The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1998-10-07October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 1) 000288 A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October 7, 1998, at 9:00 a.m., Room 241, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Ms. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin and Ms. Sally H. Thomas. ABSENT: Mr. Walter F. Perkins. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis, and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 9:00 a.m. by the Chairman, Mr. Marshall. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. There were no other matters presented today. Agenda Item No. 5. Presentation: Certificate of Appreciation. Mr. Marshall presented a plaque containing a certificate of appreciation to Mr. Stephen C. Ayres for his six years of service as a County representa- tive on the Joint Airport Commission. Stephen contributed a number of hours, as well as his knowledge and skills, to the Commission in order to make the Airport the best it can possibly be. Stephen served as Chairman for three of the six years assisting with enhancements for commercial air service, market- ing of and promotion of airport services, and improvements to airport facili- ties. The Board and the County are grateful for Stephen's dedication to the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport. The Board wishes him well in future endeavors. Not Docketed: Mr. Tucker introduced Mr. Steve Allshouse, the new fiscal impact planner for the County. Steve is a graduate of the University of Colorado. He is in Charlottesville working on a master's degree in planning and economics at the University of Virginia. Agenda Item No. 6. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Ms. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve Consent Agenda Items 6.1 through 6.17, to pull Item 6.18 and place it on a regular agenda at a later date, and to accept the remaining items as information. (Note: Conversation about each item has been placed at the end of each individual item.) Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Item 6.1. Appropriation: EMS Recruitment and Retention Mini-Grant, $4,930.00 (Form ~98012) (deferred from Septen%ber 2, 1998). It was noted in the staff's report that the Virginia Department of Health, Office of Emergency Medical Services, has approved a mini-grant to provide funds to produce movie theater ads for recruitment purposes for volun- teer rescue squad members. This grant is specific for this purpose per an application made by the County's Recruitment & Retention Committee made up of volunteers across the County. The mini-grant is funded by a $4,930.00 Office of Emergency Medical Services grant. There is no local match. Staff acknowledges the concern about using this medium for reaching potential volun- teers but has learned that the grant must be used for this purpose or returned for use by another locality. Given these circumstances, staff requests that this award be appropriated and used for its intended purpose with the October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) 000~9 (Page 2) understanding that future grant applications be directed in other advertis- ing venues. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98012 in the amount of $4,930.00. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appro- priation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NI3MBER: 98012 FUND: GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES RECRUITMENT GRANT EXPENDITI/RE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1555 32011 300000 REVENI3E 2 1555 24000 240425 DESCRIPTION PURCHASED SERVICES TOTAL AMOUNT $4,930.00 $4,930.00 DESCRIPTION AMOI/NT EMS GRANT $4,930.0.0 TOTAL $4,930.00 Item 6.2. Appropriation: Soil and Water Conservation District, $10,834.00 (Form #98026). It was noted in the staff's report that at the September 2, 1998, meeting, the Board approved additional funding in the amount of $14,782.00 for the Soil and Water Conservation District to increase the Administrative Secretary's time from a 0.6 FTE to full-time. The amount has been revised downward to reflect actual costs based on an October 1 effective date. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98026 in the amount of $10,834.00. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appro- priation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NTJMBER: 98026 FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR SOIL CONSERVATION STAFFING EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGOR¥ 1 1000 82030 110000 1 1000 82030 210000 1 1000 82030 221000 1 1000 82030 231000 1 1000 82030 232000 1 1000 82030 270000 REVENUE 2 1000 51000 510100 DESCRIPTION SALARIES-REGULAR FICA VIRGINIA RETIREMENT SYSTEM HEALTH INSURANCE DENTAL INSURANCE WORKER'S COMPENSATION TOTAL DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND BALANCE TOTAL AMOUNT $8,466.00 648.00 950.00 734.00 22.00 14.00 $10,834.00 AMOUNT $10,834.00 $10,834.00 Item 6.3. Appropriation: Virginia Film Festival, $10,000.00 (Form #98027). It was noted in the staff's report that at the September 2, 1998, meeting, the Board approved funding in the amount of $10,000.00 to the Virginia Film Festival with funds provided from the County's Tourism Fund. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98027 in the amount of $10,000.00 to the Virginia Film Festival from the County's Tourism Fund. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day M~eting) (Page 3) By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appro- priation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98027 FUND: TOURISM PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR VIRGINIA FILM FESTIVAL STAFFING EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1810 72030 560409 1 1810 72030 568905 DESCRIPTION VIRGINIA FILM FESTIVAL TOURISM PROJECTS TOTAL AMOUNT $10,000.00 (10,000.00) $0.00 REVENUE DESCRIPTION TOTAL AMOUNT $0.00 Item 6.4. Appropriation: Charlottesville-Albemarle Planning Organiza- tion Grant, $38,948.00 (Form #98028). It was noted in the staff's report that the 1998-99 Unified Planning Work Program was prepared by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) for the Charlottesville Albemarle Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO). The program includes transportation studies and ongoing planning activities, including a Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) that lists road and transit improvement for the upcoming three years, and the Twenty-year Charlottesville Area Transportation Study (CATS) updated every five years. Other activities address traffic congestion reduction, City/County bicycle and pedestrian improvements, and public-private transit development. The work to be performed by the County will be funded by a $31,158.40 Federal Grant, a $3,894.80 State Grant, and a $3,894.80 transfer from the Planning Department's approved budget. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98028 in the amount of $38,948.00. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appro- priation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98028 FUND: GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATION OPERATIONS EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1208 81301 110000 1 1208 81301 350000 1 1208 81301 600100 1 1208 81302 110000 1 1208 81302 350000 1 1208 81302 600100 1 1208 81309 110000 1 1208 81309 310000 1 1208 81309 350000 1 1208 81309 600100 DESCRIPTION SALARIES-REGULAR PRINTING & BINDING OFFICE SUPPLIES SALARIES-REGULAR PRINTING & BINDING OFFICE SUPPLIES SALARIES-REGULAR CONSULTANT PRINTING & BINDING OFFICE SUPPLIES TOTAL AMOUNT $3,300.00 42 00 200 00 12,500 00 203 00 5,000 00 2,500 00 15,000.00 100.00 103.00 $38,948.00 REVENUE 2 1208 24000 240500 2 1208 33000 330009 2 1208 51000 512004 DESCRIPTION STATE GRANT FEDERAL GRANT LOCAL MATCH TOTAL AMOUNT $3,894.80 31,158.40 3,894.80 $38,948.00 Item 6.5. Appropriation: HUD Section 8 Housing Assistance, $1,524,744.00 (Form #98029). October 7, 1998 (Resular Day Meetins) 000291 (Page 4) It was noted in the staff's report that the Section 8 Housing Program is an ongoing rental assistance program offered by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Section 8-001 program provides housing assistance with 178 subsidies and is funded through June, 2002. The Section 8-002 program provides 34 housing vouchers. The Section 8-003 program provides housing assistance for 34 units. The final amount of the Federal HUD grant will be determined by the final amount of assistance rendered to residents. It is estimated that the grant 8-001 should be approximately $1,012,694.00, grant 8-002 should be approximately $232,026.00, and grant 8- 003 should be approximately $280,024.00, for a total of $1,524,744.00. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation Form #98029 in the amount of $1,524,744.00 By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appropriation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NLYMBER: 98029 FUND: GRANT PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR HUD PUBLIC ASSISTANCE GRANTS EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1227 81920 300205 1 1227 81920 312800 1 1227 81920 579001 1 1227 81921 300205 1 1227 81921 312800 1 1227 81921 579001 1 1227 81922 300205 1 1227 81922 312800 1 1227 81922 579001 DESCRIPTION ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-AUDIT HOUSING ASSISTANCE-PAYMENTS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-AUDIT HOUSING ASSISTANCE-PAYMENTS ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES PROFESSIONAL SERVICES-AUDIT HOUSING ASSISTANCE PAYMENTS TOTAL AMOUNT $921,012.00 400.00 91,282.00 213,359.00 200.00 18,467.00 256,608.00 200.00 23,216.00 $1,524,744 . 00 REVENU~ 2 1227 33000 330015 2 1227 33000 330016 2 1227 33000 330017 DESCRIPTION SECTION 8-001 GRANT SECTION 8-002 GRANT SECTION 8-003 GRANT TOTAL AMOUNT $1,012,694.00 232,026.00 280,024 . 00 $1,524,744.00 Item 6.6. Appropriation: Criminal Justice Planner Grant 99-C9168, $69,096.50 (Form #98030). It was noted in the staff's report that grant funds are being requested to continue to fund a criminal justice planner for the Jefferson Area Commu- nity Criminal Justice Board (CCJB) serving the nine participating localities under the Community Corrections Options Program. This grant has been approved for a third year. This position will collect data, assess criminal justice needs in the nine-county area and assist the CCJB in developing a strategic 'Plan for community criminal justice services. Although the position is housed and supervised at the Planning District Office, the position serves as staff to the CCJB. Project Director for the grant is James Camblos, Albemarle Commonwealth's Attorney. The criminal justice planner will be funded by a $45,892.00 Department of Criminal Justice Services (DCJS) grant and a $15,916.00 local match for a total of $61,347.00. The local match will be provided by the nine participating localities. The match for the County is being funded by current budgeted expenditures. Operations for the 1997-98 year resulted in a fund balance of $7,288.50. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98030 in the amount of $69,096.50. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appropriation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98030 FUND: GRANT October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 5) PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR CRIMINAL PLANNER GRANT EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1520 29409 300000 1 1520 29409 580300 DESCRIPTION PURCHASED SERVICES REFUNDS TOTAL AMOUNT $61,808.00 7,288.50 $69,096.50 REVENUE 2 1520 19000 190207 2 1520 19000 190216 2 1520 19000 190217 2 1520 19000 190218 2 1520 33000 330408 2 1520 51000 510100 2 1520 51000 512004 DESCRIPTION CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE CENTRAL VIRGINIA REGIONAL JAIL COLINTY OF GOOCHLAND COUNTY OF NELSON DCJS GRAI~T FUND BALANCE GENERAL FUND TRANSFER TOTAL AMOUNT $3,979.00 6,366.40 1,061.07 530.53 45,892.00 7,288.50 3,979.00 $69,096.50 Item 6.7. Appropriation: Education, $7,840.00 (Form #98031). It was noted in the staff's report that at its meeting on September 14, 1998, the School Board approved the following appropriations: The Stone Robinson PTO donated $4,500.00 to Stone Robinson Elementary School. The donation will be used to pay for a Volunteer Coordinator position at the school. Michael Klarman and Lisa Landsverk donated $500.00 to Greer Elementary School to help train teachers in technology for use with the Standards of Learning. The Shannon Foundation for Excellence in Public Education has made grant awards to several teachers in the Albemarle County Public Schools. The awards were made as follows: Jennifer B. Ferguson, Crozet Elementary School in the amount of $440.00; Jeanie Ballard in the amount of $180.00 and Linda Haskell in the amount of $400.00, both of Paul H. Cale Elemen- tary School; Susan Oliveri, Meriwether Lewis Elementary School, in the amount of $400.00; Jill Cline, Woodbrook Elementary School, in the amount of $250.00; Christine Putnam and Clover Taylor, Walton Middle School, in the amount of $500.00; Lisa Moot in the amount of $300.00 and Susan Temple in the amount of $370.00, both of Western Albemarle High School. These funds will support projects in Science, Social Studies, Reading, History, Geography and Math developed by the teachers such as Folk Tales, TAG bags, Colonial Days, Twentieth Century Music, American Studies, Microorga- nisms, Science with Art and C.L.A.S.S. Staff recommends that the Board approve the appropriations totaling $7,840.00, as detailed on Appropriation #98031. (Ms. Thomas said notes of appreciation should be sent to those people who contributed these funds including the $4500.00 to Stone Robinson Elemen- tary School. Ms. Humphris said she was pleased that individuals had given a substantial amount of money to an elementary school to help train teachers in technology. It is wonderful when members of the community step in and give of their own funds for that item. Ms. Thomas added that the Shannon Foundation for Excellence in Publication might be able to use the Board's letter in their raising of money.) By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appropriation was approved: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98031 FUND: GRANT/SCHOOL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: EDUCATIONAL DONATIONS AND SHANNON FOUNDATION GRANT October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 6) EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 2210 61101 135000 1 2210 61101 210000 1 2204 61411 580500 1 3502 60203 601300 1 3502 60206 601300 1 3502 60212 601300 1 3502 60214 601300 1 3502 60254 601300 1 3502 60302 601300 DESCRIPTION P/T CLERICAL FICA STAFF DEVELOPMENT INSTR MATERIALS INSTR MATERIALS INSTR MATERIALS INSTR MATERIALS INSTR MATERIALS INSTR MATERIALS TOTAL REVENUE CODE 2 2000 18100 181109 2 2000 18100 181109 2 3502 18000 181223 DESCRIPTION DONATION DONATION SHANNON FOUNDATION GRANT TOTAL AMOUNT $4,155.00 345.00 500.00 440.00 400.00 250.00 580.00 500.00 670.00 $7,840.00 AMOUNT $4,500.00 500.00 2,840.00 $7,840.00 Item 6.8. Appropriation: Emergency Communications Center (ECC), $38,316.00 (Form #98032). It was noted in the staff's report that the Executive Committee of the Emergency Communications Center Management Board recently approved several actions, transfers and expenditures within the ECC fund. Albemarle County is the fiscal agent for the ECC and therefore must appropriate Fund Balance monies. Approved the transfer and expenditure of $1,808.00 from the ECC Fund Balance to the ECC operating budget to be used toward the purchase of an emergency replacement of five-minute call check recording devices. This recording equipment is used for the Charlottesville Police Department's Police console. Approved the transfer of $15,000.00 from the ECC Fund Balance to this new contingency line item. In the past, transfers have had to be made from the Fund Balance to cover emergency or other expenditures. The creation of this line item will provide funding when needed without going through the current process. Approval would still be needed from the ECC Management Board Executive Committee before any expenditures could be made. Approved the transfer and expenditure of $3,908.00 from the Fund Balance to the ECC operation budget. This money will be used toward reimbursing employees who salaries were compressed. Approved the transfer and expenditure of $17,600.00 from the Fund Balance to the ECC operation budget. This money will be used to pay a consultant for the 800 MHZ Analog/Digital Simulcast Trunked Radio System RFP. Staff recommends that the Board approve the appropriations totaling $38,316.00 as detailed on Appropriation #98032. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appropriation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98032 FUND: EOC PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FUNDING FOR EQUIPMENT AND ESTABLISH- MENT OF A CONTINGENCY LINE ITEM EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION 1 4100 31041 800301- COMM EQUIP-REPLACEMENT 1 4100 31041 999999 CONTINGENCY 1 4100 31040 110000 SALARIES AMOUNT $1,808.00 15,000.00 2,550.00 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 7) 1 4100 31041 110000 SALARIES 1 4100 31041 312700 CONSULTANTs TOTAL REVENLTE CODE 2 4100 51000 510100 1,358.00 17,600.00 $38,316.00 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT FUND BALANCE $38,316.00 TOTAL $38,316.00 000Z94 Item 6.9. Appropriation: Allocation of Budgeted Decompression Funds to Departments, $130,470.00 (Form #98033). It was noted in the staff's report that as a result of implementing the 1996 Hendricks pay plan and previous pay studies, the salaries of some county employees with varying years of experience have been "compressed', relatively close to one another within their respective pay grades. In April, 1997, based on employee concerns expressed to the Board, a combined local government/school work team was organized to look at the pay scale compression issue. The group determined that there was a problem and went on to develop a decompression formula that both Boards approved. It will be implemented over a three-year time period, beginning in July, 1998. As part of the FY 1998-99 Budget, the Board approved a total allocation to General Government of $196,240.00 for the first year of the three-year decompression process. Based on an analysis of actual compensation increases received in July, $130,470.00 of the budgeted $196,240.00 ',decompression pot" will need to be allocated to various County departments to cover the cost of implementing decompression for FY 1998-99. This amount reflects the cost of implementing the decompression formula, net savings from employee turnover. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98033 in the amount of $130,470.00 to cover the cost of decompression in various Local Government departments. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appropriation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98033 FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ALLOCATION OF FUNDING BUDGETED FOR COMPRESSION EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1000 11010 160907 1 1000 12010 160907 1 1000 12013 160907 1 1000 12040 160907 1 1000 12141 160907 1 1000 13020 160907 1 1000 31012 160907 1 1000 32011 160907 1 1000 34000 160907 1 1000 53011 160907 1 1000 71017 160907 1 1000 81010 160907 1 1000 81030 160907 1 1000 81040 160907 I 1000 95000 999977 DESCRIPTION BOARD OF SUPERVISORS COMPRESSION ADJ COUNTY EXECUTIVE COMMUNITY RESOURCES COUNTY ATTORNEY FINANCE VOTER REG & ELECT POLICE FIRE RESCUE INSPECTIONS V.P.A. PARKS & RECREATION PLANNING HOUSING ZONING TRANSFERS TOTAL AMOUNT $915.00 COMPRESSION A DJ 9,663.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 1,581.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 1,276.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 29,518.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 58.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 29,718.00 COMPRESSION A DJ 7,711.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 7,362.00 COMPRESSION A DJ 18,436.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 2,104.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 5,672.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 8,481.00 COMPRESSION ADJ 7,975.00 COMP RESERVE -130,470.00 $0.00 REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT TOTAL $0.00 Item 6.10. Appropriation: Sheriff's Department, $51,466.00 (Form #98035). October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 8) It was noted in the staff's report that late last month at a special meeting attended by both of the Juvenile Court Judges, Department of Juvenile Justice staff, Court and Sheriff's department staff, and City Police, both the County Executive's staff and the City Manager's staff were apprised of the physical plant and staffing needs for the juvenile holding cells. Currently, the cells are often overcrowded on court docket days and visibility into the cells is limited. Although a major City/County study is currently underway to address the needs of the Juvenile Court, as well as the burgeoning needs of the other court facilities, there is an immediate need to correct the situation at the Juvenile Court. Staff has met with the Sheriff's department and determined that an additional bailiff is needed to provide the required supervision of juveniles kept in the holding cells while court is in session. This temporary bailiff position, which will be reviewed during budget time, would be responsible for monitoring the juveniles, as well as for processing and fingerprinting the juveniles when they are brought into the Courthouse. In addition to the security needs addressed by an additional bailiff, staff may need to come back to the Board in the near future to request additional funding for some physical improvements, such as electronic surveillance cameras and replacement doors. The estimated cost of these minor improvements is not available at this time. Staff recommends approval of Appropriation #98035 in the amount of $51,466.00 to hire a temporary bailiff for the remainder of the fiscal year. The need for this position will be reviewed during the FY 1999-2000 budget process. The City will contribute 50 percent of the funding for the bailiff. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution of Appropriation was adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98035 FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: ADDITIONAL BAILIFF FOR JUVENILE AND DOMESTIC RELATIONS COURT EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1000 31020 110000 1 1000 31020 210000 1 1000 31020 221000 1 1000 31020 231000 1 1000 31020 232000 1 1000 31020 270000 1 1000 31020 312500 1 1000 31020 370000 1 1000 31020 530900 1 1000 31020 580100 1 1000 31020 600900 1 1000 31020 601000 1 1000 31020 601100 1 1000 31020 800501 DESCRIPTION SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SHERIFF SALARIES-REGULAR FICA VA RETIREMENT SYSTEM HEALTH INSURANCE DENTAL INSURANCE WORKER'S COMPENSATION PROF SER INSTRUCTIONAL LAUNDRY & DRY CLEANING AUTOMOTIVE INSIIRANCE DUES & MEMBERSHIPS VEHICLE & EQUIP SUPPLIES POLICE SUPPLIES UNIFORMS & APPAREL MOTOR VEHICLES-REPL TOTAL AMOUNT $20,521.00 1,570.00 2,302.00 1,732 00 52 00 386 00 180 00 138 00 729 00 35 00 1,724.00 675.00 272.00 21,150.00 $51,466.00 REVENUE CODE 2 1000 19000 190202 2 1000 51000 510100 DESCRIPTION CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE Fl/hiD BALANCE TOTAL AMOUNT $25,733.00 25,733.00 $51,466.00 Item 6.11. FY 1997-98 Reappropriations for Operating and Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budgets. It was noted in the staff's report that a preliminary review of the County's major funds shows the following results from FY 1997-98 operations. Also included below are actions which have been taken since July 1, 1998, and current requests being made. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 9) General Fund Projected Fund Balance based on FY 1997-98 Budget Actual Revenues to Budget Variance Actual Expenditures to Budget Variance Preliminary Fund Balance at 06-30-98 Actions approved for FY 1998-99 Budgeted Fund Balance Remainin~ Fund Balance $13,482,382 + 409,690 + 2,160,280 $16,052,352 -$ 69,916 $15,982,436 Current Requests: Reappropriations (Appropriations #98016 & #98017) Request for Carry-Over funds (Appropriation #98018) Remaining Fund Balance Less Sales Tax Accrual Available Fund Balance -$ 463,314 - 354,130 $15,164,992 -663,888 $14,501,104 Schools Projected Fund Balance based on FY 1997-98 Budget Actual Revenues to Budget Variance Actual Expenditures to Budget Variance Preliminary Fund Balance at 06-30-98 $ 1,202,200 - 63,389 + 1,058,150 $ 2,196,961 Actions approved for FY 1998-99: Budgeted Fund Balance -$ 1,035,512 Remaining Fund Balance Less Sales Tax Accrual Available Fund Balance $ 1,161,449 -535,097 $ 626,352 Capital Improvements - General Projected Fund Balance based on FY 1997-98 Budget Actual Revenues to Budget Variance Actual Expenditures to Budget Variance Preliminary Fund Balance at 06-30-98 $ 193,266 + 11,841 + 3,987,660 $ 4,192,767 Actions approved for FY 1998-99: Budgeted Fund Balance Remaining Fund Balance -$ 365,000 $ 3,827,767 Current Request: Reappropriation for on-going projects (Approp #98019)-$ 3,996,097 Less off-setting revenues + 168,444 Remaining Fund Balance $ 114 Capital Improvements - School Projected Fund Balance based on FY 1997-98 Budget Actual Revenue to Budget Variance Actual Expenditures to Budget Variance Preliminary Fund Balance at 06-30-98 $ 674,402 - 141,846 +10,084,400 $10,900,648 Actions approved for FY 1998-99: Budgeted Fund Balance Remaining Fund Balance -$ 100,000 $10,800,648 Current Request: Reappropriation for on-going projects (Approp #98020)-$10,084,400 Less off-setting revenues + 211,069 Remaining Fund Balance $ 927,317 Capital Improvements - Storm Water Projected Fund Balance based on FY 1997-98 Budget Actual Revenue to Budget Variance + 3,141 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 10) Actual Expenditures to Budget Variance + Preliminary Fund Balance at 06-30-98 $ Current Request: Reappropriation for on-going projects (Approp #98034)-$ Remaining Fund Balance $ 000297 924,844 927,985 $924,843 3,142 General Fund~- Overexpenditures Overexpenditures for FY 1997-98 were incurred for the following (Appropriation #97069): Board of Elections Circuit Court Sheriff Sheriff - Scottsville Fire/Rescue Contributions - Fire/Rescue Soil & Water Total Wages $ 340 Part-time Wages 200 OT - Reimbursable (~1 30,270 Wages(21 2,800 OT Wages - Firefighters 4,700 Rebates to Volunteers 4,400 Copy Supplies 450 $ 43,160 Revenues exceeded projections by $48,773.00 Reimbursable from Town of Scottsville Staff recommends that the Board approve the appropriations detailed on Forms #97069, #98016, #98017, #98018, #98019, #98020 and #98034 totaling $15,822,786.43. (Ms. Humphris said she did not realize the Board had joined the Virginia Municipal League (VML) and questioned the implications of the membership fee. Mr. Tucker said staff had asked earlier if the Board would like to join VML. This is an associate membership. Although the Board has no voting power, there are other advantages. Staff is able to speak and provide input into all of their issues. He said there are a lot of counties (particularly the growing counties) who have joined VML. Ms. Thomas asked if the Sheriff's radios for game warden assistants is listed at $2000.00, but the Department balance shows as a minus $30,000.00. She asked if that indicates the Sheriff is overbudget. Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance, said that is correct. He explained that the Sheriff's Department is over budget because of the reimbursable overtime paid for his deputies providing outside security work. The revenues generated by providing that service exceeded the projection by $48,000.00, which is reflected in the report.) By the recorded vote set out above, Resolutions of Appropriations #97069, #98016, %98017, #98018, #98019, #98020 and #98034 were adopted: APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1997-98 NIIMBER: 97069 FI/ND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: OVEREXPENDITURES FOR FY 1997-98 EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1000 13020 110000 1 1000 21010 130000 1 1000 31020 129900 1 1000 31021 110000 1 1000 32013 110000 1 1000 39000 561405 1 1000 82030 601700 DESCRIPTION BOARD OF ELECTIONS CIRCUIT COURT SHERIFF SHERIFF-SCOTTSVILLE FIRE/RESCUE CONTRIBUTIONS SOIL & WATER TOTAL WAGES P/T WAGES O/T REIMBURS WAGES WAGES FIRE/RESCUE COPY SUPPLIES AMOUNT $340.00 200.00 30,270.00 2,800.00 4,700.00 4,400.00 450.00 $43,160.00 REVENIIE CODE 2 1000 51000 510100 2 1000 16000 160304 DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND BALANCE SHERIFF-SERVICE FEES TOTAL AMOUNT $10,090.00 33,070.00 $43,160.00 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 11) . 000: 98 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1997-98 NUMBER: 98016 FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: REAPPROPRIATION FOR OUTSTANDING PURCHASE ORDERS EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1000 11010 800201 1 1000 11010 800610 1 1000 12040 800700 1 1000 12144 800901 1 1000 12200 540301 1 1000 12200 601600 I 1000 12200 800200 1 1000 12200 800700 1 1000 12200 800710 1 1000 13020 800100 1 1000 22010 800101 1 1000 31013 601101 1 1000 31013 601102 1 1000 31013 800100 1 1000 31013 800101 1 1000 31013 800200 1 1000 32015 600900 1 1000 32015 601100 1 1000 41000 312700 1 1000 41000 800501 1 1000 41000 800700 1 1000 41021 332300 1 1000 42040 390001 1 1000 42040 390010 1 1000 42040 510430 1 1000 43002 331200 1 1000 43002 332100 1 1000 43002 332200 1 1000 43003 332200 1 1000 43003 600500 1 1000 53011 800700 1 1000 53012 301212 1 1000 53013 800700 1 1000 71012 390002 1 1000 71012 540000 1 1000 71015 540000 1 1000 71031 312210 1 1000 81010 312342 1 1000 81010 312700 1 1000 81040 800700 1 1000 81040 800901 DESCRIPTION AMOUNT BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FURN & FIXT $1,037.10 BOARD OF SUPERVISORS RENOVATIONS 1,424.00 COUNTY ATTORNEY ADP EQUIPMENT 279.00 FINANCE-REAL ESTATE RENOVATIONS 6,245.00 INFORMATION SERVICES LEASE/SOFTWARE 3,083.00 INFOMATIONS SERVICES D/P SUPPLIES 1,790.50 INFOMATIONS SERVICES FURN & FIXT 1,257.12 INFOMATIONS SERVICES ADP EQUIPMENT 8,214.00 INFOMATIONS SERVICES SOFTWARE 599.00 ELECTIONS MACH & EQUIP 15,595.00 CIRCUIT COURT MACH & EQUIP 928.90 POLICE UNIFORMS 2,550.69 POLICE UNIFORMs 941.01 POLICE MACH & EQUIP 1,327.20 POLICE M-ACH & EQUIP 397.80 POLICE FURN & FIXT 698.00 FIRE/RESCUE VEHICLE SUP 1,706.63 FIRE/RESCUE UNIFORMS 687.36 ENGINEERING CONSULTANTS 2,001.81 ENGINEERING VEHICLE PURC 18,052.00 ENGINEERING ADP EQUIPMENT 622.37 STREET SIGNS SIGNS 8,642.70 SOLID WASTE KEENE LA/ffDFILL 16,476.43 SOLID WASTE RECYCLING 34,801.37 SOLID WASTE TIPPING FEES 9,935.39 STAFF SERVICES EQUIPMENT 6,342.58 STAFF SERVICES MAINT CONTR 2,600.00 STAFF SERVICES MAINT CONTR 3,362.96 STAFF SERVICES MAINT CONTR 260.01 STAFF SERVICES SUPPLIES 555.45 VPA-MANAGEMENT ADP EQUIPMENT 4,228.00 VPA-BENEFITS FOOD STAMP ISSUE 17,762.51 VPA-SERVICES ADP EQUIPMENT 1,650.00 PARKS-MAINTENANCE CONTR SERVICES 270.75 PARKS-MAINTENANCE LEASE/RENT 513.00 PARKS LEASE/RENT 510.00 GYPSY MOTH CONTR SERVICES 6,555.00 PLANNING DEVELOP STUDY 101,766.01 PLANNING CONSULTANTS 7,919.84 ZONING ADP EQUIPMENT 484.00 ZONING RENOVATIONS 2,605.00 TOTAL $296,678.49 REVENUE 2 1000 51000 510100 DESCRIPTION GENERAL FUND BALANCE TOTAL AMOUNT $296,678.49 $296,678.49 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1997-98 NUMBER: 98017 FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: REAPPROPRIATION FOR PROJECTS FUNDED IN FY 1997-98 BUT NOT COMPLETED AT END OF FISCAL YEAR EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY 1 1000 12010 800100 1 1000 12013 560416 1 1000 12141 800700 1 1000 12142 350200 DESCRIPTION COUNTY EXECUTIVE FURNITURE-FISCAL IMPACT OFF COMMUNITY SERVICES NEIGHBORHOOD TEAMS FINANCE-ADM ADP EQUIP-COLLECTIONS FINANCE-ASSESSMENTS BINDING OF RECORDS AMOUNT $ 4,526.00 4,000.00 20,900.00 1,925.00 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 12) 1 1000 12142 800710 FINANCE-ASSESSMENTS SOFTWARE-TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY 1 1000 12142 800901 FINANCE-ASSESSMENTS RENOVATIONS 1 1000 12143 800901 FINANCE-ACCT RENOVATIONS 1 1000 12144 800901 FINANCE-REAL ESTATE RENOVATIONS 1 1000 21060 800101 CLERK OF COURT 1 1000 41000 950023 ENGINEERING 1 1000 81010 130000 PLANNING 1 1000 81010 160801 1 1000 81010 301210 1 1000 81010 312700 1 1000 81010 350000 1 1000 81010 800100 1 1000 81017 130000 PLANNING PLAiVNING PLANNING PLANNING PLANNING E-911/PLANNING MACH/EQUIP AUTOMART-SOIL EROSION BONDS P/T WAGES-GP~APHICS AIDE WORK STUDY PLAN CONTRACTUAL SERVICES-GIS PILOT CONSULTANTS-FISCAL IMPACT PRINTING-COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MACH/EQUIP-FILING SYSTEM P/T WAGES-E-911 INTERN TOTAL REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION 2 1000 51000 510100 GENERAL FUND BALANCE TOTAL 1,950.00 5,000.00 7,500 00 17,500 00 24,720 00 15,920 00 1,930 00 8,305 00 25,000.00 3,000.00 5,000.00 15,800.00 .3,660.00 $166,636.00 AMOUNT $166,636.00 $166,636.00 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISC3LL YEAR: 1997-98 NUMBER: 98018 FUND: GENERAL PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FY 1998-99 NEW REQUEST FOR FUNDING FROM FY 1997-98 CARRYOVER BALANCE EXPENDITURE DESCRIPTION 1 1000 11010 580100 BD OF SUPV 1 1000 11010 800700 BD OF SUPV 1 1000 12010 550400 COUNTY EXECUTIVE 1 1000 21020 580100 GENERAL DIST COURT 1 1000 21020 600100 GENERAL DIST COURT 1 1000 21020 601200 GENERAL DIST COURT 1 1000 31012 930210 1 1000 31013 800100 1 1000 31013 800710 1 1000 31020 800300 1 1000 41000 120000 1 1000 41000 130000 1 1000 41000 301211 1 1000 41000 312700 1 1000 41000 550400 POLICE POLICE POLICE SHERIFF ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING ENGINEERING 1000 41030 390000 WATER RESOURCES 1000 42040 510430 SOLID WASTE 1000 43002 312700 STAFF SERVICES 1000 43002 800201 STAFF SERVICES 1000 53013 800200 VPA 1000 81010 312342 PLD/~INING 1000 81010 520100 PLAiTNING 1000 81010 550400 PLANNING 1000 81010 800100 PLANNING 1000 81010 800200 PLANNING 1000 81010 800201 PLANNING 1000 81017 130000 PLANNING 1000 81017 210000 PLA1TNING 1000 81030 130000 HOUSING 1000 81030 210000 HOUSING 1000 81030 550402 HOUSING 1000 81030 800200 HOUSING REVENUE CODE DESCRIPTION 2 100051000 510100 GENEPJUL FUND BALANCE VML MEMBERSHIP DUES INDEXING SYSTEM FOR MINUTES ICMA TRAINING DUES OFFICE SUPPLIES BOOKS/SUBSCRIPTIONS GRANT MATCHING MACH/EQUIP-FIREARMS SOFTWARE-JAIL CONNECTION RADIOS-GAME WARDEN ASSIST O/T WAGES-WATER PROTECTION P/T WAGES-STORMWATER CIP AMOUNT $ 6,30O.00 15,000.00 1,500.00 1,000.00 1,000.00 500.00 38,400.00 18,000.00 3,600.00 2,000.00 6,000.00 36,000.00 MEDIAN MAINT-ROUTE 250 EAST 20,000.00 CONSULTANTS-DESIGN STDS EDUCATION WATER MGR-WORK WITH RWSA TIPPING FEES-BULKY WASTE CONSULTANTS-HVAC RPLMT FURN/FIXTURES-CONFERENCE RM FURN/FIXTURES-FILE SYSTEM DEVELOPMENT AREAS STUDY POSTAL SERVICES EDUCATION-WORK PROGRAM MACHINERY/EQUIPMENT FURN/FIXTURES-SHELVING FURN/FIXTURES P/T WAGES-ADDRESSING INTERN FICA P/T WAGES-CLERICAL FICA TRAINING-SECTION 8 SOFTWARE FURN/FIXTURES TOTAL 38,000.00 2,300.00 40,000.00 30,000.00 25,000 00 8,800 00 2,500 00 5,000 00 3,000 00 5,500 00 100 00 400 O0 6,000.00 12,900.00 990.00 11,000.00 840.O0 8,500.00 4,000.00 $354%130.00 TOTAL AMOUNT $354,130.00 $354,130.00 APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1997-98 NUMBER: 98019 FUND: GENEPJLL CIP October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) 000~O0 (Page 13) PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: REAPPROPRIATION ON UNCOMPLETED CAPITAL PROJECTS (All balances are carried forward to FY 1998-99 as budgeted except for the reallocation of $88,144.00 from ADA funds and $5,000.00 from facility maintenance to Old Crozet School roof repairs; the $44,439.00 refund from the Library is included to fund ADP equipment for the library; also, $30,000 for the Police firing range. EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION 1 9010 12140 950004 DIRECTOR OF FINANCE 1 9010 12200 800700 INFORMATION SERVICES 1 9010 21000 312343 COURT FACILITIES t 9010 21000 950058 COURT FACILITIES 1 9010 21050 331000 JUVENILE COURT 1 9010 31010 800300 POLICE DEPARTMENT 1 9010 31010 8009~0 POLICE DEPARTMENT 1 9010 31010 950005 POLICE DEPARTMENT 1 9010 31040 800650 EOC-OPERATIONS 1 9010 32010 800510 FIRE DEPARTMENT 1 9010 32010 800523 FIRE DEPARTMENT 1 9010 32010 950092 FIRE DEPARTMENT 1 9010 33203 312350 JUVENILE DETENTION 1 9010 41000 80096D ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 800961 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 800962 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 800963 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 800964 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950011 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950035 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950039 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950049 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950057 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950059 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950090 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41000 950091 ENGINEERING 1 9010 41020 950024 STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1 9010 41020 950051 STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1 9010 41020 950081 STREET IMPROVEMENTS 1 9010 43100 800666 COUNTY OFFICE BLDG 1 9010 43100 800901 COUNTY OFFICE BLDG 1 9010 71000 800665 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 800668 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 800949 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950003 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950009 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950026 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950028 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950033 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950034 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950044 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950045 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950047 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 71000 950050 PARKS & RECREATION 1 9010 73020 800700 LIBRARIES t 9010 73020 800700 LIBRARIES 1 9010 73020 800949 LIBRARIES 1 9010 73020 950076 LIBRARIES 1 9010 81010 950002 PLANlqING 1 9010 81010 950053 PLANNING TOTAL ASSESSMENT SYSTEM ADP EQUIPMENT SPACE NEEDS STUDY MONUMENT CLEANING REPAIRS & MAINTENANCE COMMUNICATION EQUIPMENT FIRING RANGE SATELLITE RECEIVERS BUILDINGS-CONSTRUCTION SERVICE VEHICLES-NEW FIRE PUMPER-REPLACEMENT FIRE HOUSE/AERIAL FIRE ENGINEERING/PLANNING STREET LIGHTS ST LTS-HYDRAULIC/CMNWEALTH 16 ST LTS-HYDRAULIC/GEOTOWN 16 ST LTS-WHITEWOOD/GEOTOWN 12 ST LTS-GEORGETOWN/CMNWEALTH 16 HYDRAULIC ROAD-SIDEWALK NORTH BERKSHIRE ROAD MEADOW CREEK PARKWAY-END OLD CROZET SCHOOL GREENBRIER DRIVE-SIDEWALK KEENE LANDFILL CLOSURE IVY ROAD BARRACKS RD-SIDEWALK LANDSCAPING-29 NORTH AVON ST/RT 20 CONNECTOR REVENUE SHARING ROADS FACILITY MAINTENANCE BUILDING RENOVATIONS ADA STRUCTURAL CHANGES 62 3 28 97 10 155 51 51 114 7 534 43 4 163 AMOUNT $124 193.21 18 555.02 55 000.00 12 000.00 25 000.00 108 000.00 3O 000.00 21 526.05 662 786.90 3 496.00 250 000.00 261 139.46 174 662.94 40 000.00 000.00 000 00 000 00 000 00 849 30 800 00 584 61 536 95 000.00 329.35 667.00 000.00 087.59 274.28 914.90 916.99 742.44 165.14 ADA CHANGES-SCHOOLS MAINTENANCE PROJECTS CROZET PARK IMPROVEMENTS SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY CTR RIVANNA GREENWAY RED HILL RECREATION IMPV WALNUT CREEK REC PROJECTS TOWE PARK REC PROJECTS ATHLETIC FIELD STUDY/DVLP DIXIE LEAGUE FIELD BEAVER CREEK PARK SOUTHERN PARK DVLP ADP EQUIPMENT ADP EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE PROJECTS NORTH BRANCH LIBRARY OLD BROOK RD SIDEWALK NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN 4,074 00 15,725 97 29,516 49 3,059 21 100,000 00 11,840 57 40,000 00 143,144 00 32,266.00 73,734.00 765.40 46,000.00 170,000.00 44,438.00 63,908.39 4,223.10 1,011.35 37,162.78 $3,996,097.39 REVENI/E CODE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT 2 9010 15000 150101 USE OF MONEY & PROP INTEREST $66,000.00 2 1000 16000 160529 CM3LRGES FOR SERVICES CITY-JUVENILE DETENTION 2,592.50 2 1000 18000 189916 MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE CHA~4BER OF COMMERCE/29 in 12,000.00 2 1000 24000 240231 CATEGORICAL AID-STATE VA DEPT OF TR~SPORTATION 109,618.12 2 1000 24000 240430 CATEGORICAL AID-STATE VDOT-250E LANDSCAPING 44,234.00 2 1000 51000 510100 TRANSFERS APPROPRIATION-FUND BAL 3,761,652.77 TOTAL $3,966,097.39 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 14) 00030:i. APPROPRIATION REQUEST FISCAL YEAR: 1998-99 NUMBER: 98034 FUND: STORMWATER PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: REAPPROPRIATION OF STORMWATER PROJECTS EXPENDITURE COST CTR/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION 1 9100 41000 800975 ENGINEERING 1 9100 41000 950093 ENGINEERING 1 9100 41035 312400 FOUR SEASONS BASIN 1 9100 41035 800975 FOUR SEASONS BASIN 1 9100 41036 312400 BIRNAM/WYNRIDGE BASIN t 9100 41036 360000 BIRN~%M/WYNRIDGE BASIN 1 9100 41041 800975 LYNCHBURG RD STR SEWER 1 9100 41043 800975 FOUR SEASONS C~ANNEL 1 9100 41049 800975 WOODBROOK CH~2~NEL AMOUNT STORMWATER CONTROL IMPel30 448.46 DRAINAGE STUDY/PLAN PROF SERV-ENGINEERING STORMWATER CONTROL IMP PROF SER ENGINEERING ADVERTISING STORMWATER CONTROL IMP STORMWATER CONTROL IMP STORMWATER CONTROL IMP 291 606.70 12 164.54 75 053.70 15 641.45 55 675.98 17 500.00 20 000.00 28 035.00 1 9100 41050 800975 1 9100 41053 800975 1 9100 41054 800975 WINDHAM/JARMAN'S CH PH II STORMWATER CONTROL IMP 82.075.60 PEYTON DRIVE STORMWATER CONTROL IMP 156.447.00 RICKY ROAD STORMWATER CONTROL IMp 39,895.00 TOTAL $924,843.43 REVENUE DESCRIPTION 2 4100 51000 510100 FUND B~LANCE TOTAL AMOUNT $924,843.43 $924,843.43 Item 6.12. Set public hearing for November 4, 1998, to revise Section 17-209, Erosion and Sediment Control Fee Schedule, of the Water Protection Ordinance (WPO). It was stated in the staff's report that when the new Water Protection Ordinance was adopted in February, 1998, the Engineering Department indicated a revised Erosion and Sediment Control Fee Schedule would be proposed to more accurately reflect the cost to the Department to administer the program in accordance with State inspection requirements. Virginia Erosion and Sediment Control Law requires biweekly inspection of all projects disturbing more than 10,000 square feet of land area (agricultural activities including forestry are exempt) and all single-family dwellings in a residential development. Past administrative practices of the Department included periodic site inspections on an "as needed" basis with an inspection fee charged only if a site was not in compliance with the approved erosion control plan. State inspection requirements are reflected in the WPO, requiring biweekly site znspections for all active sites. The WPO also requires submission of a fee for plan review and site inspection efforts at the time of application for an erosion control permit. Administration of the new fee collection process is more effective than sending inspection bills monthly. State Erosion Control laws allow a locality to recover costs incurred to administer an erosion control program. The Department expects to provide erosion control plan reviews and biweekly inspections for 70 new subdivision and commercial projects as well as 650 informal erosion control agreements for new single-family dwellings in FY 1998-99. The operating cost for a staff of two plan reviewers and three inspectors is anticipated to be $218,500.00. Based on the anticipated work load, the proposed erosion control fee schedule will generate annual fees of $110,000.00, or approximately 50 percent of actual cost. Fees totaling $9500,00 were collected in FY 1997-98. The proposed fee schedule is consistent with the fee schedules of comparable counties such as Spotsylvania, Stafford and Augusta. The State Division of Soil and Water Conservation has reviewed and supports the proposed fee schedule 'as fair and reasonable. The proposed fee schedule replaces the "one fee fits all" approach with a variable rate structure to address the quantity of land disturbed by a subdivision or commercial project, as well as the length of time a project will last and require staff time for inspections and bond adjustments. Representatives of the construction, design and development communities have been reasonably involved and generally support this revised fee schedule. D~n "Impact on Housing" review of the proposed fees suggests the cost of a single-family home in a residential neighborhood will increase $16 to $100 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 15) depending upon the density of the development. The cost of a single-family home in a non-residential neighborhood will increase $25 and the cost of a small commercial project will increase $250. Staff recommends that a public hearing be advertised for November 4, 1998, to consider the Erosion and Sediment Control Fee Schedule as proposed. By the recorded vote set out above, An Ordinance to Amend and Reordain Chapter 17, Water Protection, Section 17-209, Fees, was ordered advertised for a public hearing on November 4, 1998. Item 6.13. Set public hearing for October 21, 1998, to grant water and sewer easements for Monticello High School to the Albemarle County Service Authority. It was noted in the staff's report that as part of the infrastructure supporting the new high school, public water and sanitary sewer were extended to the site. These public utilities are to be dedicated and maintained by the Albemarle County Service Authority (ACSA). This plat provides the necessary easements for both the newly constructed water and sanitary sewer lines and for future extension of these public utilities. The plat has been reviewed and approved by staff. Staff recommends that a public hearing be set for October 21, 1998 to grant the necessary easements to the Albemarle County Service Authority. By the recorded vote set out above, as requested by the County's Engineering Department, a public hearing was ordered advertised for October 21, 1998, to grant water and sewer easements to the Albemarle County Service Authority for Monticello High School. Item 6.14. Resolution to take Woodbrook Drive (SDP-95-118) into the State Secondary System of Highways. As requested by the County's Engineering Department, the following resolution requesting the Virginia Department of Highways to accept Woodbrook Drive into the State Secondary System of Highways, was adopted: R E S 0 L U T I 0 in WHEREAS, Woodbrook Drive (SDP-95-118) described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 7, 1998, fully incorporated herein by reference, is shown on plats recorded in the Clerk's Office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia; and WHEREAS, the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation has advised the Board that the street meets the requirements established by the Subdivision Street Requirements of the Virginia Department of Transportation. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Albemarle Board of County Supervisors requests the Virginia Department of Transporta- tion to add Woodbrook Drive as described on the attached Additions Form SR-5(A) dated October 7, 1998, to the secondary system of state highways, pursuant to ' 33.1-229, Code of Virginia, and the Department's Subdivision Street Requirements; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board guarantees a clear and unrestricted right-of-way, as described, and any necessary ease- ments for cuts, fills and drainage as described on the recorded plats; and FURTHER RESOLVED that a certified copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Resident Engineer for the Virginia Department of Transportation. The road described on Additions Form SR-5(A) is: O00BO 3 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 16) 1) Woodbrook Drive from Station 0+96, right edge of pavement southbound Berkmar Drive to Station 4+54, rear of cul- de-sac, 358 lineal feet as shown on plat recorded 8/20/96 in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County, Virginia, in Deed Book 1559, pages 51-54, with a right-of-way width of 60 feet, with additional drainage easements recorded 6/10/98 in Deed Book 1713, pages 62-63, for a length of 0.07 mile. Total length - 0.07 mile. Item 6.15. Resolution to adopt Non-Discriminatory Policy for Housing Rehabilitation and Production Project in the Porters Road/Yancey School Neighborhood. It was stated in the staff's report that in June, 1998 the Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development (VDHCD) awarded Albemarle County a $770,989.00 multi-year Community Development Block Grant Community Improvement Grant (CIG) to perform housing rehabilitation and production in the Porter's Road/Yancey School neighborhood. In July, County staff met with staff from VDHCD to review those activi- ties that must be completed by the County prior to executing the CIG contract. Actions required by the Board of Supervisors is the adoption of an employment- related Non-Discrimination Policy. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Non-Discrimination Policy was adopted: NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY The County of Albemarle or any employee therefore will not discriminate against an employee or applicant for employment because of race, age, handicap, creed, religion, color, sex or national origin. Administrative and personnel officials will take affirmative action to insure that this policy shall include, but not be limited to, the following: employment, upgrading, demotion or transfer; rates of pay or other forms of compensation; and, selection for training. Item 6.16. Request to approve Central Well Supply Water to Mountaintop Farm Community. It was noted in the staff's report that the Mountaintop Farm Land Trust is an existing community served by an existing well system. The system is classified as both a state-regulated public water supply (serving 15 connec- tions or 25 people) and a County central water system (serving three or more connections). The system serves 24 connections and approximately 35 people. Over the past several years, the system has suffered both water quality and quantity problems due to contamination and flow problems. The managers of the system have been working with the State Department of Health to rectify both problems, but there have been periods of time where potable water had to be hauled to the residents. Two new wells have been drilled in an attempt to secure an adequate water supply, and a chlorination system has been installed. Due to construction of the new wells, the water system is subject to Chapter 16 of the Code of Albemarle concerning central water supplies. Approval by the Board is required, as is approval of plans and system information by the Engineering Department in accordance with department policies. In this case, the Health Department has also reviewed well construction, system specifica- tions, pump test data and water quality tests. The Health Department will continue to regulate this system as a public water supply, requiring periodic testing and reporting in accordance with State regulations. At present, the water system is managed by Management Systems Corporation. The applicant submitted relevant data on the system including pump test and water quality data. With the addition of the new well, the system appears to be adequate to serve this community. The new wells are currently in operation. Neither the applicant nor the Health Department were aware of the October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 17) 000304 need to secure County approval when these systems were installed, and, at this point, the applicant would like to have all needed approvals. In addition, according to a Board resolution (February 3, 1993), if the Board approves this system, system plans must be submitted to the Albemarle County Service Author- ity for review and comment. Staff recommends that the Board approve the central water system for Mountaintop Farm with the foll0wih~ conditions: 1. The approval is for the existing connections, and 2o System plans shall be submitted to the Albemarle County Service AuthOrity for review and comment, and the Engineering Department must approve final system plans based on any Service Authority concerns. (Ms. Humphris asked why representatives from the Health Department said they were not aware of the need to secure County approval when these systems were installed. She asked how the Health Department could not know about the County's policies and suggested that someone needs to be sure this does not happen again in the future. Mr. Tucker said Engineering staff will work with the Health Department to be sure they are familiar with County policies concerning central well supplies.) By the recorded vote set out above, the Central Well Water Supply to Mountaintop Farm Community was approved with the two conditions noted above. Item 6.17. Resolution: Charter of Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Academy. It was noted in the staff's report that the Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Center (CSCJTC) is a regional training center in the Common- wealth of Virginia with a purpose of preparing and maintaining criminal jus- tice personnel in the skills required for their jobs. The training center is operated jointly under a charter agreement among 31 local governments and training personnel in the Central Virginia area, bordered in the east by Louisa and Fluvanna counties, in the west by Alleghany and Bath counties, in the north by the City of Winchester and in the south by the City of Lynchburg. Albemarle County was one of the original 31 member governments to sign the charter in 1973 creating the Training Center. The current training facility is located in the City of Waynesboro in a leased warehouse consisting of approximately 13,000 square feet. The facility in general is deplorable and inadequate as a training center. A consultant was hired during the past year to conduct a space needs and site feasibility study. This study was completed in August, 1998 and accepted by the center. The Training Center's space needs were assessed at 53,000 square feet and the membership had desire to build a new facility at either Blue Ridge Community College or Piedmont Virginia Community College. Either of these colleges would provide the opportunity to partnership and share facility space and programs. The consultant's report recommended that the facility be built (at approximately $6.0 to $8.0 million) next to Blue Ridge Community College based on the following: It is in closer proximity to the majority of the agency memberships; construction costs are less; and, Piedmont Community College would require additional expenditures for a roadway for the training center facility. Recent changes to the Virginia Code permit political subdivisions to enter into an agreement creating a regional criminal justice training "academy" that will have some powers that were not formerly available to a regional criminal justice training center. This change can be done simply by the governmental unit's adoption of a resolution approving a new center. As is currently the case with the Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice "training center", a regional "academy" will continue to be a public entity and continue to be subject to the Department of Criminal Justice services. The current training center does not have the authority to issue revenue bonds or borrow money, which is essential to the "academy" to build a perma- nent training facility and, thereby, assure each member government unit cost- October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 18) efficient training in the future. The approximate costs of adopting this new charter and constructing a training facility would be an annual assessment of $500.00 per officer, sheriff deputy and ECC personnel. This is up from the current assessment of $180.00. There are ~ery few options for County agencies (police, sheriff, correc- tions, and emergency operations personnel) as far as joining one of the other regional academies. To join as a new member it would cost the County approxi- mately $400.00 to $500.00 per officer. This would not only be less convenient in reference to travel time, but would hurt the current Central Virginia Regional Academy monetarily because the state allocates funds according to the number of personnel belonging to the regional center. By way of reference, the Northern Virginia Police Academy serves the same criminal justice personnel population size (1900) as Central Shenandoah and their assessment per officer is currently $1100.00. Staff recommends adoption of the charter resolution. By the recorded vote set out above, the following Resolution was adopted: RESOLUTION WHEREAS, the Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Center was originally organized in 1973 on the campus of Blue Ridge Community College to provide basic and in-service training for law enforcement personnel, and WHEREAS, the Training Center now serves more than 70 criminal justice agencies serving more than 50 politiCal subdivisions and localities, and WHEREAS, the Training Center's membership has remained stable and reasonably constant over many years, and WHEREAS, the Training Center has moved on two previous occasions because it has outgrown the space available to it, and WHEREAS, the Training Center is now in need of a new physical plant that will allow it to continue to provide quality criminal justice training on a cost-efficient basis to its members, and WHEREAS, the General Assembly has in recent years amended the Virginia Code to allow a regional criminal justice training academy to incur indebtedness without obligating a member governmental unit, and WHEREAS, the Training Center's charter needs to be revised and reconstituted as the Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Academy; NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia (the "County"), acting on behalf of the County, pursuant to Va Code ' 15.2-1747, that the Charter of Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Academy, a copy of which is attached to this Resolution and incorporated herein by reference, be and it is hereby ADOPTED, and said governmental unit joins as a member of this Academy formed for the principal purpose of establishing and conducting criminal justice training and education for criminal justice personnel. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, by its adoption of this Charter, it is the intention of the County, among others, to evidence a commitment to the Academy as a member thereof pursuant .to the terms and provisions set forth by this Charter. Notwithstanding, to the extent, if any, that any term or provision of this Charter shall ever be interpreted to require any binding financial commitment of the County beyond the current fiscal year of the County, then such financial obligation shall be subject to and dependent upon appropriations being made from time to time by the County for such specific purpose, as required by Virginia law. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day ~eting) (Page 19) 000306 This Resolution shall become effective upon adoption, and the Clerk is directed to forward an attested copy to the Executive Director, Central Shenandoah Criminal Justice Training Academy, 211 West Twelfth Street, Waynesboro, Virginia 22980. Item 6.18. Update on Telec6mmunications Tower Consultant Contract (RFP- 97-24). It was noted in the staff's report that RFP-97-24 was issued to solicit proposals to obtain services to provide independent engineering analyses of each application for a special use permit for a wireless telecommunications facility. The services to be provided were to include reviewing and preparing propagation analyses, identifying feasible alternative sites, alternative antenna design, alternative tower design and other related services. The cost for these services was expected to be at least $5000.00 per application. Staff was to investigate how to recover these costs by fees paid by the applicant. Although the selection process for RFP-97-24 has been narrowed to a single vendor, a contract has not yet been awarded. A recent decision by the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals concerning a case in the City of Virginia Beach has caused staff to reconsider whether the services to be provided by RFP-97-24 are necessary. The services which were to be provided assumed that Albemarle County needed to obtain independent expert analyses to review and either corroborate or rebut the evidence of experts submitted by wireless applicants in those areas beyond the expertise of County staff. However, the decision of the Court of Appeals in AT&T Wireless PCS vs. City of Virginia Beach (a summary was attached to the staff's report), affirmed the authority of localities, under their zoning powers, to control the placement of wireless facilities including towers. For purposes of review under the Telecommunications Act of 1996, the Court held that a decision to deny a request to construct a wireless facility can be based on the complaints of ordinary citizens. These complaints can rest on traditional bases for zoning regulation, such as preserving the character of a neighborhood or visual blight. This holding applies even in those cases where the applicant has submitted evidence from experts. In light of the Virginia Beach decision, staff does not think it is necessary to retain an outside consultant to review applications for special use permits by wireless service providers. Any decision to deny a special use permit must satisfy the legal standard for the denial of a special use permit in a State court (the reasonableness of the matter in issue must be fairly debatable). The development of a wireless telecommunications policy and implementing regulations, which will be generated with the assistance of Kreines and Kreines under RFP-97-23, will assure that ~he CountY's analysis of wireless applications satisfies all zoning requirements and the Telecommuni- cations Act. Therefore, staff recommends that RFP-97-24 be canceled. If the Board concurs, there is no need to address the issue of a fee at this time. (Ms. Thomas said the staff is essentially suggesting that the Board cancel the request for a proposal for a technical consultant on the wireless telecommunication towers. She was puzzled by the suggestion because to her the technical consultant would be very useful. She understands that with the change in case law the Board does not need a technical consultant to help it make decisions that will stand up in court. She still wants to make the right decisions technically and she still needs the kind of advice that she thought the Board would get from a technical consultant. If an applicant says that his proposed location is the only place a tower can go, and it is the only configuration, and the neighbors object, the Board can deny the application, and she understands that decision will stand up in court. Then what? She would prefer that the Board be able to offer the applicant alternatives. She thought this consultant would help the Board make intelligent decisions, so she is not in favor of dropping this RFP unless she can be assured that the Board will get this kind of information. She has a volunteer in the community who helps her, but he has never been requested to assist the entire Board. Mr. Marshall agreed with Ms. Thomas. He does not believe there is anyone on the Board who has the expertise to talk intelligently with the people who come with the applicants. All he has is their word. There is no one on staff who can verify that what these people are stating is the truth October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) 000207 (Page 20) because it is technical or financial. He is concerned about having these towers all over the County, and the Board does not know that it is really necessary. Mr. Tucker said staff's review of this turned on the Virginia Beach case, so he suggested that the County Attorney explain the staff's reasoning. Ms. Humphris said she was shocked when she read the Executive Summary. Even though the private consultants are going to develop an overall plan, she is in no way prepared to apply an application to a plan without having someone to whom she can ask questions about feasible alternative sites. She was on the committee to select a consultant for the second part which was the application part. It was her understanding of the Virginia Beach decision that the Board could deny on the basis of neighborhood unhappiness, but to her, that is not fair. There will always be unhappy neighbors. Only a technical consultant, such as the one requested in the RFP, would be able to consider all of the other things, as well. Mr. Davis said staff's recommendation was the result of the Virginia Beach case which clarified that this type of application could be treated as any traditional land use decision, and the Board would not be in violation of the Telecommunications Act. This was an important decision because there had been arguments made, some in Federal District Courts, that the Board would have to go further than traditional land use decisions and a need to get into the technical arguments in order to deny an application. Staff thought the Board was interested in this as a matter of land use law rather than as a technical communications network issue, and the burden would be on the telecommunications industry to come forward with information to prove to this Board that there was a technical need for their system to function better. That would be a burden the applicants could meet. Ms. Humphris said that is the major reason the consultant was needed. Some applicants have come before the Board to make their case and the Board has learned later that their case was not factually correct. The Board had no knowledge at the time of the hearing, and the only way it could have had the knowledge would have been to have this type of consultant working for the Board. Mr. Davis said if that is what the Board wants, this consultant could provide that type of checks and balances on the information which is provided by the applicants. Staff wanted the Board to understand that it no longer has to focus on those aspects of the decision-making in order to deny a request. There needs to be in effect a policy which will allow the reasonable placement of these telecommunications towers and facilities in the County. Staff believes the Kreines & Kreines analysis will provide that and still let the Board make land use decisions on where facilities are located. If the Board wants to address specific locations and get into the technical pros and cons of any specific tower based on the scientific aspects of it, then the Board does need the consultant. However, the Board does not need to do that anymore. Ms. Humphris said she believes that is what she would like to do. Mr. Marshall agreed. He believes that has been the policy in dealing with these applications. He requested comments from other Board members. Mr. Martin said he is willing to go along with the rest of the Board members on this question. Once the Board gets the Comprehensive Plan ideas, it may well be that the Board will have what it needs. At this time, he thinks the Board members are saying they do not have the technical expertise to know what it does need. He will keep an open mind. It may well be that once the Board gets the second consultant's proposal in terms of a plan, the Board can use that information to decide whether it is a good, or a bad idea. Right now, the Board does need technical assistance. Mr. Bowerman said, procedurally, this item should have been placed on the regular agenda for a discussion by the Board. He agrees with Ms. Humphris and Ms. Thomas. It was clearly his feeling that this consultant was to aid the Board in making a determination on specific applications outside of the general consultant's report as to the veracity of the statements made by the applicant and the suitability of different sites. That is where this Board has difficulties in deciding. It seems that somebody on retainer, when the Board felt it was important to have that information, would be one of the October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 21) options the Board would have in the future regardless of the Virginia Beach decision. Mr. Tucker said it would be no problem to resume negotiations with this particular consultant. Mr. Marshall said he believes the Board is unanimous in this decision. Ms. Thomas asked if this person (or firm) would be paid on a case-by- case basis, as opposed to a contract. Mr. Tucker said that is a technicality that staff will have to work through. It is hard to just apply a fee selectively. The County may, in fact, need a set fee for all applicants for this type of special use permit. Mr. Marshall said in order to get to other items on the agenda today, he will request that Consent Agenda Item 6.18 be pulled and listed as a discussion item on a future agenda.) Item 6.19. Letter dated September 22, 1998, from Ms. Angela Tucker, Resident Highway Engineer, to Ms. Ella Carey, Clerk, re: transportation matters discussed at the September 2, 1998, Board meeting, was received for information as follow: ~The Department has met with a property owner, Ms. Marion Collins on Union Mission Lane, the railroad crossing west of ConAgra on Route 240. We are reviewing the potential to take this road into the state system for maintenance. The existing road falls mainly within the CSX Railroad right of way and we are awaiting some information with the Department of Rail and Public Transportation regarding any restrictions to public use. We will keep the Board advised of any progress on this matter. We have repaired shoulders along both Route 250 east and west aS requested. We have requested a multi-STOP review at the intersection at Grassmere Road and Morgantown Road. We will advise the Board of the outcome of this study once it has been completed. I have discussed with Ms. Berne the school zone and safety issues regarding the Montessori School at Pantops on Route 250. School zone flashing lights are funded, installed and maintained by schools under permit to the Department. We are reviewing the changes in the Primary Road Allocations as outlined in V. W. Cilimberg's September 10, 1998, letter, and will respond directly to Mr. Cilimberg and copy the Board." Item 6.20. Memorandum dated September 22, 1998, from Ms. Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator, re: Enforcement of Home Occupation Regulations and Conditions of Approval, was received as information. (Ms. Humphris said Ms. McCulley's letter gives a good review of this matter. She feels the Board needs to discuss this memorandum further rather then just receive it for information. She does not believe any Board member wants to add more staff, and yet it is an impossible task to keep up with these regulations.) Item 6.21. Copy of letter dated September 25, 1998, from Ms. Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator, to Ms. Bill Brent, Executive Director, Albemarle County Service Authority, re: Camelot Sewage Treatment Plan, Zoning Use Determination, was received for information. (Mr. Martin asked Mr. Tucker to explain this item. Mr. Tucker explained that Mr. Brent made the request on behalf of the Rapidan Service Authority. The question is, what does the Rapidan Service Authority have to do to acquire the Camelot Sewage Treatment Plant? Ms. McCulley, in her letter, is saying that Rapidan will have to apply for an amendment to the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance to require a special use permit for them to acquire and operate this plant in Albemarle County. There will need to be a public hearing on the request. This is an issue between Greene County and Albemarle County.) October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 22) 000309 Item 6.22. Copy of letter dated September 4, 1998, from Ms. Amelia G. McCulley, Zoning Administrator, to Ms. Cheryl Stockton, re: Official Determination of Number of Parcels - Section 10.3.1, Tax Map 89, Parcel 65, was received for information. Item 6.23. Monthly update on the FY 1998-99 Project Schedule for the Department of Engineering & Public Works as of September 23, 1998, was received for information. Item 6.24. Copy of letter dated September 3, 1998, from the Department of Education to Dr. Kevin C. Caster, Superintendent, Albemarle County Schools, providing notice that an application for support under Title I of the Improving America's Schools act of 1994, as amended by Public Law 103-382, for school year 1998-99, has been approved in the amount of $605,852.00 (State Project No. 002-99-1 for time period August 1, 1998, to September 30, 1999). This notice was received for information. Item 6.25. Notice dated June 9, 1998, from Blue Ridge Executive Transportation, Inc., providing notice that it is in the process of applying for operating authority for limousine service in Albemarle County, was received for information. Item 6.26. Copy of minutes for May 21, 1998, from the Blue Ridge Committee for Shenandoah National Park Relations, was received for information. Item 6.27. Copy of the monthly Bond Program Report for Arbor Crest Apartments (Hydraulic Road Apts.) for the month of August, 1998, was received for information. Item 6.28. Copy of Planning Commission minutes for September 15, 1998, was received for information. Item 6.29. Copy of minutes of the Board of Directors of the Albemarle County Service Authority regular sessions on June 18 and July 16, 1998, and a special session on July 30, 1998, were received for information. Item 6.30. Schedule of meetings tentatively scheduled for the FY 1999- 2000 County Operating Budget, was received for information. Item 6.31. Statement showing the Equalized Assessed Value as of the Beginning of the First Day of January, 1998 of the Property of Electric Light and Power Corporations in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State Taxes Extended for the Year 1998, as made by the State Corporation Commission of Virginia, was received for information and is on file in the Clerk's office. Item 6.32. Statement showing the Equalized Assessed Value as of the Beginning of the First Day of January, 1998 of the Property of Gas and Pipe Distribution Corporations in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the State Taxes Extended for the Year 1998, as made by the State Corporation Commission of Virginia, was received for information and is on file in the Clerk's office. Item 6.33. Statement showing the Equalized Assessed Value as of the Beginning of the First Day of January, 1998 of the Telecommunications Companies in the Commonwealth of Virginia and the Regulatory Revenue Taxes Extended for the Year 1998, as made by the State Corporation Commission of Virginia, was received for information and is on file in the Clerk's office. 0003 0 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 23) Item 6.34. Copy of letter dated October 5, 1998, from Ms. A. G. Tucker, Resident Highway Engineer, to Mr. Juan Wade, Department of Planning, re: Road Improvement requests from the Town Council of Scottsville, was received for information. Agenda Item No. 7. Approvai of Minutes: March 17(A), 1997; and July 27 and August 12, 1998. Mr. Bowerman had read August 12, 1998, and handed to the Clerk a list of words to be corrected: Page 13 - delete the words ~It will not work as per se free space loss." Pages 16, 19, 20 change the word ~meridian" to ~Iiridium". Page 18 - change the word "All-tel" to ~ALLTEL". Page 19 - at the end of the second paragraph, next to last sentence, add the word ~it" between "so" and "is". Page 19 - second sentence of paragraph three, delete Ua" and add an "s" to the word ~system". Page 19 - fourth paragraph, change the word ~Suntech" to ~Scientific". Page 20 sixth paragraph from top of page, change "It was said that cable would replace terrestrial television .... "to read "He said that it was said that cable would replace terrestrial television .... - Page 21 eighth sentence of paragraph two, change "... suggesting in his question to Mr. Denny that there was the possibility that may be a bit broader .... "to read: ... suggesting in his questions to Mr. Denny that there was the possibility that the issue may be a bit broader .... - Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Ms. Humphris, to approve those minutes which had been read. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 8a. Transportation Matters: Work Session, Six-Year Secondary Road Plan for FY 1999-2000 through FY 2004-05. Mr. Marshall noted that all local staff members of the Virginia Department of Transportation (VDOT) are attending a meeting in Richmond this mornzng, so there is no representative present today. He called on Mr. Cilimberg to proceed. Mr. Cilimberg said the Six-Year Secondary Road Construction Plan is the plan of VDOT for the allocation of road construction funds for a six-year period. It consists of a priority list of projects and a financial implemen- tation plan. It is based on local priorities adopted by the Board of Super- visors (the County Priority List of Road Improvements). The Planning Commis- sion has reviewed and recommended approval of a list of proposed Secondary Road improvements. Also included is a list of projects requested by the Town of Scottsville that was received too late for the Commission to review. Mr. Cilimberg said the final allocations for the Six-Year Secondary Plan were just received by VDOT'S Charlottesville Residency Office (after review by the Planning Commission). The final allocation increased due to TEA-21 moneys by over $3.6 million making a grand total of $31,652,436.00 for the six years. All of the additional funds have been allocated to the Meadow Creek Parkway Phase II project. The additional funds are not needed for any projects planned for development in the next fiscal year (The County will review project allocations with the next annual update of the Six-Year Plan). Mr. Cilimberg said staff has identified several changes and new projects in VDOT's proposed 1999-2005 Secondary System Construction Plan, as follows: PROJECT NUMBER DESCRIPTION AMOUNT O003' :L October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 24) Installation of signals. Pen Park Rd at Rio Rd, and, Rt 631 at 1-64'was added +$250,000 Widening Airport Rd (Rt. 649). Increased +$500 000 10 Free State Road bridge project. Increased due to need to build a temporary bridge. +$400 000 11 Jarmans Gap Rd. Improvements increased due to more detailed cost estimate. +$1,153,41 12 Old Lynchburg Rd. Improvements decreased due to more detailed cost estimate. -$500 000 20 Blenheim Rd. Improvements increased based on more detailed cost estimate. +$500 000 29 Dick Woods Rd. Unpaved road project increased because extended to Rt 682. +$210 000 35 Catterton Rd (Rt 667). Request from some residents for an additional two-mile section to be paved. Other residents in the area have expressed concern/opposition to the project. VDOT is working on the issue of right-of-way and construction easement availability and has not provided additional information at this time. 36 Reservoir Rd. Unpaved road project decreased (new cost based on a per mile estimate use). -$500,000 Mr. Cilimberg said the following are projects to be deleted from the County and VDOT's Plan: Hydraulic Road from Route 29 to Lambs Road (The project has been completed), and, Lambs Road spot improvements (VDOT has determined that sight distance is adequate at this location). The following are new projects (their priority is listed in Attachment A): PROJECT NI/MBER DESCRIPTION 24 Rt. 641 installation of box culvert over Jacobs Run for $60,000 (VDOT request) 24 Rt. 641 installation of box culvert over Jacobs Run for $440,000 (VDOT request for Revenue Sharing Funds) 25 Rt. 631 at Pen Park Lane, add turn lanes (City request from two years ago) 28 Rt. 684 spot improvements (Planning Commission request - came up during discussion of the Gray Rock development) 65 Rt. 769 unpaved road (public request) 77 Rt. 760 unpaved road (public request) 41 Rt. 795 spot improvement (Scottsville request). VDOT has noted that the intersection is severely substandard and the alignment of Route 795 should be improved. They will review the cost benefit ratio of this proposed improvement and advise the County if the project is reasonable. 81 Rt. 707 unpaved road (Board of Supervisor's request) Ms. Humphris said she did not have a lot of time to study these figures, but she has noted a few numbers which differ but are not significant. She would like to get together with staff to go over those at another time because October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 25) oooai;e there is nothing the Board can do about them. It is just keeping the arithmetic straight. Ms. Thomas asked if the TEA-21 allocation is without strings. Mr. Cilimberg said the TEA-21 is the standard allocation under the Commonwealth Transportation Board's (CTB) formula. It is more money through the State from the Federal government. It is allocated under the normal allocation formula. It is not pulling out a particular project and saying that all of the funds should go to the project. VDOT asked staff, for this year, to put the additional $3.6 million available for the six years into the Meadow Creek Parkway Phase II project. Since the design of the Airport Road project is expected to be completed within the next year, there may be a need to shift some of that money around. Ms. Humphris asked if staff has determined why the County is not getting the Federal STP funds for the Meadow Creek Parkway as long as it is in the Secondary System because a lot of other localities are getting those funds. Mr. Cilimberg said staff has asked the question, but has not gotten a response. Staff got a response about the changes in the Primary Plan (Note: See letter of October 5, 1998, from Ms. Angela Tucker, listed as Item 6.34 on today's Consent Agenda). Mr. Cilimberg said staff continues to receive correspondence about Catterton Road. It is 34th on VDOT's list and 58th on the County's. Among the unpaved road projects, it is the eighth project. In Angela Tucker's letter of October 5, 1998, she states that the right-of-way is not available on Catterton Road (Route 667) from Route 776 to Route 601. She suggests that the project be withheld from the plan until the property owners formally request its inclusion after dedicating the necessary right-of-way. There is additional opposition to the paving of this road. Some residents support the paving of the road, and some are in opposition. The public will have the opportunity to speak at the public hearing. While some right-of-way may be available, there is a question as to whether the necessary construction easements are available. Ms. Humphris said it appears to her that VDOT "is dancing around this situation." She would like to know what it means when VDOT says they might need significant construction easements. Does that mean that VDOT would consider using eminent domain? Mr. Cilimberg said the easements would not be permanent. He does not know how those easements are obtained. Mr. Davis said VDOT can obtain temporary easements, but they cannot negotiate for them. Ms. Humphris said she does not understand why VDOT is pushin9 to get that section of road paved when there is so much opposition. Mr. Cilimberg said it is not VDOT's pushing the project, they are just responding to a public request. Now they have gotten into the middle of an unexpected controversy. Mr. Martin said one must assume that the people who donated the right- of-way have since moved, and other people now object. Mr. Cilimberg said he received an E-mail from the Ashcom's who said they were not clear about the amount of right-of-way that would be needed. Ms. Thomas said she would like to bring the Board members up-to-date on a project on Broad Axe Road, which was a road the public had wanted paved for many, many years. The people living along the road had carefully determined that the road would be built to mountain standards so it would not change the mountain countryside. It was built to mountain standards instead of the usual standards and it has some fairly sharp turns and some grade, but it also has some straight sections. It was agreed upon by everyone that it would be built to mountain standards with a 35 mph speed limit. That 35 mph was never recog- nized, and now a radar test has been done and it determined that people are driving at 45 mph. The road has been posted at 45 mph. The road was built largely because it was so dangerous for children (it was on the top of the school bus drivers hit list for bad roads). She is now getting calls from parents saying the road is far too dangerous at 45 mph. Ms. Tucker said VDOT will go back and do another testing of the speed limit, but it has already gone through the CTB. It will be a big deal now to get the speed limit dropped to 35 mph. She just wanted the Board to know the situation here, and compare it to the request for Catterton Road. This project was the most October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 26) 000,3 13 carefully done of road projects with a lot of input from the citizens. Now people wish it had not turned out the way it has. Mr. Marshall said ownership changes. Philosophy changes. One of the letters was from a lady who has a 25-foot buffer of trees and she said if that buffer was removed she could not replace it because there is a gas easement across her property and she cannot plant trees over that easement. She has been living there only two years. Ms. Thomas said the situation with Catterton Road and the Route 250 West Advisory Committee with which she is involved is raising her consciousness about the network of roads in the County. If Route 250 West is not to be significantly widened, then people will be using Garth Road and Owensville Road and Miller School Road and Broad Axe Road making their way to 1-64 or to Charlottesville. She is realizing that there are instances where the rural road system should be looked at as a connection for people to get places. The Board has been using a first-come, first-served basis for the paving of rural roads. She asked if the County does anything more than that. Mr. Cilimberg said CATS addresses rural roads in terms of the area it is studying, but not the full County. Over the years, working on the Comprehen- sive Plan, rural roads have been given the lowest priority because of limited highway funding, and the need to support the growth areas. What staff has focused on in terms of rural roads are those improvements necessary to support farm-to-market kinds of situations. It has not been a system looked at in terms of a series of collector roads. Staff has relied on the fact that the County does not want the rural areas to grow, so the County does not want to do road construction and improvements that might support the growth of those areas. The dilemma the County has is that the areas are growing anyway. The focus has ended up being on minor arterials. Mr. Tucker said Crozet is on the western end of the County and it is a designated growth area. People from Crozet are trying to find other ways to get around so they are using rural roads. The dilemma is that the Board's criteria does not recognize this type of planning and the networking Ms. Thomas was talking about. If the CATS Committee could look at that, it might be another criteria to study. Ms. Thomas said another road which is high up on the priority list is Dick Woods Road. It would be a good road to pave next because it connects to the industrial road that goes to the Landfill and then on to Miller School Road. That little section could be very important if more people from Crozet are trying to get to the interstate. Right now it has a low traffic count because it is an awful road. It got on the list because it has enough houses on it that are being impacted by the dangerous, dusty conditions. She does not think this is a particularly good criteria to use to get a road on the list. Mr. Cilimberg said staff also considers traffic counts for the prioritization of unpaved roads. Ms. Thomas said based on that, Dick Woods Road might be eliminated because it has a very low traffic count. But, if the entire road network were considered, it would be a good road to pave next. Mr. David Benish, Chief of Community Development, said he would like to speak about the rating system used by staff. On an individual basis, they take into consideration what that rural road might do. The rating does not drop out any projects. It only creates a relative priority between all the projects. One example is the Planning Commission's public request for Route 684 between Crozet and Yancey Mills. That is technically a rural area road, but staff said since the road connects the edge of a growth area to an interchange on 1-64, it should be rated as a development area road. In that case, staff said that strategically the road has a function to a growth area, so they raised the score. Dick Woods Road, at the time it was entered on the plan, actually served the Ivy Landfill. After it was rated, staff gave it a higher priority because the road served a community facility. The rating system is just a way for staff to start the process objectively. In the CATS Study, some rural routes and some improvements, about which staff has reserva- tions, are shown, but that Study does recognize strategic roadways serving high traffic volume. Route 743 out to Earlysville across the Reservoir is almost entirely in the rural areas but carries a lot of traffic from the western part of the County. The model would recommend significant improve- ments to it. Staff did not recommend that, but did recognize the need for October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 27) 0003 4 safety improvements to accommodate the traffic that will be using that roadway. Mr. Cilimberg said the Route 250 West Analysis Study, and the Route 250 East Analysis Study that will begin soon, triggers discussion of roads other than just Route 250. From the Route 250 West Committee came a question of how 1-64 could be utilized to serve that same corridor for people moving from west to east or east to west. As recommendations from these two studies are received, there may be some projects on roads which have never before been considered as significant, but which may be significant for getting people out to 1-64. Mr. Benish said regarding Catterton Road (Route 667), he would like for everyone to know what is evolving. The Board is actually getting comments on what is technically two requests for projects. Over the last couple of years, there has been a request to add one mile to the existing Catterton Road project which is in the plan. The question as to whether there is right-of- way available is the main focus of the project. Recently, comments received have been about only the existing section of Route 667. Mr. Cilimberg brought the Board's attention to the list of projects which have been removed from the plan. He said what has been presented is the priority list of projects and an associated financial plan provided by V DOT out of the additional moneys from TEA-21. He said the Board does need to set a public hearing date for this highway plan. Mr. Benish said all of the attachments to the staff's report have not been updated with all of the additional VDOT monies. The Planning Commission has asked that staff emphasize to VDOT the need for accurate and updated traffic counts on secondary roads. If the Board agrees, staff will make a formal request to VDOT. Mr. Cilimberg mentioned that the October 5, 1998, letter from Ms. Tucker said there are no roads eligible for the Pave-in-Place program on the Six-Year Plan. Staff had asked V DOT to go back and look at all of the unpaved road projects to see if any would qualify for this new program. Mr. Benish said he thinks that is the process that will occur. When a project is entered on the list, VDOT will screen the road to see if it qualifies for this program. If it does not, it will go on the plan in the usual manner. Mr. Cilimberg said staff has been made aware that VDOT will furnish updated traffic counts for projects in the Six-Year Plan over the next year so there will be up-to-date traffic counts to work with. Ms. Humphris said in the Secondary Construction Program, page 2 shows the Meadow Creek Parkway with previous funding shown to be $814,000.00. She thought there was more money in that item. She asked why that does not show on this sheet. Mr. Benish said staff is still trying to get an answer to that question. They think it is an error. The plan adopted a year ago shows $1.1 million. Mr. Cilimberg said Ms. Tucker does not know where the money went. Ms. Humphris said the Board moved money in, not out of this project. Mr. Benish said Ms. Tucker believes it is a mathematical error on the part of VDOT, but the money shows somewhere else in the plan, and she does not know where it is at this time. Mr. Tucker said if there were no further questions, staff has made a recommendation that the public hearing on this matter be scheduled for October 21. Motion was then offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Ms. Humphris, to set the public hearing on the 1999-2000 to 2004-2005 Six-Year Secondary Road Plan for October 21, 1998. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 8b. Other Transportation Matters. Mr. Marshall said since Ms. Tucker was not present today, the Board would skip this item. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) 00{D32~.5 (Page 28) Agenda Item No. 9. Presentation: Thomas Jefferson Area Community Criminal Justice Board, Update on Activities of, by Dave Pastors. Mr. Pastors said that last fall he was appointed to represent the County on the Community Criminal Justice Board (CCJB). The Board was formed in 1995 in response to Governor Allen's patrol reform legislation. In addition to overseeing criminal justice matters in this area, the Board is in the midst of preparing a comprehensive criminal justice plan for this area. He then introduced Mr. Bruce Carveth, the Criminal Justice Planner for this area who is with the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission and who serves as staff for the CCJB. Mr. Carveth said he would like to up-date the Board of Supervisors on the status of the plan they have been working on, and on the recent and future activities of the CCJB. Last year they released a report relating to crime patterns in the nine localities which this CCJB serves. This year they have completed a report on local probation services and pretrial services (a copy of that report dated September, 1998 had been forwarded to the Board members). Future reports, all of which are background status reports, will deal with court activity, electronic monitoring, and the jails in the area. Last year, they assisted six localities in the preparation of grant requests for development of victim/witness services. All six of those localities are being served by new programs. Mr. Carveth said that two years ago this area took the lead in the formation of an association that is statewide. It brings all CCJB's together. Albemarle's Commonwealth's Attorney, Jim Camblos, was instrumental in bringing that about and currently is the Chairperson of that organization. The primary function of the Association is to assist in educating its members about legislative issues. Mr. Carveth said as part of regional criminal justice activities, they will hold a series of public meetings intended to make sure the views and goals of the local citizenry are heard as part of the planning process at an early stage. Charlottesville/Albemarle citizens will be invited to meetings on November 19 and December 2. These meetings are being held so the public can discuss issues related to corrections in the area. Also, on October 23, they are sponsoring a Criminal Justice Forum at the Jefferson-Madison Regional Library dealing with pre-trail services and restorative justice. Mr. Carveth said the CCJB has, so far, made steps toward developing a rational approach to local probation, pretrial services and other community correction issues. The law enforcement people in the area have had an opportunity every other month to sit down and talk about common problems. He thanked the Board members for hearing this report and offered to answer questions. Mr. Pastors said the CCJB thanks the County for serving as the fiscal agent for the CCJB and for the programs in the area which covers nine regions. He said the CCJB is fortunate to have a criminal justice planner like Mr. Carveth. There are 36 CCJB's across the state and only seven of these have criminal justice planners. This position was made available through a grant two years ago. It was a four-year grant. They are in the process now of lobbying the legislators to see the value in criminal justice planning with the hope that in two years, not only will this position be covered by state funding, but also other planners will be provided to CCJB's across the state. If their efforts are not successful, they may have to come to the Board of Supervisors in two years seeking support for these positions. Mr. Marshall thanked Mr. Pastors and Mr. Carveth for the presentation. Agenda Item No. 10. Update on Neighborhood Activities by Lee Catlin. Ms. Catlin said Albemarle County's Neighborhood Team initiated a number of neighborhood-based activities during the past several years. These included the establishment of a matching grant fund providing seed money to neighborhoods which had identified enhancement projects and were willing to ~match" the County's contribution ($1000.00 maximum) with an equal value in time, donated materials, money, etc. The fund was allocated $10,000.00 during FY 1997-98, the first year of operation. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 29) Ms. Catlin said applications were made available to all interested neighborhoods and the process publicized through various channels including the news media, the County's home page on the Internet, inserts mailed with tax tickets and the County's monthly newsletter. By the end of the 12-month grant period (June 30th), seven grants had been given out. Six of those grants were for $1000.00 each from the Neighborhood Matching Grant Program, one grant came from the School Division's Facilities Management Program. Ms. Catlin listed the programs as: The Southern Albemarle Organization renovated the W. D. Ward Center; the Whitewood Neighborhood Association established an apartment at that complex for use as a community space/meeting room; the Batesville Ruritans had a master planning program; the Brookmill Neighborhood Association had a restoration activity for Meadow Creek which runs through their community; the Hillsboro Community Association had a community center rehabilitation; the Earlysville Area Resident's League had a project to improve the grounds of the community gathering space in their neighborhood; the Woodbrook Neighborhood Association, in cooperation with the School Division, did a landscaping project at the Woodbrook Elementary School. Ms. Catlin said people were given twelve months past the time when their grant was awarded to complete their project, so not all projects are completed, but they are progressing. The neighborhoods feel this was a galvanizing type of program for them. For their efforts, and with money from the County, they were able to do some projects they felt brought them together and it gave their efforts a visible meaning to the neighborhood. The money remaining in the fund at the end of the fiscal year was reappropriated into the current year, so there is about $14,000.00 to give away to neighborhoods. In the next couple of weeks, the availability of these funds will be advertised. Ms. Catlin said in Spring, 1998 a neighborhood conference called Neighborhood Connections, was held. About 50 neighborhood representatives attended. They felt this was a good opportunity, but they wanted more time to look at topics. Staff proposes to hold, in cooperation with the City and their neighborhood efforts, a joint community-wide Neighborhood Leadership Institute. There will be four sessions beginning in November. The closing session will be in February where they will discuss regional issues, resources available, regional organizations and partnerships. They hope to recruit 15 people from each the City and the County to take part. This is modeled after the Police Academy idea. Staff is focusing on recruitment at this time. They want to attract people who will be best served by the program. They want a diverse group geographically, socio-economically, and in all ways. Staff would appreciate receiving comments from the Board concerning this effort. Agenda Item No. 11. PUBLIC HEARING to consider the proposed renewal of a lease agreement for the Old Crozet School property located in Western Albemarle County to the Crossroads-Waldorf School as tenant. The public hearing is being held pursuant to Virginia code Section 15.2-1800(B). (Advertised in the Observer on September 29, 1998.) Mr. Marshall said the Building Committee members (Marshall, Perkins, Huff) met to discuss this request and this is their proposal to the other Board members. Mr. Tucker said that for the past six years, the County has leased the Old Crozet School to the Crossroads-Waldorf School, most recently at an annual rent of $28,254.00. Crossroads-Waldorf is interested in executing a new lease to begin July 15, 1999, upon the expiration of the current agreement. The new lease is proposed for a period of four years with the tenant having the option to renew the lease for two additional terms of one year each. The proposal stipulates that the tenant must exercise the option to renew the lease for the two additional terms by notifying the County on or before July 1, 2001. The County retains the right to terminate the lease by providing twelve months' written notice. Mr. Tucker said the proposal stipulates that the annual rent paid by the tenant increases by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) plus an additional $3000.00 for each year of the agreement. The tenant is responsible for maintenance and repairs to the property that cost less than $2000.00 up to a maximum of October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 30) 000317 $5000.00 annually with the County being responsible for any repair costing more than $2000.00. Additionally, the County agrees to undertake several projects which are scheduled in the County's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) including repair or replacement of the roof as necessary, repoint failing brick, paint the exterior of the building as necessary and replace windows as needed. The tenant further agrees to maintain an aggressivemaintenance program acceptable to the County to assure that the premises are maintained in a good and safe fashion. Mr. Marshall said the Committee did not want to get into a situation like the County had at Greenwood School. The Committee feels the County will have a future use for this building, and this is an opportunity to maintain the building other than having it done entirely at the taxpayer's expense. The Committee feels the County needs to hold onto this property. He asked for Board comments before opening the public hearing. Ms. Thomas asked if anything ever came of the University of Virginia engineering students' study that was to be done of the building. Mr. Tucker said he did not know the status of that study. Ms. Thomas said when the Board discussed this lease last year, there were questions as to how this fits into the Crozet Community plan. She said the Board has not had an update since that time. Mr. Tucker said there have been no changes. There were comments made that this building could possibly be used for a library or similar facility. There are no proposals before the County at this time. With no further comments from Board members, the public hearing was opened. Mr. Tom Loach, a resident of Crozet, spoke first. He said he was surprised at the notice in the newspaper about continuing the lease of the old Crozet School. Despite the old school being the only public facility and land available in Crozet, and being on record last year with the Board requesting that the potential use of this facility for public use be explored, there was no effort made to get community input prior to this meeting. This would not be bad if the conditions in question in Crozet at the time of the first lease were correct, or planned for. Conditions include an ever escalating school population, inadequacy of the Crozet library, and the almost complete absence of any social or extra school educational facilities within the Community of Crozet for its youth. The conditions are still present and continue to be exacerbated by a continuing population explosion. Mr. Loach said a detailed analysis of the potential use of the old school was carried out by the Engineering School at the University of Virginia. The report said that ~Because of its proximity to downtown Crozet, its history of public use, and its significance as a community landmark, the Old Crozet Elementary School is well-suited for use as a public facility to serve Crozet and the western part of Albemarle County. Reuse as a public facility directly meets the priorities and goals for downtown revitalization, resource protection, and preservation of scenic and historic resources as expressed in both the County of Albemarle's Land Use Plan and the Crozet Community study." Mr. Loach said there is a County committee which is about to make a report, and he hopes that part of their recommendation will state ~infra- structure shall be provided concurrent with the rate of development." This has not been the case in Crozet. The build-out analysis done by CHK Associates will show a potential population in the Crozet Growth Area of over 11,000 persons. The Board of Supervisors has had no trouble in approving enough development to double the population of Crozet from its 1990 Census levels. The Board is discussing this lease extension without input from the community. He said people in Crozet will think the absence of community input prior to this meeting was deliberate. Mr. Loach said the Crossroads-Waldorf School has been a good neighbor, and a good steward of the old school. He would have welcomed them into discussions with the community of Crozet to see if the needs of all parties could have been met. OCtober 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) 000~i~ (Page 31) Mr. Bowerman asked if Mr. Loach believes the continuation of the lease is inconsistent with an eventual transitional use. Mr. Loach said at the first leasing, he assumed the community would be moving in that direction. Now, two years later, they are back to square one saying there is planning for a possible six-year extension of the lease. If, in fact, there had been a plan in place to meet the infrastructure needs of the community, that would have been a different case. Since this is the only facility, he believes there should have been an ongoing discussion to meet these needs. Mr. Marshall said the County can cancel the lease at any time by giving a year's notice. Ms. Humphris said she does not remember hearing about the study by the University Engineering School before todaY. How does one get a copy? Mr. Loach said he got his copy from Mr. Bruce Dotson. Mr. Martin said he also had never heard about the studY. Mr. Marshall said he also did not know about the study. Ms. Thomas said she knew a study had been proposed, but she had never seen the study. Ms. Humphris asked how the Board would take advantage of the information if they were not provided a copy. Mr. Loach said the community would have been interested in holding open discussions with all involved. Ms. Humphris said she is dismayed that Mr. Loach thinks the Board did something deliberately. The Board is trying to do the right thing by keeping the school in excellent condition until it can be determined what will be done with the building. She thought the Board was doing a good job. Mr. Loach said he would agree if two years ago when citizens in Crozet first asked for a plan for the long-term use of the school, something had occurred. Nothing has occurred in that time period. Second, what he alluded to is the appearance. No community input was requested prior to this item being placed on the Board's agenda. He thinks somebody should have sat down with people in the community before the meeting today. Crozet is growing rapidly. The Board just approved 154 homes at Gray Rock, and later this month, there is a request for another 190 homes on the Wayland property. He has heard talk of a proposed development on Jarman's Gap Road. He thinks that meeting infrastructure needs should not always come after the fact. Ms. Thomas said it sounds like citizens in Crozet do not feel the County has followed up with the kind of planning that a year ago they thought would occur. She does not think the criticism expressed by Mr. Loach has to do with the Crossroads-Waldorf School itself. The criticism has to do with the planning Crozet had hoped the County would be engaged in with them. Mr. Loach said that is the correct interpretation of his comments. He believes that if the County and the Board had been as good stewards of the potential use of the school as Crossroads-Waldorf has been good stewarts of the use of the school, then he would not be present this morning. Mr. John Dent, Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Crossroads- Waldorf School, spoke. He feels that ultimately the school building should be used for the community. Crossroads-Waldorf proposes to occupy the building for about four more years while conducting a capital fund drive. They hope to purchase property and build, or occupy another building permanently which is closer to Charlottesville. They want to increase their enrollment potential. In the meantime, they will take very good care of the school. In the future, if they cannot find another location closer to town, or if there is sentiment among the people using the school, they could possibly try something coopera- tively with the Crozet residents on that property. He said a number of people at the school are Crozet residents, and he is very interested in the develop- ment of Crozet. He offered to answer questions. Ms. Katie Hobbs, a resident of the County, spoke. She asked that the Board delay discussion of the contract until it has read the University engineering report. She is amazed that nobody knew about the report. Mr. Marshall said that would not be fair to the Crossroads-Waldorf School. He said that if a community use for the building is proposed, and the County has the funds for that use, the lease can be canceled with a year's notice. He feels this contract is the County's best option to keep the October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 32) building from deteriorating. Mr. Bowerman asked if time is critical to the contract. Mr. Marshall said it is for the school. Mr. Dent said that any uncertainty has a negative effect and the school would appreciate there being prompt approval of the contract. He, personally, is willing to work with Mr. Loach and his group over the next couple of years about a use for the property. He said the Crossroads-Waldorf School is already recruiting for studenus for the next school year. Mr. Martin said he does not think it could hurt anything to wait for two weeks. Nothing the Board is going to do will happen in the next year. Ms. Humphris said whatever the report alludes to will be of interest to the County over time, but not in the next year or so. She does not think any good would come of not approving the lease today. Mr. David Stevens, School Administrator of Crossroads-Waldorf School, said if the lease is renewed, they would be happy to facilitate a discussion with Crozet residents. They will make the school available for such meetings. They understand their concerns. With no one else from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was closed. Ms. Humphris offered motion thau the Board approve the execution of the lease agreement for the Old Crozet School property located in Western Albemarle County to the Crossroads-Waldorf School as tenant. The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin. Ms. Thomas said the Board has certainly heard things today that it heard a year ago and paid no attention to at the time. She does not think the Board should simply vote to renew the lease for four years unless it is determined to undertake a study of the best use of the property and involve the community in that study. It seems that every year Crozet residents come to the Board and say the County is not paying any attention to their infrastructure needs. The Board nods politely and renews the lease. She does not find that to be a satisfactory response. She does not know what words should be added to the motion, because just flatly renewing the lease is not what needs to be done for the community of Crozet. Mr. Marshall said he thinks the Board has to renew the lease for economic reasons. The whole reason for renting the building is to keep the property for the use of Crozet. He does not know who will bring forth a plan for the use of the building. He thinks Mr. Loach and his committee can take the study and they can always present a plan which can be dealt with at a future time. All the Board needs to do this morning is to deal with the lease and the preservation of this piece of property for the future use of that community. Ms. Humphris said the reason she made the motion to renew this lease alone is just to keep the issues separate. If the Board approves the lease, which she thinks the Board should do, then the Board should firm up the questions that need to be answered on the Crozet part of the problem. She does not know how to state those questions at this time. Mr. Martin said he has some reservations. If the Board asks for anything from the community or from County staff concerning uses for the building, it has to be sure it is not making a commitment of any kind. He is concerned that the citizens might take such a request for a preliminary stamp of approval by the Board on their suggestions. Mr. Bowerman asked if the vote can be delayed for two weeks. He would like to have a chance to read the University's engineering report, respect the community of Crozet, and have Mr. Perkins present for that decision. He agrees that the lease should be signed. He thinks it is in the best interest of Crozet and the County. In light of the fact that new information was mentioned today, he does not think that will put the school in jeopardy, or the preservation of the facility. Mr. Martin said the Board did not ask for the engineering report. He said he has seen a lot of reports come out of the University which are done by October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 33) 000320 students who are being theoretical. He said it is probably a great project in terms of an academic exercise, but not necessary based on the reality of the situation. Mr. Tucker said he does not think the Board should focus solely on this particular building, but on Crozet's facility needs. He suggested that staff conduct a work session on November 4 on the community facility needs for the Crozet Community as set out in the Comprehensive Plan. He is afraid that if the news media picks up on this story, it may hurt the school's ability to recruit, even though it may be four years before they move. He would prefer that the question be looked at in a broader perspective knowing the lease can be cancelled. Ms. Humphris said that is why she is opposed to delaying the approval of the lease. She does not want to see this in the media because it could hurt the school. She does not think there is any reason to do that. Mr. Bowerman suggested that as part of the lease approval set a course of action the Board intends to follow, such as that suggested by Mr. Tucker. Mr. Martin said that course of action is to take a look at facility needs in total. Mr. Bowerman said he heard the Board did that before and has not progressed far. Mr. Martin said if the Board has not done anything to date it may indicate that this building is not what is needed. That is why he does not want to focus on this building because then the Board gets plans, and it seems as if the Board has already given approval for something. Mr. Marshall said this lease will preserve that piece of property in case it is needed. Mr. Bowerman said he agrees with that. He asked Mr. Marshall if he sees a necessity to approve the lease today. Mr. Marshall said he does. He likes things to be ~cut and dried" and what the Board would be doing by approving this lease today, the School can go about their business, and the Board can go about its business. It does not mean the citizens of Crozet cannot use the building in the future. Once someone submits suggested uses and shows where the funds will come from, he will support it. Ms. Humphris asked if staff will bring all of the people and reports, if any, that the Board needs to review to have a general discussion of the issue. Mr. Tucker said that was his suggestion; that the Board look at the building and property in a broader sense. Where this may have gotten lost two years ago, has been a problem with the whole Comprehensive Plan review. That review has been delayed and has not followed a normal routine. Bringing in consul- tants throws staff off of the normal process of getting the Comprehensive Plan completed and adopted. Staff is trying to deal with it by bringing different elements of the Comprehensive Plan to the Board for approval, one by one. Mr. Marshall said it may well be that the County will not do anything with that property for four or six more years. At this time, Mr. Marshall asked for a vote on the motion as set out above. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. THIS LEASE AGREEMENT, made by and between THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, (hereinafter called "Landlord"), and CROSSROADS WALDORF SCHOOL, a Virginia nonstock corporation (hereinafter called "Tenant"). SECTION i This Section 1 is an integral part of this Lease and all of the terms hereof are incorporated into this Lease in all respects. In addition to the other provisions that are elsewhere defined in this Lease, the following, whenever used in this Lease shall have the meaning set forth in this Section, and only such meaning, unless such meanings are expressly contradicted, limited or expanded elsewhere in this Lease: 1.1 Date of Lease. July 15, 1999. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 34) 00032 1.2 Premises. That certain lot or parcel of land, known as the Old Crozet Elementary School, Albemarle County, Virginia, as described on Exhibit A attached hereto and made a part hereof together with any and all improvements thereon here- inafter the "Premises" or "Property"). 1.3 Commencement Date. July 15, 1999. This Lease shall be effective and commence on July 15, 1999, the date of expiration of the Lease between the same Landlord and Tenant dated July 15, 1996. 1.4 Term. A period of four (4) years following the Commencement Date, subject to earlier termination by landlord upon providing 12 months advance written notice in accordance with section 16.1 of this Lease if the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors deter-mines that the premises are necessary to provide a public use or service. 1.5 Option to Renew. Tenant shall have the option to renew the Lease for two (2) additional terms of one {1) year each. Tenant shall exercise this option to renew by providing written notice in accordance with Section 16.1 of this Lease on or before July 1, 2001. In addition, Tenant agrees to notify Landlord in writing on or before July 1 of each year during the term of the Lease whether or not Tenant intends to exercise the option to renew. The renewal term shall be on the same terms and conditions of this Lease, except as expressly agreed to by the parties. The rent to be paid by Tenant during the renewal term(s) shall be calculated according to Section 1.7 of this Lease. Notwithstanding Tenant's right to exercise this Option, Landlord may terminate this Lease by providing 12 months advance written notice in accordance with Section 16.1 of this Lease. 1.6 Rent. The annual rent payable by Tenant during the first year of the Term, from July 15, 1999 through July 14, 2000, shall be calculated as follows: The annual rent paid by Tenant in the year ending July 15, 1999, the last year under the lease agreement dated July 15, 1996, shall be increased by the percentage of the annual percentage increase in the cost of living ("CPI") index, as defined herein, as deter- mined during the budget cycle for all County contracts for the 1998-99 fiscal year plus an additional $3,000. Landlord shall notify Tenant in writing at least thirty (30) days prior to the commencement of this Lease as to the amount of annual rent for the first year of the initial period. This annual rent amount shall be payable in equal monthly installments in advance on the first day of each month during the term of this Lease, commencing on July 15, 1999. 1.7 Rent Adjustment. For each of the lease years two, three and four and for any renewal terms as set out in Section 1.5 of this Lease, the rentals shall be increased annually, each year above the preceding year, by an amount equal to the annual percentage increase in the CPI Index, as defined herein, for the preceding lease year plus $3,000. The CPI Index shall be the U. S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Consumer Price Index, but if the CPI Index shall be discontinued, Landlord shall designate an appropriate substitute index or form having the same general acceptance as to use and reliability as the CPI Index and such substitute shall be used as if originally designated herein, but no retroactive adjustments shall be made. 1.8 Security Deposit. Tenant has, prior to the commencement of this Lease, deposited the sum of Two Thousand Five Hundred Dollars ($2500.00) with Landlord as security deposit. Prior to the termination or expiration of this Lease, if Landlord makes any deduction from this security deposit for charges arising under this Lease or by law, Tenant agrees to pay Landlord such sums as may be necessary to offset such deduc- October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 35) tions to replenish and maintain the security deposit in the amount set forth above. This security deposit shall be held by Landlord to secure Tenant's full compliance with the terms of this Lease. Within thirty (30) days after the termination or expiration of this Lease, Landlord may apply the security deposit to the payment of any damages Landlord has suffered due to Tenant's failure to maintain the Property, to surrender possession of the Property thoroughly cleaned and in good condition (reasonable wear and tear excepted) or to fully comply with the terms of this Lease and any balance, if any, to unpaid rent. Landlord shall provide Tenant with an itemized accounting, in writing, showing all such deductions. Within this thirty (30) day period, Landlord will give or mail to Tenant the security deposit, less any deductions. To assist Landlord, Tenant shall give Landlord written notice of Tenant's new address before Tenant vacates the Property. During the terms of occupancy under this Lease, if Landlord determines that any deductions are to be made from this security deposit, Landlord shall give written notice to Tenant of such deduction within thirty (30) days of the time Landlord determines that such deduction should be made. This provision applies only to such deductions made thirty days or more before the termination of this Lease. If Landlord sells or otherwise transfers all or any interest in the Property during the initial or renewal term(s) of this Lease, Tenant agrees that Landlord may transfer this security deposit to the purchaser who in such event shall be obligated to comply with the provisions of this section. 1.9 Permitted Uses. Tenant may use the Premises for the operation and maintenance of a school, and/or any business that Tenant is permitted to engage under the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance. Tenant agrees to maintain in good condition and repair (including replacements when necessary) all fire alarms and extinguishers as required by current local zoning and building authorities, to be inspected at least annually and recharged as necessary, and to bear a tag indicating the date of each such inspection and servicing. Tenant agrees not to store or maintain any equipment on any portion of the parking area of the Property. Tenant further agrees to immediately clean up any spillage of trash or debris, that shall occur in connection with the use of any dumpster or other trash collection container. Tenant shall maintain all sidewalks adjacent to the Property in a broom- clean condition at all times, and shall promptly arrange for the removal of snow or ice on such areas. SECTION 2 Grant and Term 2.1 Grant. In consideration of the rents agreed to be paid and of the covenants and agreements made by the respective parties hereto, Landlord demises and leases to Tenant and Tenant hereby leases from Landlord the Premises, upon the terms and conditions herein provided, subject to the terms and conditions of this Lease. 2.2 Term. Subject to the terms, covenants and agreements contained herein, Tenant shall have and hold the Premises for the entire Term, and any subsequent terms as provided by Section 1.5, subject to termination by the Landlord. SECTION 3 Utilities and Taxes October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 36) 3.1 3.2 3.3 4.1 5.1 5.2 Utility Charges. Tenant shall be responsible for and pay when due all charges for heat, water, gas, electricity, water, sewer, telephone, janitorial, garbage disposal service or any other utility services used or consumed in the Premises. Taxes. During the term of this Lease, Landlord agrees to pay the real estate taxes assessed against the Premises, if applicable, and Tenant agrees to pay any personal property taxes assessed against its property located in or on the Premises. Net Lease. This is a net lease (except as provided for herein) and the rent, utilities and all other sums payable hereunder by Tenant shall be paid without notice, demand, set-off, counterclaim, deduction, or defense and, except as otherwise expressly provided herein, without abatement or suspension. SECTION 4 Subletting and Assignment Consent. Tenant will not sublet the Premises or any part thereof or transfer possession or occupancy thereof to any person, firm or corporation, or transfer, assign, mortgage, pledge or encumber this Lease, without the prior written consent of Landlord, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. SECTION 5 Use and Upkeep of Premises Use. Tenant shall use and occupy the Premises for the purposes specified in Section 1.9 and only in accordance with applicable Federal, state and local regulations. Tenant is responsible for the proper installation and operation of its equipment, and for securing and maintaining all necessary licenses, permits or other authorizations, that may be required for the operation of its business. Maintenance and Upkeep. Tenant shall keep the Property clean, neat, orderly, presentable and in good repair at all times. During the term of this Lease, Tenant shall be responsible for all repairs and maintenance of the Property and the improvements located thereon, except as provided below, whether ordinary or extraordinary, structural or non- structural, foreseen or unforeseen, including, but not limited to, roof, exterior walls, plumbing, heating, electrical, air conditioning plate glass and windows, it being understood that Landlord shall have no obligation or responsibility for any maintenance or repairs to the Property or the improvements located thereon that are less than $2,000.00. Tenant's obligation to pay for repairs shall not exceed $5,000.00 in the aggregate in any one year of the initial or subsequent term(s). For any repairs costing more than $2,000.00, Tenant agrees to pay the first $2,000.00 per repair, subject to the annual $5,000.00 limitation set forth in the preceding paragraph. Landlord agrees to pay the balance of any repair over $2,000.00, provided that Landlord's obligation to pay for repairs shall only apply to repairs to the building and not to any equipment provided by Tenant in the building or to the grounds. All repairs over $2,000.00 shall require prior approval of the Landlord. Any obligation to pay for repairs is subject to and contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. If funds for such repairs are not appropriated, Tenant agrees that its sole remedy shall October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 37) 0008 4 be to elect to terminate this Lease and further agrees that it shall not be entitled to any damages of any kind. Landlord agrees to undertake the following specific repairs: repair or replace the roof as necessary, repoint failing brick, paint the exterior of the building as necessary, and replace windows as needed, if such work has not been completed prior to the effective date of this Lease Agreement. All such repairs shall be subject to and contingent upon appropriation of funds by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. Tenant accepts the Property "as is" on the effective date hereof. Landlord makes no representations or indemnities as to the condition of the Property. Roof repair or replacement work shall include the permanent repair or replacement of ceilings or ceiling joists noted prior to the commencement of this Lease as being structu- rally problematic and in need of repair. The parties agree that, while the Landlord's use of interior support pillars in the building shall be acceptable as a temporary cure for any such ceiling or ceiling joist problems affecting any particular room, Landlord will make its best efforts to complete permanent repairs affecting these areas prior to the commencement of Tenant's 1999-2000 school year, subject to the limitations specified in this section concerning appropriation of funds. In addition, the parties agree, upon completion of the permanent repairs contemplated by this paragraph, Landlord will remove any temporary interior support pillars. 5.3 Tenant Installation and Upkeep. During the term of this Lease, Tenant may, at its own expense, and with Landlord's prior written consent, make or cause to be made any interior non-structural alternations, additions or improvements that do not damage or alter the structures located on the Property, and/or alter or remodel the exterior landscaping, provided that Tenant shall obtain all required government permits for such alterations, additions or improvements. Upon expiration or sooner termination of this Lease, Landlord shall have the option (exercisable upon sixty (60) days' notice to Tenant except in the case of a termination of this Lease due to a default by Tenant, in which case no such notice shall be required) to require Tenant to remove at Tenant's sole cost and expense any and all improvements made by Tenant to the Property or to elect to keep such improvements as Landlord's property. In the event Tenant is required to remove any improvements, Tenant shall be responsible for the repair of all damage caused by the installation or removal thereof, and if Tenants fails to properly remove such improvements or provide for the repair of the Property, Landlord may perform the same at Tenant's sole cost and expense. During the term of this Lease, Tenant shall maintain an aggressive maintenance program acceptable to the Landlord to assure that the premises are maintained in good and safe order. Tenant shall, in addition, inspect any work undertaken by Landlord pursuant to Section 5.2 under guidelines established by the Albemarle County Engineer, provided, however, acceptance or rejection of such work shall be in the sole discretion of the Albemarle County Engineer. 5.4 Tenant Signs. Tenant may, at its own expense, subject to the Landlord's prior written approval and Albemarle County signage ordinances and other applicable laws and regulations, install a business sign on the Property. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 38) 0003;25 5.5 Tenant Maintenance and Condition of Premises Upon Surrender. Tenant will keep the Premises and the fixtures and equipment therein in good order and condition (defined as at least the same state of repair and condition as existed as of the Commencement Date), will suffer no waste or injury thereto, and will, at the expiration or other termination of the term thereof, surrender and deliver up the same in like good order and condition as the premises shall be at the commencement of the term of this Lease, ordinary wear and tear excepted. 5.6 Tenant Equipment. Maintenance and repair of Tenant-supplied equipment such as special light fixtures, kitchen fixtures, auxiliary heating, ventilation, or air-conditioning equip- ment, private bathroom fixtures and any other type of special equipment together with related plumbing or electrical services, or Tenant rugs, carpeting and drapes within the Premises, whether installed by Tenant or by Landlord on behalf of Tenant, shall be the sole responsi- bility of Tenant, and Landlord shall have no obligation in connection therewith. Notwithstanding the provisions hereof, in the event that repairs required to be made by Tenant become immediately necessary to avoid possible injury or damage to persons or property, Landlord may, but shall not be obligated to, make repairs to Tenant's equipment at Tenant's expense. Within ten (10) days after Landlord renders a bill for the cost of said repairs, Tenant shall reimburse Landlord. 5.7 Illegal and Prohibited Uses. Tenant will not use or permit the Premises or any part thereof to be used for any disorderly, unlawful or extra-hazardous purpose. Tenant will not use or permit the Premises to be used for any purposes that interfere with the use and enjoyment by adjoining property owners. 5.8 Title and Covenant Against Liens. The Landlord's title is and always shall be paramount to the title of the Tenant and nothing contained in this Agreement shall empower the Tenant to do any act that can, shall or may encumber the title to the Landlord. Tenant covenants and agrees not to suffer or permit any lien of mechanics or materialmen to be placed upon or against the Premises or against the Tenant's leasehold interest in the Premises and, in case of any lien attaching, to immediately pay and remove same. SECTION 6 Access 6.1 Landlord's Access. Landlord, its agent or employees, shall have the right to enter the Premises during regular business hours accompanied by a representative of Tenant in order to (a) make inspections or make such repairs and maintenance to the Premises or repairs and maintenance to other premises as Landlord may deem necessary; (b) exhibit the Premises to prospective tenants during the last four (4) months of the term of this Lease; and (c) for any purpose whatsoever relating to the safety, protection or preservation of the Premises. SECTION 7 Liability 7.1 Personal Property. Ail personal property of Tenant in the Premises shall be at the sole risk of Tenant. Landlord shall not be liable for any damage thereto or for the theft or misappropriation thereof. Tenant hereby expressly releases Landlord from any liability incurred or claimed by reason of damage to Tenant's property. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 39) 00032G 7.2 Criminal Acts of Third Parties. Landlord shall not be liable in any manner to Tenant, its agents, employees, invitees or visitors for any injury or damage to Tenant, Tenant's agents, employees, invitees or visitors, or their property, caused by the criminal or intentional misconduct of third parties or of Tenant, Tenant's employees, agents, invitees or visitors. Ail claims against Landlord for any such damage or injury are hereby expressly waived by Tenant, and Tenant hereby agrees to hold harmless and indemnify Landlord from all such damages and the expense of defending all claims made by Tenant's employees, agents, invitees, or visitors arising out of such acts. 7.3 Public Liability. Landlord assumes no liability or responsibility whatsoever with respect to the conduct and operation of the business to be conducted upon the Premises. Landlord shall not be liable for any accident to or injury to any person or persons or property in or about the Premises that is caused by the conduct and operation of said business or by virtue of equipment or property of Tenant in the Premises. Tenant agrees to indemnify and hold Landlord harmless for and against any and all claims, losses, liabil- ities, damages and expenses, including attorney's fees incurred or suffered by Landlord that (a) arise from or in connection with Tenant's possession, use, occupation, management, repair, maintenance or control of the Property, or any portion thereof that arise from or in connection with any negligent or wrongful act or omission of Tenant or Tenant's agents, employees, licensees or invitees, or {b) result from any default, breach, violation or non- performance of this Lease or any provision of this Lease by Tenant. Tenant shall, at its own expense, defend any and all actions, suits or proceedings that may be brought against Landlord with respect to the foregoing or in which Landlord may be impleaded. Tenant shall pay, satisfy and discharge any and all judgments, orders and decrees that may be recovered against Landlord in connection with the foregoing and shall pay all costs, expenses, and reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Landlord in connection with such litigation. Nothing herein shall be construed as obligating Tenant to indemnify, compensate, or hold harmless Landlord for any injury to or destruction of property or person arising from any negligent or wrongful act of omission of Landlord or its agents, or any default, breach, violation or non-performance of this Lease or any term or provision herein by Landlord. 7.4 Insurance. Landlord agrees that it will, throughout the Term, insure and keep insured, for the benefit of Landlord and its respective successors in interest, all buildings and improvements on the Property. Such policy shall contain coverage against loss, damage or destruction by fire and such other hazards as are covered and protected against, at standard rates under policies of insurance commonly referred to and known as "extended coverage,,, as the same may exist from time to time. Landlord agrees to name Tenant as an additional insured on such policy, as its interest may appear. Tenant agrees that it will, throughout the Term, keep in full force and effect a policy of public liability and property damage insurance of the following character: (I) a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance insuring Tenant and Landlord against liability arising out of the ownership, use, occupancy or maintenance of the Premises and all areas appurtenant thereto with initial basic limits of not less than $2,000,000 combined single limit per occurrence. Tenant will furnish Landlord a certificate of insurance showing limits of liability, naming Landlord as additional insured and reflecting a 30-day notice of cancellation. The limits of all insurance required herein October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 40) 0003 ,7 shall be increased from time to time to reflect the increase in the consumer price index and as required by good business practice. SECTION 8 Damage 8.1 Damage. If all or any portion of the Property shall be damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, this Lease shall not be terminated or otherwise affected unless Landlord elects not to rebuild in accordance with the following provisions. Tenant hereby waives any and all rights to terminate this Lease by reason of damage to the Property by fire, or other casualty pursuant to any presently existing or hereafter enacted statute or pursuant to any other law. In the event of any damage to the Property by fire or other casualty that renders the Property untenantable in whole or in part, there shall be an abatement of the rent payable hereunder during the period of such untenantability but only if and so long as Tenant is not engaged in the conduct of its business operations in the Property and only to the extent which the Property is rendered untenantable, prorata. If all or any portion of the Property is damaged or destroyed by fire or other casualty, then all insurance proceeds under the policies referred to in the preceding sections hereof that are paid to Landlord on account of any such damage by fire or other casualty shall be paid to the Landlord or made available for the payment for repair, or replacing, or rebuilding, and the Landlord may elect as soon as practical after the damage has occurred (taking into account the time necessary to adjust the loss with the insurance company or companies) whether or not to repair or rebuild the Property or any such portion thereof to its condition immediately prior to such occurrence, provided, however, that the foregoing provisions do not require the Landlord to repair or rebuild any part of the Property, or of Tenant's fixtures, equipment, or appurtenances not constituting a part of the Property owned by Landlord. If an election to replace or rebuild is made by Landlord, than this Lease shall remain in full force and effect. If an election not to rebuild is made by the Landlord or if no election is made within ninety (90) days after such damage has occurred, then the Lease shall be deemed terminated ninety (90) days following the occurrence. SECTION 9 Events of Default and Remedies 9.1 Events of Default. Any of the following occurrences or acts shall constitute an event of default under this Lease: if Tenant, at any time during the Term, shall (i) fail to make any payment of rent or other sum herein required to be paid by Tenant for a period of five days after delivery by Landlord of written notice to Tenant that any such payment has become due, or (ii) fail to cure, immediately after notice from Landlord, any hazardous condition that Tenant has created or suffered in violation of law or this Lease, or (iii) fail to observe or perform any of the covenants in respect to assignment, subletting and encumbrance set forth in Section 5; or (iv) fail to observe or perform any other provision hereof for thirty days after Landlord shall have delivered to Tenant written notice of such failure (provided that in the case of any default referred to in this clause (iv) that cannot be cured by the payment of money and cannot with diligence be cured within such thirty-day period, if Tenant shall commence to cure the same within such thirty-day period and thereafter shall prosecute the curing of same with diligence and continuity, then the time within which such failure may be cured shall be extended for such October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 41) 000328 period not to exceed sixty days as may be necessary to complete the curing of the same with diligence and continuity). The occurrence of any of the following shall also constitute an event of default: (a) the appointment of a receiver or trustee to take possession of all or substantially all of the assets of Tenant; (b) a general assignment by Tenant for the benefit of creditors; (c) any action or proceeding commenced by or against Tenant under any insolvency or bankruptcy act, or under any other statute or regulation having as its purpose the protection of creditors and not discharged within ninety (90) days after the date of commencement, shall constitute a breach of this Lease by Tenant. Upon the happening of such event, this Lease shall, at Landlord's option, terminate ten (10) days after written notice from Landlord to Tenant. 9.2 Remedies. In each and every such event set forth in Section 9.1 above, from thenceforth and at all times thereafter, at the option of Landlord, Tenant's right of possession shall thereupon cease and terminate, and Landlord shall be entitled to the possession of the Premises and to re-enter the same without demand of rent or demand of possession of said premises and may forthwith proceed to recover possession of the Premises by process of law, any notice to quit being hereby expressly waived by Tenant. In the event of such reentry by process of law or otherwise, Tenant nevertheless agrees to remain answerable for any and all damage, deficiency or loss of rent that Landlord may sustain by such reentry, including reasonable attorney's fees and court costs. In the event Tenant files any bankruptcy proceeding, or any bankruptcy proceeding is filed against Tenant, the Tenant shall elect (and shall make every reasonable effort to cause the Trustee to elect) within 10 days of the entry of the Order of Relief whether to accept or reject the terms of this Lease and perform the same. In addition, in the event of a failure to pay rent within five (5) days of its due date, Tenant shall pay to Landlord the greater of One Hundred Dollars ($100.00) or one-half (2) of one percent (1%) of such sum for each day after the fifth day such rent or other money is late. 9.3 Rights Cumulative, Non-Waiver. No right or remedy herein conferred upon or reserved to Landlord is intended to be exclusive of any other right or remedy, and each and every right and remedy shall be cumulative and in addition to any other right or remedy given hereunder or now and hereafter existing at law or in equity or by statute. The failure of Landlord to insist at any time upon the strict performance of any covenant or agreement or to exercise any option, right, power or remedy contained in this Lease shall not be construed as a waiver or relinquishment thereof for the future. The receipt by Landlord of any rent or any other sum payable hereunder with knowledge of the breach of any covenant or agreement contained in this Lease shall not be deemed a waiver of such breach, and no waiver by Landlord of any provision of this Lease shall be deemed to have been made unless expressed in writing and signed by Landlord. In addition to other remedies provided in this Lease, Landlord shall be entitled, to the extent permitted by applicable law, to injunctive relief in case of the violation, or attempted or threatened violation, of any of the covenants, agreements, conditions or provisions of this Lease, or to a decree compelling performance of this Lease, or to any other remedy allowed to Landlord at law or in equity. SECTION 10 Surrender; Tenant Holdover October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 42) 10.1 Surrender. Upon the expiration or earlier termination of this Lease, Tenant shall peaceably leave and surrender the Premises to Landlord broom-clean and otherwise in the condition in which the Premises are required to be maintained by the terms of this Lease. Tenant shall surrender all keys for the Premises to Landlord at the place then fixed for the payment of rent and shall inform Landlord of all combinations on locks, safes, and vaults, if any, in the Premises. Tenant shall, at its expense, remove from the Premises on or prior to such expiration or earlier termination all furnishings, fixtures, and equipment situated thereon, and Tenant shall, at its expense, on or prior to such expiration or earlier termination, repair any damage caused by such removal. Any property not so removed shall become the property of Landlord, and Landlord may thereafter cause such property to be removed from the Premises and disposed of, but the cost of any such removal and disposition and the cost of repairing any damage caused by such removal shall be borne by Tenant. 10.2 Holdover With Landlord Consent. If Tenant continues, with the knowledge and written consent of Landlord obtained at least thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the term of this Lease, to remain in the Premises after the expiration of the term of this Lease, then and in that event, Tenant shall, by virtue of this holdover agreement, become a tenant by the month at double the rent herein specified (prorated on a monthly basis), commencing said monthly tenancy with the first day next after the end of the term above demised. Tenant shall give to Landlord at least thirty {30) days' written notice of any intention to quit the Premises. Tenant shall be entitled to thirty (30) days' written notice to quit the Premises, except in the event of nonpayment of rent in advance or of the breach of any other covenant by Tenant, in which event Tenant shall not be entitled to any notice to quit, the usual thirty (30) days' notice to quit being hereby expressly waived. 10.3 Holdover Without Landlord Consent. In the event that Tenant, without the consent of Landlord, shall hold over the expiration of the term hereby created, then Tenant hereby waives all notice to quit and agrees to pay to Landlord for the period that Tenant is in possession after the expiration of this Lease, a monthly rent that is double the total annual rent applicable to the last year of this Lease. Tenant expressly agrees to hold Landlord harmless from all loss and damages, direct and consequential, that Landlord may suffer in defense of claims by other parties against Landlord arising out of the holding over by Tenant, including without limitation attorneys' fees that may be incurred by Landlord in defense of such claims. Landlord shall have the right to apply all payments received after the expiration date of this Lease or any renewal thereof toward payment for use and occupancy of the premises subsequent to the expiration of the term and toward any other sums owed by Tenant to Landlord. Landlord, at its option, may forthwith re-enter and take possession of said premises by legal process. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Tenant's holdover without Landlord consent due to acts of God, riot, or war shall be at the total rent applicable to the last month of the term for the duration of the condition (but not to exceed ten days), but such continued occupancy shall not create any renewal of the term of this Lease or a tenancy from year-to-year, and Tenant shall be liable for any loss and damages suffered by Landlord as described above. SECTION 11 Quiet Enjoyment 000330 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 43) 11.1 So long as Tenant shall observe and perform the covenants and agreements binding on it hereunder, Tenant shall at all times during the term herein granted, peacefully and quietly have and enjoy possession of the Premises without any encumbrance or hindrance by, from or through Landlord, except as provided for elsewhere under this Lease. SECTION 12 Successors 12.1 Ail rights, remedies and liabilities herein given to or imposed upon either of the parties hereto, shall extend to their respective heirs, executors, administrators, successors, and assigns. This provision shall not be deemed to grant Tenant any right to assign this Lease or to sublet the premises without Landlord's prior written consent, and only for those purposes permitted under the zoning regulations of the County of Albemarle, Virginia. SECTION 13 Miscellaneous 13.1 Leaseback. Landlord reserves unto itself and its assigns the option to lease back a portion of the Property not being used by Tenant for classrooms or administrative purposes upon six (6) months notice to Tenant, provided that the exercise of such option shall require the approval of Tenant, whose approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If such occurs during the term of this Lease, Tenant's rent shall be reduced proportionately for the loss of square footage. 13.2 Use of Grounds. Tenant is responsible for the upkeep of the grounds of the Property, including, but not limited to, grass cutting and snow removal, except that Landlord shall bushhog the field at least twice per year. Notwithstanding anything in this Lease to the contrary, Landlord shall have the right to use the grounds for its parks and recreation program at no cost to Landlord at times not inconsistent with such use by Tenant. Tenant shall allow the use of the grounds by such neighborhood organizations as little league baseball and soccer without charge to these organizations. 13.3 Right of First Refusal. Landlord shall notify Tenant of any intent to sell the Property to any third party during the Term of this Lease. Tenant shall have two (2) months after receipt of such notice of intent to notify Landlord of its acceptance of Landlord's offer to sell on the same terms and conditions extended to any such third party. Upon the expiration of this time period, this right of first refusal shall expire. 13.4 Partial Invalidity. If any term, covenant or condition of this Lease, or the application thereof, to any person or circumstance shall to any extent be invalid or unenforce- able, the remainder of this Lease, or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unen- forceable, shall not be affected thereby and each term, covenant or condition of this Lease shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law. SECTION 14 Governing Law 14.1 This Lease shall be in all respects governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. SECTION 15 Entire Agreement October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 44) 15.1 0003,3i This Lease, and the exhibit attached hereto, set forth all the covenants, promises, agreements, conditions and understandings between the parties concerning the Property and there are no other such covenants, promises, agreements, conditions and understandings, either oral or written, between them other than herein set forth. Any former lease is hereby expressly canceled and terminated. Except as herein otherwise provided, no subsequent modification, alteration, amendment, change or addition to this Lease shall be binding upon Landlord or Tenant unless reduced to writing and signed by them. SECTION 16 Notices 16.1 Addresses for Notices. Ail notices required or desired to be given hereunder by either party to the other shall be personally delivered or given by certified or registered mail and addressed as follows: If to the Landlord: If to the Tenant: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. Albemarle County Executive 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, VA 22902 Priscilla Friedberg Crossroads Waldorf School 1408 Crozet Avenue Crozet, VA 22952 Either party may, by like written notice, designate a new address to which such notices shall be directed. 16.2 Effective Date of Notices. Notice shall be deemed to be effective when personally delivered or when sent by registered or certified U.S. mail, postage prepaid, unless otherwise stipulated herein. WITNESS the following signatures. LA/~DLORD: COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA By: By: Robert W. Tucker, Jr. County Executive Its: County of Albemarle, Virginia TENANT: CROSSROADS WALDORF SCHOOL. Priscilla Friedberg Agenda Item No. 12. PUBLIC HE~LRING on the Proposed Issuance of School bonds to Finance School Capital Projects. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on September 23 and September 30, 1998.) Mr. Tucker said the FY 1998-99 Capital Improvement Budget was approved with the intent to issue approximately $7.6 million in bonds through the Virginia Public School Authority (VPSA). Resolutions authorizing the application to VPSA were approved by the School Board on August 24, 1998, and by the Board of Supervisors on September 2, 1998. A projected payment schedule based on the estimated interest rate of 4.70 percent was forwarded to the Board with the papers for this meeting. Staff recommends approval of a resolution to proceed with this project and to meet the bond issuance guidelines. Mr. Marshall asked if the Board members would like to state their questions before he opened the public hearing. Mr. Bowerman said the Board members know that he has taken an interest in Constitutional Amendments #3 and #4 which will be on the ballot in November. This Board has talked in the past about a possible bond referendum as the County approaches ten percent for bonded indebtedness (per the Board's adopted policy). For the past nine years, he has voted to add a lot of long- term debt through the VPSA, which is a constitutionally-approved mechanism for boards to use to do this, and it commits future boards to pay the bonds, and 00083;8 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 45) it is done without a referendum. That inconsistency went through his mind yesterday as he spoke. He spoke to the County Attorney, and Mr. Davis said it is a provision of the State Constitution. It is a way they allow for construction of school facilities and the pooling of funds and the pooling of the Triple A bond rating. It makes sense, yet when the Board does this (and it has been doing it and will do it again), it occurred to him as a question. Ms. Humphris said the distinction is that these constitutional amend- ments would enable establishment of a regional organization to borrow funds which removes it from the level of the elected representatives of the county. The way debt is incurred now, an elected board, directly related to the voters, makes the decision to borrow through the public authority (VPSA). Under the constitutional amendment proposed, the decision would be made by another group of people one step removed. Ms. Thomas said it would be like the Jail Authority. Mr. Bowerman said the Jail Authority has revenue from the inmates and the people who put them in the jail facility. The Airport Authority has funds. Ms. Thomas said contract debt does not count against the County's debt rating. Mr. Davis said the School debt is a debt of the County, but it doesn't require a referendum. Ms. Thomas said every time the Board forms an authority such as the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority, the Rivanna Water & Sewer Authority, the Jail Authority and the Airport Authority, these authorities can contract debt and they have, and that does not show up as debt on the shoulders of the County's citizens. That is one reason she has never been enthusiastic about authori- ties. Debt is an appropriate way to fund capital imProvements. The Board has always agreed to that. The Board certainly does it without vote and referendum of the public. Mr. Bowerman said that was his point. He believes that future genera- tions of parents and their children should help pay for the facilities they are occupying. It makes sense to bond and finance, over a period of time, capital improvements that benefit different generations of people. The way the bonding is taking place makes sense because it provides a better rate using the State authority, but the action of the Board is committing the citizens to pay this debt. He do~s not believe that is wrong, but he just never considered that before. He is going to do it again today. Ms. Humphris said schools are a required public service. She does not know what this other entity (created by the Constitutional Amendment if it passes in November) might want to do with the County's tax dollars. They would not want to build schools. Mr. Bowerman said that is part of the problem. Ms. Humphris said they would not be building the schools, jails or roads, or any of the things that are things the County must do. She assumes the things they would do would be optional things they believe would promote economic development. Mr. Bowerman said he did not mean to make any connection between the two. He thought it was inconsistent of himself, personally, making those statements when he comes to this Board year after year to indebt the County citizens, future taxpayers, for the construction 6f school facilities which is a liability of Albemarle County citizens, and it is without a referendum. With no further comments from Board members, Mr. Marshall opened the public hearing. With no one from the public rising to speak, the public hearing was closed. Motion was immediately made by Mr. Martin to adopt a Resolution Authori- zing the Issuance of Not to Exceed $7,600,000 General Obligation School Bonds, Series 1998A, of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, to Be Sold to the Virginia Public School Authority and Providing for the Form and Details Thereof. The motion was seconded by Ms. Humphris. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. 0003 3 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 46) RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THAT THE ISSUANCE OF NOT TO EXCEED $7,600,000 GENERAL OBLIGATION SCHOOL BoNDs, SERIES 1998A, OF THAT THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, TO BE SOLD TO THAT THE VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY AND PROVIDING FOR THAT THE FORM AND DETAILS THEREOF WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the County of Albemarle, Virginia (the "County"), has determined that it is necessary and expedient to borrow an amount not to exceed $7,600,000 and to issue its general obligation school bonds for the purpose of financing certain capital projects for school purposes; and WHEREAS, the County held a Public hearing, duly noticed, on October 7, 1998, on the issuance of the Bonds (as defined below) in accordance with the requirements of Section 15.2-2606, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended (the "Virginia Code"); and WHEREAS, the School Board of the County has, by resolution, requested the Board to authorize the issuance of the Bonds and consented to the issuance of the Bonds; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THAT THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THAT THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA: 1. Authorization of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. The Board hereby determines that it is advisable to contract a debt and issue and sell its general obligation school bonds in an aggregate principal amount not to exceed $7,600,000 (the "Bonds") for the purpose of financing certain capital projects for school purposes. The Board hereby authorizes the issuance and sale of the Bonds in the form and upon the terms established pursuant to this Resolution. 2. Sale of the Bonds. It is determined to be in the best interest of the County to accept the offer of the Virginia Public School Authority (the "VPSA") to purchase from the County, and to sell to the VPSA, the Bonds at a price determzned by the VPSA to be fair and acceptable to the County Executive that is not less than 99% of par and not more than 103% of par, in accordance with the terms established pursuant to this Resolution. The Chairman of the Board, the County Executive, or such officer or officers of the County as either may designate, are hereby authorized and directed to enter into a Bond Sale Agreement dated as of October 9, 1998, with the VPSA providing for the sale of the Bonds to the VPSA in substantially the form submitted to the Board at this meeting, which form is hereby approved (the "Bond Sale Agreement"). 3. Details of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be dated the date of issuance and delivery of the Bonds; shall be designated "General Obligation School Bonds, Series 1998A"; shall bear interest from the date of delivery thereof payable semi-annually on each January 15 and July 15 beginning July 15, 1999 (each an "Interest Payment Date"), at the rates established in accordance with Section 4 of this Resolution; and shall mature on July 15 in the years (each a "Principal Payment Date") and in the amounts set forth on Schedule I attached hereto (the "Principal Installments,,), subject to the provisions of Section 4 of this Resolution. 4. Interest Rates and Principal Installments. The County Executive is hereby authorized and directed to accept the interest rates on the Bonds established by the VPSA, provided that each interest rate shall be ten one- hundredths of one percent (0.10%) over the interest rate to be paid by the VPSA for the corresponding principal payment date of the bonds to be issued by the VPSA (the "VPSA Bonds"), a portion of the proceeds of which will be used to purchase the Bonds, and provided further that the true interest cost of the Bonds does not exceed six and a one-half percent (6.5%) per annum. The Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Installments are subject to change at the request of the VPSA. The County Executive is hereby authorized and directed to accept changes in the Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Installments at the request of the VPSA, provided that the aggregate principal amount of the Bonds shall not exceed the amount authorized by this Resolution. The execution and delivery of the Bonds as described in Section 8 hereof shall conclusively evidence such interest rates established by the VPSA and Interest Payment Dates and the Principal Installments requested by the VPSA as having been so accepted as authorized by this Resolution. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 47) 000334 5. Form of the Bonds. The Bonds shall be initially in the form of a single, temporary typewritten bond substantially in the form attached hereto as Exhibit A. 6. Payment; Paying Agent and Bond Registrar. The following provisions shall apply to the Bonds: (a) For as long as the VPSA is the registered owner of the Bonds, all payments of principal of and premium, if any, and interest on the Bonds shall be made in immediately available funds to the VPSA at or before 11:00 a.m. on the applicable Interest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption, or if such date is not a business day for Virginia banks or for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then at or before 11:00 a.m. on the business day next preceding such Interest Payment Date, Principal Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption. (b) Ail overdue payments of principal and, to the extent permitted by law, interest shall bear interest at the applicable interest rate or rates on the Bonds. (c) Crestar Bank, Richmond, Virginia, is designated as Bond Registrar and Paying Agent for the Bonds. 7. Prepayment or Redemption. The Principal Installments of the Bonds held by the VPSA coming due on or before July 15, 2009, and the definitive Bonds for which the Bonds held by the VPSA may be exchanged that mature on or before July 15, 2009, are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities. The Principal Installments of the Bonds held by the VPSA coming due after July 15, 2009, and the definitive bonds for which the Bonds held by the VPSA may be exchanged that mature after July 15, 2009, are subject to prepayment or redemption at the option of the County prior to their stated maturities in whole or in part, on any date on or after July 15, 2009, upon payment of the prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as percentages of Principal Installments to be prepaid or the principal amount of the Bonds to be redeemed) set forth below plus accrued interest to the date set for prepayment or redemption: Dates July 15, 2009, through July 14, 2010 102% July 15, 2010, through July 14, 2011 101 July 15, 2011, and thereafter 100 Prices Provided, however, that the Bonds shall not be subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities as described above without first obtaining the written consent of the registered owner of the Bonds. Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the registered owner by registered mail not more than ninety (90) and not less than sixty (60) days before the date fixed for prepayment or redemption. 8. Execution of the Bonds. The Chairman or Vice Chairman and the Clerk or any Deputy Clerk of the Board are authorized and directed to execute and deliver the Bonds and to affix the seal of the County thereto. 9. Pledge of Full Faith and Credit. For the prompt payment of the principal of and premium, if any, and the interest on the Bonds as the same shall become due, the full faith and credit of the County are hereby irrevol cably pledged, and in each year while any of the Bonds shall be outstanding there shall be levied and collected in accordance with law an annual ad valorem tax upon all taxable property in the County subject to local taxation sufficient in amount to provide for the payment of the principal of and premium, if any, and the interest on the Bonds as such principal, premium, if any, and interest shall become due, which tax shall be without limitation as to rate or amount and in addition to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available and appropriated for such purpose. 10. Use of Proceeds Certificate and Certificate as to Arbitrage. The Chairman of the Board, the County Executive and such officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute a Certificate as to Arbitrage and a Use of Proceeds Certificate each setting forth the expected use and investment of the proceeds of the Bonds and October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 48) 000835 containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "Code"), and applicable regulations relating to the exclusion from gross income of interesu on the Bonds and on the VPSA Bonds. The Board covenants on behalf of the County that (i) the proceeds from the issuance and sale of the Bonds will be invested and expended as set forth in such Certificate as to Arbitrage and such Use of Proceeds Certificate and that the County shall comply with the other covenants and representations contained therein and (ii) the CounEy shall comply with the provisions of the Code so that interest on the Bonds and on the VPSA Bonds will remain excludable from gross income for Federal income tax purposes. 11. State Non-Arbitrage Program; Proceeds Agreement. The Board hereby determines that it is in the best interests of the County to authorize and direct the Director of Finance of the County to participate in the State Non-Arbitrage Program in connection with the Bonds. The Chairman of the Board, the County Executive and such officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute and deliver a Proceeds Agreement with respect to the deposit and investment of proceeds of the Bonds by and among the County, the other participants in the sale of the VPSA Bonds, the VPSA, the investment manager and the depository, substantially in the form submitted to the Board at this meeting, which form is hereby approved. 12. Continuing Disclosure Agreement. The Chairman of the Board, the County Executive and such officer or officers of the County as either may designate are hereby authorized and directed to execute a Continuing Disclosure Agreement, as set forth in Appendix F to the Bond Sale Agreement, setting forth the reports and notices to be filed by the County and containing such covenants as may be necessary in order to show compliance with the provisions of the Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 15c2-12 and directed to make all filings required by Section 3 of the Bond Sale Agreement should the County be determined by the VPSA to be a MOP (as defined in the Continuing Disclosure Agreement). 13. Filing of Resolution. The appropriate officers or agents of the County are hereby authorized and directed to cause a certified copy of this Resolution to be filed with the Circuit Court of the County. 14. Further Actions. The members of the Board and all officers, employees and agents of the County are hereby authorized to take such action as they or any one of them may consider necessary or desirable in connection with the issuance and sale of the Bonds and any such action previously taken is hereby ratified and confirmed. 15. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately. EXHIBIT A (FORM OF TEMPORARY BOND) NO. TR-1 $ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE General Obligation School Bond Series 1998A The COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA (the "Counuy,,), for value received, hereby acknowledges itself indebted and promises to pay to the VIRGINIA PUBLIC SCHOOL AUTHORITY the principal amount of DOLLARS ($ ), in annual installments in the amounts set forth on Schedule I attached hereto payable on July 15, 1999, and annually on July 15 thereafter to and including July 15, 2018 (each a "Principal Payment Date"), together with interest from the date of this Bond on the unpaid installments, payable semi- annually on January 15 and July 15 of each year, commencing on July 15, 1999 (each an "Interest Payment Date"; together with any Principal Payment Date, a "Payment Date"), at the rates per annum set forth on Schedule I attached hereto, subject to prepayment or redemption as hereinafter provided. Both principal 000336 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 49) ~ · . of and interest on this Bond are payable in lawful money of the United States of America. For as long as the Virginia Public School Authority is the registered owner of this Bond, , as bond registrar {the "Bond Registrar"), shall make all payments of principal of and premium, if any, and interest on this Bond, without the presentation or surrender hereof, to the Virginia Public School Authority, in immediately available funds aG or before 11:00 a.m. on the applicable Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption. If a Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption is not a business day for banks in the Commonwealth of Virginia or for the Commonwealth of Virginia, then the payment of principal of and premium, if any, or interest on this Bond shall be made in immediately available funds at or before 11:00 a.m. on the business day next preceding the scheduled Payment Date or date fixed for prepayment or redemption. Upon receipt by the registered owner of this Bond of said payments of principal, premium, if any, and interest, written acknowledgment of the receipt thereof shall be given promptly to the Bond Registrar, and the County shall be fully discharged of its obligation on this Bond to the extent of the payment so made. Upon final payment, this Bond shall be surrendered to the Bond Registrar for cancellation. The full faith and credit of the County are irrevocably pledged for the payment of the principal of and the premium, if any, and interest on this Bond. The resolution adopted by the Board of Supervisors authorizing the issuance of the Bonds provides, and Section 15.2-2624, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, requires, that there shall be levied and collected an annual tax upon all taxable property in the County subject to local taxation sufficient to provide for the payment of the principal of and premium, if any, and interest on this Bond as the same shall become due which tax shall be without limitation as to rate or amount and shall be in addition to all other taxes authorized to be levied in the County to the extent other funds of the County are not lawfully available and appropriated for such purpose. This Bond is duly authorized and issued in compliance with and pursuant to the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia, including the Public Finance Act of 1991, Chapter 26, Title 15.2, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, and resolutions duly adopted by the Board of County Supervisors of the County and the School Board of the County to provide funds for capital projects for school purposes. This Bond may be exchanged without cost, on twenty (20) days written notice from the Virginia Public School Authority, at the office of the Bond Registrar on one or more occasions for one or more temporary bonds or definitive bonds in marketable form and, in any case, in fully registered form in denominations of $5,000 and whole multiples thereof, and having an equal aggregate principal amount, having principal installments or maturities and bearing interest at rates corresponding to the maturities of and the interest rates on the installments of principal of this Bond then unpaid. This Bond is registered in the name of the Virginia Public School Authority on the books of the County kept by the Bond Registrar, and the transfer of this Bond may be effected by the registered owner of this Bond only upon due execution of an assignment by such registered owner. Upon receipt of such assignment and the surrender of this Bond, the Bond Registrar shall exchange this Bond for definitive Bonds as hereinabove provided, such definitive Bonds to be registered on such registration books in the name of the assignee or assignees named in such assignment. The principal installments of this Bond coming due on or before July 15, 2009, and the definitive Bonds for which this Bond may be exchanged that mature on or before July 15, 2009, are not subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities. The principal installments of this Bond coming due after July 15, 2009, and the definitive Bonds for which this Bond may be exchanged that mature after July 15, 2009, are subject to prepayment or redemption at the option of the County prior to their stated maturities in whole or in part, on any date on or after July 15, 2009, upon payment of the prepayment or redemption prices (expressed as percentages of principal installmenEs to be prepaid or the principal amount of the Bonds to be redeemed) set forth below plus accrued interest to the date set for prepayment or redemption: October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 50) Dates July 15, 2009, through July 14, 2010 July 15, 2010, through July 14, 2011 July 15, 2011, and thereafter Prices 102% 101 100 0003,37 _ Provided, however, that the Bonds shall not be subject to prepayment or redemption prior to their stated maturities as described above without the prior written consent of the registered owner of the Bonds. Notice of any such prepayment or redemption shall be given by the Bond Registrar to the registered owner by registered mail not more than ninety (90) and not less than sixty (60) days before the date fixed for prepayment or redemption. All acts, conditions and things required by the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia to happen, exist or be performed precedent to and in the issuance of this Bond have happened, exist and have been performed in due time, form and manner as so required, and this Bond, together with all other indebtedness of the County, is within every debt and other limit prescribed by the Constitution and laws of the Commonwealth of Virginia. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, has caused this Bond to be issued in the name of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, to be signed by its Chairman or Vice-Chairman, its seal to be affixed hereto and attested by the signature of its Clerk or any of its Deputy Clerks, and this Bond to be dated November , 1998. COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA (SEAL) ATTEST: Clerk, Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia Chairman, Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle, Virginia Agenda Item No. 13. Presentation: Albemarle County Strategic Plan. Ms. Roxanne White said at the time the Planning Commission was reviewing various components of an expanded Comprehensive Plan, staff recommended to the Board that rather than incorporate all elements of the County's vision and mission, i.e., housing, human services, art/culture and education, into the Plan, a more flexible and simplified strategic plan should be developed for the Board's review and approval. The plan was to incorporate the Land Use, Facilities and Environmental goals and objectives of the Comprehensive Plan, as well as the major goals and objectives of other major County plans. Ms. White said the Strategic Plan presented today incorporates the goals and objectives of the major plans that have been approved by the Board to date, i.e., Housing, Human Services, Economic Development, Growth Management and Land Use, Transportation, Public Utilities and Community Facilities. Ms. White said there are only three components that have not been reviewed and approved. (1) Arts/Culture (this plan was developed by Planning staff, the Director of Piedmont Council of the Arts and the County Executive's staff. It is based on the five-year strategic plan of the PCA. It incorporates their major goals and objectives.); (2) Education (This is the School Division's Six-Year Strategic Plan previously approved by the School Board and updated in 1998. It replaces the Education section of 1989 Comprehensive Plan. It also satisfies the requirements the School Division has for its standards of quality strategic planning activities. This strategic plan is a result of the Blue Ribbon Commission that began in 1990.); (3) Department Improvement Plans (which the Board saw last month) which incorporate all department major goals and objectives into five elements being used as the County's work plan for departments; (4) Sustainability (The Sustainability Report was developed by the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) Sustainability Council. It was approved in 1998. It is the result of a 34-member group composed of citizens and some local elected officials. It has not been officially adopted by the Board, but it does October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 51) 000885 incorporate many of the principles and goals of other County plans, so staff felt it was appropriate to include it.). Ms. White said it is hoped that this document will provide an easy reference guide for both the Board and the citizens. Specific implementation strategies are found in the individual plan documents. Staff requests the Board to accept the Albemarle County Strategic Plan to serve as a road map for citizens and staff for more effective service delivery and improved customer service. It is anticipated that as individual plans are updated, their major goals and objectives will again be incorporated into this document. (Note: Mr. Bowerman left the room at 11:00 a.m.) Mr. Marshall said he read this report with great interest. He would just like to mention for the Board some things he has been saying for the last several years. He read from several parts of the plan. A relative lack of affordable housing and low wages in many employment sectors remains a problem for many county residents, particularly minorities. A Planning Needs Survey of long-term community planning goals revealed that bringing more jobs to the area was less of a priority to residents than was protecting water quality and preserving the natural resources, i.e., open space, farm lands and historic buildings. The old, elderly and minorities are the ones that seem to be suffering the most in the community. In fact, that is proved by approximately 4.8 percent of County families who live with incomes below the poverty level. Of the 14 percent of households who own their homes, they spend more than 30 percent of their income on those homes. Of all renters, they spend more than 30 percent of their household income, which is high. In 1990, 13.3 percent of black families were poor compared to 3.8 percent of white families. 15.9 percent of single-parent families are poor compared to 2.6 who are married. Finally, about 11.2 percent of persons aged 65 and over were poor compared to 7.2 percent of younger persons. Families in poverty are more heavily concentrated in the southeastern and the northwestern portions of the County. Mr. Marshall said he represents a large part of these people. He said there is a lot of good information in the report about Albemarle County. Reading what he just did, and bearing in mind what he has been saying for the last several years, although the County is experiencing a relatively low rate of unemployment, on the other hand, there are a large number of people who are underemployed in the County. (Note: Mr. Bowerman returned to the meeting at 11:02 a.m.) Mr. Marshall asked what the Board can do to correct some of the underemployment and what can it do to increase affordable housing stock? All of the things the Board has done so far have been aimed at preserving the water supply, the beautiful scenery, etc., and he is not opposed to that. At the same time, what does the Board do about the poor people? Where are they going to live? Are they being forced out of the County? Is the Board going to expand the growth areas in order to make some cheaper land available for them? Is the Board, by infilling, limiting the number of parcels available to people? Is the Board actually increasing the price and making the land less affordable? He does not have the answers, and he asks the~e questions because when he was elected to this Board, his goals were affordable housing and equal opportunity employment for all, particularly so native citizens would not be forced out of the community. Mr. Bowerman said the Development Areas Initiative Steering Committee (DISC) is looking at housing policies and rural/urban design standards in terms of affordability, incentives and disincentives for keeping lots affordable wherever someone chooses to live whether it is urban or rural. Those issues have been debated at length. Mr. Martin said the DISC has debated only one-half of the picture and that half is the price of housing. The other half of the picture is how much someone earns. It is affordable if one makes enough money, and the DISC is not dealing with that part of it. People sometimes forget that the two parts have to work together. It is not just how much it costs, but how much one earns. Mr. Marshall said he is not saying a lot of industry should be brought to the County and thereby create the need for more infrastructure. What he is October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 52) 0003;39 saying is that there is a need to concentrate on small businesses and businesses that will employ the people who live here now. Ms. White said one thing that runs throughout the Strategic Plan is looking at economic self-sufficiency, and looking at underemployment. There is an emphasis in several parts of the plan on training and education so the work force has the skills to take advantage of some of the higher paying jobs. Ms. Thomas said the people who are, in theory, looking at economic development in this area (the Economic Development Partnership), have become very interested in work force training, partly because as employers they are having trouble getting employees with the skills they need. This is probably the one chance in the century for people to actually better their situation in life and get higher wages. There are below-the-state-average-wages in Albemarle (she objects to that designation a little because there are so many part-time employees in the locality). People are actually begging for better qualified employees, and there is such a low unemployment rate that there are not many people who have time to get into education and better themselves. Employers and the educational system have to work together to get the kind of education to people that they can take at nighttime, or whenever, in order to get up to a higher paying job. Mr. Marshall said this locality does not need another ~hamburger joint." His point is that there is not the right mix of jobs. Ms. Thomas said there are people in the community who are working on this question. From the Charlottesville/Albemarle School-Business Alliance (CASBA) to a pilot program at Piedmont Virginia Community College (she is dismayed because only two employers have joined in this program). She is saying there are programs that are taking people and giving them an opportunity for retraining. Some of that exists. Getting more of that in the community is the best hope of getting the people who are working at the hamburger joints in to something that is closer to being able to support a family (she saw figures saying one had to make at least $11.00 an hour to support one person and one child in this community). Mr. Bowerman said the County has 4.0 million square feet of light industrial and mixed commercial land available in Albemarle County between Peter Jefferson Place and the University of Virginia (UREF) Real Estate park. What is needed are the qualified employees that have the ability and the initiative to move from entry level jobs to the next level, etc. That is what Mr. Marshall was talking about, and that is what he believes is set out in the Economic Development section of the Strategic Plan. The Board has already approved plenty of space for technology jobs and for economic opportunity. People have to be trained so they don't have to leave the area. Ms. Humphris said some of the Board members alluded to what is available, and there are more and more training opportunities being made available in this area, but it requires individual initiative. Someone who works at a ~fast-food" place cannot be put in a job which requires technolo- gical knowledge. There is no magic there. It requires hard work. They have to go back to school and learn or relearn skills and prepare. Mr. Bowerman said there has to be the initiative, but there has to be the means by which they can pick up the skills. That is through a public/ private partnership of some kind. Ms. Humphris said that is available. By moving the people at that level now up to a higher level, it will not do away with the people who work at a fast-food joint. Ms. White said technical training is occurring at earlier ages now. Mr. Martin said he is 91ad to hear this discussion. Someone whose only skill is working at a fast-food place cannot just move from a low-level job to a very technical, quasi-engineer position without a lot of training. At least, the Board recognizes that those kinds of jobs need to be available to those people who are willing to take the initiative. It is his opinion that there has not been much to offer in that way. There is still not a lot to offer, but as Mr. Bowerman said, there is the space available now for more of those types of jobs. People have pulled themselves up ~by their bootstraps" before. Some of what is being done now has been done for a long time. When Dr. Deborah DiCroce first came to the area, she started trying to connect the work force with people who could be trained to do the job. It is not like it just started in the last couple of years. 000840 October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 53) Mr. Martin said he is glad to hear it understood that there are two sides of the equation for affordable housing. In his opinion, this report goes a long way by identifying problem areas, identifying goals, and setting up strategies to achieve those goals. It is the Board's job to constantly remind itself that in trying to achieve the objectives in one section, it does not hurt the objectives in another. The Board has to look at it in a balanced approach. That is the role of the Board members. It needs to be sure it is looking at every section of the Strategic Plan at the same time, and at all times. Ms. White said it is hoped that this Plan will be of benefit to the Board by having everything listed in one place. Mr. Marshall said he is pleased with this plan. It is a visible way for everybody to see what is going on. He talked to someone on Wall Street yesterday, and this gentlemen said Wall Street today is not in a state of recession, but in a state of depression. This gentlemen said there will be huge layoffs in the future because the country is not immune to what is going on in Asia and Russia and South America; at this time next year the country will be dealing with an entirely different environment. Mr. Marshall said he thinks this person knows what he is talking about. Ms. Thomas said five years ago when she was running for public office, she was asking for something like the information in this plan. She appreciates having all this information in one place. She really admires the Education Section because it sets out measurable strategies, which is something not all of the sections have. She thinks it would be good in the future to have more measurable strategies so the County will know when something is successful. She encourages everyone to look at the way the Sustainability Council developed snapshots to see how the area is doing. Ms. White said that is the next step for a lot of the plans. Ms. Thomas said she does have a question about the Sustainability Council. She said that Mr. Bowerman is the Chair of the Council, and she also sits on the Council. If the Sustainability Council's report shows in this Strategic Plan, does it mean the Board has adopted that report? Where does the Board stand and what do the other Board members want? Mr. Tucker said staff would like for the Board to simply accept the various plans set out in the Strategic Plan. Then, staff will follow them, as best it can. It sets out the Board's vision and is a guide to various entities. Sustainability is just one of them. (Note: Mr. Marshall left the room at 11:15 a.m. He handed the gavel to Mr. Martin.) Mr. Bowerman said he and other members of the Council have to take to each elected governing body a presentation of the work of the Council. They also have to take that presentation to dozens of groups. It is then up to each governing body or anyone in the private sector to pick whatever they want out of that work in terms of trying to carry it out. What he learned most from all of this work is that it is thousands of individual decisions every day that make the region what it is. Every small decision adds up. The Council is not telling anybody how to do anything. It is only asking that people consider those things when making decisions. Mr. Martin said he thought that one of the reasons for having a strate- gic plan was to keep from having to adopt everything into the Comprehensive Plan. The Strategic Plan would be agreed to by all without having to adopt it. Mr. Tucker said the Strategic Plan is actually broader than the Compre- hensive Plan. Staff has basically used the Comprehensive Plan in years past as the County's strategic plan. This plan gets into issues the Comprehensive Plan does not focus on. That is why staff felt it was important, particularly with Education's plan, to accept these plans as a guide for the future. Ms. White said the Sustainability part was included because it had been approved. Mr. Bowerman agreed, but he said it has not been seen by the Board members other than by himself and Ms. Thomas. He does not know the meaning of the presentation of the Strategic Plan to the Board today. Mr. Martin said the Board is only getting a presentation. He assumes that at a later date, the Board will take action. Mr. Tucker said staff is recommending that the Board accept the Plan, as presented today, as a guide. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 54) It is something the County has not had before. These plans have never been pulled together in one binder. Mr. Martin asked the pleasure of the Board. He said the Board can accept the Plan today, or look at it another time. (Note: Mr. Marshall returned to the meeting at 11:18 a.m.) Mr. Bowerman said he would make a motion to accept the plan presented today as the Strategic Plan recognizing that the Board can modify or review any section at any time. The motion was seconded by Ms. Humphris who reminded staff that there is no date on the report. Mr. Bowerman said this is just the draft of the report, so he suggested that the word ~DRAFT" be included with the date on the cover. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 14. Voting Credentials for the Annual Business Meeting of the Virginia Association of Counties (VACo). Mr. Tucker asked the Board to designate a representative of this Board to cast the County's vote at the annual business meeting of VACo and to also designate an alternate delegate. (Note: Mr. Martin left the room at 11:30 a.m.) Mr. Bowerman nominated and moved that Ms. Humphris be the primary delegate with Ms. Thomas as the alternate delegate, with credentials. Seconds to the motion were given by Ms. Humphris and Ms. Thomas. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: ABSENT: Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. None. Mr. Martin and Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 15. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the Board. Mr. Marshall mentioned a letter he had received from Delegate Paul C. Harris dated September 17, 1998, re: proposed Constitutional Amendments #3 and #4. He asked Mr. Bowerman to comment. Mr. Bowerman said he wanted a sense of the Board members as to whether they wanted to take a position on the two constitutional amendments. Mr. Marshall asked if the Board members wanted to adopt a resolution. He is personally opposed to #3 and $4. All of the Board members agreed that they had not seen the letter in question. Mr. Tucker volunteered to have copies made so the Board could look at it during lunch. Ms. Thomas said she has not seen the letter, only heard about it, but she understands part of the letter also asks about planning district commissions. She thinks this Board and the region have received immeasurably valuable from the regional Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission over the years. (Note: Mr. Martin returned to the meeting at 11:24 a.m.) Ms. Thomas said she does not know why Mr. Harris asked about the Planning District Commission, and she would like for the Board to strongly support the existence of the Planning District Commission. When planning district commissions were first proposed 25 years ago, people were afraid it would be just another level of government. To their surprise, President Nixon supported this level of government and had a review system set up so that all October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 55) 000842 grants from the Federal Government had to go through the planning district commissions. That is no longer an activity of the commissions, but they have been very useful for outlying counties who are not able to afford planning staffs. She said all would be poorer if there had been no level of planning going on in the surrounding counties. She said Mr. Harris wants to know why support of planning district commissions should not be continued immediately. She said the Board should let him know that the citizens have gotten great value for the fifty cents per capita that is put into the planning district commission. That is the part of his communication she feels is relevant. Mr. Martin said he does not think this is something this Board needs to discuss as a board. He thinks all are in favor of the planning district. As far as the constitutional amendments are concerned, each Board member goes into the ballot box and votes as he/she sees fit. He does not think the Board, as an official body, should take a stance either way. Ms. Thomas said Mr. Tucker just clarified something for her since she had never seen the letter in question. He said Mr. Harris said "if you want to support amendment $3, then tell me why we should also have the planning district commissions." Ms. Thomas said she could do that because they are not the same. His final words are: "Should the Board decide to adopt a resolution favoring amendment #3, I further request that it provide an explanation for why State support for PDC's should not be discontinued." Mr. Martin said he thinks it is a non-issue for this Board. He thinks each Board member votes his/her thinking on that amendment. The Board should not adopt a resolution in favor of, or in opposition to. Mr. Marshall asked if that is the consensus of the Board members. It was so agreed. Agenda Item No. 16. Executive Session: Legal and Personnel Matters.' At 11:30 a.m., motion was made by Mr. Bowerman, that the Board go into Executive Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A) of the Code of Virginia under subsection (1) to consider appointments to boards and commissions; under sub- section (3) to consider the acquisition of property for stormwater management and bike path improvements; under subsection (3) to consider the acquisition of property for transportation improvements; under subsection (7) to discuss pending and probable litigation regarding the provision of public water; under subsection (7) to discuss with legal counsel and staff a specific legal matter relating to an interjurisdictional agreement; under subsection (7) to discuss probable litigation regarding an incident relating to courthouse security; and, under subsection (7) to discuss pending litigation regarding a county detention pond. The motion was seconded by Ms. Humphris. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 17. Certify Executive Session. At 3:52 p.m., the Board reconvened into open session. Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bowerman that the Board certify by a recorded vote that to the best of each Board member's knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the executive session were heard, discussed or considered in the executive session. The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 56) 000,343 Agenda Item No. 18. Appointments. Ms. Thomas offered motion to: Appoint Ms. Dolly Prenzel as the University of Virginia's representative on the Albemarle County Housing Committee for a term which will expire on December 31, 2000. Reappoint Ms. Frances Lee-Vandell to the Albemarle County Housing Committee for a new term which will expire on December 31, 2001. Reappoint Mr. James Clark, Jr. to the Equalization Board as the Scottsville representative for the Calendar Year 1999, with term to expire on December 31, 1999. Reappoint Mr. Craig VandeCastle and Ms. Sherry Buttrick to the Public Recreational Facilities Authority for new terms which will expire on December 13, 2001. Mr. Martin offered motion to: Reappoint Mr. Samuel Anderson to the Albemarle County Planning Commission as the University of Virginia representative, for a term which will expire on Reappoint Ms. Tracy Corea as the Rivanna District representative to the Equalization Board for Calendar Year 1999, with term to expire on December 31, 1999. Reappoint Mr. John F. Marshall as the joint City/County representative to the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority and to the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority, for terms to expire on December 31, 2000. Mr. Bowerman seconded both motions. Roll was called, and the motions carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 19. Policy on water/sewer service to properties split by jurisdictional area boundaries, Discussion of. Mr. Marshall requested a motion concerning this item. (There was no staff presentation of this item or any discussion by the Board at this time.) Motion was offered by Ms. Humphris for the Board to adopt the policy that is suggested to us by staff which would read: "From this day forward, for parcels with jurisdictional area designation on a portion, but not all of the property, and for which no other Board action describes the availability of service to the parcel, water and/or sewer service shall be provided only to a structure or structures located substantially within the area included within the jurisdictional area. Service proposed to any other portion of the property outside the jurisdictional area will require amendment to the jurisdictional area boundary." Any determination of "substantially" within the jurisdictional area will be made by the Board of Supervisors. The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin. Roi1 was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Not Docketed: Mr. Tucker said there is a request from the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission (TJPDC) and the Metropolitan Planning October 7, 1998 (Regular Day Meeting) (Page 57} 000.2,44 Organization (MPO} that Mr. john Bunch and Ms. Joanne Ebersold be the Jefferson Area Bicycle and Walking Advisory Committee appointed to Motion to appoint Mr. Bunch and Ms. Ebersold was offered by Ms. Thomas and seconded by Ms. Humphris. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Martin, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Ms. Humphris and Mr. Marshall. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mr. Perkins. Agenda Item No. 20. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:00 p.m. Approved by the Board Supervisors Date ~/~/~9 Initials