1990-09-12September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 17~
(Page 1)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on September 12, 1990, at 9:00 A.M., Room 7, County Office
Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr. (arrived at 9:05 a.m.), David P.
~owerman (arrived at 9:05 a.m.), F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr.
~alter F. Perkins and Mr. Peter T. Way.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; County Attorney,
Seorge R. St. John; and County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 9:03 A.M. by the
Chairman, Mr. Bowie.
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 from the
Public.
Mrs. Barbara McKinley, a resident of Batesville, said she frequently
drives through the intersection at Route 250 West and Miller School Road
(Route 635). She thinks there is a need for a stop light at that intersec-
tion. In August she started circulating a petition and to date.has received
over 500 signatures. While working on this petition, she learned that there
have been five major accidents at this intersection since January, 1989, and
there was another accident on Monday, around 12:05 p.m. She presented to the
Board the signed petitions. She thinks that emphasis should be placed more on
the number of accidents than just on the traffic count. This intersection is
not continuously busy, only at certain times of the day.
Mr. Henrik A. Schutz, a resident of Woodbrook, said he was present to
speak on behalf of an ad hoc citizens group called The Charlottesville-
Albemarle Task Force on Economic Conversion. This Task Force began meeting in
the Spring in response to media reports about the end of the cold war and
about congressional plans to cut back military appropriations. The Task Force
is trying to discover what these cutbacks may mean for this community. A
nation-wide survey prepared in 1989 by the Military Statistics Research
Service revealed that the Pentagon acquired goods and services in this area
under 73 contracts worth over $50 million. In addition, there are three local
military installations with annual payrolls totally approximately $20 million.
If the local share of the military budget were reduced by even ten percent,
this communities' economic base could erode by as much as $7 million. This
Task Force is pursuing the following four step process: 1) Surveying military
contractors and conducting follow-up interviews to determine how spending cuts
may affect the profits and work force of these units, and determining what
plans are being made in the event of such cancellations; 2) Based on the
results of the surveys and with the help of such local agencies as the Univer-
sity of Virginia's Institute of Public Affairs, then will prepare a list of
non-military products and services which may reasonably replace lost military
business; 3) Determine how the existing educational resources in the community
might serve to retrain civilian workers who are laid off as a result of
military cutbacks or people who are returning to the area after discharge from
the armed forces; and 4) Consider the "peace dividend". The Task Force will
also offer suggestions on how to best spend monies from cuts in defense
spending that accrue in some form to local city and county governments. Mr.
Schutz said he is before the Board today to provide information and inform the
Board that the work of the Task Force relates to community preparedness for
reduced military spending. Mr. Schutz said he is open to any suggestions or
questions that Board members may have concerning the Task Force.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the Task Force has received any responses from the
business community. Mr. Schutz said of the 15 questionnaires distributed, six
responses have been received. Initially the Task Force phoned the companies
that would be surveyed and the response from those companies was enthusiastic.
Economic cutbacks have already affected some of the businesses.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 2)
Mr. Way said he had not thought about this problem, so he appreciated the
efforts of the Task Force. Mr. Schutz sid the Task Force was surprised at the
magnitude of the military cutbacks in this area.
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Way,
seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to approve Item 5.7 on the consent agenda, to hold
Items 5.2, 5.3 and 5.5 for discussion later in the meeting and to accept the
remaining items as information. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Item 5.1. Copy of Letter dated August 17, 1990, from A. G. Tucker,
Assistant Resident Engineer, addressed to Ms. W. B. McCaskill concerning
"Restricting Through Truck Traffic on Route 637," received as information.
Item 5.2. Superintendent's Memo No. 169 from the State Department of
Education dated August 17, 1990 entitled "Budget Reductions for 1990-92,"
received as information. (Mr. Bowie asked that this item be discussed with
revenue shortfalls (Item #15).
Item 5.3. Quarterly Report from JAUNT for Albemarle County Service
Provided 10-1-89 to 6-30-90, received as information. (Mr. Bain asked that
this item be discussed on JAUNT fares (Item 22d).
Item 5.4. Copy of Letter from the Department of Historic Resources dated
August 29, 1990, addressed to Mr. Thomas B. Bishop, stating that the Depart-
ment is not able, at this time, to prepare the national register nomination in
order to have THE BARRACKS placed on the Virginia Landmarks Register and the
National Register of Historic Places, received as information.
Item 5.5. Memorandum dated September 7, 1990, from David Benish, Chief
of Community Development, entitled "Post Census Local Review," received as
information. (Mr. Bowie asked that this item be discussed with redistricting
(Item 22a).
Item 5.6. Letter dated September 6, 1990, from Mr. Dan S. Roosevelt,
Resident Highway Engineer, re: Projects currently under construction in
Albemarle County, received as information. (The list showed no new projects
had been added. The completion date for the Route 620 bridge replacement at
Buck Island Creek had been changed to October 1990.)
Item 5.7. Statements of Expenses for the Department of Finance, Sheriff,
Commonwealth's Attorney and Regional Jail, for the month of August, 1990, were
approved as presented by the above recorded vote.
Agenda Item No. 6. Approval of Minutes: May 16, June 20, July 18,
August 1 and August 8, 1990.
Mr. Bain had read the minutes of August 8, 1990, pages 22 - end, and
found them to be in order with the exception of a typographical error.
Mr. Perkins had read the minutes of August 1, 1990, and found them to be
in order.
Mrs. Humphris had read the minutes of June 20, 1990, and found them to be
in order.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Way, to approve the
minutes as read. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
;eptember 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 174
~Page 3)
kYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
dAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 7a. Highway Matters - Agreement: Timberwood Parkway/
~ith Virginia Department of Transportation (continued from August 8, 1990).
Mr. Cilimberg said since the last meeting at which this item was dis-
cussed, the County Attorney has written a letter Mr. Gerald E. Fisher, the
State Secondary Roads Engineer, expressing his concern about language in the
resolution obligating future Boards.
Mr. St. John said yesterday he received a response from the Assistant
Secondary Roads Engineer. To refresh the Board's memory, in the past, a
three-party agreement between VDoT, the County and the developer, has been
used for upgrading of roads. VDoT revised this form. The revised form
includes an open-ended monetary commitment by the County beyond the current
fiscal year which is a violation of the Virginia Constitution. His letter to
Mr. Fisher indicated that this Board could not enter into this agreement. The
response to his letter recognized that the Board cannot make that kind of
monetary commitment and that it was never intended that this agreement consti-
tute a monetary agreement, but rather a commitment on the County's part that
it would not permit any development that requires upgrading of a road until
the County is assured of the funding for that upgrading. Mr. St. John said it
is his opinion that the agreement needs to be reworded to include that re-
sponse from the Assistant Roads Engineer.
Mr. Perkins said he is concerned about the County guaranteeing the costs
of this project. He does not think the County should get into the road
building business.
Mr. St. John said even if the Board made that kind of guarantee, it would
not be enforceable. He thinks the Board can guarantee that it will not take
any action to permit a development on a road or upgrading of that road until
it receives assurance of funds from the developer. This Board cannot commit a
future Board to funding this item. He thinks that the staff needs to reword
the agreement and proceed from there.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to defer the
agreement for Timberwood Parkway with the Virginia Department of Transporta-
tion to October 10, 1990. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 7b. Other Highway Matters.
Mr. Way asked the status of the underground tank problem at the Avon
Street/Route 20 intersection. Mr. Roosevelt responded that there has been no
change. Mr. Bowie asked that the Highway Department reps keep the Board
apprised of the situation.
Reviewing the memorandum dated September 6, from Mr. Roosevelt concerning
projects under construction, Mr. Perkins asked why it will take until Decem-
ber, 1990, to complete the Route 240 project. Mr. Roosevelt said the next
step in the project is to place fill over the constructed section of box, fill
the new pavement over the box and detour traffic onto the new pavement. The
Department must then come back, tear out the old road, and extend the box and
fill. The additional time is necessary to extend the section of box and fill
slope.
Mrs. Humphris said she has received several calls from citizens concern-
ing congestion at the turn from Hydraulic Road onto Lambs Road at Albemarle
High School. She asked if the Highway Department has any plans to do some-
thing with that stretch of road. Mr. Roosevelt responded "no". Although this
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 4)
175
road is classified as an improvement need, it is a case of what the Board
zonsiders a priority. Mrs. Humphris asked that the Board be cognizant that
there is a problem and take a look at the situation when they are in the area.
Regarding the Hydraulic Road/Whitewood Road intersection, Mr. Bowerman
said he has received telephone calls from citizens concerning crosswalk
signage and a pedestrian crossing at that location. There is a lot of non-
automotive traffic at this intersection. He thinks that because there is so
much traffic movement and the potential for a lot of pedestrians that some-
thing should be, done to the intersection along with the proposed improvements
to Hydraulic Road and Lambs Road. Mr. Bain said improvements to Hydraulic
Road include four-laning and if predominance is given to pedestrian traffic,
he thinks that will just create more problems. He would rather that a wald
over the road or under the road be considered.
Mr. Roosevelt said if the Department agreed to put a crosswalk at that
location, that might satisfy the concerns expressed. Crosswalks are rela-
tively inexpensive. The Department does not feel that the crosswalk and
"walk", "do not walk" signs provide any additional protection to the pedes-
trian than what is already there. The Department feels that this signage
gives the pedestrians a sense of protection that they do not actually have.
The Department thinks that it is better for pedestrians to come to an inter-
section and be alert of the dangers there and not rely on a painted road or
signage. The Traffic Engineer thinks that the only "walk", "do not walk" sign
that is valid protection is one that stops vehicle traffic from all four
directions and allows a period of time for pedestrians to walk. That takes
about 30 percent of the travel time away from the intersection. The time when
this pedestrian protection is needed is usually the same time that there is
heavy traffic on the road which causes considerable congestion. Right now he
thinks the pedestrians at that intersection are better served by knowing their
protection is in their hands and not relying on signs. For those reasons, he
does not recommend signage at that intersection.
Mrs. Humphris said Mr. Roosevelt may be right, but she thinks that
something needs to be considered now. When Hydraulic Road is four-laned, the
traffic will-be heavier and faster. Something should be implemented when the
sidewalks for the project are installed.
Mrs. Humphris said she received a call from a citizen concerning the
speed limit on Route 660 at the entrance to Arbor Park. Mr. Roosevelt said he
will ask the Traffic Engineer to do a speed study and look at the accidents
along that section of road to see whether a reduction in speed is justified.
As he has stated previously, on most roads it does no good to set the speed
limit below what the people drive. That is the reason the Highway Department
puts a lot of reliance on "maximum safe speed" signage to alert drivers of a
condition that warrants reduction of speed. Mrs. Humphris said she thinks a
speed study would be helpful.
Mr. Roosevelt said there will be a Location and Design Public Hearing on
the Tabor Street (Route 691)/Park Road (Route 1204) Project, at Brownsville
Elementary School Auditorium, on September 19, 1990, at 7:30 P.M. The Depart-
ment is currently studying four ways to improve access into the Claudius
Crozet Park area. The Department will also hold an informational meeting on
September 18 at the same location. After the Department has a public hearing
on a secondary road project, the Board is then asked for a recommendation. He
is sending a letter to the Board transmitting a copy of the public hearing
report and requesting a discussion of ~he project at the October 10 Board
meeting. Since September 19 is next week, he is providing the Board a copy of
the public hearing report today. He asks that someone from County staff
attend the public hearing to hear the comments.
Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department is formulating a response to
the 1991 Federal Surface Transportation Act. The Department has developed a
set of policy goals and is asking anyone interested to make comments on the
Act and the goals. Hearings are scheduled at five different locations around
the state. One of the hearings is scheduled for September 18, 7:30 p.m., in
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 5)
176
the Department's Auditorium in Richmond. Written comments concerning these
goals will be accepted until October 1. He provided the Board with a copy of
the announcement and policy statement.
Mr. Bain asked when the last speed study was done on the Route 250/Route
40 intersection. Mr. Roosevelt said he is not certain when the Department
last did a study on the speeds. The Department did a traffic volume study for
a traffic signal within the past six months. The study should have included a
review of accidents at the location. He will do a follow-up and an update.
Mr. Bain said most of the accidents relate to the opening and closing of the
school. He thinks that the impact of the school should be considered with the
traffic study. Mr. Roosevelt said he will get a speed study done and get some
information on the accidents.
Mr. Perkins said he also has received several calls from citizens con-
cerning this intersection. He has been informed of several accidents that
have taken place. Mr. Roosevelt said the Department usually looks at three
years of accidents at an intersection, but if the accidents are not reported
to the Police, they do not get into the system. Mr. Perkins said he thinks
that some type of signal light needs to be installed. He also noticed in a
letter on the Consent Agenda that the County can restrict truck traffic on
state roads and that may be an option the Board will want to consider.
Mr. Way asked the Highway Department to clean up the area where trash is
being dumped along Broadway Street in the Woolen Mills area.
Agenda Item No. 8. Request for Street Name - Rio Mill Road.
This request came before the Board in a letter dated May 1, 1990, from
Mrs. Pamela G. Murray.
Mr. Cilimberg presented the following staff report:
"Staff research on this name is contrary to the current request for
road naming. On the 1932 Virginia Department of Transportation map,
State Route 122 was designated Rio Mill Road. This road followed the
alignment of what is now State Route 659 and the portion of State
Route 643 which extends from the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir
dam, north to State Route 743. At that time, there was no reservoir
and the road ran across the river continuously from Rio Road (State
Route 631) to Earlysville Road (Route 743). The road for which Ms.
Murray was requesting the name Rio Mill Road is shown only on the
Peyton map (an historic 1870 map prepared by G. Peyton, C. E.) to the
west of the true Rio Mill Road. Since staff determined that the road
in question is not Rio Mill Road, another name has been selected and
agreed to by Mrs. Murray. Mrs. Murray's road is a continuation of
State Route 844 (from the west side of State Route 743) and could,
therefore, bear the same name. To resolve the request at hand, staff
recommends that the name Panorama Road be adopted for both Mrs.
Murray's road and State Route 844, since State Route 844 leads to the
Panorama Farm, a well known landmark in the area.
The Board may want to consider also naming the portion of State Route
643 north of the South Fork Rivanna River Reservoir dam as Rio Mill
Road, since it is in the alignment of the historic use of this name.
In addition, staff has on two other occasions spoken with residents of
the area regarding naming State Route 659, another portion of the
original alignment of Rio Mill Road. The Board of Supervisors may
also consider naming State Route 659 as Woodburn Road, to make offi-
cial a name in common usage and keep the road name the same as the
community."
Mr. Cilimberg said since the E-911 system locator study includes naming
of all the roads in the County, it is the staff's opinion that the Board not
~eptember 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 6)
177
take any additional requests to name roadways until the completion of the
study. The staff does not recommend naming Rio Mi%l Road and Woodburn Road
until the completion of the E-911 study.
Mr. Bain asked the status of the E-911 study. Mr. Agnor responded that
proposals have been received and the E-911 Board is in the process of awarding
the contract. The study is projected to take approximately two years.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Way, to set a public
hearing for October 3 on a request that Route 844 and an old road on the east
side of Route 743, extending from Route 844 to Route 643 at the dam of the
South Fork Rivanna River, be officially named "Panorama Road". Roll was
~alled and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
lYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Agnor asked that the Board consider the staff's request to not take
any additional requests for naming of roads. Mr. Bowie said he supports the
request.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bain, to adopt the
following resolution:
P 0 L I C Y
R E S 0 L U T I 0 N
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that it will not take any requests to name streets or roads
until the study by the E-911 Committee is completed.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 9. Request to vacate right-of-way in Canterbury Hills
Subdivision.
This request came before the Board in a letter dated July 15, 1990, from
Arthur M. Shalloway and Phyllis P. Baker. In their letter, the petitioners
state that between their two properties is a County right-of-way 50 feet wide
and 150 feet deep that was made a right-of-way for possible future use by the
County. Mrs. Baker spoke to someone in County government and was informed
that the County had decided not to interconnect subdivisions, but instead to
let each one have its own outlet to the main roads, in this case Barracks
Road, and, therefore, the County could deed the right-of-way to the adjacent
property owners.
Mr. Cilimberg presented the following staff report:
"Two property owners are petitioning the Board to vacate the public
right-of-way for an unconstructed portion of Bennington Road in
Canterbury Hills Subdivision.
During the Route 29 North improvement review the Board endorsed the
concept of completing/upgrading certain roads west of Route 29 includ-
ing Barracks Road.
Upgrading Barracks Road has been in the Six-Year Secondary Road Plan
for some years and the current 'go-to-bid' date is April, 1992. The
Board of Supervisors has not yet reviewed detailed plans of this
improvement project.
Staff would recommend that no consideration be given to vacation of
the Bennington Road right-of-way until improvement plans for Barracks
Road are finalized."
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 17~
(Page 7)
Mrs. Humphris asked if it has been considered that Georgetown Road be
extended through the Booth's property. Mr. Cilimberg said that is not a part
of the Barracks Road project, but it is a possibility. At this time, the
- staff is suggesting that before the Board takes action to vacate the right-of-
way, that it keep all options open.
Mr. Bain agreed with the staff's recommendation. He then asked what
stage the Barracks Road project is in. Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Depart-
ment has held a field inspection on the plans and transmitted them to the
central office in Richmond for approval. The next step is to hold a public
hearing which will be scheduled in the next four to six months. The Depart-
ment then allows a year to purchase right-of-way. He supports the position of
the staff. Although a connection is not in the plans, he agrees that the
Board should leave all of the options open. If the Board vacates this right-
of-way and then at the public hearing there is strong support for a connec-
tion, the County would then have to purchase that right-of-way.
Mrs. Phyllis Baker, the applicant, said she and Mr. and Mrs. Shalloway
have maintained this right-of-way for 25 years without any use of it. If the
Board is not inclined to support the vacation, she asked if the property
owners can petition for use of the right-of-way. She is interested in install-
ing a driveway. Mr. Bowie suggested Mrs. Baker contact Mr. Cilimberg concern-
ing use of the right-of-way.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Bain, to not consider
vacating the right-of-way at the end of Bennington Road in Canterbury Hills
Subdivision. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 10. Request to abandon rights-of-way in Rosemont, Ragged
Mountain Farm and on property owned by Mrs. Jane L. Heyward.
(Mr. Bain abstained from discussion on this item due to a conflict of
interest. He left the room at 10:09 a.m.)
This request came before the Board in a letter dated August 29, 1990,
from Mr. Michael T. Boggs, transmitting three petitions requesting the aban-
donment of old public rights-of-way on Rosemont, Ragged Mountain Farm and pro-
perty owned by Ms. Jane L. Heyward.
Mr. Cilimberg presented the following staff report:
"Owners of three adjoining properties in the Ragged Mountains are
petitioning the Board to abandon several old public road rights-of-way
These roads are referred to in deeds as Mountain Road, Woodson Road,
McGeHee Road, McGee Road, and Rockfield School Road, together with
other unnamed roads.
It does not appear that abandonment of these rights-of-way would
deprive access to any property. Staff can determine no public purpose
to be served by continuing these rights-of-way. Staff recommends that
the Board proceed to public hearing for the purpose of abandonment of
these rights-of-way."
Mr. Bowie noted that although this is not a public hearing, the Board
would take comments from the public at this time.
First to address the Board, Mr. Sydney Smith, a neighboring landowner,
presented a letter, dated September 4, from Mrs. Phyllis Smith Gilmer with-
drawing her signature from the petition in favor of the request. Mr. Smith
said abandonment of this right-of-way would affect his right-of-way. He owns
thirty acres of land used for timbering and this right-of-way is the only way
to get off the property. Mr. Smith said he is opposed to abandoning the
right-of-way.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 8)
Mr. Perkins asked if abandoning this right-of-way would abolish Mr.
Smith's right-of-way. Mr. St. John responded "yes", abandonment could possi-
bly abolish Mr. Smith's right-of-way.
Next to address the Board, Mr. John Embree, Project Manager for Blandemar
Farms Estate, said the petitions originated and were circulated by Haley,
Chisholm & Morris, as opposed to the residents of Rosemont. Alarm over
hunters was used as the reason for the petitions. The statement in the
petition that there is no evidence that these roads have been utilized by any
persons other than owners of property now contained within the boundaries of
Rosemont or their guests is not correct. These old roads and right-of-ways
have been used as a basis for the development of Rosement since 1977. Adjoin-
ing neighbors have different interests and right-of-ways in these roads. For
example, Blandemar Farms has at least two accesses from the old roads. He
understood from the Planning Commission that the main reason Rosemont was
interested in abandoning the right-of-way was to be able to locate a house
closer to the old right-of-way than what would be allowed by the 75 foot
setback. If that is the case, then Rosemont should apply for a waiver of the
75 foot setback. His main comment is that the Board should look at the origin
of the request.
Mr. Way said there are a lot of roads involved in this request and he
thinks the way to sort everything out is by having a public hearing. Motion
was then offered by Mr. Way, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to set a public
nearing for November 21 to consider abandoning public rights-of-way in Rose-
mont, Ragged Mountain Farm and property owned by Mrs. Jane L. Heyward. Roll
was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
ABSTAIN: Mr. Bain.
NAYS: None.
(Mr. Bain returned to the meeting at 10:30 a.m.)
Agenda Item No. 10a. Request from Albemarle County Service Authority,
re: Scottsville Sewer Project.
Mr. J. W. Brent, Execntive'Director, Albemarle County Service Authority,
presented the following letter dated September 10, addressed to the Board:
"After you amended and adopted the County's Comprehensive Plan last
year the Service Authority updated its Capital Improvement Program.
Following a public hearing, a plan was adopted on December 21, 1989,
which included water and sewer extensions into the growth area north
of Scottsville. These utility extensions were scheduled to take place
in the period July 1, 1989 - June 30, 1991. These projects have now
been designed and the Service Authority is faced with higher than
anticipated project cost estimates. Sewer was expected to cost
$171,000, but is now estimated to be $418,000. This is due, in part,
to the fact that a plea was made in the public hearing to expand the
scope of the sewer project beyond what had been proposed in the budget
estimate. The water project, if constructed to serve the projected
growth of this community in the Comprehensive Plan, will cost $830,000
rather than the originally estimated amount of $426,000. This cost
escalated because the design engineer determined that the existing
water line between the Scottsville storage tank and the town is not
large enough to provide fire protection to the new growth area.
The Service Authority Board of Directors reviewed these projects on
August 23 and a number of questions arose as to whether committing
these funds to the Scottsville growth area was the most advantageous
use of the funds. The Board of Directors acknowledged that the final
decision was its to make, but directed me to write you seeking your
thoughts and input. These projects will be an extensive and expensive
undertaking. The projects will not generate sufficient revenue to
justify them. It is pure guesswork to estimate when or how the
industrial area might develop or whether the residential growth
projections will ever occur. If there is ever a return on the Service
Authority's investment in these projects, it will be at some point far
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 9)
into the future. The Board of Directors respectfully requests you to
consider its dilemma and to offer your thoughts and guidance as to
whether the Service Authority's limited resources are best applied in
this growth area or some other."
180
Mr. Brent said in the immediate future, total gross revenue will be less
than $20,000 per year. Presently, the utility costs for treating water and
sewer in Scottsville is the highest of the three service areas (Scottsville,
Urban area and Crozet). The Service Authority averages its costs throughout
the system and charges one retail rate to its customers. If the Service
Authority Board of Directors decides to proceed with the project, it is
expected to go to bid within the next 90 to 120 days.
Mr. Way said he is appalled that this project would be questioned again
after having gone through the procedure in the past and having unanimous
approval by this Board and the Service Authority Board of Directors. Mr. Way
said he recognizes that there are some new members on the Service Authority
Board that are not familiar with the history of this project; therefore, due
to the tremendous amount of money it will cost, he understands their reasons
for questioning the project. He thinks it was unfortunate that the represen-
tative on the Service Authority Board from Scottsville was not able to parti-
cipate in any of the discussion concerning this project because he is a
potential connector to the system. He suggests that this representative
confer with the County Attorney concerning his ability to vote when the
project is again discussed by the Service Authority Board. Mr. Way said this
project has been on his mind for seven years. The people involved with the
project have worked closely with the Service Authority and have followed the
system "to the T" in accomplishing this goal. The people have been diligent,
patient, reasonable and cooperative. This Board discussed this project during
Comprehensive Plan work sessions and agreed to upgrade Scottsville from a
village to a community. The Board realized that this project was not going to
pay for itself in the immediate future, but endorsed the project because
Scottsville was to become a growth area and because there are considerable
water and sewer problems in the community. This project will relieve an
existing problem. At the present time, the bidding market is good. The
Service Authority has the funds for this project. If the project is delayed
further, the price will only increase. He does not think the project will
ever get done if it is delayed further. Without the project, nothing in
Scottsville will change; there will be no growth and a worsening of existing
water and sewer problems. He thinks the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan
is at stake. Why would the Board have made Scottsville a community and a
growth area, if the intent was not to proceed with the project? The Board's
credibility in working with people would be at stake if it did not agree to
proceed with this project. Because of the history, the existing situation in
Scottsville, the integrity of the Comprehensive Plan and credibility of the
Board, he offered motion that the Board send a letter to the Albemarle County
Service Authority Board of Directors indicating its support of the Scottsville
sewer project. He noted that several people from Scottsville were present at
this meeting. Mr. Bain seconded the motion.
Mr. Bowie said he supports the motion. It is his opinion that Scotts-
ville wants to grow. Scottsville has the opportunity for commercial, indus-
trial and residential development that cannot happen without water and sewer.
If water and sewer are not provided to Scottsville, then the Comprehensive
Plan for that area cannot work.
Mr. Bowerman said this is a Situation where the needs of the community
outweigh the needs of a particular area. He thinks there could be a more
efficient use of the money in the urban area where there is a denser popula-
tion and sewer service is needed at the present time. However, he also thinks
the credibility and integrity of the Comprehensive Plan is at stake. Since
Scottsville is an important component of the Plan, he thinks it is important
that the Board proceed with the recommendations of that Plan. He also sup-
ports the motion.
Mr. Bain said he supports the motion for the reasons stated and given
that the Plan is in place for Scottsville. He thinks it is important that the
project move forward.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 10)
181
Mr. Perkins said this is a typical example of what is happening through-
out the county. Infrastructures are aging and getting to the point where they
must be replaced. It is a matter of abandoning these areas or making a
commitment to improve that infrastructure. He thinks this project should be
done in Scottsville.
Mrs. Humphris said she is thrilled that there is an area that wants to
grow. There are many areas of the county which have been established as
growth areas, but where the residents do not want growth. She also supports
the motion.
Mayor Thacker of the Town of Scottsville thanked the Board for keeping
its promise to the people. He thinks that Scottsville will grow.
Mr. George Hubert, President of the Southern Albemarle Association, also
thanked the Board for its support of the project and the Scottsville community.
There being no further discussion, roll was called and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
(At 10:45 a.m., the Chairman called a recess. The Board reconvened at
11:02 a.m.)
Agenda Item No. 11. Appeal: Somerset Farms Preliminary Plat.
Mr. Bowie noted a letter dated September 7, 1990, from the applicant
requesting that this plat be referred back to the Planning Commission due to
the submission of new information. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded
by Mrs. Humphris, to refer the Somerset Farms Preliminary Plat Appeal back to
the Planning Commission. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 12. Federal Express Site Plan, clarification of condi-
tion.
Mr. Bowie noted a letter received from the applicant requesting that
clarification on a condition for the Federal Express Site Plan be deferred
until November 14. No action was taken by the Board.
Agenda Item No. 13. Memorandum of Understanding - Thomas Jefferson Soil
and Water District.
Mr. Agnor presented the following memorandum dated August 2, 1990:
"The attached Memorandum of Understanding has been offered by the Soil
Conservation District to memorialize a cooperative working relation-
ship between the District and the County. It describes the responsi-
bilities of the District and the County.
In general, the District will provide staff assistance with soil data
and interpretations; development of ordinances and programs related to
soil and water conservation; assist with local education programs on
conservation and environmental protection; financially assist land
owners with Best Management Practices and prepare an annual plan of
work.
The County, in general, provides funding for District activities and
staff; consults the District on policies, ordinances, and programs;
administers and enforces the erosion control ordinance; and provides
the District with land use plans, maps, and data.
Staff requests authorization to execute the agreement."
iSeptember 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 3_82
(Page 11)
Mr. Eddie Wood, a director of the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conser-
vation District, said the District is in a position to coordinate efforts
!among various federal and state agencies. The State Soil and Water Conserva-
-tion Commission preSently has a large staff and'employs many professionals and
specialists. He recommends the Board endorse the agreement.
Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Mr. Bain, to authorize
staff to execute the following Memorandum of Understanding between the Thomas
iJefferSon Soil and Water Conservation District and the CoUnty of Albemarle.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS:. None.
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
Between the
Thomas Jefferson Soil & Water Conservation District
and the
County of Albemarle
This Memorandum of Understanding is entered into by and between the
County of Albemarle, Virginia, hereinafter called the County, and the
Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conservation District, Commonwealth of
Virginia, hereinafter called the District.
Recognizing the need for close working relationships in carrying out
the responsibilities for which each is charged, the County and Dis-
trict enter into this Memorandum of Understanding as the foundation
for an enduring cooperative working relationship. Such cooperation
allows joint effort in the solution of resource problems in Albemarle
County.
The District will, at the request of the County, provide assistance,
as set forth below. This assistance will be provided by federal,
state, and local personnel which work through the District, within the
limitations of their budgets and in accordance with established
policies for budget allocations.
The District Agrees To:
1. Provide available natural resource data to assist the County with
land inventories and planning considerations.
Provide interpretations of soil data to assist the County with
land use decisions and to provide information on the suitability
of land for various uses.
o
Assist in the development of policies, ordinances, and programs
for the conservation of soil, water, and related natural resour-
ces.
Provide current soil and water conservation practice standards and
specifications to be used as a basis for developing conservation
plans on lands within the County and on County owned property.
5. As personnel, time, and resources permit, assist the County with
the implementation of the Chesapeake Bay Preservation Act.
Conduct an annual operations and maintenance inspection on the
Beaver Creek Watershed structure (constructed under P.L. 566).
Provide maintenance recommendations to the County.
7. Inform the County of programs available through the District and
its cooperating agencies which affect natural resource management.
8. Assist with local educational programs relating to natural re-
source conservation and protection of the environment.
As personnel, time and resources permit, assist the County in
maximizing compliance with the Virginia Erosion and Sediment
Control law and the corresponding County Ordinance.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 12)
10. Provide financial assistance to landowners through the Virginia
Agricultural BMP (Best Management Practice) Cost Share Program.
11. Delegate a District representative to serve as liaison to the
County.
12. Furnish, to the County, a copy of its long range program and
annual report of accomplishments.
13. Prepare and submit to the County an annual plan of work and a
budget request for carrying out the plan.
The County Agrees To:
1. Provide the District with funding in support of District activi-
ties and personnel.
2. Provide the District access to available maps, photographs, and
natural resource data of Albemarle County.
3. Provide the District with a copy of the comprehensive plan, land
use plan and any other plan(s) for the County.
4. Consult with the District in the development or review of poli-
cies, ordinances and programs which deal with soil, water and
related natural resources.
5. Assist the District in the development of effective soil and water
conservation programs.
6. Help carry out an education program designed to make the public
aware of the need for the proper use and management of natural
resources.
7. Administer and enforce the County Erosion and Sediment Control
Ordinance, meeting the specifications of the Virginia Erosion and
Sediment Control Law.
8. Delegate a County representative to serve as a liaison to the
District.
It is Mutually Agreed That:
1. The County, and the District will meet periodically as needed to
further coordinate their respective programs and activities for
optimum mutual benefit.
2. Special emphasis will be given by the County and District to
maximize communication and sharing of resources among the Dis-
trict, the Department of Planning, the Department of Watershed
Management, and the Department of Engineering.
3. This Memorandum may be amended at any time by mutual consent of
the parties hereto or may be terminated by either party by giving
sixty (60) days notice in writing, to the other party.
In Witness thereof, this Memorandum executed and agreed to on the day
and month and year written below (Signed September 14, 1990).
183
Agenda Item No. 14a. Appropriation: SPCA Improvements.
Mr. Agnor said staff recently received a report from Dr. Barry G.
Dawkins, State Animal Welfare Veterinarian, concerning the need for certain
improvements at the Charlottesville/Albemarle SPCA. These improvements would
bring the SPCA into compliance with State animal shelter regulations. Mr.
Michael A. Forman, Director of the local SPCA, estimates the cost of these
improvements to be $8500 which is proposed to be shared equally between the
County of Albemarle, City of Charlottesville and SPCA. The CountY's one-third
cost share for the improvements is $2835. Staff recommends that this amount
be appropriated from the General Fund Balance.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 184,
(Page 13)
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt
the following appropriation resolution to appropriate $2835 from the General
Fund Balance for improvements at the Charlottesville-Albemarle SPCA. Roll was
- called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL Y=~R: 1990/91
FUND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
CONTRIBUTION TO SPCA FOR SHELTER
IMPROVEMENTS.
EXPENDITURE
COST/CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1100039000565500
SPCA $2~835.00
TOTAL $2,835.00
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2100051000510100
APP FROM GEN'L FUND BALANCE
TOTAL
$2~835.00
$2,835.00
Agenda Item No. 14b. Appropriation: Swim Area Improvements - Chris
Greene and Mint Springs.
Mr. Patrick K. Mullaney, Director, Parks & Recreation, presented the
following memorandum, dated July 27, 1990:
"The 1990-91CIP request for Chris Greene and Mint Springs of
$55,000.00 is to close the deep water area (over six feet) to general
recreational swimming.
While 80 to 90 percent of the activity usually occurs where people can
stand, the closing of the deep water area to recreational swimming
will create the need for additional shallow water areas. The funds
budgeted will provide for the construction of these areas.
The impetus for this recommendation is the National Water Safety
Congress Standards, which recommends a maximum depth of five feet of
water for lake swimming. The National Water Safety Congress was
formed in 1951 to promote the safe use of the nation's waters for
recreational purposes. Its membership consists of a broad base of
organizations interested in water safety.
Facilities similar to ours are usually found in state park systems.
We have checked with state park officials in Maryland, Delaware,
Pennsylvania and Virginia. None of these states have deep water
swimming areas. Separate diving areas with deep water are provided at
Virginia state parks.
The reason for going to shallow water areas at lakes is simply to
decrease the margin for error. The chances of a person needing to be
rescued increases in deeper water, while the likelihood of being
rescued decreases. If a swimmer does get into trouble in shallow
water, a helping hand from a friend may be all that's necessary to
avoid a tragedy. A swix~er~ in trouble in deep water requires assis-
tance from a trained lifeguard. In deep water a good samaritan act by
an untrained person can resUlt in a double tragedy. The major diffe-
rence between guarding a lake versus a swimming pool is the inability
to see a person when they go under water. Shallow water search
techniques are much quickerl and efficient than deep water techniques,
thus increasing the chance Of a successful rescue.
At Chris Greene and Mint Springs, the docks serve as an attraction for
weak swix~ers to venture across deep water. This combined with the
other activities, which are now occurring simultaneously in deep
water, such as diving, lap swimming and general play makes these areas
difficult to guard effectively. Our proposal would limit general play
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 14)
and recreational swimming to shallow water. The current deep water
area would be roped off for lap swimming and guarded separately. If
diving is deemed a necessary activity, a separate area could also be
roped off and guarded.
The improvements at Chris Greene would result in the opening of a new
shallow water swimming area directly across the beach from the main
swimming area. At Mint Springs, the improvements would provide for a
separate wading area for small children, and some needed additional
beach and shallow water area on the parking lot side of the existing
beach. Approximately $35,000 to $40,000 of the total $55,000 project
cost is for sand for the new swimming and beach areas. The remaining
funds are for engineering, grading, fencing and costs associated with
marking the swim areas. We will provide some visual aids to better
describe these proposed improvements at your meeting on August 8."
185
Mr. Mullaney explained the training procedures lifeguards undertake when
doing a search in a five foot depth versus an eleven foot depth. He presented
a rendering of the layout of the swim areas at Chris Greene and Mint Springs.
Mr. Bain asked if the rope around~the recreation area will be moved
further out into the lake at Mint Springs. Mr. Mullaney said there will be
two ropes; one rope around three feet and the second rope between the five to
six feet level. Mr. Bain asked if there will be a separate diving dock area
at Mint Springs. Mr. Mullaney replied "yes". Mr. Perkins asked the depth of
water for the lap swim area. Mr. Mullaney replied that the lap swim area
would run from five to ten feet in depth.
Mr. Bowie said when this first came before the Board, he thought the
lakes would be five feet deep all the way across. Mr. Bain said that was also
his impression. He thinks this is a better plan.
Motion was offered by Mr. Way to adopt the following resolution to
appropriate $55,000 in the 1990-91 Capital Improvements Program for swim area
improvements at Chris Greene and Mint Springs Lakes. Mr. Bain seconded the
motion and said that if there are any significant changes to the plan, then
he would like to be informed. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 90/91
FUND: CAPITAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
IMPROVEMENTS AT CHRIS GREENE AND MINT
SPRINGS SWIM AREAS
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1900071000950080
P&R-SWIM AREAS
TOTAL
$55~000.00
$55,0O0.0O
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2900051000510100
CIP FUND BALANCE
TOTAL
$55~000.00
$55,000.00
Agenda Item No. 14c. FY 89-90 End-of-Year Report and Reappropriations.
Mr. Agnor presented the following memorandum dated September 7, 1990:
"The attached report indicates that the County completed FY 89-90 in a
continued sound financial position. General Government operations
left the General Fund with $1.06 million of revenues in excess of
expenditures. These remaining funds completely restored a planned
$970,000 reduction of the General Fund balance in FY 89-90. Of the
$1.06 million remainder, $306,570 in reapppropriations is needed to
complete projects begun in FY 89-90 and paid for in FY 90-91. The
unrestricted balance of the General Fund (unaudited) should be $8.49
million.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 15)
School operations left the School Fund with $251,262 of revenues in
excess of expenditures. These remaining funds restore an accrued
revenue error in the FY 88-89 School Fund balance of $225,170 which
was discovered during FY 89-90. The unrestricted balance of the
School Fund (unaudited) is -$14,392."
186
Mr. Agnor presented the following FY 1989-90 Year End Report, which
includes the County Executive's Financial Report for the period of July 1,
1989, to June 30, 1990, dated September 6, 1990, prepared by Melvin A.
Breeden, Director of Finance:
"As previously discussed, the County completed fiscal year 1989/90 in
a sound financial position. Although we experienced some shortfalls
in revenues, expenditures were mostly within budget and resulted in
improved fund balances.
A prior year adjustment (FY 1988/89) in the School Fund had a negative
impact on their fund balance. Expenditures for Special Education,
which are 60 percent reimbursable by the State, were erroneously
recorded as 100 percent reimbursable resulting in a decrease to the
School Fund Balance of $225,170. Except for a minor amount, the
School Division has been able to absorb this reduction in current year
operations.
Summarized below are significant factors which effected FY 1989/90
operations and actions required.
Revenues
Expenditures
Inventory Adjustment
Variance
$52,157,506.21
(51,097,772.31)
(1~678.07)
$ 1,058,055.83
This excess of revenues over expenditures includes the planned use of
$970,325 of the General Fund Balance to finance 1989/90 operations.
The Fund balance actually increased by $87,730.83 instead of decreas-
ing by $970,325 ($1,058,055.83 - $970,325.00 = $87,730.83).
Revenues, with the exception of local taxes, were near budget projec-
tions. Major variances are as follows:
Source Budget Actual Variance
Real Estate $20,104,963 $20,204,161 $ 99,198
Personal property 8,871,000 8,434,606 (436,394)
Machinery & Tools 850,000 478,657 (371,343)
Sales & Use 4,895,000 4,688,435 (206,565)
Utility 3,441,000 3,748,382 307,382
Business License 2,659,500 2,992,897 333,397
Vehicle Licenses 1,110,000 758,719 (351,281)
Int. on Investments 839,400 1,112,911 273,511
Public Assistance 1,437,539 1,291,533 (146,006)
Personal Property Tax was under projection primarily due to a slow
down in new car sales. Machinery and Tools Tax was less than budgeted
due to a major reclassification of equipment owned by a County manu-
facturer. Vehicle Licenses were less due to the shortened license
year. Public Assistance revenues are less due to a corresponding
reduction in expenditures.
Expenditures for General Fund Departments were within appropriations
except for the following:
Department Reason Amount
Police Overtime $ 8,184.28
Sheriff Training 863.20
Animal Control Claims 4,897.47
3oint Dispatch Equipment 920.07
VPI Extension Telephone 261.39
Refunds Business License 6~439.63
Total $21,566.04
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 16)
187
The major underexpenditure in the General Fund was the budgeted
contingency which had an unused balance of $428,989.05.
Transfers from the contingency are requested for the above over-
expenditures and the required appropriation form is attached (Appro-
priation Form #890045).
In addition, reappropriation totaling $306,570.14 have been requested
and the required appropriation form is attached (Appropriation Form
#900008). Reappropriations requested are as follows:
Department
Finance
Information Services
Clerk of Circuit Court
Police
Egll Implementation
Drug Seizure Assets
Engineering
Ivy Landfill
Staff Services
Health Department
Planning
Reason
Office Supplies
Equipment on order
Audit/Indexing
Equipment
Study
Road Projects
Repairs/Maintenance
Repairs
Contract/Minutes
Total
Amount
'$ 1,444.35
1,265.91
6,717.45
15,359.92
42,754.75
46,599.87
49,018.33
94,792.83
33,516.73
6,710.00
8~390.00
$306,570.14
Revenues
Expenditures
Variance
$ 46,287,654.64
(46~036~392.63)
$ 251,262.01+
The excess of revenues over expenditures includes the planned use of
$479,819 of the School Fund Balance to finance FY 1989/90 operations.
Previous reports have shown the adjusted School Fund Balance at
$15,094.01. This must be adjusted as follows:
Adjusted Fund Balance 5-31-90
FY 1988/89 Revenue Error
Inventory Adjustment 6-30-90
FY 1989/90 Operations
15,094.01
225,170.00
55,578.00
251.262.01 +
($ 14,391.98)
I would recommend a transfer of $14,391.98 from the General Fund to
remove this deficit fund balance (Appropriation Form #890046).
There are no reappropriation requests from the School Division. This
will also require a reduction in FY 1990/91 school expenditures of
$147,438 which were planned to be funded from the School Fund Balance.
SCHOOL PROGRAMS
Details of FY 1989/90 activities and fund balances are provided.
Actions required in these funds are as follows:
Cafeteria - Supplemental appropriation of $14,469.18 to cover over-
expenditure. Advance of $46,770 from the General Fund to
offset the shortfall of Federal revenues. This will
eliminate the deficit fund balance and hopefully can be
recovered in FY 1990/91 cafeteria operations (Appropria-
tion Form #890046).
Migrant
Supplemental appropriation of $4,943.78 to cover overex-
penditure. This appropriation can be covered by program
revenues (Appropriation Form #890047).
Drug Education - Supplemental appropriation of $666.19 to cover
overexpenditure. This appropriation can be covered
by program revenues (Appropriation Form #890048).
C.B.I.P.
Supplemental appropriation of $70,627.34 to cover overex-
penditure. This appropriation can be covered by program
revenues (Appropriation Form #890049).
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 17)
188
Albemarle High Sschool Fire - Appropriation of $234,093.27 to cover
repairs made through 6-30-90 resulting
from fire. This appropriation can be
covered from insurance reimbursements
(Appropriation Form #890050).
OT~R FONDS
Soil & Water
Supplemental appropriation for $764.13 to cover
overexpenditure. This appropriation can be
covered from grant revenues and beginning fund
balance (Appropriation Form #890051).
Gypsy Moth
Reappropriation of $70,352.56 for remaining
portion of grant (Appropriation Form #900012).
CITY/COUNTY JOINT ACTIVITIES
Joint Security - Expenditures exceeded appropriation by $119,196.59
primarily due to food supplies resulting from in-
creased prisoner days. This appropriation can be
covered by revenues which exceeded projections by
$186,146.63. Revenues exceeded expenditures by
$66,950.04 which will result in a refund to the City
and County (Appropriation Form #890052).
Joint Dispatch - Expenditures exceeded appropriation by $1128.72
primarily due to overtime; also, revenues were
$5981.12 more than projections. A supplemental
appropriation of $1128.72 to cover the overexpen-
diture can be funded from the surplus revenues
(Appropriation Form #890053).
Joint Recreation - Revenues exceeded expenditures by $15.13 resulting
in a positive fund balance of $164.22.
CAPITAL ]I~PRO~ ~
Capital Improvement
Two projects are overexpended and can be covered by transfer from
other completed projects (Appropriation Form #890054). These projects
are:
Fire Department - Vehicle Refurbishment $ 841.92
Burley School Paving 2,290.00
Also, the Murray School renovations budgeted in FY 1990/91 required
expenditures for planning services in FY 1989/90 totaling $83,014.58.
A supplemental appropriation Of this amount in FY 1989/90 is reques-
ted (Appropriation Form #890054). An offsetting reduction in FY
1990/91 appropriations is also requested (Appropriation Form #900009).
Reappropriations for uncompleted projects totaling $7,069,260.89 are
detailed on Appropriation Form #900010.
Storm Water Control
Reappropriations for uncompleted projects totaling $840,755.18 are
detailed on Appropriation Form #900011."
189
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meetin§)
(Page 18)
COUNTY OF ALBRMARLE FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT SYSTEM
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS BUDGET REPORT
- FOR THE PERIOD OF JULY 1, 1989 TO JUNE 30, 1990
GENERAL FUND
1989/90 RECEIPTS BALANCE COLLECTED
REVENUES EST. REVENUE YTD YTD YTD
LOCAL SOURCES 47,205,380 47,194,909 10,471 - 99.98%
COMMONWEALTH 4,074,240 3,845,646 228,594 - 94.39%
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 182,370 146,627 35,743 - 80.40%
TRANSFERS 970,325 970~325 0 - 100.00%
TOTAL 52,432,315 52,157,507 274,808 - 99.48%
89/90 EXP/OBLIG BALANCE EXP/OBLIG
~¥PENDITURES APPROP YTD YTD YTD
GENERAL GOV'T ADMINISTRATION 3,238,855 3,136,242 102,613 + 96.83%
JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 1,185,246 1,166,493 18,753 + 98.42%
PUBLIC SAFETY 5,186,148 5,060,430 125,718 + 97.58%
PUBLIC WORKS 1,908,178 1,665,191 242,987 + 87.27%
HUMAN DEVELOPMENT 3,325,031 3,129,750 195,281 + 94.13%
EDUCATION 27,004,044 27,003,944 100 + 100.00%
PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURAL 1,891,402 1,786,920 104,482 + 94.48%
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 1,416,451 1,297,323 119,128 + 91.59%
TRANSFERS 4,104,946 4,103,148 1,798 + 99.96%
NONDEPARTMENTAL 3~172~014 2~748,331 423,683 + 86.64%
TOTAL 52,432,315 51,097,772 1,334,543 + 97.45%
SCHOOL FUND
1989/90 RECEIPTS BALANCE COLLECTED
REVENUES EST. REVENUE YTD YTD YTD
LOCAL SOURCES 504,313 691,924 (187,611)+ 137.20%
COMMONWEALTH 17,793,385 17,806,873 (13,488)+ 100.08%
FEDERAL GOVERNMENT 357,600 357,600 0 - 100.00%
TRANSFERS-IN 27~431~258 27~431~258 0 - 100.00%
TOTAL 46,086,556 46,287,655 (201,099)- 100.44%
89/90 EXP/OBLIG BALANCE EXP/OBLIG
EXPENDITURES APPROP YTD YTD YTD
INSTRUCTION 36,026,619 35,981,073 45,546 + 99.87%
ADMIN., ATTENDANCE, & HEALTH 1,632,075 1,671,711 (39,636)- 102.43%
PUPIL TRANSPORTATION 4,071,242 3,908,716 162,526 + 96.01%
FACILITIES OPERATION & MAINT 3,883,929 4,025,402 (141,473)- 103.64%
FACILITIES 472,691 449~490 23~201 + 95.09%
TOTAL 46,086,556 46,036,392 50,164 + 99.89%
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT FUND
1989/90 RECEIPTS BALANCE COLLECTED
REVENUES EST. REVENUE YTD YTD YTD
LOCAL SOURCES 383,000 372,303 10,697 - 97.21%
COMMONWEALTH 527,040 75,000 452,040 - 14.23%
NONREVENUE RECEIPTS 15,383,000 8,204,945 7,178,055 - 53.34%
FUND BALANCE 1,424,250 0 1,424,250 - 0.00%
TRANSFERS-IN 1~431~570 1~431~570 0 - 100.00%
TOTAL 19,148,860 10,083,818 9,065,042 - 52.66%
89/90 EXP/OBLIG BALANCE EXP/OBLIG
EXPENDITURES APPROP YTD YTD YTD
GENERAL GOV'T ADMINISTRATION 251,594 237,747 13,847 + 94.50%
- JUDICIAL ADMINISTRATION 29,908 28,505 1,403 + 95.31%
PUBLIC SAFETY 619,795 539,130 80,665 + 86.99%
· PUBLIC WORKS 2,153,089 622,176 1,530,913 + 28.90%
EDUCATION 13,333,116 9,367,865 3,965,251 + 70.26%
PARKS, RECREATION AND CULTURAL 2,010,555 633,916 1,376,639 + 31.53%
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 216,495 198,304 18,191 + 91.60%
TRANSFERS 534,308 534,308 0 + 100.00%
TOTAL 19,148,860 12,161,951 6,986,909 + 63.51%
September 12,
(Page 19)
OTHER FUNDS
1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
1989/90 RECEIPTS
REVENUES EST. REVENUE YTD
BALANCE COLLECTED
YTD YTD
190
METRO PLANNING GRANT-PL FUNDS 14,730 12,963
SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION 30,299 31,018
MODERATE REHAB. GRANT 782,959 726,479
CDBG-AHIP 239,927 239,927
GYPSY MOTH AIPM PROGRAM 149,103 80,117
FIRE SERVICE PROGRAM 0 108,486
DUPLICATING EQUIPMENT 0 109,363
FOOD SERVICES 1,470,530 1,424,823
CHAPTER I 510,628 506,561
CHAPTER II 51,893 47,390
MIGRANT EDUCATION 49,000 58,095
MISC. SCHOOL GRANTS 0 0
FED JOB TRAINING PART ACT 25,000 21,930
DROP-OUT PREVENTION GRANT 4,590 0
DRUG EDUCATION GRANT 36,661 37,827
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH 26,583 15,695
SLIAG PROGRAM 22,118 20,875
CBIP SEVERE 419,823 492,363
E. D. PROGRAM 557,501 507,978
COMMUNITY EDUCATION 683,960 580,066
TEXTBOOK RENTAL FUND 361,511
MCINTIRE TRUST FUND 10,000
A H S FIRE DAMAGE 0
JOINT SECURITY 2,193,225
JOINT SECURITY-CAPITAL 1,035,195
JOINT DISPATCH FUND 717,862
JOINT RECREATION FACILITY 152,230
STORM WATER CONTROL FUND 852,331
VISITOR CENTER FUND 67,735
DEBT SERVICE FUND 2~670~037
TOTAL 13,135,431
1,767 - 88.00%
(719)+ 102.37%
56,480 - 92.79%
0 + 0.OO%
68,986 - 53.73%
(108,486)+ 0.00%
(109,363)+ 0.00%
45,707 96.89%
4,067 99.20%
4,503 91.32%
(9,095)+ 118.56%
0 + 0.00%
3,070 87.72%
4,590 - 0.00%
(1,166)+ 103.18%
10,888 - 59.04%
1,243 + 0.00%
(72,540)+ 117.28%
49,523 - 91.12%
103,894 - 84.81%
274,577 86,934 - 75.95%
8,120 1,880 - 81.20%
383,000 (383,000)+ 0.00%
2,379,372 (186,147)+ 108.49%
1,004,576 30,619 - 97.04%
696,919 20,943 97.08%
112,413 39,817 73.84%
577,260 275,071 67.73%
67,734 1 100.00%
2~642~153 27~884 98.96%
13,168,080 (32,649)+ 100.25%
89/90 EXP/OBLIG BALANCE EXP/OBLIG
EXPENDITIIREg APPROP YTD YTD YTD
METRO PLANNING GRANT-PL FUNDS 14,730 12,969
SOIL & WATER CONSERVATION 30,299 31,063
MODERATE REHAB. GRANT 782,959 723,585
CDBG-AHIP 239,927 239,927
GYPSY MOTH AIPM PROGRAM 149,103 78,750
FIRE SERVICE PROGRAM 0 407,813
DUPLICATING EQUIPMENT 0 103,595
FOOD SERVICES 1,470,530 1,484,999
CHAPTER I 510,628 503,766
CHAPTER II 51,893 47,686
MIGRANT EDUCATION 49,000 53,944
MISC. SCHOOL GRANTS 0 0
FED JOB TRAINING PART ACT 25,000 21,687
DROP-OUT PREVENTION GRANT 4,590 4,590
DRUG EDUCATION GRANT 36,661 37,327
ORGANIZATIONAL RESEARCH 26,583 26,024
SLIAG 22,118 20,875
CBIP SEVERE 419,823 490,451
E D PROGRAM 557,501 512,140
COMMUNITY EDUCATION 683,960 575,524
TEXTBOOK RENTAL FUND 361,511 246,832
MCINTIRE TRUST FUND 10,000 8,120
A H S FIRE DAMAGE 0 234,093
JOINT SECURITY FUND 2,193,225 2,312,422
JOINT SECURITY-CAPITAL 1,035,195 1,004,576
30INT DISPATCH FUND 717,862 718,991
JOINT RECREATION FACILITY 152,230 112,398
STORM WATER CONTROL FUND 852,331 11,576
VISITOR CENTER FUND 67,735 67,734
DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,670,037 2~641~765
TOTAL 13,135,431 12,735,222
1,761 + 88.04%
(764)- 102.52%
59,374 + 92.42%
0 - 100.00%
70,353 + 52.82%
(407,813)- 0.00%
(103,595)- 0.00%
(14,469)- 100.98%
6,862+ 98.66%
4,207 + 91.89%
(4,944)- 110.09%
0 - 0.00%
3,313 + 86.75%
0 0.00%
(666)- 101.82%
559 + 97.90%
1,243 + 94.38%
(70,628)- 116.82%
45,361 + 91.86%
108,436 + 84.15%
114,679 + 68.28%
1,880 + 81.20%
(234,093)- 0.00%
(119,197)- 105.43%
30,619 + 97.04%
(1,129)- 100.16%
39,832 + 73.83%
840,755 + 1.36%
1 + 100.00%
28~272 + 98.94%
400,209 + 96.95%
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 191
(Page 20)
Mrs. Humphris asked what changes are proposed by the School Division to
recover the Cafeteria Fund deficit in 1990-91. Mr. Agnor said one way to
recover the deficit is by raising lunch prices. He added that the cafeteria
- program has not had the participation anticipated so food was prepared and
then unused. Mr. Bowie commented that it is a matter of management. Mrs.
Humphris asked if the funds transferred to offset this deficit could be
repaid. Mr. Agnor responded "hopefully". He added that funds from the
General Fund have not previously been used to support the food operations in
the School system. Mr. Bowie asked what happens if the Board does not trans-
fer the funds. Mr. Agnor responded that the accounting records would show a
deficit in funds. Mr. Bain said the distinction is that the Board is not
appropriating the funds, but instead making a transfer, and sending the
message that the funds have to be recaptured.
Mr. Bowie asked the basis for the $14,469.18 error in the Cafeteria Fund.
Mr. Agnor said the finance division of the School office mistakenly identified
a revenue item as being 100 percent reimbursable from the state when it was
actually on a 60/40 ratio.
Mr. Bain asked if the nonrevenue receipts ($15,383,000 - estimated
revenue and $7,178,055 - balance year-to-date) listed under the Capital
Improvement Fund shows a balance because the funds have not yet been needed
for expenditures. Mr. Breeden said the figures are the proceeds on bonds the
County issued last Fall. The funds are held by the state and the County is
reimbursed as it expends the funds.
Mr. Bain asked if the balance of $146,549.43 shown in the Textbook Fund
was anticipated. This balance is more than what is shown at the beginning of
the fiscal year. Mr. Breeden said most of the textbooks are scheduled for
replacement on either a two, three or four year cycle. There are fluctuations
in this fund balance because of an accumulation of funds over a period of
years and then when the actual purchases are made, the fund balance is used
up. The balance shown are close to what was anticipated.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt the
following resolution to transfer $21,566.04 from the Contingency Account to
cover FY 1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was called and the motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90 NUMBER: 890045
FUND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: FY 89/90 OVEREXPENDITURES.
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1100031010120000 POLICE-OVERTIME $8,184.28
1100031020282000 SHERIFF-TRAINING 863.20
1100035010580200 ANIMAL CONTROL 4,897.47
1100031040800301 JOINT DISPATCH-EQUIPMENT 920.07
1100083000520300 VPI EXTENSION-TELEPHONE 261.39
1100092010580304 REFUNDS-BUSINESS LICENSE 6,439.63
1100095000999990 CONTINGENCY (21,566.04)
TOTAL ($0.00)
Motion was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Mr. Bain, to adopt the
following resolution to transfer $61,161.98 from the General Fund Balance to
the School Fund and the Cafeteria Fund to cover deficit fund balances. Mr.
Bain reiterated that the funds to Cafeteria is a transfer only. Mr. Bowie
- suggested that this item be a discussion for the next joint meeting with the
School Board. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 21)
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90
FUND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 890046
TRANSFER TO SCHOOLS AND CAFETERIA TO COVER
DEFICIT FUND BALANCES
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1100093010930001
1100093010930009
TRANSFER TO SCHOOLS
ADVANCE TO CAFETERIA
TOTAL
$14,391.98
46~770.00
$61,161.98
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2100051000510100
GENERAL FUND BALANCE
$61,161.98
TOTAL $61,161.98
192
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt
the following resolution to appropriate $4,943.78 to the Migrant Fund for FY
1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90
FUND: MIGRANT
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 890047
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90
OVEREXPENDITURE
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1310361101600000
REVENUE
MIGRANT-MATERIALS AND SUPPLIES
TOTAL
$4~943.78
$4,943.78
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2310333000330102
FEDERAL REVENUES
$4~943.78
TOTAL $4,943.78
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt the
following resolution to appropriate $666.19 to the Drug Education Fund for FY
1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90
FUND: DRUG EDUCATION
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 890048
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90
OVEREXPENDITURE
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER / CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1310761311312700
REVENUE
DRUG EDUC-PROF. SERVICES
$666.19
TOTAL $666.19
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2310724000240500
STATE REVENUES
$666.19
TOTAL $666.19
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt the
following resolution to appropriate $70,627.34 to the C.B.I.P. Fund for FY
1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 22)
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90
FUND: C.B.I.P.
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 890049
SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90
OVEREXPENDITURE
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
193
1320161102112100
CBIP-SALARIES-TEACH~RS
$70~627.34
TOTAL $70,627.34
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2320118000189905
CBIP REVENUES
$70~627.34
TOTAL $70,627.34
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Bain, to adopt the
following resolution to appropriate $234,093.27 to cover Albemarle High School
fire damage from insurance monies. Roll was called and the motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90 NUMBER: 890050
FUND: ALBEMARLE HIGH SCHOOL FIRE DAMAGE
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90 EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1391064600800661
REVENUE
BUILDING REPAIRS
DESCRIPTION
TOTAL
$234~093.27
$234,093.27
AMOUNT
2391019000190800
INSURANCE RECOVERY
$234~093.27
TOTAL $234,093.27
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Way, to adopt the
following resolution to appropriate $764.13 to the Soil and Water Grant Fund
for FY 1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was called and the motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90 NUMBER: 890051
FUND: SOIL AND WATER GRANT
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90 OVEREXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1122282030110000
SALARIES $764.13
TOTAL $764.13
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2122224000240500
STATE REVENUES
$764.13
TOTAL $764.13
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bain, to adopt the
following resolution to appropriate $119,196.59 to the Joint Security Complex
Fund for FY 1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was called and the motion carried
by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 23)
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90 NUMBER: 890052
FUND: JOINT SECURITY
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90 OVEREXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
1400033020600200 FOOD SUPPLIES
AMOUNT
$119~196.59
194
REVENUE
TOTAL $119,196.59
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
$119,196.59
2400023000231002 STATE REVENUES
TOTAL $119,196.59
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt the
following resolution to appropriate $1,128.72 to the Joint Dispatch Fund from
the Joint Dispatch Fund Balance for FY 1989-90 overexpenditures. Roll was
called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
~AYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90 NUMBER: 890053
FUND: JOINT DISPATCH
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: APPROPRIATION FOR FY 89/90 OVEREXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
$1,128.72
1410031040120000 SALARIES-OVERTIME
REVENUE
TOTAL $1,128.72
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
$1~128.72
2410051000510100 FUND BALANCE
TOTAL $1,128.72
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adOpt the
following resolution to transfer $83,014.58 from the Capital Fund Balance to
several Capital Improvement projects for FY 1989-90 year end adjustments.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 89/90
FUND: CAPITAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 890054
FY 89/90 YEAR END ADJUSTMENTS
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
1900032010700505 FIRE DEPT-¥EH±CLE REFURBISHMENT
AMOUNT
$841.92
1900060251800675
1900060206800901
1900060100950052
1900060303312350
REVENUE
BURLEY SCHOOL-PAVING
MERIWETHER LEWIS-RENOVATIONS
SCHOOL BOARD-ASBESTOS ABATEMENT
MURRAY SCHOOL-PLANNING SERVICES
TOTAL
DESCRIPTION
2,290.00
(956.00)
(2,175.92)
83~014.58
$83,014.58
AMOUNT
2900051000510100
CIP FUND BALANCE
$83~014.58
TOTAL $83,014.58
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman to adopt the
following resolution to reappropriate $306,570.14 from the General Fund
Balance for FY 1990-91. Roll was called and the motion carried by the follow-
ing recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
~eptember 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 24)
FISCAL YEAR: 90/91 NUMBER: 900008
FUND: GENERAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: REAPPROPRIATIONS FROM FY 89/90
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
195
1100012140600100
1100012200332104
1100012200800200
1100021060312800
1100021060350300
1100021060520300
1100031010800300
1100031040950054
1100039000580902
1100041000331905
1100041000331900
1100041000312700
1100042040700006
1100043000331200
1100043000332200
1100051020800902
1100081010312700
1100081010390000
1100081010312700
FINANCE-OFFICE SUPPLIES
INFO. SERVICES
INFO. SERVICES
CLK OF CIR COURT-AUDIT
CLK OF CIR COURT-INDEXING
CLK OF CIR COURT-TELEPHONE
POLICE-EQUIPMENT
Egll IMPLEMENTATION
DRUG SEIZURE ASSETS
ENGINEERING-STOWE PARK
ENGINEERING-LAUREL RIDGE
ENGINEERING-CONSULTING
IVY LANDFILL
STAFF SERVICES-R&M EQUIPMENT
STAFF SERVICES-MAINT. CONTRACT
HEALTH DEPT-REPAIRS
PLANNING-HYDRAULIC SIDEWALK
PLANNING-MINUTES
PLANNING-911 STUDY
TOTAL
$1,444.33
300.00
965.91
2,117.45
4,000.00
600.00
15,359.92
42,754.75
46,599.87
35,046.50
4,840.00
9,131.83
94,792.83
9,668.00
23,848.73
6,710.00
2,520.00
970.00
4~900.00
$306,570.14
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2100051000510100
GENERAL FUND BALANCE
$306,570.14
TOTAL $306,570.14
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt the
following resolution to reappropriate $83,014.58 from the Capital Fund Balance
to Murray School renovations due to prior year expenditures. Roll was called
and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 90/91
FUND: CAPITAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 900009
ADJUSTMENT TO MURRAY SCHOOL RENOVATIONS DUE TO
PRIOR YEAR EXPENDITURES
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION
1900060303312350 MURRAY SCHOOL-PLANNING SERVICES
AMOUNT
($83,014.58)
REVENUE
TOTAL ($83,014.58)
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
($83,014.58)
2900051000510100 CIP FUND BALANCE
TOTAL ($83,014.58)
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt
the following resolution to reappropriate $7,069,260.89 from the Capital Fund
Balance for FY 1990-91 due to uncompleted projects. Roll was called and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 90/91
FUND: CAPITAL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 900010
FY 89/90 REAPPROPRIATION FOR UNCOMPLETED
PROJECTS.
September 12, 1990 (Regular
(Page 25)
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
Day Meeting)
DESCRIPTION
AMOUNT
196
1900012200800700
1900021010800730
1900032010800520
1900033020700002
1900041000700006
1900041000800960
1900041000800961
1900041000800962
1900041000950011
1900041000950035
1900041000950037
1900041000950038
1900041000950039
1900041000950049
1900041000950056
1900041000950059
1900041000950064
1900041020950032
1900041020950036
1900041020950050
1900041020950051
1900041020950065
1900043100312702
1900043100800901
1900060100950042
1900060201312350
1900060203312400
1900060203580000
1900060203800200
1900060203800650
1900060203950041
1900060203999999
1900060205800902
1900060207800902
1900060208800660
1900060210312400
1900060211312300
1900060211580000
1900060211800200
1900060211800901
1900060211800902
1900060211999999
1900060213312300
1900060213312400
1900060213580000
1900060213800200
1900060213800650
1900060213800901
1900060213800903
1900060213999999
INFORMATION SERVICES
ADP EQUIPMENT
CIRCUIT COURT
MICROFILM EQUIP-NEW
FIRE DEPARTMENT
HAZARDOUS MATERIAL VEHICLE
CORRECTIONS
REGIONAL JAIL
ENGINEERING
IVY LANDFILL
STREET LIGHTS
ST. LTS. HYDRAULIC/COMMONWEALTH
ST.LTS. HYDRAULIC/GEORGETOWN
HYDRAULIC ROAD SIDEWALK
NORTH BERKSHIRE ROAD
KEENE TRANSFER STATION
RIO ROAD SIDEWALK
MEADOWCREEK PARKWAY ENGIN
GEORGETOWN ROAD PATHWAY
ROADS-MEYERS DRIVE
KEENE LANDFILL CLOSURE
ROADS- 708 / 631 IMPROVEMENT
STREET IMPROVEMENTS PEYTON DRIVE
BERKMAR DRIVE EXTENDED
RT 678 RELOCATION
AVON ST RT 20 CONNECTOR
COMMONWEALTH DRIVE
COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING
CONSULTANTS- TELEPHONE
BUILDING RENOVATIONS
SCHOOL BOARD
UNDERGROUND TANKS
BROADUS WOOD ELEMENTARY
PLANNING SERVICES
CROZET ELEMENTARY
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
FURNITURE & FIXTURES
BUILDINGS - CONSTRUCTION
ROADS RT 810
CONTINGENCY FUNDS
HOLLYMEAD ELEMENTARY
ROOF/MASONRY REPAIRS
RED HILL ELEMENTARY
ROOF/MASONRY REPAIRS
ROSE HILL ELEMENTARY
BUILDING ALTERATIONS
STONE ROBINSON ELEMENTARY
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
STONY POINT ELEMENTARY
PROF. SER. ARCHITECTUAL
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
FURNITURE & FIXTURES
BUILDING RENOVATIONS
ROOF/MASONRY REPAIRS
CONTINGENCY FUNDS
YANCEY ELEMENTARY
PROF. SER. ARCHITECTUAL
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
FURNITURE & FIXTURES
BUILDINGS- CONSTRUCTION
BUILDING RENOVATIONS
ASBESTOS REMOVAL
CONTINGENCY FUNDS
$13,846.54
1,403.00
50,000.00
31,507.21
377,151.07
40,000.00
16,000.00
16,000.00
24,626.39
3,800.00
222,145.92
92,800.00
109,298.64
5,020.00
22,000.00
115,688.23
10,000.00
88,624.58
224,327.95
53,750.00
7,000.00
88,630.00
14,050.00
64,548.72
28,932.77
140,423.75
2,934.32
9,977.30
80,000.00
780,080.00
255,031.41
40,996.29
90,642.62
24,231.04
175,934.38
10,533.82
13,277.27
4,649.30
70,000.00
369,266.69
97,000.00
68,537.45
10,211.72
73.52
2,679.00
59,690.66
77,000.00
136,064.19
14,885.67
35,823.66
leptember 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
Pige 26)
1900060214312350
1900060214360000
1900060214580000
1900060214800200
1900060214800650
1900060214800750
1900060214999999
1900060215312350
1900060301312350
1900060303800903
1900060500800650
1900071000950003
lg00071000950004
1900071000950009
1900071000950013
1900071000950021
1900071000950027
lg00071000950042
1900071000950046
1900071000950047
1900071000950060
1900071000950063
1900071001312400
1900071001800605
1900071001800750
1900071002312400
1900071002800650
1900071002800680
1900073020950062
1900073020312350
1900073020950040
CALE ELEMENTARY
PLANNING SERVICES
ADVERTISING
MISCELLANEOUS EXPENSES
FURNITURE & FIXTURES
BUILDINGS-CONSTRUCTION
PURCHASE OF LAND
CONTINGENCY FUNDS
URBAN AREA SCHOOL
PLANNING SERVICES
ALBEMARLE HIGH SCHOOL
PLANNING SERVICES
MURRAY EDUCATION
ASBESTOS REMOVAL
SCHOOL MAINTENANCE
BUILDINGS-CONSTRUCTION .
PARKS & RECREATION
CROZET PARK IMPROVEMENTS
MINT SPRINGS VALLEY PARK
SCOTTSVILLE COMMUNITY CENTER
STONE ROBINSON PLAYGROUND
SCOTTSVILLE ASBESTOS REMOVAL
GREENWOOD COMM CENTER
UNDERGROUND TANKS
MERIWETHER LEWIS ELEM SCH
BEAVER CREEK PARK
GREENWOOD-REC. IMP.
IVY CREEK-HANDICAPPED
SOUTHERN PARK
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
CONSTRUCTION
PURCHASE OF LAND
RIVANNA PARK
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
BUILDINGS-CONSTRUCTION
CONSTRUCT ACCESS ROAD
LIBRARIES
LIBRARY RENOVATIONS
PLANNING SERVICES
GORDON AVE LIB - DRAINAGE
TOTAL
REVENUE
44,335.00
493.02
22,083.14
196,139.05
804,100.76
11,002.62
45,209.02
197
129,698.25
101,853.19
5,474.64
23,500.00
14,048.44
50,000.00
2,385.48
1,870.00
17,868.24
7,000.00
21,357.95
2,316.61
25,000.00
5,000.00
3,500.00
35,259.16
1,130,111.24
323.00
350.26
17,840.44
14,068.44
37,500.00
8,019.00
458.86
$7,069,260.89
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2900024000240750
2900024000240000
2900041000410500
2900041000410300
CATEGORICAL. AID-RECREATION ACCESS FUND $126,139.50
STATE CATEGORICAL AID 25,900.00
BANK LOAN PROCEEDS 1,447,166.64
VPSA BOND PROCEEDS 5,470~054.75
TOTAL $7,069,260.89
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to adopt the
following resolution to reappropriate $840,755.18 to the Storm Water Fund for
FY 1990-91 due to uncompleted projects. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 90/91
FUND: STORM WATER
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 900011
FY 89/90 REAPPROPRIATION FOR UNCOMPLETED
PR03ECTS
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1910041031360000
1910041031800975
1910041033360000
1910041033800975
WINDHAM/JARMAN
ADVERTISING
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
SMITHFIELD
ADVERTISING
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
$124.60
25,799.00
150.00
8,449.80
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 27)
198
1910041034312400
1910041034360000
1910041034800975
1910041035800975
1910041036312400
1910041036360000
1910041036800750
1910041036800975
1910041038800975
1910041039800975
1910041040800975
1910041041800975
1910041042800975
1910041043800975
1910041046800975
1910041047800975
1910041049800975
BERKMAR
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
ADVERTISING
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
FOUR SEASONS
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
BIRNAM/WYNRIDGE
PROF. SER. ENGINEERING
ADVERTISING
PURCHASE OF LAND
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
BERKELEY
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
LICKINGHOLE CREEK
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
BERKELEY
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
LYNCHBURG ROAD
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
SOLOMON ROAD
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
FOUR SEASONS
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
BERKSHIRE
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
KING GEORGE
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
WOODBROOK
STORM WATER CONTROL IMP
TOTAL
167.00
105.20
11,234.01
1,313.70
2,248.91
300.00
3,000.00
85,100.00
1,258.62
595,957.00
22,180.00
8,000.00
17,100.40
23,100.00
17,000.00
13,666.94
4~500.00
$840,755.18
REVENUE DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
2910051000510100
STORMWATER CONTROL FUND BALANCE
TOTAL
$840~755.18
$840,755.18
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Perkins, to adopt the
following resolution to reappropriate $70,352.56 to the Gypsy Moth Fund for FY
1990-91 due to uncompleted project. Roll was called and the motion carried by
the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
FISCAL YEAR: 90/91
FUND: GYPSY MOTH
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION:
NUMBER: 900012
FY 89/90 REAPPROPRIATION FOR UNCOMPLETED
PROJECT
EXPENDITURE
COST CENTER/CATEGORY
DESCRIPTION AMOUNT
1123034010110000
1123034010210000
1123034010221000
1123034010231000
1123034010232000
1123034010241000
1123034010270000
1123034010520100
1123034010550100
1123034010550110
1123034010550400
1123034010600100
1123034010601400
1123034010601700
REVENUE
SALARIES-REGULAR
FICA
VSRS
HEALTH INSURANCE
DENTAL INSURANCE
VSRS GROUP LIFE INSURANCE
WORKER'S COMPENSATION
POSTAL SERVICES
TRAVEL-MILEAGE
TRAVEL-POOL CAR EXPENSES
TRAVEL-EDUCATION
OFFICE SUPPLIES
OTHER OPERATING SUPPLIES
COPY SUPPLIES
TOTAL
DESCRIPTION
$50,836.20
3,844.77
1,805.76
501.55
76.50
162.76
297.61
453.60
4,187.43
3,328.89
147.59
1,034.95
3,638.73
36.22
$70,352.56
AMOUNT
2123033000330001
2123051000510100
GRANT REVENUE-FEDERAL
FUND BALANCE
TOTAL
$68,985.43
l~367.13
$70,352.56
~eptember 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 28)
Agenda Item No. 16. Dr. Deborah DiCroce, Piedmont Virginia Community
College, Annual Report.
Dr. DiCroce acknowledged the four Board members on the P¥CC Board of
)irectors from Albemarle County and said PVCC appreciates this Board providing
it with fine representation on its Board of Directors. In 1989-90, PVCC
served 7114 individual students, an eight and one-half percent increase.
~inety-eight percent of the students were Virginia residents and thus paid
in-state tuition. Approximately 87 percent of the residents were directly
from the college's service area; 81 percent of the PVCC students attended
part-time, 62 percent of the students were women; nine percent of the students
were African-American; a total of 11.5 percent were minorities and 66 percent
were returning students. In 1989-90, PVCC served 2761 residents of Albemarle
County. This accounted for 39 percent of all students enrolled from the
college's service area. During the Fall semester 1989, a total of 1786
students from Albemarle County took bloth on- and off-campus classes from PVCC.
This accounted for 40 percent of the college's total enrollment for the Fall
semester and 2.6 percent of the county's total population. In 1989-90, PVCC
enrolled 30.5 percent of the 354 members of the 1989 graduating class of
Albemarle High School (up about 10 percent over last year) and 24.6 percent of
the 211 graduates of Western Albemarle (up about four percent). In addition,
P¥CC provides courses and training to Albemarle County businesses including:
Cooper Industries, GE Fanuc, Amvest, Comdial, Sperry Marine, Teledyne Avio-
nics, and Albemarle County public schools.
Dr. DiCroce said the college's continuing education division administers
an evening program at Albemarle High School with additional classes offered at
Western Albemarle High and sites in Scottsville. This program provides a full
range of classes from all of PVCC's academic divisions. During the Fall
semester 1990, approximately 50 classes were offered at Albemarle High; some
900 students are enrolled there each semester. PVCC rents some 15 classrooms
each semester at a cost of $18,000 per year.
Dr. DiCroce said in terms of PVCC goals, PVCC will continue to expand its
outreach efforts to Albemarle County, the business community and especially
the outlying counties. PVCC will continue to cultivate for the campus a
multi-cultural diversity which both reflects and models the community. PVCC
will also enhance its partnership with the University of Virginia and with the
public schools. PVCC is also in the process of launching its first major
private fundraising. Due to budget cuts, PVCC will be operating with approxi-
mately $500,000 less than it had last year which is a challenge that the
college intends to meet.
Dr. DiCroce said she is in her second year as President of PVCC and as a
member of this community, she feels even better about this position than she
did a year ago. She is delighted to be here and looks forward to working with
this Board.
Mr. Bowie thanked Dr. DiCroce for being present and said he was impressed
with the statistics provided.
Agenda Item No. 15. Revenue Shortfall - Operational Policy.
Mr. Agnor said the staff requests the Board to endorse its efforts to
minimize impacts of revenue shortfalls, and to request that the School Board
participate in similar efforts in the School Division. The state is expected
to provide revenue figures by September 14. Mr. Agnor then summarized the
following memorandum, dated September 7, 1990, addressed to Department and
Agency Heads:
"It is obvious to all of us that State revenues to localities are
being reduced in the current fiscal year, and will be further reduced
next fiscal year. It is also obvious that each of us in our responsi-
bilities as budget managers are going to have to save 'Local' dollars
to cope with the loss of 'State' dollars, and probably some loss of
'Local' dollars as well.
The Finance Department has just completed an unaudited report to the
Board of Supervisors which indicates we finished FY 89-90 in a con-
tinued sound financial position, thanks to your budget management
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 29)
efforts. FY 90-91 revenues, however, are already known to be decreas-
ing, and are being analyzed by Finance staff, awaiting final State
reductions anticipated to be received mid-September. When received,
they will be disseminated to you.
In the meantime, whatever the revised estimates become, we are certain
there will be impacts. To prepare for those impacts, and provide as
much flexibility to manage the shortfall, a group of five department
heads discussed suggestions with me as guidelines for preparation of
this memorandum. From that discussion, the following administrative
policy is effective immediately:
Approval by the Executive staff of all out-of-state trips,
currently required, will be extended to all out-of-town staff
trips that involve overnight stays. Staff participation in
approved trips, deemed to be essential to the department/agency
operations, will be limited to one person whenever feasible.
Approval by the Executive staff of all job offers to applicants,
currently required, will be extended to the approval of the
filling of all vacancies prior to the application process com-
mencing. Efforts will be made to delay, or defer, filling of
vacancies, where feasible.
All programs and/or projects, both operational and capital, will
be reviewed by department heads for reductions, deferrals or
curtailments. If projects are essential, consideration should be
given to accelerating the schedule to gain from the current
favorable bidding climate, thereby completing projects at reduced
costs. Results of this review should be reported via memorandum
to the Executive staff by September 25.
Staff awareness of enormous fuel increases over budgeted costs
should be a focus of staff meetings, asking the question before
every use of a County vehicle 'Is this trip necessary?' Goals
are encouraged by each department and agency to curtail and/or
pool vehicle usage. When traveling with use of credit cards,
refueling should be limited to sufficient fuel for the return
trip to County fuel pumps.
Costs of operations including source reduction of paper, postage,
long distance telephone calls, copying, fax machine usage,
overtime, and other such costs should be reviewed, with choices
made consciously and regularly to reduce costs.
Building operational employees should adjust thermostat settings
by at least two degrees for two weeks, and as buildings and
employees adjust to the change, gradually increase the adjust-
ments each week until maximum work environment levels are
reached. These levels will vary by buildings and activities, but
staff can adjust to less comfortable levels than currently used
when requested to participate in operational economies and fuel
conservation.
Staff should be asked to be constantly aware of the unnecessary
use of lights, turning lights off when not in use.
Food service at County expense as a part of any meeting should be
eliminated."
200
Mr. Agnor said he recommends that the Chairman of the Board send a letter
to the Chairman of the School Board asking the School Division to participate
in similar efforts to handle revenue shortfalls and discuss this item at the
next joint meeting of the two boards.
Mr. Bowie said he thinks it is important that the School Division agree
to take these nonclassroom saving steps in an effort to handle revenue
shortfalls. Mr. Bowie said the Board is aware that he requested the cost of
the recent Wintergreen trip from the School Division. He thinks this is an
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting) 201
(Page 30)
example of using County funds for renting rooms and buying food when it is not
needed. The trip cost the taxpayers over $15,000 for three days, in the
middle of the week. Two weeks before school started, all of their top admini-
strators left town. If the County is short of money, why are we going to
resorts? He thinks there needs to be some sort of joint policy. He thinks
there must be an agreement that when there is a shortfall, the money will be
taken out of something other than classrooms and from services provided to the
citizens.
Mr. Bain agreed that a joint meeting with the School Board needs to be
scheduled.
Mr. Bowie asked if a request has been received concerning Murray School
revnovations. Mr. Agnor responded "yes", he has received a request and
suggested that it be scheduled for the joint meeting. The bids for Murray
were opened on September 25. The project is scheduled for completion in
August, 1991. The request asked if the School Board could go ahed and sign
the contract immediately even if the bid was over the appropriated amount.
His response was that he did not think it would be prudent to approve the
request while the bidding process was going on.
Mr. Way said he appreciated Mr. Agnor's initiative and leadership in
proposing the changes to manage the shortfalls. He thinks the changes are
timely and hopes that others will follow the lead.
Following some discussion, the Board decided to suggest that the next
joint meeting with the School Board be scheduled for either October 3, between
3:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. or October 1, at 8:00 a.m. Items to be included on
the agenda for discussion are: revenue shortfalls, tenth day enrollment
figures, advance to the Cafeteria Fund, and the Murray School remodeling.
Mr. Bowie thanked the County Executive for his guidance on ways to handle
revenue shortfalls.
Agenda Item No. 17. Approval: Early Retirement - Guy B. Agnor.
Mr. Agnor requested approval for participation in the County's Voluntary
Early Retirement Incentive Program (VERIP) effective January 1, 1991. The
costs of the VERIP would end in 47 months on his 65th birthday. Mr. Agnor
said his energy levels needed to fulfill the responsibilities of the position
have declined along with his health to a point where he cannot adequately
serve the demands placed on him by the office. His 14+ years in the Executive
office have been the pinnacle of his career, and he thanked the Board and the
citizens for affording him the opportunity to service the community.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to accept
Mr. Agnor's request for participation in the County's VERIP, effective January
1991. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 18. Request from Children & Youth Task Force to create a
Youth Commission.
Mrs. Roxanne White of the County Executive's staff said the number one
recommendation from the Children and Youth Task Force was the establishment of
a joint Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth Commission. The Board
approved the concept of the Commission in March, 1990, agreed to fund up to
$10,000 for the first year of operations, and appointed two Supervisors to
meet with City Council to work out details of the joint Commission. The
Children and Youth Development Committee met three times over the last month
and a half to work out the administrative details. Before the Board today is
the result of those meetings. Mrs. White then presented the following memo-
randum, dated September 6, 1990:
"Attached for your approval is a resolution creating the joint Char-
lottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth Commission and a Letter of
Understanding between the City and the County that addresses the
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 31)
administrative details of the merger agreed upon by the development
committee'over the past three weeks.
In summary, the resolution creates an Albemarle Children and Youth
Commission, which then joins the current Charlottesville Youth Commis-
sion to become the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth
Commission. What seems to be a convoluted approach is a legal re-
quirement by the State Board of Youth Services to insure continued
state funding already being received by the Charlottesville Youth
Commission.
The joint commission will consist of 13 members, seven of whom will be
appointed by the County and six by the City. One of the County
appointees will be a representative of the new Interagency Council,
and two members will be youth under the age of 18. The other four
County appointees will be at the discretion of the Board. The Commis-
sion will be an advisory body in the sense that it will assist the
County and City in the hiring, supervision and administration of
staff, but a policy making body in that it will be charged with
establishing goals and objectives and setting priorities for children
and youth services. The Commission will also make program and funding
recommendations to the respective governing bodies during the normal
budget process.
The Letter of Understanding, in addition to describing the structure
and responsibilities of the Commission in more detail, sets forth the
development committee's staffing and funding recommendations for the
new Commission. One full-time and one part-time staff will be hired
and evaluated jointly by the City and County with input from the
Commission. Staff will be City employees, housed in City Hall and
supervised directly by the Assistant City Manager with a staff liaison
in the County Executive's office.
In regard to funding for the Commission, the City and County agree to
contribute equally to the Commission and to provide the required 25
percent match for state funding. Based on 1.5 full-time staff, the
projected seven month budget for FY 90-91 is $35,000, which will
require a County contribution of approximately $6000. Full year
funding for FY 91-92 is projected to be $80,000 with 2.0 full-time
employees or $62,400 with 1.5 full-time employees which would require
a County contribution of $20,000 or $12,000 respectively.
Adhering to legal requirements and City and County meeting schedules,
as well as providing an opportunity for the new commission to parti-
cipate in the hiring process, the Commission and staff should be in
place by December 1."
202
Mrs. White said in addition to the staff liaison, there will be a group
composed of persons from the City Manager's office, the County Executive's
office, one representative from the Board and one representative from the City
Council, who will meet with members of the Commission at least once a year to
review the Commission's goals and objectives and to make sure that the County
and City are in agreement with the directions and programs that the staff are
following.
Mrs. White said advertisements have been placed in local newspapers for
representatives to serve on the Commission. Applications are due by October
1. It is scheduled that the Commission be appointed by the first week of
November and staff hired by the first week in December.
Mr. Bain said the term of the youth member on the Commission needs to be
set out in the agreement.
Mr. Way asked that the term "professionals" in the draft resolution (No.
2, third line) be struck from the language. That was a major point of discus-
sion by him. The final agreement states that there will be no professionals
included unless the Board makes that decision. The language as written
indicates that there will be a professional on the Commission.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 32)
203
Mr. St. John said section 4b of the agreement is subject to the budget
process. He believes that is a statement of intent that an appropriation will
be made. Mr. Bowie suggested that the word "agree" be changed to "intends".
Mr. St. John agreed with the proposed language. He said it has to be the
option of the members of the Board at the time. It was also agreed to change
"will also fund" in paragraph#6 of the agreement to "intends to fund".
Mr. Bain said he thinks the overseeing of the Commission is important in
terms of its direction.
Mr. Perkins asked what is to come from this Commission with regard to
programs and results. Mr. Bain said one item is an attempt to eliminate the
duplication of services. There will be one overseeing group of both the City
and County who will make recommendations, coming from the Interagency Council.
He thinks that will ~mprove County and City-wide services.
Mr. Way said this Commission Will act as a buffer for the County's Budget
Review Committee. That is one of the reasons he was so adamant that the
members of the Commission not isclude self-interested, professional persons.
One of the duties of this Commission is to look into dUplication of services
and what is available in terms of services.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Way, seconded by Mrs. Humphris, to adopt
the following resolution creating a joint Charlottesville/Albemarle Children
~nd Youth Commission:
RESOLUTION
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors is committed
to the identification, development and delivery of services to child-
ren and youth in Albemarle County that will improve the quality of
life, enhance wholesome youth development and prevent juvenile delin-
quency; and
WHEREAS, the citizens of Albemarle County have a vested interest
in the development of positive attributes in its youth, and citizen
participation is acknowledged as beneficial to the planning, develop-
ment and coordination of services for children and youth; and
WHEREAS, the Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act
passed by the Virginia General Assembly in 1990 endorses the estab-
lishment of a Youth Services Citizen Board; and
WHEREAS, representatives of the Albemarle County Board of Super-
visors and the Charlottesville City Council are recommending that the
County join with the present Charlottesville Youth Commission to form
a comprehensive planning, coordinating and evaluating body for child-
ren and youth services.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED:
That there be established a Children and Youth Commission
which shall derive its authority from, and be administered
by, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. The Children
and Youth Commission shall function in an advisory capacity
in the establishment of goals and objectives, and in the
supervision and administration of the Office of Children and
Youth in compliance with all "Minimum Standards for the
Delinquency Prevention and Youth Development Act Grants";
That the membership of the Commission shall be by appoint-
ment of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and
consist of seven citizens and youth. The Commission shall
elect its own officers and establish its own by-laws. A
majority of the Commission shall be citizens who are not
elected government officials; at least one member shall be
below eighteen years of age; one member shall represent the
children and youth serving agencies in the community. No
person, title or agency shall be appointed to a permanent
position on the Commission. Adult members of the Commission
shall be appointed for terms of three years and eligible to
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 33)
204
serve two consecutive terms; initial appointments shall be
staggered for continuity. Youth members of the Commission
shall be appointed to a one year term and subject to reap-
pointment;
That the Children and Youth Commission established by the
County will join the current Charlottesville Youth Commis-
sion to become the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and
Youth Commission;
That the responsibilities of the Commission shall include,
but not be limited to:
Evaluatlngiand monitoring current service delivery
systems of children and youth agencies to assure
greaterl cocrdination and communication within the
community;!
Recommending any additions, deletions, or changes in
laws, policies, or procedures that will improve commu-
nity conditions for children and youth development;
Acting as an advocate for the improvement of children
and youth services and encouraging the involvement of
the community in the solutions to identified problems;
Providing a program of public education about the needs
and problems of youth in the community;
Participating with community representatives in the
formulation of a comprehensive plan for the develop-
ment, coordination and evaluation of the children and
youth services program and making formal recommenda-
tions to the governing authority at least annually
concerning the comprehensive plan and its implementa-
tion during the ensuing year;
That the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth
Commission shall assistthe County Executive and the City
Manager in the supervision and administration of the Office
on Children and Youth. The Office on Children and Youth
shall implement strategies to accomplish the goals and
strategies established by the Commission, the County Execu-
tive and the City Manager. The Office on Children and Youth
shall be managed by a full time staff person titled as
Director;
That the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors intends to
fund its share of the required local match (a proportionate
share of twenty-five [25] percent of the total program cost)
for grants awarded pursuant to Title 66, Chapter 3, Section
66-31 of the Code of Virginia.
Roll was called and the foregoing motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to approve the
following agreement between the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and the
City of Charlottesville on the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and Youth
Commission:
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 34)
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
AND THE CITY OF CHARLOTTESVILLE
ON THE
CHARLOTTESVILLE/ALBEMARLE CHILDREN AND YOUTH COMMISSION
In joining together to form the Charlottesville/Albemarle Children and
Youth Commission, which will serve as a comprehensive planning,
coordinating and evaluating body for children and youth services for
both jurisdictions, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors and the
Charlottesville City Council agree to the following:
In respect to the STRUCTURE OF THE COMMISSION, the City and
the County agree that:
The Commission will consist of eleven to thirteen
members, seven appointed by the County and six appoint-
ed by the City. A majority of the Commission will be
citizen representatives with at least one member, but
preferably two, from each jurisdiction below the age of
eighteen. Of the seven County appointees, one member
shall be a representative of the Interagency Council;
Children and Youth Commission members shall be appoint-
ed for a term of no less than three years and not more
than five years; youth members of the Commission shall
be appointed to a one year term and subject to reap-
pointment; initial appointments may be staggered for
continuity;
The Children and Youth Commission shall elect its own
officers and establish its own by-laws.
me
In respect to the RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE COMMISSION, the
City and the County agree that the Commission shall:
Assist the County and the City in the supervision and
administration of a joint Office of Children and Youth;
Set goals and objectives for the Office of Children and
Youth through the development of a five-year operating
work plan. To insure that the County and City are in
agreement with the policy and direction being set by
the Commission, this plan should be reviewed and
approved at least annually by a committee composed of
one representative from the Board of Supervisors, City
Council, City Manager's Office, and the County Execu-
tive's Office;
Provide comprehensive short and long range planning for
children and youth services within the Charlottes-
ville/Albemarle community;
Make program and funding recommendations to the City
and County governing bodies within the budgetary
procedures and guidelines set by each jurisdiction;
Review and evaluate current service delivery systems to
ensure that the needs of children and youth are being
met effectively and efficiently;
Identify and encourage new and innovative approaches to
program development for children and youth;
Identify additional public and private funding sources
for children and youth programs;
Create and provide leadershiP to a regional Interagency
Council to improve service coordination and information
exchange among children and youth serving agencies in
the community;
205
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 35)
206
Participate in the hiring and yearly evaluation of the
director of the Office of Children and Youth;
Sponsor one or two public hearings each year to receive
community input about the needs of children and youth.
In respect to STAFFING OF THE COMMISSION, the City and the
County agree that:
Staff of the Office of Children and Youth will be hired
and evaluated jointly by the City and the County with
assistance and input from the Commission;
Staff will be employees of the City of Charlottesville
subject to all personnel policies and entitled to all
its benefits;
Staff of the Office of Children and Youth will be
located in the City Hall Annex under the direct super-
vision of the Assistant City Manager;
The County Executive's Office will designate a staff
member to serve as a liaison to the Office of Children
and Youth and to the Assistant City Manager;
In respect to FUNDING OF THE JOINT OFFICE OF CHILDREN AND
YOUTH, the City and the County intends to:
Provide an equal contribution for the operation of the
Office of Children and Youth;
Provide the required twenty-five percent local match
required by the Virginia Delinquency Prevention and
Youth Development Act Grant Programs;
Direct the Children and Youth Commission to actively
seek funding for children and youth projects from other
sources, including public and private grants, local
service groups and the business community;
Use a portion of the current Virginia Delinquency
Prevention and Youth Development Act Grant to fund the
SOAR program for City youth with the understanding that
both the City and the Commission will look for another
source of funds to provide these direct services in the
future.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 19. Personnel Policy Revision: Military Leave.
Mr. Agnor said the recent situation in Kuwait has raised to the attention
that people are called to active duty for more than 15 days at a time. The
County's present personnel policy recognizes summer training programs and
during that sun, her training, the employee is not charged with annual leave.
The employee is paid his County salary and also collects military compensa-
tion. The proposed revision clarifies that it is the Board's intent to place
employees who are called to active military status on unpaid leaves of absence
(after 15 days) and to protect their positions and fringe benefit rights
during that time.
Mr. Bain asked what happens to the employees insurance benefits while on
unpaid leave. Mr. Agnor said the employee would have to pay for their insur-
ance during that time.
Mr. Bowie said he has a concern for employees who are called for 90 days
of service. It is quite possible that a person with a good County salary is
called to active duty and is a PFC. He would like a hardship clause provided
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(page 36)
200
for up to 90 days service. Duty for that length of time could possibly
financially destroy a young family and he would like to see that income
protected.
Mrs. Humphris asked if the Personnel Department knows how many people
could be affected by this policy. Mr. Agnor said departments have been
requested to provide that information.
Mr. Bain suggested adopting this policy and then request that the addi-
tional information be provided at a later date. Mr. Way said he supports the
concept suggested by Mr. Bowie.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Humphris, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to adopt
the following amendment to Policy P-83, Military Leave:
MILITARY LEAVE
Ail employees of the Board who are members of the organized
reserve force of any of the armed services of the United States or of
the National Guard shall be entitled to leaves of absence for their
respective duties without loss of seniority, accrued leave or effi-
ciency rating on all days when they are engaged in annual active duty
or training or when called forth by the Governor of Virginia pursuant
to the provisions of Section 44-75 of the Code of Virginia or by the
President of the United States. There shall be no loss of pay during
these leaves of absence, not to exceed fifteen calendar days per
federal fiscal year (October 1 September 30). After fifteen days,
the employee will be placed on an unpaid leave of absence. When
relieved of this duty, these employees shall be restored to comparable
positions they held when ordered to duty. Ail fringe benefits to
which these employees were entitled prior to military leave shall be
restored to include the rate of annual leave accumulation and seniority.
Mr. Bowie said as a matter of principle he will not support the motion,
although he understands the Board's views. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bain, Mr. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: Mr. Bowie.
It was agreed that the additional information be provided at the next
joint meeting of the School Board and Board of Supervisors.
Agenda Item No. 20. Executive Session: Personnel Matters.
At 12:57 A.M., motion was offered by Mr. Bain, seconded by Mr. Bowerman,
to adjourn into executive session under Section 2.1-344.A.1, personnel mat-
ters. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
The Board reconvened into open session at 2:31 P.M. with all Board
members present. (See Certification of Executive Session on Page 44.)
Agenda Item No. 21. Certificate of Appreciation.
Mr. Bowie presented a certificate of appreciation to Mrs. Elizabeth
Tewksbury for service on the Albemarle County Service Authority Board of
Directors for 12 years. During her tenure Mrs. Tewksbury participated in
directing the growth of the Service Authority from a customer base of 4000 to
the current 8500 and gross revenues annually from $2 million to $6 million.
Mrs. Tewksbury's concern for the environment, coupled with a desire for a
fiscally sound water and sewer utility service in Albemarle County, has
contributed to the progress of the Service Authority and to Albemarle County.
Mr. Bowie expressed appreciation for the willingness of citizens of the County
to serve in such capacities.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 37)
20~
Agenda Item No. 22a. Work Sessions: Albemarle County Redistricting from
1990 Census.
Mr. Agnor said that in order to accomplish redistricting by June, 1991,
the Board must consider the feasibility of appointing an advisory committee to
develop a redistricting plan. It is also necessary to make a decision regard-
ing the question of establishing a seventh magisterial district. Other
matters such as additional precincts and the criteria for precinct boundaries
must be considered as well.
Staff recommends that the entire Board of Supervisors serve as a review
committee rather than establishing a separate advisory committee. Staff from
the County Attorney's office, the Registrar and the Department of Planning and
Community Development will be available to develop the redistricting plan for
the Board's review once the census numbers have been verified.
(Mr. St. John left the meeting at 2:45 P.M.)
Mr. Jim Heilman, Registrar, said the State Department of Legislative
Services has distributed a calendar for localities in submitting a redistrict-
ing plan to the Justice Department. He said the deadline is mid-May rather
than mid-June as previously thought. The Justice Department requires 60 days
in which to approve the plan before voters can be notified of the new dis-
tricts. Anyone considering running for election to the Board of Supervisors
next year will know what the new districts are in August of 1990. The faster
the redistricting plan can be completed, the better it will be for all in-
volved.
At this time, Mr. Bain asked for an update on Item 5.5 from the Consent
Agenda. Mr. David Benish, Chigf of Community Development, said the post-
census review is nearly complete. He said the total dwelling unit count from
the census appears to be close to the Planning Department's figures based on
the number of certificates of occupancy issued. He said a recheck is being
done in a few areas of the County where there is a discrepancy between the
computer information system and the actual count of dwelling units. However,
the total population figures are not complete at this time. Based on the
total dwelling unit count, the total population figure is lower than the
population figure estimated by the Planning Department.
There was no objection from Board members to Mr. Agnor's recommendation
that the entire Board act as a review Board in developing a redistricting
~lan.
Regarding the decision to establish a seventh magisterial district, Mr.
;owie said he feels the County is better served by the necessity for com-
promises and concessions through a six-member Board. Mr. Bain said he does
not see the need for a seventh member as a tie-breaker because there are very
few land use issues that result in a tie vote. He feels that Albemarle County
is not experiencing growth at this time to the degree that would require a
seventh district. Mr. Perkins said it has been mentioned that another member
is necessary to help with the work load of Board members. He feels that
another member would actually create extra work for staff. Mr. Bowerman said
he feels that the boundaries of the districts are more important than creating
another district. Mrs. Humphris said she has not seen any problems in the
years she has been observing the Board that would justify the creation of a
seventh district. It was the consensus of the Board that a seventh magis-
terial district is not necessary.
Regarding the question of the parameters of the magisterial districts,
Mr. Agnor asked if the Board wants to continue the policy of having a mix of
urban and rural areas, or whether a district should be distinctly urban or
distinctly rural. Mr. Bain felt that a combination of urban and rural areas
_ in each district is preferable. Mr. Bowerman agreed and feels that such a mix
Keeps all Board members mindful of all of the needs of the County. Mr. Bowie
said it is possible to have three Board members represent rural districts and
three represent urban districts. He thinks it will be geographically diffi-
zult to continue a mixture of urban and rural communities without forcing
;oters to travel a distance to vote. Mr. Bowie noted that it is difficult for
~upervisors to travel to meetings at opposite ends of the larger districts as
~ell.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 38)
209
Mr. Perkins asked on what percentage of population the districts are
based. Mr. Heilman said the "rule of thumb" used by counties in the past is
approximately five percent.
Mr. Benish said it appears that the Scottsville District will need to
expand to include a population equal to other Districts because there has been
less growth in Southern Albemarle.
Mr. Bain asked when the Board may receive the final figures on the
census. Mr. Agnor said he would prepare a calendar for the Board based on the
mid-May deadline date.
Regarding the question of whether additional precincts are needed, Mr.
Bain said he feels that the precinct boundaries need to be reviewed especially
in cases where voters have to drive 12 miles to vote. Mr. Perkins said a
number of people in Earlysville have requested that a voting precinct be
established there because of the distance to vote.
Mr. Heilman asked the Board to consider increasing the overall number of
precincts. He said Albemarle County is beneath the State average for a county
of this population and geographical size. He said it is detrimental to drive
long distances to their polling location. Mr. Heilman asked that the Board
take into account areas such as Earlysville where three districts converge in
"downtown" Earlysville.
(Mr. St. John returned to the meeting at 2:59 P.M.)
Agenda Item No. 22b. Resolution: re: Federal Budget.
Mr. Bowie said that the National Association of Counties asked that
localities contact their congressional delegation in opposition to a proposal
to eliminate state and local income taxes as deductions on Federal tax re-
turns. He said a resolution has been drafted for the Board's approval.
Motion was offered by Mr. Way and seconded by Mrs. Humphris to adopt the
resolution as presented and set out below. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
WHEREAS, there is a bipartisan effort to reduce the federal
budget deficit through elimination of state and local income tax
deductions; and
WHEREAS, deductibility has always been accepted as an essential
constitutional principle to protect the integrity and fiscal indepen-
dence of the separate states and local governments; and
WHEREAS, repeal of deductibility would be a direct interference
with the most fundamental of all state and local government rights--
the power of each to raise revenue and finance services as it deems
appropriate; and
WHEREAS, repeal of deductibility represents a continuation of the
shift of unfunded responsibilities to local government, double taxa-
tion, and an unfair burden on the middle class; and
WHEREAS, the Federal Government undermines the efforts of state
and local government by imposing more restrictive and revenue con-
suming mandates while cutting back vital federal grant programs;
THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, THAT the members of the Board of
Supervisors, Albemarle County, Virginia, are absolutely and unques-
tionably opposed to eliminating the state and local income tax deduc-
tion as a means of reducing the federal deficit.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 39)
Agenda Item No. 22c. Private/Public Transit Alternatives.
21(~
Mr. David Benish said the Board received a copy of the Public/Private
Transit Alternatives for Urban Albemarle County~ Virginia, dated January 30,
1990, prepared by a Subcommittee of the Charlottesville/Albemarle Metropolitan
Planning Organization. He noted that Mrs. Humphris chaired this committee and
Ms. Nancy O'Brien, Executive Director of the Thomas Jefferson Planning Dis-
trict Commission, provided staff support. Mr. Benish said the report is to
provide a framework for the County to address present and future transit needs
by examining existing transit service and identifying problems. The report
makes recommendations that: the County take a proactive role in transit
planning; that the report be used to do general transit analysis and planning
activities for the County; the present County development review process be
amended to consider transit issues; for new transit service areas; and a
traffic reduction strategy ordinance be considered for implementation.
Staff's recommendation is that the Board endorse in principle the recom-
mendations in the report and direct staff to develop strategies toward imple-
menting the recommendations.
Mrs. Humphris said the County owes a debt of gratitude to Ms. Nancy
O'Brien and the TJPDC staff for seeing this project through to a fruitful
contribution to the County's new effort in the transportation field. Mrs.
Humphris asked the status of hiring a transportation planner. Mr. Agnor said
interviews have been conducted, but, to the best of his knowledge an offer has
not been made.
Mrs. Humphris noted that the contributions made from the private sector
toward the work of this committee were outstanding as well.
Mrs. Humphris offered a motion, seconded by Mr. Way, to support the MPO
Subcommittee's recommendations in principle and to request the planning staff
to develop strategies for implementation. Roll was called and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 22d. JAUNT fares.
Ms. RoxanneWhite, Management Analyst, said JAUNT is designed to provide
low-cost transportation mainly to the handicapped and elderly population. She
said it is essentially a subsidy program because individual fares do not come
close to paying the total cost of a ride. She said the subsidy sources are
federal, state and local contributions, of which the federal portion is
declining. If it is assumed that the cost of a ride should be subsidized and
that the fares only cover a small portion of the cost, then it follows that
increasing ridership will increase the total operating costs. Therefore,
there is a need for increased subsidies. Even though fare revenue increases
slightly with increased ridership, the increased operating costs will not be
made up because the fares represent only 20 percent of the cost of the ride.
Therefore, more riders requires a larger subsidy from the County. In the past
two years, the ridership has increased substantially. She said the hope is
that the increase will level off soon. She said the projections made during
the budget work sessions are already different from the current figures. Ms.
White said that increasing ridership in the urban ring does not mean that
riders are riding the bus at the same level of cost. For example, there must
be someone to get off the bus and assist the elderly and handicapped out of
the house and onto the bus. This can take 10 to 15 minutes for each stop.
Therefore, the operating costs actually increase with increased ridership.
Ms. White said the second part of the report is focused on establishing
an equitable funding formula for the County's share of the subsidy. The local
subsidy for urban riders is approximately twice that of the rural riders. She
said this reflects the fact that the federal subsidy for the urban area is
about one-half of that of the rural subsidy. Due to this inequity, it is
difficult to equalize the local subsidy without forcing urban riders to pay an
exorbitant fare. Therefore, staff reviewed the rider's share of the cost for
all zones rather than looking at the subsidy. She pointed out that the fare
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 40)
amounts of $1.75 in Zone A, $2.25 in Zone B, $3.50 in Zone C and $4.75 in Zone
D (Option 6) represent the most equitable distribution of costs across the
zones. These rates maintain a contribution of 20 percent of the cost of the
_ trip by the rider in each zone. However, Option 6 requires a $0.25 increase
in Zone A, the urban area. She said staff does not recon~nend such an increase
at this time because the fares have already been set for the year in the urban
area. Option 6 decreases the fare in Zone D by $0.25, which staff is not
recommending because JAUNT's policy is to maintain a consistent rate as much
as possible. Staff is recommending Option 4 as the best choice at this time.
This means the fare in Zone B would be raised by $0.75 and in Zone C by $0.50.
Ms. White said there is no easy solution to the escalating need for
public funds to subsidize JAUN~ ridership. She said the options are to either
increase the revenues to match the local subsidy or to reduce costs by limit-
ing or reducing ridership. Since JAUNT cannot refuse to transport qualified
riders, the hours of operation can be limited or fares raised to reduce
ridership. She said staff recommends that Option 4 be implemented, that a
$0.25 increase in the urban fare be considered during the 1991-92 budget work
sessions, that an appropriation of $23,284 be made to fund the County's share
of the projected 1990-91 revenue shortfall; and that JAUNT survey its client
population during the next six months to determine the cause of the increase
in ridership.
Mr. Bain asked what percentage of the ridership is elderly and handi-
capped. Mrs. Linda Wilson, Executive Director of JAUNT, said the elderly and
handicapped make up 95 percent of the ridership. Of that number, the majority
are handicapped. Ms. White said there are no statistics on where rides
originate and their destination.
Mr. Way said the purpose of the survey is to determine whether the trips
are because of employment or for some other reason. In that way, it can be
determined whether it is feasible to limit the trips. Ms. White gave as an
example the use of the JAUNT bus by residents of Branchlands because of the
long walk to Route 29 for public bus service. She said it may be better to
have the Route 29 North bus pick those people up rather than JAUNT.
Mr. Bowerman said he feels that a percentage should be established as to
what riders should pay. Depending on what the State and Federal funds are,
the County can subsidize the rest. Mr. Bowie suggested that the County agree
on a certain percentage and let JAUNT come up with the rest wherever possible.
Mrs. Humphris said this report is what the Board asked for at a previous
meeting, and staff's recommendation is Option 4 that the County will subsidize
about 20 percent. She offered a motion to adopt staff's recommendation to
implement Option 4, to consider a $0.25 increase in the urban fare at the next
budget work session, and request a JAUNT survey. Mr. Way seconded the motion.
Mr. Bowie said he will support the motion as the beginning of the pro-
cess, but he does not want to have to go through this process again. He feels
the Board should commit to a certain percentage, or have the rider pay a
certain percentage with the Federal, State and local funds paying the rest.
He wants to have a formula established for future situations.
Mrs. Humphris said she feels that could be a separate motion.
Mr. Bain said he has a problem supporting this motion. He is concerned
about increasing the fares because the elderly and handicapped cannot afford
it. He feels the fares should not be increased at this time.
Mr. Way said he can support staff's recommendation. He feels that the
JAUNT Board also supports this recommendation.
Mr. Bowie said he feels that it is better for citizens to pay their way
as far as possible. He does not agree with a "free ride" because there is no
such thing. He said he supports the motion. Mr. Bowie feels that the extra
money needed should come from the people who are receiving the benefits and
riding the bus. Mr. Bain said the risk then is that people who need this
transportation will not be able to take advantage of it because of the cost.
Mrs. Humphris said she is supporting staff's recommendation because it
makes sense as a compromise for starting to calculate the projected cost.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 41)
212
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: Mr. Bain.
Mr. Bain said he feels that the survey information is important, and he
feels that it should be taken into consideration. Mrs. Wilson said that
statistics are available from JAUNT regarding where the riders are going.
They do need to survey where the new riders are coming from. She said the
information can be available before the next budget work sessions.
Mrs. Humphris noted at this time that Consent Agenda Item No. 5.3 was
pulled for discussion. She asked why the agency ridership dropped in the
second quarter. Mrs. Wilson said that a one-time trip to Bloomfield in the
first quarter caused the disparity.
Agenda Item No. 22e. Report: Northside Branch Library.
Mr. Agnor said during the 1990-92 work sessions, the Board approved
funding a northside branch of the Jefferson Madison Regional Library, but
deferred the actual appropriation until a site was located. The Board also
agreed to appropriate funds in the Capital Improvement Program budget for
leasehold improvements, book inventory and shelving. Staff is requesting the
Board's approval of a lease agreement with Dunbarton Properties for 15,570
square feet of space in Albemarle Square Shopping Center for the new branch.
Yearly operating costs are estimated to be between $400,000 and $560,000,
depending on the operating cost option selected. The opening date is estimat-
ed to be between June and September of 1991.
Mr. Agnor said the County issued a request for proposal to landowners,
developers and builders for 15,000 square feet of space limited to the Route
29 corridor. Eight proposals were received. Based on the site analysis
criteria, the Library Site Selection Committee evaluated the proposals and
selected four for interviews. From that process, the Dunbarton Properties was
selected.
Mr. Agnor said staff is recommending a ten-year lease at $10.35 per
square foot for a yearly rental cost of $206,329. He said there are some
leasehold improvements which are to be funded from the CIP budget or from the
rental cost. He prefers funding from the Capital budget. He said the im-
provements include a new HVAC system, additional bathrooms and plumbing,
ceiling tiles, sheetrock and floor covering for an estimated total of
$178,000.
Mr. Agnor said there are three funding options for annual operating
costs. Staff is recommending Option 3 in which the Library is open 48 hours
with an estimated circulation of 100,000 and a full-time staff of eight. The
projected operating cost for Option 3 is $399,67.7 per year. The hours of
operation in this option are the same as those of the Scottsville and Crozet
branches. Staff's recommendation reflects a concern for the equity of operat-
ing hours among branch libraries and diverting services from the Central
Library.
Mr. Agnor noted that in light of the Board's earlier discussions with
regard to budget reductions, he feels it is prudent to proceed with caution.
His recommendation is that staff proceed with preparing a lease agreement, but
that the documents not be finalized until a fiscal impact analysis is complet-
ed early in October. He said operational and capital programs will be exam-
ined in terms of the necessity of deferring some of them.
Mr. Way asked what the actual operating hours are under Option 3. Ms.
Donna Selle, Director of the Library, said the hours are 1:00 P.M. to 9:00
P.M. on Monday and Tuesday. On Wednesday, Thursday, Friday and Saturday the
hours are 10:00 A.M. to 6:00 P.M. There are no hours of operation on Sunday.
Mrs. Shirley Dorrier, Chairman of the Library Board, said the Library
Board wants to spend money wisely, but differs with staff's recommendation.
She recommends Option 2 because the Northside Branch is a completely new
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 42)
opening, whereas the Scottsville and Crozet Branches grew over the years in a
:ural atmosphere. The Northside Branch is located in the most populated area
of the County with an expected circulation of 100,000. Crozet and Scottsville
branch libraries serve half that amount. Therefore, the Library Board feels
the need to operate at the Option 2 level with 12 full-time staff and 55 to 58
hours of operation per week. She said the citizens have been waiting a long
time for this library, and she feels that delaying another month may jeopar-
dize the June opening date. Mrs. Dorrier said the operation of this library
will be a positive influence for all categories of citizens. If hard times
are coming, Mrs. Dorrier said the library will be even more valuable to
:itizens: She asked the Board to consider that the library will operate more
efficiently at the level of service provided in Option 2.
Mr. Agnor said Option 2 provides for evening hours four days a week with
Sunday hours from 1:00 P.M. to 5:00 P.M. Mr. Agnor said a delay will not
jeopardize the negotiation of a lease but will allow the County time to
examine the fiscal revenue projections for next year.
Mr. Bowerman said the community has been promised a library for the past
20 years, and it is a needed service within the growing urban population of
the County. He feels it Hs prudent to examine revenue projections before
making a final decision. However, he feels that the operating level may vary
depending upon the resources, but the decision to have a library on the
northside is not a postponable one. He feels that Board members should not
leave this meeting thinking that the library can just be eliminated.
Mr. Bain said he would not vote to eliminate the library. He agrees that
the operating hours can be examined, but the decision to have a library must
go forward.
Mrs. Humphris said she feels this Board is committed by its promise to
have a library on the northside. She does not object to a month's delay to
review the fiscal projections, but she wants it clearly understood that she is
going to push to see this project completed.
Mr. Bain said he is in favor of beginning with Option 3. Eventually,
there may be a need for a level of service provided in Option 2. Mrs.
Humphris said she does not object to Option 3 and is willing to let the demand
for services prove that Option 2 is necessary.
Mr. Agnor recommended that the Board proceed with Option 3 until the
revenue projections are available or until use of the library requires a
different operational plan.
Mrs. Humphris offered a motion authorizing staff to lease space from
Dunbarton Properties, in Albemarle Square, in the space currently occupied by
a drug store, for ten years at $10.35 per square foot, subject to annual
appropriations, and with the conditions stated in the staff report as set out
below. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bowerman.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
For 10 years at $10.35 per square foot, for a yearly rental cost
of $160,392;
One-half of the cost of improvements to the current retail space
are included in the square foot rental cost;
The second half of the cost, plus 15 percent for project coordi-
nation, could be amortized over the 10-year period and added to
the rental cost or paid in advance by the County; and
Improvements include a new }IVAC system, additional bathrooms and
plumbing, ceiling tiles, sheetrock and floor covering for an
estimated cost of $178,000.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 43)
214
Agenda Item No. 22f. Report: Cable Television.
Mr. Bowerman said he had received a citizen complaint to the effect that
_ there is a feeling that federal regulations preclude action by the County and
that there is no recourse concerning the level of service being received.
Mr. St. John said Albemarle County has not issued an exclusive franchise
to any cable company. Even if the County had a monopoly on cable, neither
rates nor service requirements could be required above the level of the
Federal Communications Commission. He recommends that the County not get
involved in this issue until the new Federal legislation is available. He
advised the Board that the cable business should not be considered a revenue-
generating device.
Mr. Bowerman said there is a frustration on the part of consumers as
evidenced in the new Federal legislation. He said he has no wish to pursue
this item further.
Agenda Item No. 24. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the
Public and Board Members.
Mr. Lynwood Coffmann, Southern Baptist minister, said he is working his
utmost to create rural permanence. In that capacity, he has been able to show
Albemarle County's newly adopted Comprehensive Plan and brag on it in other
counties. He feels that Albemarle County is at the top of the list of most
beautiful, most historic and having the highest quality of life of all coun-
ties in Virginia. Mr. Coffman is requesting county-wide elections based on
Section 15.1-37.4 of the Code of Virginia.
Mr. Coffman said in next year's election, one-half of the County will not
be voting for Supervisors according to the present election procedures. Last
year he supported the Supervisor from the Charlottesville District, who Mr.
Coffman feels is doing a fair job. He would like to have the opportunity to
vote for all of the representatives on the Board of Supervisors. He said the
Comprehensive Plan is full of references to the needs of citizens. Therefore,
he feels that all of the citizens of Albemarle should vote on all of the
Supervisors. He said citizens keep tabs on votes made by Board members
regarding land use and other issues, and citizens feel they have the right to
confront Board members with their record of votes when it is time for re-
election. He is for increasing rural permanence in historic Virginia, and he
wants Supervisors who are committed to that program. Having County-wide
election of Supervisors would allow citizens more input on who is best quali-
fied to create rural permanence in the counties of Virginia. He is reasonably
satisfied with the decisions of the Board. However, he does want to see
residential development cut in half. He asked the Board to give serious
consideration to allowing county-wide elections in the future.
Not Docketed: Executive Session: Legal Matters.
At 4:10 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Bowerman
to adjourn into Executive Session for the purpose of discussing potential
litigation re: appealing the Zoning Administrator's decision regarding
Blandemar development rights; the case of Albemarle County vs. Ripper; poten-
tial litigation of Sanford vs. Albemarle County; Camellia Gardens; and poten-
tial litigation from a personnel grievance involving the Jail Board; all
pursuant to Section 2.1-344.A.7 of the Code of Virginia.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
At 5:20 P.M., the Board reconvened into open session. Motion was immedi-
ately offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mrs. Humphris certifying the execu-
tive session as follows.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 44)
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has convened
an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded
vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of
Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that such
executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's
knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the
executive meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and
(ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the
motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or
considered by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
VOTE:
AYES:
Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr.
Perkins and Mr. way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT DURING VOTE: None
ABSENT DURING MEETING: None
215
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Bowerman
certifying the Executive Session held during the lunch break as follows.
CERTIFICATION OF EXECUTIVE MEETING
WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has convened
an executive meeting on this date pursuant to an affirmative recorded
vote and in accordance with the provisions of The Virginia Freedom of
Information Act; and
WHEREAS, Section 2.1-344.1 of the Code of Virginia requires a
certification by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors that such
executive meeting was conducted in conformity with Virginia law;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors hereby certifies that, to the best of each member's
knowledge, (i) only public business matters lawfully exempted from
open meeting requirements by Virginia law were discussed in the
executive meeting to which this certification resolution applies, and
(ii) only such public business matters as were identified in the
motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or
considered by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors.
VOTE:
AYES:
Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr.
Perkins and Mr. way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT DURING VOTE: None
ABSENT DURING MEETING: None
Not Docketed: Mr. Bain said the Board authorized the County Attorney on
Camellia Gardens and the homeowner's association to pursue having the problem
corrected a year ago. Motion was then offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr.
Way authorizing the County Attorney to obtain compliance of the problem at
Camellia Gardens, and if not obtained, to go to court.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 45)
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 22g. Report: Determination of Development Rights.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mrs. Humphris to adopt the
following resolution of intent to amend the Zoning Ordinance to bring the
Zoning Ordinance into compliance with the Comprehensive Plan with regard to
Sections 10.3 and 10.5.1 and to resolve ambiguities in those sections relating
to agricultural and rural uses.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, does hereby state its intent to amend the Albemarle County
Zoning Ordinance in Sections 10.3 and 10.5.1 to bring them into
compliance with the Comprehensive Plan as relates to agricultural and
rural uses and to resolve ambiguities in those sections; and
FURTHER requests the Albemarle County Planning Commission to hold
public hearing on said intent to amend the Zoning Ordinance, and does
request that the Planning Commission send its recommendation to this
Board at the earliest possible date.
Agenda Item No. 23d. Appointments: JAUNT.
Mr. Way said he has been nominated to be President of the JAUNT Board,
but must be reappointed to that Board first by the Board of Supervisors.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Bowerman
to reappoint Mr. Peter T. Way to the JAUNT Board, term to expire September 30,
1992.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
The Board authorized the Clerk to advertise for vacancies in instances
where applications have not been received.
Agenda Item No. 23h. Other.
Mr. Bowie said that Mr. Lindsay Dorrier is leaving the County and has
resigned from the Jefferson Area Community Corrections Board. Mr. Dorrier is
recommending that the newly appointed Commonwealth's Attorney, Mr. Lester A.
Wilson, III, be appointed to replace Mr. Dorrier.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman and seconded by Mr. Bain to appoint
Mr. Lester A. Wilson, III, to the Jefferson Area Community Corrections Board
to fill the unexpired term of Mr. Lindsay Dorrier, term to expire December 31,
1992.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowerman, Bowie, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
lng.
Agenda Item No. 23g. Rockfish State Scenic River Advisory Board.
Mr. Way said he expects to have nominations to submit at the next meet-
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 46)
217
Agenda Item No. 24. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from Board
Members.
Mr. Agnor noted that the Zoning Text Amendment for an Entrance Corridor
Overlay District will be on the Board's October 3 agenda for adoption.
Mr. Agnor reported that the review of the Articles of Incorporation of
the Solid Waste Authority has been completed by the State Corporation Commis-
sion.
Mr. Bain requested a report on the status of the Route 678 reconstruction
project and whether it will be included in the Spring construction cycle.
Mr. Bain said that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission had
a presentation from representatives at the Shenandoah National Park regarding
cooperation from adjoining counties in efforts to expand Park boundaries
through donations of land purchased through private corporations. He said the
Board will be receiving a similar request.
Mr. Bowerman asked the status of the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority
agreement. Mr. Bowie said City Council has not responded yet to the .Board's
position regarding "veto" power. As far as Mr. Bowie knows, that is the only
point of disagreement.
Mr. Perkins asked why there was no penalty clause in the construction
contract for the new Crozet Elementary School, when there was one in the
contract for Cale Elementary. He pointed out that Cale was completed as
scheduled, but the Crozet School is behind schedule. He said he was surprised
to learn that the penalty clause was not in the contract and thought it was a
matter of County policy to include a penalty clause. He feels it is good
business to include such a clause.
Mr. Bowerman said his understanding is that the School Board decided not
to add a penalty clause to the Crozet School contract because of the added
cost. Apparently, the decision was made administratively to include the
clause to the Cale contract.
Mr. Perkins said he thought a contractor bid the job on a certain number
of days. Mr. Agnor said the bid includes the penalty, and if the contract is
completed on time, nothing is paid back to the County. The penalty clause is
paid for in advance of the completion date. He said the idea was to avoid
more costs on the Crozet School project by not including a penalty clause.
Mr. Bowie said once the actual site determination is made for a school,
he feels the construction portion should be handled under General Government
as a solution to this type of problem.
Mrs. Humphris said she thinks a future policy decision regarding the
penalty clause must be made on a case-by-case basis rather than as a blanket
policy.
Mr. Way asked for a recommendation from staff as to the procedure for
receiving suggestions from the public for a name for the Southern Regional
Park.
Mr. Bowie said he has received a request from the Planning Commission for
a joint meeting with the Board of Supervisors. The consensus of the Board was
to meet at 3:00 P.M. on October 10, 1990. Items for the agenda can be submit-
ted to the Chairman of the Board of Supervisors or the Chairman of the Plan-
ning Commission.
September 12, 1990 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 47)
Agenda Item No. 25. Adjourn. At 5:40 P.M., with no further business to
come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned.
Chairman