Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
2004-03-10
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FINAL MARCH 10, 2004 6:00 P.M., AUDITORIUM COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING 2. 3. 4. 5, 6. Call to Order. Pledge of Allegiance. Moment of Silence. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Consent Agenda PUBLIC HEARING to receive comments on the County Executive's Recommended Operating Budget for FY 2004/2005. PUBLIC HEARING to receive comments on the FY 2004-05/2008-09 Capital Improvements Program. From the Board: Matters not Listed on the Agenda. Adjoum to March 15, 2004, Room 235, 1:00 p.m. CONSENT AGENDA FOR APPROVAL: 5.1 Request to set public hearing on Albemarle County's Annual Plan for Administering Housing Choice Vouchers. 5.2 Methe~. (Remove from agenda) 5.3 Park View at South Pantops - Adopt resolution of support for Iow income housing tax credits/CEO letter and intent to allocate Housing Choice Vouchers. FOR INFORMATION: 5.4 2003 Fourth Quarter Building Report as prepared by the Department of Planning and Community Development. 5.5 2003 Year End Building Report as prepared by the Department of Planning and Community Development. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Request to set Public Hearing on Albemarle County's Annual Plan for Administering Housing Choice Vouchers SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Housing Choice Voucher Annual Plan for FY beginning July 1,2004 STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Roxanne White. Ron White LINK TO ATTACHMENT(S): LEGAL REVIEW: Yes AGENDA DATE: March 10, 2004 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: X ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: INFORMATION: INFORMATION: No / The U.S. Deoartment of Housing and Urban Development requires each public housing agency to prepare a five-year plan for administering public housing assistance programs. Administration of the Housing Choice Vouchers makes Albemarle County subject to this requirement. In addition to completing a five-year plan, an Annual Plan must be submitteo each year. Prior to submission, ~ne plan must be available for a 45-day comment period and reviewed Dy a Resident Advisory Board for comment and input. After receipt of this input, the final p~an is presented for adoption at a Public Hearing. STRATEGIC PLAN: Goal 3.2: Promote a variety of safe, sanitary and affordable housing types. DISCUSSION: The 5-year p~an was submitted to HUD in January 2001. Subsequen[ annua~ plans have peen submitted and approved. Work has begun on the propesee elan - a summary having been sent to members of a Resident Advisory Board for review and comment and a summary prepared for review by the Housing Committee at their March 10, 2004 meeting. The Dian may include revisions and/or comments as a result of these processes and inpu[ at a public hearing. RECOMMENDATIONS: Staff recommends setting ane advertising a public hearing on the proposed Annual Plan for the April 14, 2004 Board of SuDervlsors meeting, 04.029 05_03_04P08:1~ qCVD COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY AGENDA TITLE: Park View at South Pantops SUBJECT/PROPOSAL/REQUEST: Resolution of Support for Low Income Housing Tax Credits/CEO Letter and Intent to allocate Housing Choice Vouchers STAFF CONTACT(S): Tucker, Roxanne White, non White AGENDA DATE: March 10, 2004 ACTION: CONSENT AGENDA: ACTION: × ATTACHMENTS: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: IN FORMATION: INFORMATION: The Shelter Group (Baltimore, MD) and JABA are entering into a partnership to develop a 90-unit apartment complex for seniors using, in part, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. The complex will consist of 54 :)ne-bedroom units (750 sq, ft.) and 36 two-bedroom units (960 sq. ft.) with proposed rents of $640 and $765, respectively. The units will be restricted to elderly households with incomes at or below 60% of the area median income. The four-story building will be constructed adjacent to Winterhaven Assisted Living on South Pantops Ddve. The partnership agreement gives JABA the first right-of-refusal to purchase after 15 years of operation. DISCUSSION: The state aIIocation plan for issuing Low-Income Housing Tax Credits provides an extremely competitive environment for proposed projects. This year elderly projects face additional competition due to VHDA's desire to fund more family4ype rental units. In fact, Park View is in a 3ool with at least 10 other proposed projects and it is likely only one will receive funding. Tax credit applications are scored on a number of criteria and required documents. One such document is the Local CEO Support Letter (attached). In addition to the local support letter, the applicant can receiveten points ifa portion of the units will receive project-based rental subsidies. The applicant has requested that the County provide up to 12 project-based vouchers to support this project. The project-based vouchers would not be additional rental vouchers to the County but would come from the existing allocation. While this does not provide a net increase of assistance, the effect ora successful project would be that 90 units of affordable rental housing would be developed with at least 12 serving households with incomes below 50% of the area median income. The annual value of the project-based vouchers is estimated to be $54,000. Prelect-based vouchers would be contracted on an annual basis provided that HUD continues to fund the voucher program and approves the County's proposal to utilize up to 15% of authorized vouchers as project-based. The Park View proposal is similar to the Woods Edge Elderly Housing project developed under a partnership between Fore Properties and JABA. The County provides direct local support ($40,000 annually) to reduce the rents for thirty households with incomes below 50% of the area median ~ncome. Using project-based vouchers rather than direct local subsidy will allow more control over those receiving assistance and provide a deeper subsidy for those households that may have extremely-low income. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the attached resolution of support and execution of the Local CEO Support Letter by Mr. Tucker. 04.028 05-03-04708:18 RCVD (This Form May Be Included With Application - Tab I) or (This Letter Must Be Received by VHDA by April 15, 2004) (This Form Must Be Submitted Under Locality's Letterhead) Mamh 3, 2004 TO: Virginia Housing Development Authority 601 South Belvidere Street Richmond, Virginia 23220 Attention: Jim Chandler RE: LOCAL SUPPORT Name of Development: Name of Owner/Applicant: Park View at South Pantops South Pantops Limited Partnership The construction of Park View at South Pantops and the allocation of federal housing tax credits available under IRC Section 42 for that development will help meet the housing needs and priorities of Albemarle County. Accordingly, Albemarle County supports the allocation of federal housing tax credits requested by South Pantops Limited Partnership for that development. Yours truly, Robert W. Tucker. Jr. County Executive NOTE TO LOCALITY: Any change in this form letter may result in a reduction of points under the scoring system. If you have any questions, please call Jim Chandler at VHDA (804) 343-5786. NOTE TO DEVELOPER: You are strongly encouraged to submit this certification to the appropriate local official at least three weeks in advance of the application deadline to ensure adequate time for review and approval. RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle ~s committed to improving the livability of all neighborhoods and access to support services by residents; and WItEREAS, The County of Albemarle is committed to promoting development of new affordable housing stock; and WHEREAS, the Shelter Group in partnership with Jefferson Area Board of Aging intend to apply for Low-Income Housing Tax Credits for Park View at South Pantops; and WHEREAS, all proposed units in the development (90) will be restricted to households with incomes at or below 60% of the area median income; and WltEREAS, the Albemarle County Office of Housing proposes the use of Housing Choice Vouchers to provide project-based assistance to up to 12 units with household incomes below 50% of the area median income; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive. is hereby authorized to sign the Local CEO Support Letter supporting the proposed Park View at South Pantops development using, in part, Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Office of Housing lS authorized to proceed with seeking approval from HUD for use of project-based vouchers contingent on continued funding from HUD for the Housing Choice Voucher Program. I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a true correct copy of a resolution adopted by the County Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia at a regular meeting held March 20, 2002. Clerk, County Board of Supervisors COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE Office of Count~ Executive 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434 296-5841 FAX/434) 296~5800 -March 10. 2004 TO: Virginia Housing Development Authority 601 South Belvidere Street Richmond, Virginia 23220 Attention: Jim Chandler RE: LOCAL SUPPORT Name of Development: Name of Owner/Applicant: Park View at South Pantops South Pantops Limited Partnership The construction of Park View at South Pantops and the allocation of federal housing tax credits available under IRC Section 42 for that development will hetp meet the housing needs and priorities of Albemarle County. Accordingly, Albemarle County supports the allocation of federal housing tax credits requested by South Pantops Limited Partnership for that development. RW-r,Jr.tewc truly, . o°u%E%cutiv "Jr' RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to ensuring that safe, decent, affordable, and accessible housing is available for all residents; and WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle is committed to improving the livability of all neighborhoods and access to support services by residents; and WHEREAS, The County of Albemarle is committed to promoting development of new affordable housing stock; and WI-IEREAS, the Shelter Group in partnership with Jefferson Area Board of Aging intend to apply for Low-income Housing Tax Credits for Park View at South Pautops; and WHEREAS, all proposed units in the development (90) will be restricted to households with incomes at or below 60% of the area median income; and WltEREAS, the Albemarle County Office of Housing proposes the use of Hous'mg Choice Vouchers to provide project-based assismncc to up ro 12 units with household incomes below 50% of the area median income; and NOW, II-IEREFORFo BE IT RESOLVED that Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive, is hereby authorized to sign the Ix)cai CEO Support Letter supporting the parmersl/~p's application for Low-Income Housing Tax Credits. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Office of Hous'mg is authorized m proceed with seeking approval from HUD for use of project-based vouchers conungent on continued funding from HUD for the Housing Choice Voucher Program I, Ella W. Carey, do hereby certify that the foregoing is aume correcz.~q~.X of a resolution headtdOP~,ldarbc~a lth~,C2004oun~y Board of Supervisors c~/ounty,, x¢ '~. a ~/~lar meeedng I( County ~oa~ofSupmds(~ 2OO3 YEAR END BUILDING REPORT County of Albemarle Dept. of Planning & Community Development Office of Geographic Data Services 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5823 INDEX I. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Month (Charts A & B) II. Comparison of Residential Dwelling Units by Type (Charts C, D, & E) IlL Comparison of All Building Permits (Chart F) KEY TO TYPES OF HOUSING REFERRED TO IN REPORT SF SFA SF/'rH DUP MF MHC AA Single-Family (includes modular) Single-Family Attached Single-Family Townhouse Duplex Multi-Family Mobile Home in the County (not in an existing park) Accessory Apartment Dudng the year of 2003. 688 building permits were issued for 1079 dwelling units. In addifJon, 26 permita were issued for mobile homes in existing parks s~ an average exchange value of $2,500, for a total of $65,000. L Comparison of Residential Dwelling Units by Type Chart A. Nine Year Comparison of New Resident~t Dwelling Units by Month MONTH 1995 1996 1997 t 998 'i 999 2000 2001 2002 2003 JAN 50 26 54 38 49 52 52 55 96 FEB 43 44 44 39 84 43 39 348 34 MAR 47 61 57 65 65 54 54 74 106 APR 46 71 75 62 102 63 62 63 69 MAY 41 63 118 65 55 72 196 198 90 JUN 62 41 89 85 75 50 181 117 64 JUL 51 37 59 74 69 56 46 235 54 AUG 44 105 34 221 56 65 55 64 61 SEP 56 64 48 68 68 49 32 72 60 OCT 42 186 216 61 48 48 86 308 74 NOV 66 43 49 48 42 49 36 48 41 DEC 48 44 62 48 57 49 36 138 330 TOTAL 596 835 905 874 770 650 875 1720 1079 Chart B. Throe Year Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Month 4OO 380 36O 34O 32O 2~0 240 22O 1~0 ~40 '120 ~00 ~0 IChart B: Throe Year Comparison of New Residential D.U. by Month JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH [02001 E]2002,2003] Prepared by the Albemarle County Office of Geographic Data Services -3- Year End, 2003 II. COMPARISON OF RESIDENTiAl DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE Chart C. Breakdown of New Reside~al Dwelling Units by Magisterial D~trict and Dwelling Unit Type MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL DISTRICT SF SFA SFFFH DUP MF MHC AA UNITS UNITS RIO 57 23 9 0 40 2 2 133 12% JACK JOUE~- 9 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 t 1% RIVAN NA 1 t 2 20 24 0 2~0 3 0 439 41% SAMUEL MILLER 104 0 0 0 0 3 2 109 10% SCOTTSVILLE 10t 7 0 0 97 3 4 212 20% WHITE HALL 151 6 16 0 0 0 2 175 16% TOTAL 534 56 49 0 417 11 12 1079 100% Chart D. Breakdown of New Residential Dwelling Units by Comprehensive Plan Area and Dwelling Unit Type COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AREA DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL SF SFA SFFFH DUP MF MHC AA UNITS UNITS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 0 URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 24 19 5 0 0 0 0 48 URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 19 0 0 0 0 0 0 19 2% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 15 3 0 0 0 0 I 19 2% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 29 0 0 0 97 0 0 126 12% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% CROZET COMMUNITY 61 6 7 0 0 1 1 76 7% HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 55 12 16 0 0 2 0 85 8% PINEY MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY 18 8 8 0 280 0 0 314 29% RIVANNA VILLAGE 52 0 0 0 0 1 {3 53 5% DEVELOPMENT AREA SUBTOTAL 273 .48 36 0 417 4 3 781 72% RURAL AREA 1 68 4 0 0 0 0 4 76 7% RURAL AREA 2 77 4 13 0 0 2 0 96 RURAL AREA 3 58 0 0 0 0 0 I 59 5% RURAL AREA 4 58 0 0 0 0 5 4 67 6% RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 261 8 13 0 0 7 9 298 28% TOTAL 534 56 49 0 417 11 12 1079 100% Prepared by the Albemer~e County Off.me oi' Geographic Data Services -4- Year End, 2003 IL COMPARISON OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE (continued) Chart E. B~eekdown of Residential Dwelling Units by Elementary School District and Dwelling Unit Type SCHOOL DVVELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC AA UNITS i UNITS Agnor-Hurt 19 23 9 0 40 0 1 92 9% Baker Butler 18 0 Broadus Wood 35 0 0 0 0 0 2 37 3% Brownsville 43 0 6 0 0 0 1 50 5% Crozet Greer 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 3 Hollymead 59 16 16 0 0 3 0 94 Meriwet her Lewis 22 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 2% Murray 24 0 0 0 0 0 I 25 2% Red Hill 35 0 0 0 0 3 O 38 4% Cale 53 7 0 0 377 0 2 439 41% Scottsville 14 0 0 0 0 I 0 15 1% Stone Robinson 59 2 0 0 0 2 1 64 6% Stony Point SS 0 0 0 0 I 0 39 4% Woodbrook 15 2 0 0 0 0 0 17 Yancey 31 0 0 0 0 I 2 34 3% TOTAL 534 SS 49 0 417 11 12 1079 100% lit, COMPARISON OF ALL BUILDING PERMITS Chart F. EstJmsted Cost of Construction by Magisterial District and Construction Type MAGISTERIAL NEW *NEW NON-RES, NEW COMMERCIAL FARM BUILDING TOTAL DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL & ALTER. RES. & NEW INSTITUT. & ALTER. COMM. No. Amount-S No. Amount-$ No. AmountS No.= Amount-$ No. Amounts RIO S6 13,627,425 115 2,167,034 14 4,581,651 131 6,376,003 356 $ 26,752,113 JOUETT 11 3,780,000 87 8,351,631 I 50,000 16 594,225 115 $ 12,775,856 RIVAN NA 182 38,186,291 171 4,715,855 10 4,712,800 72 3,386,9G9 435 $ 51,001,885 S. MILLER 108 24,240,324 143 6,897,577 § 80,500 28 3,013,450 284 $ 34,231,851 SCOTTSVILLE 116 27,073,035 123 3,731,178 17 2,437,700 37 4,042,503 293 $ 37,2~4,416 WHITE HALL 175 36,251,572 165 21,9SS,916 13 1,543,040 40 1,433,640 393 $ 61,2t4,168 TOTAL 688 $ 143,15~,647 804 ~ $ 47,849,191 60 $ 13,405,691 324 $ 18,846,760 1,876 $ 223,2SS,28~ Additional value of mobile homes p~aced in existing parks is included in Residential Alteration Category. 2OO3 FOURTH QUARTER BUILDING REPORT County of Albemarle Dept. of Planning & Community Development Office of Geographic Data Services 401 Mclntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22902-4596 (434) 296-5823 INDEX I. Comparison of New Residential Dwelling Units by Month (Charts A & B) I1. Comparison of Residential Dwelling Units by Type (Charts C, D, & E) Ill. Comparison of All Building Permits (Chart F) KEY TO TYPES OF HOUSING REFERRED TO IN REPORT SF SFA SF~H DUP MF MHC AA Single-Family (includes modular) Single,Family Attached Single-Family Townhouse Duplex Multi-Family Mobile Home in the County (not in an existing park) Accessory Apartment -2- During the fourth quarter of 2003, 188 building permits were issued for 445 dwelling units. In addition. 2 permits were issued for mobile homes in existing parks at an average exchange value of $2.500. for a total of $5,000. I. Comparison of Residential Dwelling Units by'~jfpe Chart A. Nine Year Comparison of New Residential Dwelilng Units by Month MONTH 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 JAN 50 26 54 38 49 52 52 55 96 FEB 43 44 .44 39 84 43 39 348 34 MAR 47 61 57 65 65 54 54 74 ~06 APR 46 71 75 62 102 63 62 63 69 MAY 41 63 118 65 55 72 196 198 ~) JUN 62 41 89 85 75 50 181 117 64 JUL 51 87 59 74 69 56 46 235 54 AUG 44 105 34 221 56 65 55 64 61 SEP 56 64 48 68 6~ 49 32 72 60 OCT 42 186 216 61 48 48 86 308 74 NOV 66 43 49 48 42 49 36 48 41 DEC 48 44 62 48 57 49 36 138 330 TOTAL 596 835 905 874 770 650 875 1720 1079 Chart B. Three Year Comparison of New Residentia~ Dwelling Units by Month IChart B: Throe Year Comparison of New Residential D.U. by Month~ ! JAN FEB MAR APR MAY JUN JUL AUG sEP OCT NOV DEC MONTH tO2(X)I .2002 .2003] Prepered by the Alhomade County Office of Geographic Data Services Quater 4, 2003 [1. COMPARISON OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE Chart C. Breakdown of New Resk:~ential Dwelling Units by Magisterial District and Dwelling Unit Type MAGISTERIAL DWELLING UNit TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL DISTRICT SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC AA UNITS UN[TS RIO 12 4 4 0 0 1 0 21 JACK J OU E'l-i' 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 RIVANNA 18 8 0 0 280 0 0 306 69% SAMUEL MILLER 32 0 0 0 0 1 0 33 7% SCOTTSVILLE 24 4 0 0 0 0 0 28 6% WHITE HALL 39 4 13 0 0 0 0 56 13% TOTAL 126 20 17 0 280 2 0 445 100% Chart D. Breakdown or New Residential Dvelling Units I~y Compmhensiw Plan Ama and Dwelling Unit Type COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AREA DWELLING UNit TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL SF SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC AA UNITS UNITS URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD B 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% URBAN NEIGHBORHOOD 7 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% CROZET COMMUNITY 12 4 4 0 0 1 0 21 5% HOLLYMEAD COMMUNITY 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0% PINEY MOUNTAIN COMMUNITY lB 8 0 0 280 0 0 306 69% RiVANNA VILLAGE 32 0 0 0 0 1 0 33 7% DEVELOPMENT AREA SUBTOTAL 63 12 4 0 280 2 0 361 81% RURAL AREA 1 24 4 0 0 0 0 0 28 6°% RURAL AREA 2 39 4 13 0 0 0 0 56 13% RURAL AREA 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 O RURAL AREA 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% RURAL AREA SUBTOTAL 63 8 13 0 0 0 0 84 19% TOTAL 126 20 17 0 280 2 0 445 100% Prepared by the Albemarle County Oft-me of Gengmphic Data Services Quarter 4, 2003 II. COMPARISON OF RESIDENTIAL DWELLING UNITS BY TYPE (continued) Cha~t E. Breakdown of Residential Dwalling Units by Elementary School District and Dwelling Ualt Type SCHOOL DWELLING UNIT TYPE TOTAL % TOTAL DISTRICT BF I SFA SF/TH DUP MF MHC AA UNITS UNITS Agnor-Hurt 5 4 4 0 0 0 0 1:3 Baker Butler 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 Broadus Wood 10 0 0 0 0 0 0 10 2% Brownsville 10 0 3 0 0 9 0 13 3% Crozet 19 4 10 0 0 0 0 32 7% Greer 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0% Hotlymead 5 6 0 0 0 I 0 12 3% Meriwether Lewis 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 1% Murray 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2% Red Hill 14 0 0 0 0 I 0 15 Cale 7 4 0 0 280 0 0 291 65% Scottsville 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 J 5 1% Stone Robinson 20 2 0 0 0 0 0i, 22 5% Stony Point 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 1% Woedbmok 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 3 1% Yancey 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 9 2% TOTAL 126 20 17 0 280 2 0 445 100% IlL COMPARISON OF ALL BUILDING PERMITS Chart F. Estimated Cost of Construction by Magisterial District and Construction Type MAGISTERIAL NEW *NEW NON-RES. NEW COMMERCIAL FARM BUILDING TOTAL DISTRICT RESIDENTIAL & ALTER. RES. & NEW INSTITUT, & ALTER. COMM. No. Amounts No. Amounts No. Amount..$ No. Amounts i No. Amounts RIO 21 $ 2,761,785 18 $ 294,700 4 $ 1,143,000 34 $ 545,294 77 $ 4,744,769 JOUETT 1 $ 550,000 19 $ 5,858,044 0 $ 5 $ 33,225 25 $ 4,441,269 RIVAN NA 49 $ 18,470,074 37 $ 1,060,269 2 $ 425,000 13 $ 4S0,250 101 $ 20,435,593 S. MILLER 33 $ 8,044,751 32 $ 1,586,368 2 $ 12,500 8 $ 130,400 75 $ 9,774,019 BCOTTSVILLE 28 $ 7,999,920 24 $ 649,804 5 $ 95,000 9 $ 122,581 66 $ 8,867,30.~ WHITE HALL 56 $ 10,089,611 34 $ 1,405,287 5 $ 285,001 10 $ 135,100 105 $ 11,915,199 TOTAL 196 $ 47,916,341 164 $ 8,854,472 18 $ 1,960,501 79 $ 1,446,840 449 $ 60,178,154 * Additional value of mob{le homes placed in existing parks is included in Residential Alteration Category. PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET FOR FY 2004/2005 & THE FY 2004-0512008-09 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM. The following ~uidelines will be used for this public bearing:. . . .EACH' SPEAKER IS'ArLO'FI'ED 3'MiNOTES. ' ' ' ... INDIVIDUALS CANNO]' RELINQUISH THEIR 3 MINUTES TO ANOTHER' SPEAKER:, : .... INDIVIDUALS CAN 0NLY. SIGN,UP ONE PERSON TO SPEAK. PLEASE GIVE ANY WRI'[~EN STATEMENTS ~'O THE CLERK.. ' 1/ NAME (Please print clearly) PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional) PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET FOR FY 2004~2005 & THE FY 2004-0512008-09 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM. The folloWing guidelines will be used for tl~is public hearing; EACH SPEAKER S ALLO]-[.E'D'3 J~ NUTES. NDIVIDUAr.S CANNOT RELINQUISH THEIR 3.MINUTES TO' ANOTHER SPEAKER. ,. INDIVIDUALS CAN ONLY SIGN'UP ONE PERSON. TO SPEAK. ' '" : P. LEAS'E .Gly~ ANY WRITTEN S'~ATEMENTS.TO THE CLERK, NAME (Please print clearly) ~0 39 ~tU ~ PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional] PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET FOR FY 200412005 & THE FY 2004-05/2008-09 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM. The folloWing guidelines will be dsed.for this public .hearir~g: . ' . . . EACH'SPEAKER IS ALLOTTED 3 MINUTES.' .... ' ' INDIVIDUALS CANNOT RELINQUISH. THEIR 3, MINUTES TO ANOTHER. SPEAKER. ' ' ' INDIVIDUALS CAN ONLY SIGN UP ONE PE~RS0N TO' SPEAK. · P. LEASE' GIVE' ANY WRITTEN: STATEMENTS. TO THE CI~ER.K. · NAME (Please print clearly) 46 /,~/.~-7'"-/-/-o¢¢ Y" "'~-,¢'C..-.-, PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional) PLEASE SIGN BELOW IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK ON THE COUNTY EXECUTIVE'S RECOMMENDED OPERATING BUDGET FOR FY 2004/2005 & THE FY 2004-05/2008-09 CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PROGRAM. follo~ihg' guidelineS, wiil bb used for thi~ public, flea'lng: E~CR .$ PEAKER IS A[~LOTTED 3 MINUTES.. 'INDIVIDUALS CANNOT RELINQUISH THEIR 3 MIN,.UTES TO A~IO'I:HER ' SPEAKER. · · INDIVIDUAES'CAN oNI~Y,SIGN'UP, ONE PERSON'TOi' SPEAK:.: PLEASE G!VE ANY WRITTEN STATEMENTS TO THE CEERK., NAME (Please print clearly) 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 PHONE NUMBER/ADDRESS (Optional) I.,U W ~JJ © 00-- 0 0 ~ 0 0 0 .~ 0 -- C~ ~-~o Churches of Albemarle County Share the Blessings Thanksgiving Dinner This program was developed to target those who are sick. eIdedy, or with financial aha social circumstances that would prevent their children from experiencing Thanksgiving. The program provides a Thanksgiving meal proportionate to the number of individuals in the family. We strive for each family to have a whole turkey with sides of potatoes, dressing, gravy, mils, green beans and pie. We do not require proof of financial status in order for participate in this program: however we have established a few guidelines to make the most efficient use of our resources: They are as follows: · We must have your request by November 7, 2003. · All information requested on our form must be provided to us using our form. (Leave nothing blank) · We cannot serve a family without a telephone number for Contact. If the recipient does not have a phone or cannot provide a retiable contact number, the requestor (usually Social Services or School Guidance Official) must be willing to be the contact person and assist us with arranging for pick-up or delivery. · In order to serve more families, a fult UNCOOKED meal will be provided on November 23rd. Cooked meals will be available on November 27th ONLYforthosewith circumstances that would prevent them from cooking for themselves. An example of that would be elderly or sick individuals, children left to their own means etc. Request Form Name of Recipient: Address: City. Zip Recipient's Phone #: (or name of contact person & relationship to recipient) # of Adults eating: # of Children eating Pick 1 --. Uncooked Meal --. Cooked Meal November 22. 2002 November 27, 2002 ~ick ' Pick-up at Crozet Baptist Cl Pick-up at County Office Bu Pick-up Sco~sville Element~ Pick-up Walton Middle Schc: Sutherland Middle School: Stone Robinson Elemen~ Deliver, recipient ~ust be (Please rese~e deli arkJng arking ot arking lot arking lot arking lot Tonight you will hear many people talk about the WONDERFUL School System we have here. I too could tell you of the wonderful teachers I have had the honor of working with, instead, I wish to bring up 2 other items. While I support the people behind me who are here for the teachers, I would like you to remember the STAFF WORKERS: The Nurses, TAs, janitorial staff, bus drivers and so on. These people are often overlooked, yet without them, the schools could not function. And this request is for the all the staff workers of this county. Like those who work in this very building...those who are waiting for us to leave so that they can get on with their work. What kind of a raise will they receive? Or more important, what kind of salary do you offer these people? There is a term referring to salaries for these workers, it is called A Living V~age! ][ would disagree, their wages are not living. This leads into my 2nd point....The Tax Decrease and Wasted Revenues. How much money have you wasted on studies concerrfmg our transportation problems? Think of the Meadowcreek Parkway, the way YOU design it, having it NOT for truck traffic, it cannot be considered an alternate roadway for the proposed by-pass. This year the Senators and Delegates of this Commonwealth scolded you for your lack of vision and your contempt for the communities south of us. So while you waste so much money on these on going studies, you are now proposing a tax decrease. One which will only reduce the amount of money the County would have to pay its workers, and improve the quality of life of all residents. You know that when things get tight, you will only raise our property assessments. Can't you be honest, raising assessments is rasing taxes! And this tax decrease will only amount to about $50 a year for the average hOme owner yet it will cost the schools over 1.1 million dollars. I'll end here with this...Stop wasting money on inadequate road works; work with the State to develop REAL solutions to our transportation problems; and most of ali, leave the tax rate as it is, so that there is enough revenue to take care of our fmanciaI problems, today! Albemarle County RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING Date:~~ Agenda Rem #: Clerk's In[tials:~ 6ood evening. Tonight my fellow board members and Z are here to thank you for your past support and to urge your funding of our request, There are four major points I~d like to emphasize. The first is compensation. More than 80% of our request is for improved teacher and employee compensation. We are losing ground in our ability to attract the best teachers and administrators to Albemarle ¢ounty...and to retain teachers once they're here. Annually we hire more than twice the number of teachers than any division in the region. We are currently loosing 6070 of our teachers during their first three years...a statistic the private sector would not tolerate. And with nearly 3070 of our most experienced teachers and administrators eligible to retire in the next three years, we must address competitive compensation now. Point number two; This request restores critical support to our schoo s, supporting the work of our educators For example, in recent years we've held off on bus and computer replacements. Mr. Dottier sow firsthand the computer replacement needs when he and I recently toured schools in the southern feeder I~ttern. Because of cutbacks for several years our schools have accumulated a backlog of maintenance requests. Now is the time to address these needs, before we fall further behind and begin to put our educational programs at risk. Point number three: Will Rogers said" You can be on the riqht track but if you sit still you'll be run over". This request identifies and supports program and curriculum improvements to move our school system "train" forward into the global economy of the 2lst Century. Technology is essential for quality instruction; and we've requested additional technical staff support. Teaching positions for our growing limited English -1- speaking population are requested. With the SOLs and the Leave No Child I~ehind Act we ore now generating large amounts of student data allowing more personalized instruction. In order to fully utilize that data for all students, and especially our children who fall within the achievement gap, we must create internal efficiencies in the way we store and access the information. And, to move from a ~OOD school system to a GP, EAT school system, we must fund staff development in areas beyond 50[. preparation. Fourth and finally, this funding request shows we are qood stewards of taxpayer dollars. In the past we've implemented cost-cutting strategies in many ways: years of level-funding school operating costs, reduction in departmental budgets, changing school starting times to reduce the number of buses we use, phasing in gifted and literacy programs over several years to minimize their one-time financial impact, implementing hiring freezes when necessary, and restructuring central office to create efficiencies. We also demonstrate we are qood stewards of taxpayer dollars throuqh our results. Our system performs in the top Z0% of all school divisions in the state. We urge your careful attention to our proposed request. Thank you. -2- Good evening. Tonight my fellow board members and I are here to thank you for your past support and to urge your funding of our request. There are four major points I'd like to emphasize. The first is compensation. More than 80% of our request is for improved teacher and employee compensation. We are losing ground in our ability to attract the best teachers and administrators to Albemarle County...and to retain teachers once they're here. Annually we hire more than twice the number of teachers than any division in the region. We are currently loosing 60% of our teachers during their first three years...a statistic the private sector would not tolerate. And with nearly 30% of our most experienced teachers and administrators eligible to retire in the next three years, we must address competitive compensation now. Point number two: This request restores critical support to our schools, supporting the work of our educators. For example, in recent years we've held off on bus and computer replacements. Mr. barrier saw firsthand the computer replacement needs when he and I recently toured schools in the southern feeder pattern. E~ecause of cutbacks for several years our schools have accumulated a backlog of maintenance requests. Now is the time to address these needs, before we fall further behind and begin to put our educational programs at risk. Point number three: Will Rogers said" You can be on the riqht track but if you sit still you'll be run over". This request identifies and supports program and curriculum improvements to move our school system "train" forward into the global economy of the 2:~st Century. Technology is essential for quality instruction; and we've requested additional technical staff support. Teaching positions for our growing limited English -]- speaking populotion are requested. With the SOLs and the Leave No Child Behind Act we are now generating large amounts of student data allowing more personalized instruction. Zn order to fully utilize that data for all students, and especially our children who fall within the achievement gap, we must create internal efficiencies in the way we store and access the information. And, to move from a GOOD school system to a GREAT school system, we'must fund staff development in areas beyond SOb preparation. Fourth and finally, this funding request shows we are good stewards of taxpayer dollars. ;In the post we've implemented cost-cutting strategies in many ways: years of level-funding school operating costs, reduction in departmenta budgets, changing school starting times to reduce the number of buses we use, phasing in gifted and literacy programs over several years to minimize their one-time finoncial impact, implementing hiring freezes when necessary, and restructuring central office to create efficiencies. We also demonstrate we are good stewards of taxpayer dollars throuqh our results. Our system performs in the top I0% of all school divisions in the state. We urge your careful attention to our proposed request. Thank you. -2- RECENED AT BOS Agenda Item #:_ Comments from Brian Wheeler to Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on 2004-2005 Budget March 10, 2004 My name is Brian Wheeler. I am the parent of two children in County schools and I am the At-Large member of the Albemarle County School Board. Our chairwoman, Diantha McKeel, has already spoken to you in her official capacity representing the School Board and I fully support her comments. I am speaking tonight as citizen to demonstrate my support for full funding of our County's education needs and the maintenance of Atbemarle's current tax rate. As you know, we have some new challenges that have arisen since the beginning of the budget process, namely the uncertainties related to the costs of VRS and the revenues we will receive in the state budget. Based on what we know today, it would be a mistake to back away from the decision this community made in 2000 to raise taxes to better support our schools. Those investments have been successful AND we have more challenges we need to address. When we measure our student performance, we are in the top 10% of all school divisions in the Commonwealth. When we measure our investments in education, we see we are getting a tremendous value for our education tax dollar. We are able to do that because of the hard work of this system's employees, and to them I say, "Thank you for a job well done." However, this budget recognizes that we cannot continue down this path of trader ftmding education, rinsing the bar higher, and continually expecting our staff to get the job done absent additional support and resources. It also recognizes that we have many challenges in front of us for which we are going to need an exceptional cadre of teachers and administrators to be Brian Wheeler · (434) 984-2233 · bwheeler®a[bemarlematters.com · www.whee[eronboard.com successful. High on that list of challenges for me are the achievement gaps that are leaving some in this community behind. The warning signs have been made very clear: · This level of performance will not continue if we cannot pay our employees a salary that allows them to fred affordable housing in our community. · This level of performance will not continue if we do not reward our employees for their accomplishments. · This level of performance will not continue if we cannot attract and retain the best teachers in the face of growing retirements and nationwide teacher shortages. Mrs. McKeel mentioned the high rate of teacher turnover... 60% in the first three years. I am a businessman in the private sector, I know what high turnover costs my firm in lost investments in training, recruiting costs, and processing new hires and terminations. My turnover rate is much smaller, yet I am having to add technical staff to keep up with the chum. Imagine the costs m our schools. Those dollars could be invested more wisely in competitive compensation. Yes, more money for public schools has been an evergreen rallying cry for parents as well as teachers in Albemarle. It should not have to be that way, but the fact is we are not fully funding education in Virginia and the localities are being forced to pick up the tab. As part of the budget I asked staff to tell us what the state was not paying Albemarle ro fund the Standards of Quality (SOQ), we determined that Albemarle should have received an additional $3.86 million in SOQ funding in the 2002-03 school year alone. tfthe state starts paying its fair share, we can and should keep taxes as Iow as possible. Until that happens, even with escalating property values, we have ro increase our investments in education to ensure this school division and all/ts children will be successful. Counties like Albemarle can, and should, step up to the plate to keep improving our public schools. It is not fair that state funding is inadequate, but it is the smart investment for our County's children and our furore. We can only ~mprove with market-competitive compensation that ensures this system has highly qualified teachers, administrators, and support staff. Sign below to state your support for the Superintendent's Budget Request and your disapproval of the $,02 tax decrease. This [ist Will be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their headng on March 10. Sign below to state your support for the Superintandent's Budget Request and your disaPproval of the $102 tax decrease. This list wilJ be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their headng on March 10. 36. 37. 38. 39. 41. 42. 45. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. RECEJVED AT BOS MEETING g enda - ,, Good Evening. My name is Shelley Payne. Tonight, I am ~pre.~,i,y L,,~ ~ecutive Boards at both Burley Middle S~ool and Stone-Robinson Elementa~ addition, I have these lists of signature, i~ormally ~llected at~PTO events held at each s~ool, to present to you. retaining high quality teachers. Our students peflorm above state averages on almost eve~ standard. This su~ss is in I~ge pa~ to ~e ex~llent teachers employed by our schools. ~~acher~ arc~.~ ~. ~+ ~ ma~eve~ " ." ' ' , .......... ~ .~,., ~ ~ ~ ................ r~ Olearly, with 300 of our most senior teachem eligible to retire in the next two years, higher salaries available Dom neighboring school divisions and only a 40% retention rate for newly,hired teachers, we need to have a competitive sa~ package to meet these ahallenge~ we must do this without ;, .~ ~_ ' ' increasing class size or eliminating a~demic programs. I hopo you a~roo and voto to fully fu~d tho 8~ool ~oard's fundin~ roquost. I also h~vo bocomo more infq~od about the proposod propo~ tax roduction from $0.7~ ~OceF~n to $0.74 per $100. Given ~he~ status of funding from the state and the proposed contributions mandate, ' .... - ~$.5 ;~:~~, a proposed t~ decre~e seems ve~ unwise. FuRher, in reading Mr. Tuckers' Budget Message, he writes, "With a proposed real est~e prope~ t~ rate of $0.74 per $100, Albemarle County would continue to have the lowest t~ rate for any ~un[y in Virginia with a ~pulation ov~ 70,000." - which means that we already have the lowest t~ rate at the current level of $0.76. However, due to the rev~ue shari~ agr~ment, we a~ually operate on a net properly t~ of $0.66 - this rate Js less than the smaller, more rural ~unfies of Frederick and RockJngham and is the same as Bedford's. This tax de~se is a~b~t shodsighted and at worst will pla~ many of our essential se~i~s in jeopardy. Finally, I acknowledge that our properly assessments have increased significantly in the past few years. This is a result of a vibrant real estate market, and while it makes our tax payments higher, it means that our real estate investments are growing more valUable. However, if there are people in this county who have difficulty with their tax burden due to fixed income or property values many times more than their long-ago, original purchase price, there are better, more targeted ways to assist them than a broad-brush tax decrease. I encourage the Board to consider more targeted approaches to help these specific individuals while keeping the tax rate for the vast majority that can afford it at its current level of $0.76 per $100. Public Hearing Board of Supervisors March 10, 2004 Remarks from the Gifted Advisory Committee: My name is Blaine Norurn and I am the chairperson of the Gifted Advisory Committee to the Albemarle School Board. Our charge is to advise the School Board of the educational needs of all gifted students in the division. Albemarle County is noted for its quality of life. With a university at the center, this community values and supports education. The community has hig~h expectations for its public schools and wants nothing but the best. Citizens expect · quality education that prepares children for the new and ever-changing challenges of the 21st century workplace, · dedicated teachers willing and able to respond to the needs of a diverse student population and the increasing expectations for accountability in terms of student achievement, and · a full complement of academic programming designed to challenge and engage all students at their own levels. Our community does not expect average schools. Rather, our community wants any discussion of our schools phrased in terms of how good we can make them rather than how little we can get by with doing. The Gifted Advisory Conm~ittee strongly supports all the initiatives that the School Board has deemed essential to a quality education and has presented in its proposed budget. In the proposed budget, we see several initiatives that we believe are essential to this goal. Among the initiatives that we specifically commend are the proposed teacher salary scale increases, the staff development/curriculum institute initiative, the teacher performance appraisal plans, and the data-warehousing project. Attracting and retaining the highest quality teachers requires competitive salaries. Currently, a starting teacher cannot afford the average rent in Charlottesville, a 30ryear veteran can't qualify for the average priced home here, and a 13 year veteran in Fairfax would be making about $60,000 vs. the $40,000 that a similar teacher is making here. Research indicates that the single most important factor affecting student achievement is the qd~-~o~~ - classroom. Why woa]d we want to be an:~hing less th~,~-he~2- ?utfing the best teacher possible in eve~ classroom is certainly the most direct way to influence quality instruction for all students. Providing ongoing professional development for those teachers is essential to sustaining quality instruction. Thus, we value the budget directive to continue the professional development and 'curriculum initiatives currently underway. Teacher performance appraisal plans and the data-warehousing projects are tools that allow teachers and school leaders to more effectively achieve their goals. These initiatives also garner our support. Beyond the needs incorporated in the proposed budget, we stand before you tonight to address our interest in needs as yet unmet. In particular, our committee has recommended that the School Board fund some of the costs associated with college course work needed by high ability students enrolled in our schools. Our committee has examined enrollment in Advanced Placement and other college level courses for the past three years. We found that participation in college course work and AP test-taking have increased annually. As a matter of fact, college course participation has more than doubled in the last four years - evidence of a strong demand on the part of our students to take rigorous courses. However. with more students taking college-level courses and with students taking more college level courses per person, the expense incurred by families is significant ($80/AP test this year; up to more than $200/college credit hour). Currently, no funds are allocated to support AP test participation or college credit options. Thus, this strong drive for increased rigor on the part of our students is placing an increasingly excessive burden on many families. In the last school year, there were over 1200 AP course registrations in the division; if all registrations resulted in an exam taken, families would have incurred a combined expense of approximately $100,000. The need for college level course funding is an example of a need that has not yet been included in the proposed school division budget. With many competing demands for the limited funds allocated to the division, the School Board remains unable at present m support this request. Thus, we urge the Board of Supervisors to find the funds to do what is necessary for our students. If that entails a tax increase rather than a decrease, then so be it. This community wants the brightest future for its children. It expects the best schools that we can provide and we challenge you to make them possible. P, ECENED AT BOS ~EETJNG Remarks of -- Befo~ ~e Alb~le CounW Bo~d o~$~ Re.lng the Propo~d ~~~~ W~n~day, March ~0, 2~4 ~ Good evening, 1VKster Chairman; Supervisor Thomas; and gentlemen of the Board. My name is Chip Deule, and I come before yon in multiple capacities: · As the four-term president of the Crozet Elementary School PTO. · As a representative of Henley's Parent and Teacher Snpport Organization, · As the president-elect of the Albemarle County Schools Parent Council. · And, as a property owner with an abiding interest in seeing that my tax dollars are effectively utilized. My message this evening is one you've already heard.. ~ will hear again throughont the evening.., and, in my opinion, cannot be heard often enough: Ist, fully fund the School Board's funding request. And, 2aa, do not reduce the property tax rate. The proposed school budget you have received is not one that is filled with "bells and whistles". Rather, it is a document that provides for the basic needs of over 12,000 students; the outstanding faculty that teaches these individuals; and the physical plants in which their learning takes place. In short, it's a budget that provides for the county's continued excellence and provides our youth with the skills needed to succeed in the workforce. Anything less than full funding potentially halts the progress our schools are enjoying; denies the teachers the compensation they deserve: and runs the risk of sending our schools in a backward direction - all of which are unacceptable options. Shortchange our students and teachers, and you shortchange the entire county. Don't let that happen. Find the money to fullv fund the School Board's request! 2 Supervisor Wyant: Your election campaign included support for quality education in the county. Be true to what you pledged. With your vote on the budget, show me as a constituent and the hundreds of families on whose behalf I am speaking this evening that you truly are committed to those campaign pledges and that they were not simply empty promises. Do not let us down. The Board can start in the proper direction right now by banishing any farther consideration of a reduction in the property tax rate. Even contemplating a rate reduction is an illogical response to what County Executive Tucker has self- described as a "recovery" budget. Walking away from over $2 milfiou in county revenues is a risk that the Board of Supervisors simply cannot afford to take. Do'mg so would rob the county of vital assets that are needed -- for education and/or other services. Reducing the tax rate would not he a trmancial windfall for anyone. But, collectively, the reduction would have a significant impact on county resources. You already have heard, and will hear again, that the reduction would have an average savings for households of I5 cents a day. For me, the savings would be a 3 whopping 19 cents -about 4 tootsie rolls a day. To which I say: No way! Gi~e mine to education! Thank you. Sign below to state your support for the Su pedntendent's Budget Request and your disapproval of the $.02 tax decrease. This list will be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their hearing on March 10. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 23. 24. 25. 26. Good evening. My name is Tom Pajewsld and I would like m speak to you on behalf of the Albemarle County Schools Parent Council. The Parent Council is comprised of representatives from each of the county's elementary, middle and high schools. The Parent Council represents the interests oF the county's public school education community, namely parents, teachers, administrators, and, above all, the students. As a community, we have demanded excellence from our teachers and from our students. Thanks to excellent instruction by outstanding teachers, our students have demonstrated several notable achievements: 1. Performance on the state mandated SOL exams continues.to improve in all schools. Ninety percent of our students passed the Grade 11 SOL reading exam in 2003. 2. Our students' performance on the Stanford 9. which you know is a standardized test administered throughout our nation, is in the top ten percent of all Virginia schools. 3. An impressive 81% of our 2003 graduates took the SAT exam. This is a much higher percentage than many other localities. In spite of this, our graduates earned the highest scores in cotmty history, exceeding not only state but also national averages. 4. And finally, let us not forget that already24 of 25 schools met the state's 2006-07 requirements for full accreditation. Putting ali this together, it is easy to tmderstand ~.t why Albemarle County Public Schools are recogxtized as performing in the top ten percent of all school districts across Virginia. As parents, taxpayers, and supporters of quality public education in Albemarle County, we believe that it is of vital importance that our schools receive the needed support from our Board of Supervisors. So that we could clearly demonstrate to you~our position on next year's budget, I would like to read m you a two-part Resolution that we unanimously adopted at our March 2nd meeting. First, the Parent Council strongly endorses full funding of the Albemarle County School Board's 2004 - 2005 needs-based funding request of $115.4 million, and commends the School Board for its unanimous approval of the proposed funding request at its February 17th meeting. The Council is resolute in its belief that the School Board's funding request, particularly its increased focus on teacher compensation, is critical to the Albemarle County school division's sustained goal of superior academic achievement and its vision of providing a learning environment that enhances the attaimnent of 2 lsT century skills for our children. Second, the Parent Council supports efforts to maintain the existing property tax rate of $0.76 per $100 of assessed value, and opposes any reduction in that rate. ]?he Council believes that consideration by the county Board of Supervisors of a tax rate reduction to $0.74 is a politically expedient but fiscally irresponsible action that, if adopted, would result in minimal savings for taxpayers - while causing both inunediate and long-term negative ramifications for the overall quality of life in Albemarle County, by unnecessarily reducing needed funding for public education and other vital resources that benefit the entire community. We believe that the Board of Supervisors has the mandate to fully fund Dr. Castner's needs-based funding request. Please do what we all know is right for the students and for Albemarle County. Thank you for your time and consideration. PIEDMONT ENVIKONMENTAL COUNCIL Promoting and £ro~ec~ng the Piedmont's rural economy, natural resources, hirtory and beaut~ Presentation to the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Regarding Funding for ACE in the County Executive's Budget March 10, 2004 Since 1972, the Piedmont Environmental Council has worked to promote and protect th~ area's rural economy, natural resources, cultural and historic resources, and scenic ~ beauty. Thanks to the stewardship of Piedmont landowners and the diligence of the ~ Virginia Outdoors Foundation and other groups, over 190,000 acres now lie protected~ under permanent conservation easement in our nine county region. This is one of the ~ largest collections of privately protected land in the country. One of our biggest priorities has been to help create, support, and promote Albemarle County's purchase of development rights program - the ACE Program. We lmve been involved hq the process from the beginning, and continue to be a strong advocate today. We encourage you to restore funding for ACE to its original $1 million per year level. When a landowner wants to protect his or her property but can't afford to donate a conservation easement, we all turn to ACE. ACE enjoys great popular support. Just as important though, ACE is a very effective program. Here are some results compiled by county staff. Through the first two funding cycles of ACE: · $2,079,700 spent ($1,829,700 in county fimds, $250,000 in state fimds) · 9 conservation easements recorded · 2,202 acres protected · 6 working family farms preserved · 786 acres of prime farmland preserved · 933 acres protected in watershed of SFRR, a public drinking water source · 5,168 feet along scenic highway/entrance corridor protected · 93 acres of mountaintop land protected · 141 potential development lots eliminated in the rural area · Costs - $944/acre protected ($831/acre in county funds) As this information indicates, ACE is providing concrete results that are helping to reach many of the objectives in the county's Comprehensive Plan. Further, it is being done in a very cost-effective manner. In 2002 & 2003 in Loudoun County, the purchase of development rights program spent $13.17 million in loeal and federal funds to protect 2,535 acres, for a cost per acre 6t' $5,195. This is more than 5 times greater than the ACE expenditures on a per acre basis. By wisely spending money to reduce potential development in the rural area now, we can avoid waging an expensive and losing effort to (OVER) © I-Ieadquarters Albemarle Cl.-ttke I~Omtoun Orange ,540 3-1~ 21~'3.~i . ~ · ~'ilidm-16aic:?i!~c .V.¥.2290,~ ' .~0-953.9~)00. 703 669..4990 . ' ()rot)Sc, VA 22960 Rapl)',tha~mock [ 2717 l.cc Highw,:) protect the countryside, as is happening in northern Virginia. Albemarle County is saving money in the long run by minimizing the need to provide costly public services m the rural area. The applicants in the third funding cycle of ACE represent another group of important properties. Of the original eight applicants, six landowners are moving forward with easements. These landowners represent a total of 1,522 acres and many outstanding conservation values. One of the six easements is actually complete, and county staff anticipates the remaining five will go to closing in the very near future. ACE continues to be an attractive option to many rural landowners, and it will continue to attract quality applicants. Given the success of this program, the rising costs of land. and the long-term economic benefits to Albemarle taxpayers, it does not make sense to reduce the funding for ACE. Please fund it at the $1,000,000 level provided over its first few years. In the long nm, taxpayers, farmers, elected officials--all of us--will be the better for it. David Hannah Currituck Farm Jacob's Run Ag/Forastal District P. O. Box 207 Earlysville VA 22936 March 10, 2004 Dear M~mber~ of the Board of Supervisors, In case I am home with a cow and calf tonight, I am sending you this letter in support of full funding for continuation of the ACE program. While I am on the ACE committee, I am speaking for myself, not with an approved consensus of the committee. Hopefully the other members will speak for thernselves. I have heard a claim that funds will be carded over from last year's budget and that $350,000 of tourism money will have to do. As I r~member it, the previous spending has been thr~ years of $1 million per year and one year of $800,000. At ACE committee meetings I have trouble keeping the years straight, therefore I have classified them as follows: 00-01 was the Jimmy Powell group, 01 was Huffh Gildea group, 02-03 was the Marshall and Kindrick group (some of these properties are yet to close) and 03-04 (the year of the $800,000 budget) is in process now. Applications were accepted last summer, 03, and five properties have been recommended for appraisal. If appraisals and acceptances flfll in predicted ranges, then we might have $15 - 20, ~00 to carry over, This might help with closing costs and appraisals for another group. First the carryover: Thc approval process is a bit cumbersome, as recent participants will attest, The 02-03 prol~mes have bun approved, offers to purchase have been sent, acceptances have been received from the l~down~rs, and we are all waiting (since December or January) for the county attorney sUdito complete the paperwork, This delay does not mean that the funds have not been needed or allocated. It means that the checks have not yet been signed, Frankly this kind of delay drives me to distraction and makes the landowners rightly upset. The ACE committee recently asked the County Executive to assign a line item in the budget to this program. We are now in the middle of thc fourth year. Over 3000 acres has already been covered by deeded easea~ents. Over 1000 ac,res more are in process. Any way yo.u. do the ma. fh, you might agree that those acres could contain many houses and many school children. Having a reliable source of fund~ for the program will encourage more people to participate. In this world of pay now or pay later, it seems better to pay now, rather than pay much more later for schools, roads, _. There is huge support across the county for this program to purchase conservation easements. The I~ARL survey asked residents to choose two aspects of life which were most worthy of protectmn. 69.7% chose Natural beauty / rural landscape, while 60 ~ chose small town ~nvironment, Farming was third choice at 30%, 80% of respondents'wanted programs to support enhancement of the rural aspects of the area, 30*/0 of our respondents actually said they would pay more to support this program Similar results wer~ found in the 2003 countywide input meetings for the Rural Area review of the Comprehensive Plan. t'Notes are from the KA worksession 9-2-03 70% wanted most of thc growth in the development area, 73% favored "l-rural" meaning Invest residential development. Another 24% chose "2-rural" on a 1-4 scale where 4 equaled suburban. 97.3% wanted to look at farms, forests and natural areas rather than suburbs in the rural area, A broadly supported and fair way to achieve the goals stated above is the ACE program. People from all perspectives appreciate that the program is voluntary and that landowners are paid fair market value for the "easement," the difference in appraised value between their land as subdivision and as open space, Others support it because it is a powerful tool to achieve hard edges between the rural and the growth areas, All of the candidates for the last supervisor's race said they favored the program. Protection of open space is a guiding principle in many areas of the comprehensive plan. The recent drought brought our collective water needs into clear view.-Page 37 of the draii states "the link between forests and the continued proteotion of the county's water resources cannot be overstated." Page 39 states "recognition of conservation as a use of land is crucial to protection of essential natural resources such as water. Conservation ranks with agricultural and forestal uses as one of the most prevalent and important uses of land in the rural areas, They are ranked equally, The Ag/Forestal districts are slowly shrinking, as land in the program is taken out and subdivided. Hopefully stronger penalties will be approved to slow this conversion. However, purchasing the easements removes the land permanently from development above one house per 100 acres. Open space protection is touted as a lynchpin for dean water, olean air, peaceful quality oflif~, traffic prevention, and the preservation of farming as a viable economic enterprise, We need to preserve our agricultural land in order to preserve the farms, which feed us all and cost us little. For generations the farm families have done the work and absorbed the costs of providing open space for the rest of the community. It behooves us all to make a down payment on that open space. Removing development pressure may result in young farmer families purchasing the laud and keeping it in active production. In the last 17 years, over 15,000 acres were converted to lots smaller than 21 acres. Over 19000 acres were turned into large parcels of 21 to 50 ~cras, That is 34,000 acres, almost half as many as the total acreage in the ag/forestal program. If the ACE program can help to keep land in agriculture, then I am for it. The money spent now will save much more money in the future, Thank you all for your help and happy spring. Sincerely, Ann Mallek Cow midwife Museum educator Fervent ACE supporter Parent Council Resolutions In Support of School Board's Funding Request And In Opposition to Tax Rate Reduc ion The Albemarle County Schools Parent Council repres~ county's public school education community parents, teachers, administrators and, most important, students. The Cot ncil is steadfastly committed to ensuring the highest possible standards ~f education in the school division. The Parent Council is comprised of arepresentative from each of the county's elementary, middle and high scho~ls. 1 At its March 2nd meeting, the Parent Council unanimously adopted the following two-part Resolution. nts the interests of the First, the Parent Co__u~,c_il strongly endorses full funding of the Albemarle County School Board s 2004 2005 needs-based funding request of$115.4 . million, and commends the School Board for its unanimous approval of the proposed funding request at its February 17th meeting. The Council is resolute in its belief that the School Board's funding request, particularly its increased focus on teacher compensation, is critical to [he Albemarle County school division's sustained goal of superior academic achievement and its vision of providing a learning environment that enhances the attainment of 1 century skills for our children. Second, the Parent Council supports efforts to maintain the existing property tax rate of $0.76 per $100 of assessed value, and oppo,ses any reduction in that rate. The Council believes that consideration by the county Board of Supervisors of a tax rate reduction to $0.74 is a politic411y expedient but fiscally irresponsible action that, if adopted, would res~tlt in minimal savings for taxpayers - while causing both immediate and long-term negative ramifications for the overall quality of life in Albemarl~ County, by unnecessarily reducing needed funding for public education and other vital resources that benefit the entire community. SCI !001., B U'DGET SI..'PPORT Sign below to state your support for the Superintendent's Budget Request and your disapproval of the ~i.02 tax decrease. This list will De presented to the Board of Supervisors at their headng on March 10. 46. / 51. 5~ . 88. 89. 90. Sign below to state your support for the Superintendent's Budget Request and your disapproval of the $.02 tax decrease. This list will be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their hearing on March 10. 6. 8. 10.[ 11. 12. , 13, 14. 15. 16.1 17. ~8. I 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. ' 25. 26. Sign below to state your support for the Superintendent's Budget Request and your disapproval of the $.02 tax decrease. This list will oe presented to the Board of Supervisors at their hearing on March 10. .8';C}-[O.('):lz B U I).G I,, I',',S L,'P.PO.R .I: Sign below to state your support for the Superintendent's Budget Request and your disapproval of the $ 02 tax decrease. This list will be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their hearing on March 10. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10, 11, 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. I8. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. ~7. ~00, ~0~. ~02. ~03. ~0~. ~05. 106. 107. lO& 109. 110. ~11~ 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120 121 122. Sign below to state your support for the School Board's Funding Request and your disapproval of the $.02 tax decrease. This list will be presented to the Board of Supervisors at their hearing on March 10. _L RECEIVED AT BOS MEETING KENNETH O.LEE 354 Key West Drive A~,~nda item #: Charlottesville, Virginia 229 434/295-4525 18 February 2004 Board of Supervisors: I come here tonight as an advocate of effective education. I am not opposed to properly compensating effective teachers. I sumaise that many in the audience tonight are here at the behest of Superintendent Castner or one of his many advocates. Of course, if I were to attend to promote a raise in salary, as exemplified by the proposed budget for a 6 to 8% salary increase in addition to the pre-programmed step increases for years in service, I would do the same as most o you. ~xs a rettred executave, I only envy you. I had to showthat I was worth additional compensation, notwithstanding some corporate executive's salaries which have been in the news lately. I did not dare to bring my staff to a meeting such as this to support a budget which would increase my salary. I sincerely believe that most of us in the audience selected our career goal because we wanted to be an engineer, a nurse, or a teacher. My wife and I (she's still working) chose our careers because we loved what we did, are doing, You mean we get paid for doing this? We knew what we were getting into with our eyes wide open. its what we wanted to do! Some information in the press states that Albemarle County Teachers cannot afford tn live in the County, My goodness, early in my career I was working in New York City. I could not afford to live in NYC, so I hved in Levittown, some 40-50 miles from NYC, and paid the commutation fee. I suspect many of our teachers have made the same economic decisiows and live in Louisa, Fluvaona, Nelson, Greene, or elsewhere. IfI had my way, I would double the salary of performing teachers if the VEA would aquiesce. They want every teacher to be rewarded on the basis of time in service, not competence! What,prevents such a'policy? Bureaucray! We have been saddled with a superstmctnre of experts in every discipline. We have even hired a PR (spin doctor) person. I would like to have the job of Superintendent whereby I could refer any problem and maintain my distance from any problem. I would have my mahogany desk and Persian carpet, and stay aloof. I only have to propose a budget which includes a m/se for most employees, and I can get the support from all my staff. Money doesn't assure education. I this were so, Washington, DC, would b~ave the greatest performing students. They pay the greatest amoont per student, yet they are at the bottom of performance, by any criteria. Reduce the budget request!