Ms. Thomas said for most programs expanding the ridership only increases the cost. The Big Blue service was an exception. Mr. Martin said that he has often said there are some agencies that should be funded because the amounts were small, and the benefits were great. Given the point system now being used, he does not feel that same way. It is a nice performance-based system, so rather than doing as he usually does, he will not make those arguments this year. The next category was Parks & Recreation. Ms. White said there are only a couple of impacts for this item. Delaying opening of the Summer Swim Program and closing it down earlier in the fall will save $20,000 by not having the program in operation while the schools are open. Mr. Pat Mullaney, Director of Parks & Recreation, said the program has been closing early because there are not the lifeguards necessary. Mr. Martin asked about the contingencies for future growth at Towe Park. Mr. Mullaney said at Darden Towe Park they are losing their part-time laborer and will not be able to replace a piece of equipment. But, Ms. White has allowed them access to their maintenance replacement capital funds to replace needed equipment. The only problem there is that it pushes back some needed capital project. He said the change in the Swim Program is just good business. His one problem is that they have had to halt their athletic field maintenance program at its current level. They were having a major success with that program. It has been a much-appreciated program by citizens, and even by people who realize how much it costs. Ms. Thomas said the request was for expansion of the program which means that the Parks continue to do what they have been doing. Mr. Mullaney said they are losing a part-time laborer on that crew, and it will rush them to do what they are doing now. They just took on the two new fields at Baker-Butler School. At this time there are 62 playing fields in Albemarle County, with 12 of them being on this high level of service program. Eventually, they would like to be able to bring all the playing fields up to a level of service where they are safe. They have shown it can be done, but it does cost money. It is part of the quality of life in Albemarle County, but he knows it is hard to compete again the needs of police and fire services. Ms. White said this is part of the long-term strategies. Mr. Martin asked if Mr. Mullaney will be able to keep the same level of service even though it will be hard. At any time they start losing ground, he should come back to the Board for further discussion. Mr. Mullaney said there are several things in the capital plan for next year that will not be done because there will not be the operating funds necessary. Ms. White said some major issues with this category concern the level funding of some major partner agencies such as the Library and the Visitor's Bureau. She said the City did give the Library a three percent increase. The County may realize a loss of some services at the Library, but that has not been decided yet. Mr. Tucker said one service that may be lost is the bookmobile. It basically serves Albemarle County, and those services may be cut. Mr. Martin suggested putting the Library budget on the list of items to be reconsidered. He thinks libraries are in the same category as Police, Fire and Education. It is one of things the County should provide. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 11) Ms. White noted that libraries consume about 50 percent of what the County spends on Parks, Recreation and Culture. The next category was Community Development. Mr. Foley said he wanted to clarify that the additional planner position related to the development areas study is being frozen, but it will not effect the regulatory changes staff is working on now for the Neighborhood Model. Ms. Thomas asked the situation with the next master plan. She thought there was to be one each six months, but now the plan is to finish the Crozet plan and not do another one in this next budget. Mr. Foley said that is the plan. Ms. Thomas said the County is behind in planning and it is going to get worse, so the master planning process was an attempt to pick the hot spots and do the planning in order to get ahead. She thinks the Board made a promise that it would continue the master planning process so the community can see there is something good to the DISC process. In the end, she thinks Crozet citizens will be glad they got to plan their community in a way that otherwise would not happen. She thinks the Board told citizens in some of the development areas that this would be done, along with these areas having more compact, dense development in the urban area. She would hate to see the County drop the next master plan, but she does not know the cost of that plan. Mr. Wayne Cilimberg said the cost had been estimated at $200,000+. Mr. Foley said if the planner position were included it would be about $269,000. Mr. Cilimberg said there is $65,000 in the current budget for that expense, so there would have been $65,000 in next year's budget as baseline for that expense. However, that money is not available now. Mr. Foley said at the time that was budgeted, staff thought the master plans would cost about $125,000. Each. Ms. Thomas said she did not think the other plans would be as expensive as that for Crozet. Mr. Cilimberg said Crozet was easier because there was a fairly active group involved. There will probably be a lot of start-up costs in other communities that do not have an active community group in place. Mr. Rooker asked if the total cost of the Crozet master plan is known. Mr. Cilimberg said if staff time is not included, the contracts were about $215,000. Mr. Rooker asked for an estimate of the cost of stafftime. Mr. Cilimberg said Susan Thomas has spent about 80 percent of her time on this study. There were also additional costs over and above the contract costs. He thinks the cost will be close to $269,000. Mr. Martin asked when the Crozet Master Plan will be completed. Mr. Cilimberg said the work is on schedule. The consultant's work should be finished in June. Mr. Martin asked if staff would want to immediately start another plan. He asked if everyone will want to take a breath in order to benefit from what they learned. He suggested putting $80,000+ on the list to begin again in January. He thinks that when this study is finished, staffwill want to be debriefed. Mr. Cilimberg said staff has already planned to do that. Mr. Rooker said a number of the development areas are fairly well built out, so a master plan will not have as much impact as it would in an area like Pantops where there are tremendous transportation needs. That area is beginning to build out rapidly. Mr. Martin said there are many residents in that area that would want to be involved because they care. He thinks the next area planned should be Pantops. He suggests including on the list of items to be reconsidered one-half of the amount needed for a complete study. Ms. Thomas suggested that the Board seriously consider another staff position for historic preservation. Otherwise, she thinks the Board is just like the state, giving unfunded mandates. The Board gave a mandate to a committee of professionals who are volunteering their time. One member spent 175 hours on one task and at $35 an hour that would be more than $6000. The Board gave them a task and they are doing a good job, but have reached the limit of their ability to do things as volunteers. She would like to put this on the list and discuss it further at the last work session. Mr. Martin mentioned the request by Charlottesville Transit. He said their request was for $427,000 which included a lot of expanded services including night services to Wal-Mart. They had requested a Mill Creek/Monticello line. He thinks it is in the best interest of the County to make some steps each year in the way of public transportation. He did not want to put a dollar amount on the list of items to be reconsidered, but suggested just listing it as a "next step". Ms. Thomas said the CTS consultant presented a plan where most of their additions were in the County. She thinks this Board realized it would cost additional money. She would support it. Mr. Dorrier asked if the bus runs full or half-empty. Mr. Martin said if the daytime run to Wal-Mart does not produce any numbers, then why have a nighttime run to Wal-Mart? Mr. Dorrier said maybe it would be more reasonable to offer a van service rather than bus service. Ms. White said she has asked that question a number of times. If there are such small numbers, why not have smaller buses, and the answer from both CTS and JAUNT has been that the larger buses are more economical to run, and there is not a lot of savings by running smaller vans. Mr. Rooker said if that is the case, why does JAUNT have vans? He would be in favor of looking at expanded transit service with smaller vehicles. Mr. Tucker said the Federal grant funds are for the larger vehicles. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 12) Mr. Martin said he thinks the Board needs to have someone come to a day meeting and give it an update on transit services in general. Ms. Thomas asked why $335 was taken from the Soil & Water Conservation District. Ms. White said they were level funded for operations, but there are some additional costs that need to be included for their staff. They have one employee on the County payroll, and there needs to be adjustment for insurance and compensation increases that were not included in their original request. Ms. Thomas said she thought the Planning District Commission contribution was based on the population. If the population is 84,800 then 83,700 is not the right number. She asked staffto check that figure. Ms. White said the County funded what the PDC requested. Mr. Dorrier said that completes the published agenda. He asked if anyone had another matter to discuss. Ms. Thomas asked when the Board will discuss the ACE Program. Mr. Dorrier said ACE is too important of an issue to discuss at the end of an agenda. Mr. Foley said this can be the first item discussed under capital. Mr. Martin asked if staff can run some scenarios for the School Board in preparation for the work session with them on Wednesday. At 4:10 p.m., Mr. Bowerman offered motion that the Board go into closed session pursuant to Sec. 2.2-3711 (A) of the Code of Virginia under Subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding specific legal matters requiring provision of legal advice relating to a contract for a public safety facility and an agreement between the County and other political entities; and, under Subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding specific legal matters requiring provision of legal advice relating to an agreement between the County and other political entities regarding solid waste. The motion was seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mr. Dorrier. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. At 4:50 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session. Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman that the Board certify by a recorded vote that to the best of each Board member's knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rooker. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mr. Dorrier. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Motion was then offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Rooker, to expedite the public hearing process of five special use permits, which would result in the extension of special use permits allowing the development of facilities for the Emergency Communications Center's 800 MHz emergency communications system. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mr. Dorrier. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. March 17, 2003 (Meeting Adjourned from March 12, 2003) (Page 13) Adjourn: At 5:00 p.m., with no further business to come before the Board, motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Rooker, to adjourn this meeting until March 19, 2003, at 1:00 p.m., in Room 235, for another work session on the budget. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and Mr. Dorrier. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Chairman Approved by the Board of County Supervisors Date: 10/22/2003 Initials: GAS