Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1977-06-29NJune 29, 1977 (Night-Adjourned from June 16, 1977) Z36 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on June 29, 1977, at 7:80 P. M. in the Albemarle County Courthouse, Charlottesville, Virginia; said meeting being adjourned from June 16, 1977. Present: Mrs. Opal D. David and Messrs. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Gerald E. Fisher, J. T. Henley, Jr., F. Anthony Iachetta and W. S. Roudabush. Absen~t: None. Officers present: St. John. County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; and County Attorney, George R. Agenda Item No. 1. Mr. Fisher. The meeting was called to order az ?:34 P. M. by the Chairman, Agenda Item No. 2. Public Hearing: An ordinance to re~enact Article II, Chapter 7 of the Albemarle County Code, Sections 7-10 through 7-14 entitled "Protection of Water in South Rivanna River Reservoir". The purpose of this public hearing being for the Board to consider re-enacting this ordinance for the period July 1, 1977, through September 30, 1977. (Notice of this public hearing was advertised in The Daily Progress on June 15 and June 22, 1977. ) Mr. Fisher noted that this ordinance is identical to the one adopted earlier in the year; this readoption having an expiration date of September 30, 1977. This would continue the same ordinance in effect, in the same area of the County, in order to allow the Board and County Staff time to work on an ordinance which will be put in effect on a permanent basis. At this time the public hearing was opened. First to speak was Francis Fife, City Councillor, who read into the records the resolution adopted by the City Council on May 23, 1977 and set out in full on page 216 , Minute Book 15. Mr. Fife said although the Board may not want to do what City Council has requested, Council does request consideration of some sort of joint action. They do recognize that most of these matters are under the County's legal powers. It might be better for the City and the County if City Council was able to join with the County in looking over proposals. The Board may not want to consider doing these things through the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, but City Council recommen- ded this due to the fact that if it is done through the Rivanna Authority, the people who use the reservoir will be the ones paying for it. Mr. Joe Wright asked how long the County had been waiting for the Betz Report. Mr. Fisher said it was due last October. The final report was received yesterday. Now there is considerable work to be done, not just on development standards~but on other forms of pollution in the watershed. Mr. Wright said he had hoped that this temporary delay in the moratorium would not be needed and had hoped the Board would have the Betz Report and be able to place sufficient restrictions mn a new ordinance to protect the water supply. He asked that the Board consider a 30-day e~tension rather than a 90-day extension. He said the delay has become a hardship on people in the County. Mr. Fisher said he agrees with the concerns expressed. About 13 days ago, the Board took action to try and deal with the full problem of pollution. Ms. Ruth Wadlington, League of Women Voters, said they support the Board in the ex- tension of the moratorium. It is too important a matter to drop without taking some remedial steps. They hope the Board can come up with something within 90 days~and are glad to see the expression of concern on the part of the City. Mr. Wendell Wood asked that the moratorium not be extended. pointed a finger at developers. He said Betz has not At 7:51 P. M., with no other citizen rising to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Roudabush said he agrees with Mr. Wright and Mr. Wood on the delay, but if the Board resolves the question on a permanent basis without looking into long-range effects on the reservoir they might adopt something which is hard to-modify in the commng months or years. Mr. Roudabush said he is hopeful that the Board can, in 90 days, with the staff working as rapidly as they can on a new ordinance, abolish the moratorium or make an acceptable substitute.. Dr. Iachetta said it has been the Board's intent to put into place a permanent ordinance; 30 days is not a practical extension of time, because of public hearing notices alone. In reference to the Betz study, there were a number of things the Board did not know before which the study sets out. Specifically, it gives items that must be reduced and the Board did not have that number before. The study does not point a finger at any- body. The County has to draw UP a Land Use Management Plan that has as its objective the reduction of phosphorus input to the reservoir by 60 to 80 percent of what is presently happening. Point sources are identified~ the problem is nonpoint sources. Dr. Iachetta said the Board has asked the staff to proceed with formulating relatively new and unused land use management practices in this watershed. He is sorry that this whole process is inconvenient to a significant number of people, but although the community has not been fast L~ cgm£ng to grips with the problem, the Board needs to proceed cautiously and be sure that what is being put into place is workable in order to treat all with-fairness. Mrs. David said she agrees with the people who want the City-County cooperation, but she does not see how reasonable people expect the Board not to do this extra bit to get the technical information necessary to have a good answer to the problems. Mr. Dorrier said there are some statistics in Mr. Bailey's report which he would like to quote, namely that approximately 2,400 acres in the watershed will be developed between 1975 and 1995. Even if controls are developed to control the amount of phosphorus entering the reservoir, the?most that can be controlled is five to six percent. This leaves 94 per- cent of phosphorus entering'from other sources. The developers may be correct in their assumptions that development is really causing only a small percentage of the pollution. June 29, 1977 (Night-Adjourned from June 16, 1977) Mr. Bailey's report also notes that 32 percent of the annual phosphorus loading comes from undeveloped land; 27 percent from agriculture; and 16 percent from presently developed land. Mr. Dorrier said he' was not sure the Board was moving in the right direction in developing these standards for development. He agrees that the Board should impose restrictions, but does not think that the developer should be singled out and felt the Betz Report indicates that developers are not the main cause of pollution.. Mr. Dottier said he would like to see a committee set up between the County and City to formUlate guidelines along these lines, working simultaneously with Dr. Grizzard. Mr. Fisher said he would like to comment On Mr. Bailey's report. Mr. Bailey said the purpose of the report was to show that the County must work not only on the.transition of land from one use to another but on existing land uses throughout the watershed. He made' it clear that his intent was to show that the control of runoff from development alone was not going to solve the problem. The question before the Board tonight, at this time, is whether or not to continue the present ordinance in effect. Mr. Dorrier said he was in favor of continuing the ordinance but thinks that the Board should set up this committee with the City. It is a joint problem and the Board may receive some joint funding of the solution. At this time, motion was offered by Dr. Iachetta to adopt an ordinance to amend and re-enact Article II of Chapter 7 of the Albemarle County Code as set out below: BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County that Article II of Chapter 7 of the Albemarle County Code be, and hereby is, amended and re-enacted as follows: (1) Article II. Protection of Water in South Rivanna River Reservoir. Sec. 7-10 Purpose of article. The purpose of this article is to protect against and minimize the pollution and eutrophication of the South Rivanna River Reservoir resulting from development in the drainage basin thereof on an interim basis pending the completion of studies designed to determine the effect of such develop- ment upon the reservoir. It is hereby found by the board of supervisors as a matter of legislative determination that this article is necessary to prevent pollution of the reservoir and to protect health, safety and welfare of the people of the county. Sec. 7-11 Definitions. For the purposes of this article, the following terms shall be defined as follows: Development. Any construction, external repair, land disturbing activity, grading, road building, or other activity resulting in a change of the physical character of any parcel of land, except as herein otherwise expressly provided. Immediate drainage area. That portion of the county lying within the watershed of the South Rivanna River: (1) Bounded by an arc having a radius of five miles as measured from the water supply intake pipe of the reservoir and (2) lying within five hundred horizontal feet of the edge of the reservoir at normal pool or within five hundred horizontal feet of the centerline of any perennial or intermittent stream flowing directly into the reservoir. In addition, any area having a slope in excess of fifteen percent which is immediately adjacent to the five hundred foot boundary line as herein defined, shall be deemed to be included within the immediate drainage area. A map labeled "South Rivanna River Reservoir Immediate Drainage Area", showing the boundaries as herein described,'is incorporated herein by re- ference and copies of such map are on file in the office of the zoning administrator. Permit. Any building permit, erosion control permit, or flood plain permit which is required to be zssued by any board, committee, officer, employee or other agency of the county as a prereq$isite to any development. See. 7-12. Issuance of permits. No permit shall be issued for any development in the immediate drainage area.~)f the South Rivanna River Reservoir until such time as the board of supervisors shall have determined that such development will have no substantial adverse effect on the reservoir or on the quality of the water therein. Sec. 7-13. Exemptions. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the following shall be exempt from the effect of this article: (a) The construction, repair, enlargement, or other activity, other than ~oad building, relating to any single family detached dwelling !oeated upon a lot having a minimum area of one acr~; provided, that no such activity shall be permitted within two hundred horizontal feet of the edge of the reservoir at normal pool nor within two hundred feet of the centerline of any p~rennial or intermittent stream flowing directly into the reservoir; (b) The repair or reconstruction of any structure which repair or reconstruction is necessitated by forces beyond the control of the owner of such structure, which repair or reconstruction shall be necessary to prevent June 29, 1977 (Night-Adjourned from June 16, 1977) 238 reconstruction will, in the opinion of the board of supervisors, have no significant impact on the quality of water in the South Rivanna River Reservoir; (c) The tilling, planting or harvesting of agricultural, horti- cultural or forest crops or products or engineering operations under section 21-2(c) of the Code of Virginia, as amended; (d) Nothing in this section shall be construed to permit the issuance of any permit for any land disturbing activity as defined in article I of this chapter; provided that, notwithstanding any provision of law to the contrary, any activity necessary for the elimination of any condition which constitutes a d~nger to the public health, safety and welfare may be carried out as otherwise provided by law. Sec. 7-14. Construction of article. This article is declared to be remedial in nature and protective of a paramount public interest and shall be liberally construed to effectuate its purpose. Sec. 7-15. Duration of terms of article. This article shall take effect upon February 25, 1976, and shall remain in effect until repealed by the board of supervisors; provided., however, that this article shall terminate and be of no further effect on and after September 30, 1977, unless the same shall have theretofore been re-enacted in accordance with law. (2) Section 7-16 of the Albemarle County Code is hereby repeaIed. The foregoing motion was seconded by Mrs. David and carried ~y the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Yms. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Not Docketed: Mr. Fisher said at this time the Board needs to continue their dis- cussion which began two weeks ago with Dr. Grizzard. At that time, the Board. discussed the procedures that might be taken to come up with a Management Plan for the watershed. Dr. Grizzard was requested to draft two proposals; one with him primarily doing all of the work drafting the ordinance and working on the Management Plan for the nonpoint source pollution that exists in the watershed; and two, the County staff~and the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority staff doing a good bit of the work with special help from Dr. Grizzard. Mr. Fisher said he understands that nothing has been received in writing to .this date. Mr. Agnor said the staff has completed its work as far as it can in drafting an ordinance and an appendix to that ordinance containing technical data. It was at the request of the staff that professional help was sought from Dr. Grizzard. The staff re- cognizes that they are working in a technical area as well as an uncharted area in dealing with nonpoint source pollution. Since the Board met with Dr. Grizzard on June 16, Dr. Grizzard was to review the data collected for the Betz study. From that data he was to send the County 'the two proposals referred tO above. The data was not received by him from Betz until Wednesday of last week. It was his intention to have a proposal in Mr. Agnor's office on Friday but he called yesterday to say that he had spent the weekend examining the data and was not yet prepared to send a proposal. Since his review of the data, he wants to make the proposal in a different manner. Dr. Grizzard cannot be employed as a consultant to Albemarle County without working through a consulting firm. This is a ruling that V.P.I.-S.U. requzres of its staff. He is unable to respond as an individual, but is prepared to make a proposal through a firm in northern Virgini~ That is one reason for the delay. More important is the fact that he wants to make a two-part proposal. He would prepare a Watershed Management Plan of a interim nature based upon the Betz Report and the data collected for same. He would propose that additional data be co~lected for a long-range permanent plan to be enacted in about a year from now. Dr. Grizzard has different ideas on the methodology of collecting data. He feels this different methodology would provide more refined data than is provided in the data that he has reviewed in the Betz Report. Mr. Agnor said when he had heard this proposal he asked Dr. Grizzard n~t to proceed mn preparing a proposal until he discussed this with the Board. Mr. Agnor asked if the Board would like to have his recommendation at this point. The answer was yes. Mr. Agnor said when it was recommended and requested by the staff that someone oversee its work, it was felt that-a consultant would have an objective point of view, perhaps a different point of view from the people who did the Betz study. Mr. Agnor said his re- action to Dr. Grizzard's proposal to do an interim water management study and then ultimate- ly a long-range one, is that data collection could go on for m~ny years. This fact has been discussed in Board meetings. Mr. Agnor said he would recommend that the Board not accept Mr. Grizzard's proposal, but that the Board go back with specific times frames to Betz Engineers and with them having collected the data and having complete familarity with it, review the work that the staff has done on the draft ordinance. He recommended that he be authorized to contact Betz Engineers and explain the proposal, say that the work must be completed in four to six weeks, with a finished product ready for public review and public hearing in the latter part of this 90-day period. Mr. Fisher asked how this could be guaranteed for a firm that had been eight months late in producing a report. Mr.' Agnor said he knows that Dr. Browne has been just as frustrated in many ~ays and concerned about the delays as everyone else, although he has been~ble to handle these even within his own organiZation. He would hope that Dr. Browne would be able to improve his track record and not have this happen again. Mr. Fisher asked if there was any way this could be done by the County staff and the staff of the Rivanna Authority so the County is not dependent on somebody else's work schedules. Mr. Agnor acid he thinks it can be done, but he is concerned that the staff does not have the technical June 29, 1977 (Night-Adjourned from June 16, I977) expertise that is involved in this type of work. From that standpoint he is thoroughr!y concerned that if the work of the staff was ehallenged,~it would be difficult for the County to defend it without having technical advice from a consultant. Dr. Iachetta said he thinks this part of the problem is different from the preparation of the final report on a year's work of data collected. He understood that the hydrological data collected had to be meprocessed through the computer a number of times in order to get the reduced data in a form which was acceptable. In this case, the Board will be request- ing the firm to respond to a proposed ordinance that the staff has drawn. There is a specific document on which~comment~s~i can be made. Dr. Iaehetta said he understood Dr. Browne and Dr. Grizzard both to say there are certain things that are known to work in the way of structures and devices. He would assume that Dr. Browne's information came from the same literature sources as that of Dr. Grizzard. The Board is not talking about ~he Land Use Management Plan, but an ordinance to replace the ordinance just adopted. Dr. Iachetta said if the Board establishes a group directed toward putting together this ordinance using County staff, plus some help from the Rivanna Authority s%aff, with Dr. Browne as the technical person, the Board should be able to get a document within the time frame. Mr. Fisher said he did not think it should take four to six weeks just to review what the staff has already drafted. Mr. Roudabush said it may be that the staff is so far off target that the ordinance may have to be started over at the beginning. Dr. Iachetta said what concerns him is the interpretation Mr. Dorrier has put on Mr. Bailey's comments. In ~ne sense, what he said is right, but there is another aspect. Thirty-two percent of what presently gets into the reservoir comes from undeveloped land, but for every acre that is turned to a new use you multiply that acreage contribution by a factor of seven. How many acres of the watershed are now developed and yet they contribute 16 percent of the total input. That is the kind of problem that must be dealtwith. Mr. Fisher said he was concerned that when the Board gets into suggestions on undeveloped and agricultural land that farmers and other people in the watershed have an opportunity to make comments. An Advisory Panel has been working through the Rivanna Service Authorit~ on the Betz Report. This panel was composed of a representative from agriculture, industry, home building, City and County Planning Commission and Regional Planning staff. A group of this type might help with the review of the ordinance before it goes to a public hearing. Mr. Roudabush agreed and said he felt it would be a good idea to have such a group review the information before it goes to public hearing. Dr. Iachetta said this ordinance is technical and the Board wants input from technical people. If the Board puts together a group of people who have expertise of this type and then have a public workshop, it might be a better approach than having a committee. Mrs. David said the Advisory Panel mentioned by Mr. Fisher sounds like the kind of mix that the Board wants and if that group of people could participate actively in the workshops with the technical people that might be the way to arrive at the proper ordinance. Dr. Iachetta said this Board has already agreed in principal to a joint approach and it might be desirable to appoint an overview committee of one person from this Board, one person from City Council and one from the Rivanna Authority that could work with County s'taff and the consultant in developing the materials for the first workshop. Mr. Dorrier agreed with Dr. Iachetta's proposal but said there should probably be more than one from each of these Boards; maybe two or three. Dr. Iachetta said the bigger the committee, the longer it takes to arrive at a decision. Mr. Agnor said when the Rivanna Authority appointed their Advisory~Panel for the Betz study, they had kept the number to a seven member panel, trying to keep it representative cross-sectionally, but also small. There would be gains in time by using that group because of their acquaintance with what is already in the Betz Report.. This would also fit with the City's idea of using the Rivanna Authority as the vehicle for helping to develop the performance standards. Mr. Fisher said the report on the reservoir was done by contract with the Rivanna Authority directly with Betz Environmental Engineers. Mr. St. John said it will be the Board's responsibility no matter which draft of the ordinance is used. If using the Rivanna Authority as a contracting agency to draft the regulations and present them to the Board is the most feasible way to do this, there is no legal reason why it can- not be done in this manner. A proposal of this type would be sUbject to acceptance of the responsibility by the Rivanna and ratificatinn by the City. Mr. Fisher asked the record to show that Mr. Fife was shaking his head in agreement. He asked if the work could be completed within 40 days. Mr. Agnor said if what the staff has done to this point is reasonably acceptable and only needs refinement, it can be completed within 40 days, but the staff does need some input from technical people, plus citizen reaction. For the record, Mr. Agnor presented to the Board the final copy of the Betz Environ- mental Report on the reservoir which was received yesterday, June 28~ He said there are no more changes to be made in the report, but there is a second volume which is the raw data which is not being distributed because it was felt that this type of information was of interest only to people dealing with the technical aspects of the report. The report is dated June 1977. Mr. Fisher asked if the Board were interested in requesting the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority to immediately undertake to negotiate a contract with Betz Environmental Engineers to review the staff's work on the ordinance and to return the ordinance in a form suitable for the Advisory Panel to review within 40 days from July I. Dr. Iachetta offered motion to this effect, and the motion was seconded by Mr. Roudabush. ~Mr. Dorrler asked if this is an open ended motion on funding for this contract. Mr. Fisher said the intent of the motion is that the funding of the work to be done by Betz will be paid for by the Rivanna Authority. Mr. Henley said he had some questions about who the advisory committee will be and if they can do the watershed management plan. He did not feel the committee mentioned by Mr. Fisher had enough representation for the many uses in the watershed. In other words non-point pollution sources such as forestry and agriculture. June '29, 1977 (Night-Adjourned from June 16, 1977) 24¸0 Dr. Iachetta asked if this Board should go on record as to whether or not it is will- ing to sUpport this. contract financially. He asked if the County is expecting Rivanna to pay for the entire contract. Mr. Fisher said that is the intention. If this recommenda- tion is not accepted by the Rivanna Authority, the Board will have to dlseuss this further. Mr. Agnor said the Concept is that the users of the water are participating in the cost rather than the taxpayers of Albemarle County alone. Mr. George Williams of the Rivanna Authority said he would have to call a meeting of his Board as soon as possible to be sure that they are willing to undertake this responsi- bility. Mr. Fife ~aid this motion is agreeable to City Council. He feels the Board of Supervisors will be in a be~ter position doing it this way than by themselves. He also recognizes that the major users of the service are now living in the City. At this time, roll was called and the motiOn carried bY the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS' Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Dr. Iaehetta said he felt the Board should proceed to set up a committee composed of members of the Board of Supervisors, Rivanna Authority and City ~Couneil to be charged with the long-term interaction and development of a Land Use Management Plan. The committee should also include Mr. Agnor and Mr. Hendrix. This would give a five-person body to work on how the three entities are going to work together in the future. Mr. St. John said in the motion just adopted, part of what the Betz people are to do is make a response to the ordinance which has already been drafted and then turn it over to the advisory panel. Before the Board goes into discussion of long-range solutions, he felt it should he.cleared up as to who this advisory panel is andWhat they are supposed to do when Betz turns over their recommendations to them. Mr. Fisher said'he should clarify his original statement. Ail of the appointees to the Advisory Panel of the Rivanna Authority were appointed by the Rivanna Authority itself. It is his understanding that some of these people were appointed because of the offices they held in their respective organizations. He suggested that some of these people could be kept on the committee for continuity and possibly find some new people in similar positions. Mr. St. John asked if it were the intent to leave the representation on the panel up to the Rivanna Authority. Mr. Fisher said it se~ms that decision will~ still rest with the Rivanna Authority. The Board might make suggestions if it is felt changes should be made. The composition at the present time is Dr. Quarles, Chairman of the Rivanna Board; Edgar Garnett, representing agriculture; Warren Judge~of Sperry Marine Products, representing industry; Leroy Bruton, home builders; Mrs. 0'Bbien, City Planning Commission; Dr. Moore, County Planning Commission and Bob Abbott, Planning District Commission. Mr. Roudabush said he felt it might be premature to talk about a steering committee to work on a watershed management study that will be done in the future. There may be too many committees Working at one time and something may emme to light in this first phase that might change the thinking on the second phase. Mr. Fisher said the primary objective at this .time is to arrive at the proper ordinance. That has to be the only major objective for the next few weeks. Dr. Iachetta said his reason for wanting to establish a joint committee of the two political subdivisions is that the second phase obviously involves'whatever is done on the first phase. This Advisory Panel would not be able to function until they get some input from the ~ivanna stUdy. They need that and ought to be a part of the process as well. The long-term monitoring program involves the Board on how it will be funded, how it will be regulated, etc. Mr. Dottier felt the Advisory Committee should have representatives from the Board, the City and Rivanna since the governing bodies need to have a small committee to overview ~the final product~ Mr. Fisher said he could not see what this group will do right away. The Rivanna Authority is composed of the City Manager, the County Executive, the City Director of Public Works, the County Engineer and Dr. Quarles. The committee that is being discussed would probably have Dr. Quarles, the City Manager and the County Executive; three of the pe6ple already on the Rivanna Board. Dr. Iachetta said the City Council has a desire to be involved in establishing the performance standards and develop- ing a monitoring program. The standards are going to be a part of the ordinance. If the Board is going to have concurrent interaction with Council relative to performance standards it seems this would have to start with the first phase. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Fife how he feels the City can best interac~ in this work beyond what has been proposed with1~the Rivanna Authority. . Mr. Fife said he felt the first part of the p~oblem has already been handled by referr- ing it to the Rivanna Authority~and then to the Advisory Committee already established. As far as the second step is concerned, he would have to think more about that. Mr. 'Fisher asked that Mr. Fife discuss this with City Council and let the Board have a response by next WedneSday~ Mr. Fife said ~f he understands correctly, the Board is asking how the City Council would prefer to carry oDt some of the suggestions they have made regarding permanent performance standards and monitoring for the watershed. Mr. Fisher said yes, and the degree of involvement of individual members of City Council. Mr. Dorrier asked ~r Agnor exactly what problem Dr. Grizzard had with the Betz methodology for collecting runoff samples. Mr. Agnor said during a storm, Betz had people go out and take Samples from certain stations in the watershed. This activity could not be planned ahead and had to'be done whenever such occurred. Dr. Grizzard prefers that during a storm event, a series'of samples be taken from every station rather than just a single sampling station. Dr. Grizzard would prefer to take the samples when the flrst flush arrive~ at the station as well as samples after the first flush passes throUgh. This is a rather extensive sampling program. Mrs. David said she gets the impression that the ordinance, being proposed is a whole new ordinance to control runoff as distinct from soil erosion control. That bothers her because it seems as though this is setting up a whole new bureaucracy. She would rather see this handled as an extension of the soll erosion control. Dr. Iaehetta said it is the other way around; watershed management requires soil erosion control. Mrs. David said she JUne 29, 1~77 (Night-Adjourned from June 16, 1977) does not want to see another set of inspectors and controls because it all seems to be part of the same problem. Mr. St. John said the answer to this will not be known until it is known what is required. At the present, no one knows the qualification of the people who will be required to monitor this ordinance. If the Rivanna Authority is responsible for monitoring, it will have to be separate because they cannot be responsible for ordinary soil erosion control throughout the County. At 9:02 P. M., Mr. Fisher declared a recess. The Board reconvened at 9:14 P. M. and picked up with Agenda Item No. 2. Appropriation: School Board. Mr. Agnor noted the following memo from Clarence S. McClure, Superintendent of Schools. June 29, 1977 TO: Mr. Ray B. Jones, Director of Finance FROM: Clarence S. McClure, Division Superintendent SUBJECT: Advance of Funds According to the information that you supplied me yesterday, it appears that the school fund balance may be showing a deficit of approximately $165,000 as of June 30. This is due to delayed reimburse- ments by the state on certain educational programs. We received a memorandum today dated June 24 (copy attached) that $250,218.25 was being forwarded as reimbursement on school programs for the current fiscal year. Although there are overexpenditures in several energy related costs of approximately $180,000, it appears that unexpended balances in other functions that may be transferred at a later date will ade- quately cover this overexpenditure. I have been aware that energy costs would exceed our appropriation for several months and certain purchases and expenditures have been deliberately held to the lowest possible level to compensate for these anticipated overexpenditures. I hereby request that the Board of Supervisors take the necessary action to advance the school operating fund $165,000 in order that the fund will not show a deficit balance on June 30 if the state funds are not received by then. Thank you. Motion was offered by Mrs. David to advance $165,000 from the General Fund to the School Operating Fund, if needed, on June 30, 1977; said funds to be returned to the General Fund upon receipt of State monies. The motion was seconded by Dr. Iachetta and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs.~ Dottier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. Not Docketed. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from Dr. Edward Hook, Virginia Council on Health and Medical Care Incorporated, in which Dr. Hook-said that the Council is developing a budget for 1977 and they requested that the Board share in expenses necessary for operation of the Council. Dr. Hook suggested a contribution of $!00. He gave this letter to Mrs. David for a recommendation. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a packet of materials from the National Association of Counties dealing with the annual meeting to be held in Detroit in July. Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a letter from Piedmont Virginia College dated June 17, 1977 inviting Board Members to attend the final meeting of the business teehno!ogies division faculty and members on June 30, 1977, at 6:0O P. M. Mr. Roudabush requested that the July 6 agenda carry an item for a resolution declar- ing Albemarle County a disaster area. Mrs. David noted materials received from the Virginia Association of Counties in which there is included a legislative proposal on conditional zoning. Mrs. David said there will be four different hearings around the State on this legislation and she will try to attend the meeting in Richmond on July 20th. She also noted that the Virginia Association of Counties wants the Board's legislative proposals for the 1978 session of the General Assembly by September 1; with these proposals being predicated on a biennial bases. June 29, 1977 (Night-Adjoumned from June 16, 1977) Mr. Fisher said he had been in Richmond today working on House Document 17. There are a number of problems which have been identified by counties. Through an oversight, such items as powers of eminent domain, powers to lease and sell propemty and powers to transfer funds from one account to anothem, have been deleted from this new legislation. The way it is presently written it would eliminate staggered Germs of elections for counties but provide for those in cities and towns. It also will require that all accounting systems be the State accounting system. Theme are still a lot of things t° be worked out on House Document 17. Claims against the County for the month of June 1977 were examined, allowed and certified to the Director of Finance for payment and Charged against the following funds: General Fund School Fund School Construction Capital Outlay Fund ~ Joint Security Complex Fund General Operating Capital Outlay Fund Town of Seottsville 1% Local Sales Tax Commonwealth of Virginia Current Credit Account TOTAL $ 480,656.95 1,977,249.88 328,009.11 51,689.28 16,778.50 108.88 12,249.44 $2,811,786.99 At 9:90 P. M., at the request of the Chairman, motion was offered by Mr. Roudabush, seconded by Mrs. David to adjourn into executive session to discuss legal matters. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mrs. David and Messrs. Dorrier, Fisher, Henley, Iachetta and Roudabush. None. At 10:80 P. M. the Board reconvened and immediately adjourned the meeting which had begun at 7:80. ~ - -C~irm,an ~