Loading...
1990-04-02 adjApril 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 1) 322 An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on April 2, 1990, at 1:00 P.M., Meeting Room #7, County Office Building, 401McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. The meeting was adjourned from March 28, 1990. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., David P. Bowerman, F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Charlotte Humphris, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Mr. Peter T. Way. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive; Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Deputy County Executive; and Mr. Ray B. Jones, Deputy County Executive. Also present was Ms. Roxanne W. White, Management Analyst. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 1:00 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Bowie. Agenda Item No. 2. Work Session: 1990-91 County Budget: School Division, AmdrewOverstreet, Present. Requested $54,417,374; Recommended $54,417,374. Mr. Charles Martin, Chairman of the School Board, said the School Board worked hard on the budget and had to compromise on some items, but they are presenting a balanced budget as the Board of Supervisors requested totalling $54,417,374. This budget does not include debt service on capital projects. He said that 478 new students are expected which will require that 23 teachers be hired. In addition to balancing the budget and handling the expected growth, the budget allows for new initiatives, particularly in the area of elementary science and math. He said that the School Board was able to find an additional $147,500 from this year's budget that can be carried forward to FY 90-91. Although the School Board is submitting a balanced budget, they are requesting additional funds in order to retire the amortization debt for non-recurring items totalling $184,000 for 1990-91. They would also like to give teachers and classified staff an additional raise. Mr. Overstreet, Superintendent of Schools, handed out a summary of the budget overview. He explained the process used in preparing the budget. He said more time was spent this year than ever before in discussing the budget in public hearings and in work sessions. Mr. Overstreet explained that the budget is divided into two major components. The regular school fund portion contains on-going educational needs totalling $50,169,201, while the self-sustaining programs total $4,248,173 and do not require local funds. The base budget accounts for 51 percent of the regular school fund budget, growth accounts for 38 percent, and 11 percent of the regular school fund budget is for new initiatives. The regular school fund represents a 9.1 percent increase over current operations. The basic budget component supports a five percent scale increase for teachers, a 5.5 percent increase for classified employees and an $80,000 study to investigate inequities in the existing salary scale. Also addressed in the basic budget are increases in fringe benefit and utility rates, local school allotments, and general inflation. The only allowance for growth in the basic budget component is an increase in materials and supplies for students at the local school level. Mr. 0verstreet said that the student population is predicted to increase by 478 students next year. This will result in the need for about 23 addi- tional teachers and assistants, five mobile classrooms, nine buses, and additional clerical help. In addition, five more buses and drivers will be needed to implement Phase I of the School's redistricting plan. The cost of these growth needs totals $2,019,119. He explained that the School Board decided to amortize the initial cost of buses and capital items for five years, thus reducing next year's growth cost to $1;579,717. Regarding new initiatives, Mr. Overstreet said the School Board consid- ered over $2 million in new initiatives in areas including instructional April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 2) 323 needs, facilities, and transportation, and gave final support to a total of $483,833~ The largest new items include improvement of the math and science curriculum at primarily the elementary and middle ~school levels, instructional computing for at-risk students at the elementary level, and elementary guid- ance counselors. Mr. Overstreet said for some time middle schools have wanted to have intramural activities, after school events, and clubs for the students. He said pilots programs used in the past were deleted from the budget because the programs were too costly. He said the current attempt is to incorporate middle school student activities into the after sdhool format already in existence for elementary schools. However, the program will not work without satellite transportation. Therefore, a $20,000 item in this budget is to provide transportation for three weeks of a six-week period for two days a week for students to be involved in an after school program. Parents will contribute costs for students on a sliding scale j~st as the elementary after school program now works. Mr. Overstreet said the elementary guidance initiative funds three additional counsellors. Mr. Bowie asked if this i~itiative is in response to State mandates. Mr. Overstreet said it is. In response to Mr. Bowie's question for clarification, Mr. Overstreet explained that Instructional Computing for At-Risk Students would allow at least one computer in every classroom in those schools having the highest concentration of at-risk students. He said the schools have experimented with a laboratory method and a networking method of computer instruction. They have found that placing computers in the classrooms (networking) works best at the elementary level. Students are able to use the computers in small groups or individually. The computers are available all the time and in a more efficient manner than is provided through scheduling for use of the computers in a laboratory setting. For at-risk students specifically, the program monitors progress in basic skills rather than teaching computer skills. Several Board members questioned the need for additional clerical support and a science/math coordinator included in the new. initiative of improving the science and math curriculum. Mr. John English said the work load in the media center is such that no more work can be taken on by that group with regard to distributing materials to teachers. The clerical support position would handle the additional work load involved in distributing materials. Mr. Overstreet said the new initiative in Personnel requires a support person for handling certification benefits. He said increasing requirements relating to personnel in the areas of a drug-free workplace, hazardous materi- als, teacher certifications, and affirmative action programs demand additional staffing to continue to maintain current operations. Specifically, the new certification requirements by the State will be basically housed and tabulated at the local School Division level. Mrs. Carole Hastings, Director of Personnel, said the certification requirements for 900 people are maintained in the personnel Office because the State holds the Superintendent of Schools or his d~signee responsible for making sure that teachers are certified. She explained a new system of accumulating 180 points over a five-year period to,obtain certification. There are a variety of choices for teachers to obtain these points such as peer observation, educational travel, or educational projects. Although the new system may be better for the teachers, it requires more recordkeeping over a five-year period. Board members expressed concern over unrealisCic State mandates and reported confusion on the part of principals as to who is doing the record- keeping for teacher certification. Mrs. Hastings said the principals will be advising teachers regarding their choices over the :five-year period, but the actual recordkeeping will be done at the central office. In response to a question regarding a budget item for the affirmative action recruitment initiative, Mrs. Hastings said the budget involves out-of-state recruitment as authorized by the School Board when the affirmative action plan was adopted in 1979. : Mr. Bowie said he personally feels that the solution to staffing requests already exists through principals and teachers who are qualified and are receiving State-mandated pay and good benefits. He personally does not April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 3) 324 understand the need for hiring additional staff members and secretaries. Mr. Overstreet said the principals cannot handle new requirements without techni- cal assistance. Mr. Overstreet said other new initiatives include more recruiting assis- tance and training for bus drivers, and an additional maintenance mechanic for heating and air conditioning repair. Mr. Overstreet concluded by saying that the budget presented is balanced within available revenue as requested by the Board of Supervisors. Amortiza- tion to fund growth is a new feature in this budget. Also, new and expanded instructional programs are included in this budget, unlike the current budget. He said the budget is conservative and falls short of correcting salary deficiencies. Mr. Way asked the priorities for needs in the event that additional money became available for this budget. He assumed that additional money would be used for the unfunded requests in the budget. Mr.~ Overstreet said it would depend on where the Board of Supervisors directed~the money to be spent and how much money might be available. He said the S6hool Board felt that the first priority would be paying off the amortization. After that, the School Board would like to increase classified employee salaries. Mr. Bowie said there may be a few classifications that should be adjusted. However, he would be hesitant to support undoing the work that has been done to get the scale equal for all County classified employees. He said he felt the percentage of increase should stay the same for classified employees in the Schools and in local government. Mr. Bain asked the salary of bus drivers and the turnover rate. Mrs. Hastings said next year for the first time bus drivers will be on the County pay schedule. The average pay for a bus driver is~ about $7500 per year. The problem which causes a turnover rate of about 16 percent a year is that these are part-time positions, and most people want to work full time. Mr. Papenfuse noted that there is a disproportionate number of bus drivers to students because of the distance to the rural areas of Albemarle County. Mrs. Humphris pointed out that the special education and pre-school/ handicapped portions of the growth requirements account for 57 percent of the regular instructional costs. Mr. Overstreet said many of the handicapped children have severe needs which require special staff, training, equipment and transportation. These needs result in a cost that is about three times the amount per student for regular education. Mr. Papenfuse said because the Kluge Rehabilitation Center and other residential children's homes are located in this area, a larger proportion of children with special needs are served by Albemarle County schools. Mr. Overstreet said the, pre-school handicapped program is State mandated. Mr. English noted that~the law requires that handicapped children be accommodated from the ages of two years to 21 years. Not only that, but the school system is required to actively look for children who qualify for these programs. Mr. Perkins then asked informational questions relating to specific lines items in various categories of the budget. There were no further questions regarding the school budget. (The Board recessed at 3:00 P.M. and reconvened at 3:12 P.M.) Mr. Bowerman complimented the School Board on an excellent job in submit- ting a balanced budget to this Board. He recognized that there were some hard choices made resulting in having to compromise. He said the School Board worked hard with time constraints, and he is satisfied with the budget pre- sented. Mr. Bowie concurred and added that he is aware of the hard work and long hours spent by the School Board on this budget to meet growth needs, meet the needs of students, provide new initiatives and remain within the County Executive's guidelines for a balanced budget. Mr. Bowie said he feels com- fortable with the budget and added his thanks to Mr. Bowerman's remarks. Mrs. Hnmphris said she was able to attend the School Board's work ses- sions on the budget and saw the School Board members work within a short time April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 4) 325 frame to produce the budget. hardworking and conscientious. citizen participants. She feels that the School Board members are She congratulated them for a super job as Mr. Bain said he knows the School Board worked long and hard, but he is concerned about the issue of amortization. If growth continues, and it is anticipated to do that according to the School's Lpng Range Plan, he is not sure amortization is the choice Albemarle County should make. There were no further comments regarding the School Budget. Redevelopment and Housing, l(arenMorris, Present. Requested $143,584; Recommended $131,931. Mr. Jones said the baseline-housing budget reflects an overall decrease of $2884, which reflects a 2.7 percent decrease in personnel costs due to staff turnover, an 11.3 percent increase in fringe benefit costs, an 11.8 percent decrease in operating costs, and an 11.79 percent decrease in capital costs. With projected state revenues of $50,000 and Federal revenues of $70,000, the local tax funding is $11,931. Sighificant increases or decreases in the baseline budget are an increase of $1750 by adding Workman's Compensation to the budget this year; an increase of $75 in consultant fees to implement Virginia Housing Development Authority computerization of the Section 8 program; a decrease of $600 in postage based on actual costs; a decrease of $460 in maintenance contracts based on'actual costs; and a decrease of $450 in office supplies based on actual costs. No new personnel or capital needs are included in this budget. ~ The County Executive recommended funding at the baseline level. Not funded is an increment of $12,000 to fund a part-time eligibility worker to handle new leasing and the recertification of cases. Mr. Jones said this is the highest priority among the Social Service programs requested due to the growth of the Moderate Rehabilitation Program. Mr. Bowie said it would have been helpful to the Board to know priority items early in the review process. At this point, items not recommended for funding have been acted on by the Board, which may or may not be the highest priority for a particular Department. Mr. Agnor said if the Board wishes to allocate a specific amount of resources and leave the specific allocations to the Execu- tive Staff, he would be happy to do that. Mr. Bain said he would like to have this item~reconsidered at the last work session. There was no objection from other Board members. Zoning, Amelia Patterson, Present. Requested $319,479; Recomended $254,996. Mr. Tucker said the proposed baseline budget reflects an overall increase of $27,169 with salaries increasing by .04 percent, fringe benefits by 2.6 percent, operations by 11.9 percent, and capital equipment costs by $23,700. Other significant increases or decreases 'in the baseline budget include a decrease of $2000 in contracts to hire temporary secretarial help to perform the duties of a recording secretary for the Board of Zoning Appeals; an increase of $1000 in copy supplies due to under'budgeting in FY 89-90; an increase of $2500 to modify current desks to incorporate computer equipment; and an increase of $20,300 to replace two vehicles 'with 100,000 miles. This budget includes capital equipment requests for two,file cabinets for $700 and two calculators for $200. No new personnel are included. The County Executive recommended funding at the baseline level. Not included for funding is an increment of $56,340 to fund a third zoning inspec- tor, increase the hours of the office assistant to a full-time position, and hire a part-time intern. Mr. Tucker said since these budget requests w~'re made in December, the workload has increased dramatically because of the inoperable vehicle ordi- nance adopted in January. He said staff feels that the office assistant and the zoning inspector are priority items. Ms. Amelia Patterson, Zoning Administrator, said the most dramatic increase in the workload results from ordinances adopted recently. She said there has been a 500 percent increase over last year's requests for enforce- ment mainly due to complaints from trash dumping and abandoned vehicles. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 5) 326 General permit requests have increased by 75 percent since 1988. Other general department activity has increased as much as 100 percent over the past two years. Ms. Patterson said the response time to the public for complaints regarding possible land use violations is over three weeks. She said that is unacceptable, and other localities have a goal of no more than four days of response time. She feels that an additional inspector could cut the response time in half. Mrs. Humphris said she is aware of the desperate need for help to handle the volume coming to this Department. She suggested that the inspector and full-time office assistant be reconsidered on April 4. Other Board members concurred. Soil & Water Conservation, Gordon Yager, Present. Requested $44,047; Recommended $14,357. Mr. Tucker said the County provides the Soil and Water Conservation District with funding for a part-time clerical position plus funding for copy supplies and expenses. The baseline budget for the County contribution increases by $996. Funding is recommended for the baseline budget. Not recommended is a request to transfer matching funds of $7000 from the Engineering Department to this department to fund the 25 percent local match, for the Conservation Specialist. This position has been used in the Engineering Department for work on erosion sediment control, but the Engineering Department no longer feels the position is necessary. The Conservation Specialist would be used mainly to provide conservation education to area schools. Mr. Eddie Wood, member of the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Conservation District Board, said that last year the Conservation Specialist worked a great deal in the area of education. However, the Chesapeake Bay program demands as much work from this position. The Conservation Specialist works with land users on best management practices, site reviews, and implementation of water quality practices in Albemarle County and in the Chesapeake Bay Program. As a result, last year $6170.50 was returned to the Coupty as a part of cost sharing by the land users. Mr. Wood said Jthe problem his Board faces is a lack of manpower. There are four permanent personnel working within four counties. He said they would like to have the position funded outside the Engineering Department. The Conversation SpecialiSt would work 50 percent of his time in Albemarle County, and that would amount to approximately $4000. He said the position is needed, and he feels it isia benefit to Albemarle County. Mr. Perkins suggested that this request be reconsidered on April 4. There was no objection by Board members. Watershed Management, Peyton Robertson. ReqUested $39,754; Recommended $39,754. Mr. Tucker said the budget increases by 7.9 percent, reflecting a six percent increase in salaries, a 9.7 percent increase in fringe benefit costs, and a 4.5 percent increase in operating costs. There are no new personnel requests. Database software for $300 is included in the request. The County Executive recommended full funding. There were no recommendations for changes to this budget. V~I-SO Extension Progrmm~, Charlie Good-~u, Present. Requested $85,917; Recommended $84,917. Mr. Jones said the baseline bludget of $84,917 increases by $9322, reflecting a 10.9 percent increase in salaries, a 9.3 percent increase in fringe benefit costs, and a 32 percent increase in operating costs. Significant increases or decreases are an increase of $6359 in compen- sation for four extension agents based on state salary projections; an ,increase of $500 in telephone charges based on increased usage; and an increase of $200 in copy supplies based on actual costs. No new personnel or capital needs are included in the budget. The County Executive recommended funding at the baseline level. There were no recommendations for change in this budget. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 6) 327 Gypsy Moth Program. Requested $3,290; Recommended $3,290. Mr. Jones said the total budget is $104,010, out of which the County is asked to con- tribute $3290 for office support. This reflects an increase of $40 over the FY 89-90 budget. The County Executive recommended funding at the baseline level. Not included in the recommendation is an increment of $250 for a mountain bike. Mr. Taylor Williams, Director of the Gypsy Moth Program, said this is not a spurious request. The bike is to be used for rough terrain throughout the County. He said his staff monitors and surveys in uninhabited areas where there are no roads. He said it would be less hazardous and less time consum- ing to access these areas by bike. Mrs. Humphris said she agreed that the bike would save time and money on three-mile hikes which have to be made with or without a bike. The Board agreed to reconsider this item on April 4. Thomas Jefferson Planning District, Nancy O'Briem, Present. Requested $44,068; Recommended $44,068. Mr. Tucker said based on a total baseline budget of $325,423, the County's share is $44,068, an increase of $2548 over FY 89-90. This includes an increase per capita allocation from $0.50 to $0.52 and a five percent increase for the legislative liaison program. (The total cost of the legislative program is $11,200.) The County's share is calculated on a 1988 population estimate of 63,200 assessed at $.52 per capita. Funding is recommended at the baseline budget level of $44,068. There were no recommendations for changes to this budget. Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHTP), Theresa Tapscott, Present. Requested $269,889; Recommended $251,835. Mr. Jones said AHIP is requesting $269,889 from Albemarle County, an increase of 14 percent over FY 89-90. Of that total, $242,793 is in support of AHIP's on-going "core" operational activities, $13,527 is in support of the emergency repair program, and $13,569 is in support of the home ownership program. The seven percent increase for the core program reflects a four percent cost of living increase, a three percent rent increase, a 35 percent increase in medical insurance, an increase of 25 percent in audit expenses, and a 25 percent increase for updating equipment. AHIP is available to all low to moderate income homeowners and potential home buyers in Albemarle County. The majority of funds have been targeted for rehabilitation in specific areas of the County where deteriorated units are concentrated. The County Executive recommended funding at the baseline level of $251,835, reflecting a high level funding recommendation from the Program Review Committee. Not funded is an increment of $13,569 for the County's share of the Home Ownership Program. Mr. Jones said the unfunded amount represents one-half of the position for the Home Ownership Program, which is subject to a grant. Mr. Agnor said the County made a qualified commitment to the Charlottesville Housing Foundation that if a State grant were awarded, the County would make a contribution from local funds to support the Home Owner- ship Program. Staff did not feel it necessary to include this position in the budget until the grant determination is made. Ms. Theresa Tapscott, Director of AHIP, emphasized the importance of beginning the process of counseling potential homeowners in this program. She said if the grant is successful for the installation of roads, the situation may be that homes will be ready without families prepared to move into them. She said last year the Board suggested that funding for one-half of this position should come from private sources. Ms. Tapscott said she was April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 7) 328 successful in obtaining that funding. The Charlottesville Housing Foundation has committed to pay one-half for this position for the next several years, and in fact, have granted $8200 to employ that person. She said the position has been filled since January 1, and a list of interested families has accumu- lated since that time. Ms. Tapscott said over 150 expressions of interest have been received. Questionnaires were submitted to those, and 80 families have responded. Ms. Tapscott feels that this work will have to cease if the County does not fund the other half of the position. She said this person works with potential homeowners in terms of preparing them to purchase a home. The intent is to make this a model project. In that respect, families will need to be counseled with regard to home maintenance, saving money, and forming a homeowners association. Mr. Agnor asked what happens to this position if the grant is not suc- cessful and the program is not begun. Ms. Tapscott said the Charlottesville Housing Foundation has committed a great deal of time and money to this program, and their intent is to see it through one way or another. She said the application for this grant is one route among Others that can be taken. Mr. Bain said he feels this request should be ~considered as part of the contingency items if the program is not funded by a grant. That information should be available by July 1. There was no object'ion by other Board members. Monticello Area Co~m~nityAction Agency, Ken Ackerman, Present. Request- ed $38,028; Recommended $30,000. Mr. Jones said MACAA is requesting an increase of 34 percent over last year's budget. Additional funding is requested primarily to provide for inflationary costs in Community Programs; increase the County share of Project Discovery; and begin to contribute to Hope House. The State has indicated that the Project Discovery program will be level funded. Assuming a six percent overall increase in program costs, the County's share would have to be $9435 to make up for the shortfall caused by level funding from the State. Currently, the County's share is $4300. MACAA projects served 309 County residents in FY 89-90 and 321 in FY 90-91. Funding is recommended at the baseline level of $30,000, reflecting a low funding recommendation from the Program Review Committee. Not included for funding is $1200 to increase Albemarle's share of Project Discovery. Mr. Ackerman said the recommendation for a bas~ budget increase of two percent is disappointing. Over the years MACAA has worked toward the County's objective of balancing the budget requests in an equitable manner between the City and the County. He said federal and state funding is not increasing this year. Mr. Ackerman said last year his staff received no cost of living salary increase, and he feels it would be a disservice to his agency to forego that again this year. Mr. Ackerman thanked the Board for its support in January for Project Discovery. However, State funding is not increasing for this program, and it is necessary to ask for increased support from local jurisdic- tions. Mr. Ackerman said the City of Charlottesville in combination with the City Schools is contributing $15,000 in the 1990-91 budget for this program. He said Fluvanna County is also interested in contributing to this program. He encouraged the Board to consider funding $1200 as recommended by the Program Review Committee but not included in the CoUnty Executive's recommen- dation. He requested that the base budget be increased by six percent rather than two percent as recommended. The combination of these two areas equals a total additional request of $2037. Mr. Ackerman also requested a contribution from the County of $238 for property taxes charged to MACAA by the City. He amended his total request to add $2275. ~ The Board agreed to reconsider this request at the April 4 work session. Bus Service - Route 29, Helen Poore, Present. 'Requested $20,087; Recom- mended $21,087. Mr. Tucker said the proposed County contribution of $21,087 represents a $2179 increase over FY 89-90. The County Executive recommended full funding for baseline operations. Not included lin the recommendation is an increment of $33,237 to extend service to Pantops Mountain. The reason for the high cost of this extended service is that it would not be subsidized, but would require all local dollars. This is based on a decision by Charlottes- ville Transit in the absence of any new Federal funding to use Federal subsi- dies only on existing routes. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 8) 329 Mr. Tucker said there is no federal program for new bus routes. The only way this program can be expanded to Pantops is for the County to fund it totally. Mr. Bowie said four years ago the owners of businesses at Pantops chose not to contribute a nominal fee toward this service. In his opinion~ they should pay for this service. There were no recommendations for changes in this budget. Agenda Item No. 3a. Joint Meeting with the School Board. Discussion: Drug Free Workplace Policy. At 4:00 P.M., the Board recessed and reconvened in Room 5 at 4:03 P.M. with all members of the Board present except Mr. Bowerman, who returned at 4:10 P.M.) School Board members present were Mr. Richard Bagby, Mr. William Finley, Mr. Charles Martin, Mrs. Patricia Moore, Mr. Roger'Ward (arrived at 4:06 P.M.) and Mrs. Sharon Wood. Mrs. Hastings said that Version II of Draft V of the Drug Free Workplace policy incorporates the current School Board policy related to drug and alcohol usage in schools. The School Board requested that the pre-employment testing requirement for safety-related positions be added. Mrs. Hastings summarized the policy which is set out below in its entirety: ALCOHOL/DRUG FREE WORKPLACE Albemarle County has a vital interest in maintaining a safe, health- ful, and productive environment for its employees. The use of alcohol or illegal drugs, or unlawful use of prescription drugs undermines the quality of job performance, endangers co-workers and brings discredit to the County. The County will not tolerate the possession or use of alcohol or illegal drugs, or unlawful use of prescriptionl drugs by its employees in any job-related context and is cox~itted to. the eradication of them from the workplace. Any County employee determined to have violated this policy may be subject to disciplinary action up to and including dismissal. Ail County employees shall be responsible for reporting any evidence of the use of drugs or alcohol by students or Staff to their princi- pal/department head. All such reports shall be thoroughly investigat- ed and reported to the County Executive/Superintendent/or designee and appropriate action will be taken as necessary. The board will not tolerate any violation of the law and, in accord- ance with the law, will fully support any employee who, in good faith and with probable cause and without malice, acts to report the activi- ties of students or other persons as they relate to the use of alcohol or drugs in the public schools. In order to comply with federal law, the County requires that an employee notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five days after such conviction. The County must notify any federal contracting agency within ten days of having received notice that an employee engaged in the performance of such contract has had any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace. The County will impose a sanction on, or require the satisfactory partici- pation in a drug/alcohol abuse assistance or rehabilitation program by, any employee who is so convicted. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 9) 330 Procedure for Compliance Any employee who enters upon County property or reports for duty while possessing or under the influence of drugs or alcohol shall be immediately suspended until the County Executive or Superin- tendent shall take such action as is advisable. The County Executive/Superintendent shall investigate all charges and shall make such recommendations to the board as he judges to be appro- priate. Any employee of the board who is convicted of the illegal posses- sion, use or distribution of controlled drugs will be relieved of his or her duties in accordance with dueprocess. Upon being charged by legal authorities, the employee will be suspended without pay until the case is resolved. If the em- ployee is convicted, the employee will be dismissed effective the date he or she was originally suspended. If not convicted, the employee will be reinstated with full pay retroactive to the date of suspension. Each employee is notified that, as a condition of employment, he/she must abide by the Policy Statement, notifying the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five days after such conviction. Failure to abide by the Policy Statement may result in discipli- nary action. The County will notify any federal contracting agency within 10 days of having received notice that an employee who is engaged in the performance of such contract has had any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace. The County will impose a sanction on, or !require the satisfactory participation in a drug/alcohol abuse assistance or rehabilita- tion program by any employee who is so convicted. The County shall establish a drug-free awareness program to inform all employees about the dangers of. drug abuse in the workplace and that the maintenance of a drug-free workplace is the County's goal. The awareness program shall identify counsel- ing and rehabilitation programs and shall emphasize the penalties for employees' violating this policy and its administrative procedures. The County recognizes that alcohol and drug dependencies are illnesses and major community health problems. Early recognition and treatment of alcohol and drug abuse are essential to success- ful rehabilitation. The County maintains an employee assistance program (EAP) to assist employees with alcohol and drug abuse problems as well as with other personal problems and will also make referrals to appropriate treatment programs. Employees voluntarily seeking assistance for a substance abuse problem through EAP or a medical source will not be disciplined as a result of their disclosure of prior drug or alcohol use, and treatment by EAP or another source will be handled in confidence. A substance test will be given at County expense to all new persons offered permanent employment in certain safety related positions with the County. These positions will be designated on a list approved by the County Executive or Superintendent and will be maintained by the Assistant Superintendent/Director of Personnel. Principals/Department Heads may require that employees undergo testing for substance usage if they suspect such usage in the workplace. Such testing will be coordinated through the County Physician services provided by Martha Jefferson Hospital. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 10) 331 Through this program of providing every employee with the infor- mation listed above as well as alcohol/drug abuse education and training programs and the Employee Assistance Program, the County is making a good-faith effort to maintain a drug-free workplace. The proposed safety-related positions to which pre-employment testing would apply are: POSITION JUSTIFICATION SCHOOL DIVISION Cafeteria Worker Use of potentially dangerous equipment Courier Maintenance/Building Services Director Custodial Supervisory Maintenance Supervisor Extensive driving Vehicle operatiDn, supervision of employees and Safety inspections Carpentry Foreman Electrical Foreman Plumbing Foreman Grounds Foreman Custodial Foreman Custodial Supervisor I,II Vehicle operation, safety inspection, machinery and equipment operation, and supervision Carpenter Maintenance Mechanic Maintenance Helper Grounds Custodians Vehicle operation, machinery and equipment operation Pupil Transportation School Bus Drivers Substitute Bus Drivers Transportation Aides Substitute Trans. Aides Automotive Mechanics Senior Automotive Mechanics Parts Manager Shop Aides Driver Supervisors Shop Foreman Assistant Shop Foreman Supervisor of Transportation Director of Transportation Shop/Technology Teachers Positions listed are responsible for the operation, maintenance, repair, and/or the supervision of the above functions, for Pupil Transportation. Additionally, the shop staff is responsible for the repair and maintenance of the Police Department vehicles and all other County Department vehiales. Operation of potentially dangerous equipment LOCAL GOVERNMENT Police Officers Use of force/operation of emergency vehicles Social Services Social Service Aide Sr. Social Service Aide Social Worker Sr. Social Worker Sr. Employment Services Worker Social Work Supervisor Frequent transportation of clients Parks and Recreation Park Foreman Lead Groundskeeper Groundskeeper Part-Time Bus Driver (unless already employed by schools) Use of dangerous equipment Transportation of participants April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 11) 332 Joint Communications Center Center Manager The planning, directing, and evaluation of the entire operation of the 911 Joint Dispatch Center Communications Supervisor II Communications Supervisor 1) The supervision of three communication shifts working 365 days a year, 24 hours a day. Personnel supervised are Communications Supervisor I and Communications Officers. 2) Directs all the activities of call taking, and dispatching of Police Communications and Emergency Medical Dispatch. 1) Supervises Communications Officers during assigned communications shift. 2) Conducts communication work pertaining to the receipt of emergency calls from the public and the maintenance of radio com- munications with Emergency Police and Rescue Units. Communications Officer Performs communications work pertaining to the receipt of emergency calls from the public and the maintenance of radio com- munications with Emergency Police and Rescue Units. Mrs. Hastings said this policy is essentially the minimal implementation of the federal law requirements with the exception of the pre-employment testing requirement for safety-related positions. Because federal funds are received, the County must comply with requirements for in-service training of employees, assistance through the Employee Assistance Program, and notifica- tion by employees having drug-related convictions. Mr. Martin pointed out that No. 3 under Procedure for Compliance is not clear whether the conviction is for alcohol and/or drug use and felony and/or misdemeanor conviction. Mrs. Hastings said this is the current language in the School Board policy, which was meant to leave to the discretion of the Superintendent and the Board the type of charge and the action warranted. The consensus was that it should be clear whether a conviction is for a drug or alcohol-related offense. The Boards then discussed the second paragraph under No. 3 which refers to notification by the employee of violations of criminal drug statutes occurring in the workplace. Mr. Martin asked what is the policy with regard to notification for offenses outside of the workplace. Mrs. Hastings said earlier versions of the proposed policy included offenses outside the workplace. Because employees felt strongly that the policy should address the workplace only, the language was changed. However, Mrs. Hastings pointed out that a conviction outside the workplace could result in the inability of an employee to perform job requirements which, in turn, would result in discipli- nary action. Several Supervisors and School Board members felt that the policy should not be restricted to the workplace. Mrs. Hastings said the federal law addresses the workplace, and the School Board's direction was to draft a policy that met the minimal conditions of that law. Mr. Martin said that statements in Item No. 2 and Item No. 3 are contra- dictory. On one hand, the employee who is convicted of an illegal drug offense will be relieved of his duties. In the other instance, a sanction or a drug rehabilitation program can be required if an employee is convicted of a drug offense. Mrs. Hastings said some confusion results from using the current policy language while at the same time incorporating the requirements of the law. She said this is an area the Boards need to discuss. She said in the first version of this policy, it was clear that a conviction meant disciplinary action, while volunteering that a drug problem exists resulted in an offer of assistance. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 12) 333 Mrs. Humphris suggested that the term, "controlled substance", be used consistently throughout the policy when referring to drugs. She also noted that this version of the policy should be carefully reviewed by the County Attorney before a final decision. Mr. Bowie said this discussion would result in a final policy which would be submitted to the County Attorney. Mr. Bowie said he personally supports the policy covering the workplace and elsewhere, particularly regarding illegal drug use. Mr. Martin said there are circumstances in which he does not feel an offense outside the workplace should result in being fired from the job. He feels that a policy addressing areas outside the workplace should focus only on ~ontrolled substances. At the workplace, abuse of either drugs or alcohol is~ dangerous. Off the work site, the limitation should be to those things which are illegal. Some members of both Boards thought the policy should address both alcohol and controlled substances in the workplace and controlled substances only outside of the workplace. Mr. Bagby said that there should be an except~ion to Driving Under the Influence (DUI) charges outside the workplace. For example, bus drivers already have a policy regarding offenses. Mr. Harold Grimes, Director of Transportation, said that the State Transportation Department has to be notified within 48 hours of a conviction for a DUI and the disciplinary action taken by the School's Department of Transportation. The regulations in effect for bus drivers require that a conviction for DUI results in revocation of bus driving privileges anywhere in the State for five ~years. Mrs. Hastings said that does not have to be a part of this policy for bus drivers because it is already in effect by State law. She said if the concern is about other employees who drive, this policy would need to address that issue. Mr. Bagby feels that bus drivers charged with DUI should be suspended in accordance with the actions taken in Item No. 3 for controlled substances. Mr. Grimes said when a bus driver is charged with a moving violation in a bus or a private vehicle, State regulations require that the County be notified within 24 hours. The School Division's current policy is that if the charge is for DUI, the employee is suspended with or without pay, at the discretion of the Superintendent. If the employee is convicted, the suspension becomes termination. Mr. Martin said he feels that the option should be included that the County can impose a sanction or require participation in a rehabilitation program. Mr. Finley asked if applicants are asked whether or not they use con- trolled substances. Mrs. Hastings said that question is not asked, but in the case of bus drivers, the State requires a physical examination. Mr. Grimes said that bus drivers are asked if they use illegal drugs or use alcohol in excess, and the answer is recorded by the physician during the physical examination required by the State. Mrs. Hastings Said that is not the case for other employees, but the question can be added to the application form. She said the question is asked regarding convictions for crimes, and criminal investigations are done. Mr. Finley said conceivably an applicant other than a bus driver could be employed while using drugs and be treated at County expense. Mrs. Hastings said the best detection method would be a physical examination for all prospective employees. However, that would be prohibitive in terms of expense. Mr. Martin said he has researched the issue of pre-employment testing. The Supreme Court has ruled that certain safety-related positions can be pre-tested legally. One category declared legal bY the Supreme Court was railroad workers because 73 percent of that group were found to be abusing drugs. The other category was immigration workers because they carry guns. Mr. Martin said there has been no ruling by the Supreme Court that would indicate that a cafeteria worker, for example, would fall into the same category. The criteria used by the Supreme Court was significant abuse by the group and the use of firearms in the course of duty. He feels that bus drivers can probably be included for safety reasons. The question is then asked whether a chemistry teacher should be included if a cafeteria worker is included based on the safety issue. He feels the County will face law suits on the issue of pre-testing if that is included in the policy. Mrs. Hastings said the recommendation for pre+testing is made based on "Drug Testing Programs by Public Employers--Suggested Guidelines", published by the American Bar Association. She read, "An employer may conduct April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 13) 334 pre-employment drug testing through urinalysis in those jobs where physical fitness, safety, or security is an issue of particular concern." Mrs. Hastings said the County Attorney has stated that as long as the County's rationale is based on the employee's potential to harm himself through the use of equipment, or is in a position of transporting or protecting the public, he feels comfortable with those positions. Mr. Perkins asked why the private sector can legally require pre-employment drug testing. Mrs. Hastings said the public sector is subject to more legal challenges. She related a recent situation in which the City of Charlottesville tested a bus driver applicant for drugs, and he failed the test. The County does not have a pre-employment drug test for bus drivers. Therefore, the same applicant came to the County and was sent for the physical examination required by the State. Luckily, the same doctor performed the County's physical, and the applicant was turned down. Mr. Martin said in a few years when the S6preme Court has made decisions regarding other cases pending, he would feel more comfortable about a policy such as this one. At the present, he feels the County would be in the fore- front in lawsuits should it adopt the proposed policy. Mr. Bagby said he agrees there is risk involved in adopting such a policy. His personal opinion is that he is unwilling to be held hostage to minimal risk when he knows that the policy is right. Regarding the list of safety-related positions, Mrs. Hastings said she solicited input from Department Heads and Principals. She said bus drivers and police officers were on virtually all the lists. However, the list can be modified if the Boards desire to do so. Mr. Bowie then polled the Board of Supervisors to determine how the majority feel on the major issues of the policy. He said the suggestion was made that the list of safety-related categories be approved by the County Attorney before the policy is approved. There was no objection by the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Bowie said the second item to be resolved is whether the EAP is available to employees instead of dismissal if they are caught using drugs, or is the EAP available without dismissal if they voluntarily go get the help. His feeling is that the EAP should be available on a voluntary basis only. Mr. Bain said EAP should be available because this only addresses being charged with the illegal use of drugs. He feels differently about a convic- tion for illegal drug use. If an employee is found to be using drugs by a supervisor, he should be able to receive assistance through the EAP. Mr. Bowie then clarified that the question is whether help is available when the employee has been criminally charged. Mr. Bain said he thought that would be left open to discretion, depending on the nature of the offense. Mrs. Hastings said she can virtually guarantee dismissal if an employee is caught using an illegal substance in the workplace. The same is likely to be true for drug-related convictions away from the workplace. Mr. Bowie asked if the consensus is that the policy address convictions for illegal drug offenses on and off the workplaceand alcohol use at the workplace, with the exception of DUI charges for bus drivers. If criminal charges are placed, the employee is suspended. If the employee is convicted, he is fired. There was no objection from the Supervisors. Mr. Bowie said the next question is whether members of the Board of Supervisors support pre-employment testing for the list of safety positions. He said he personally supports pre-employment testing. There was no objection from the other members on this question. Mr. Bowie said the last question is regarding employee assistance. Mr. Bain said he feels if an employee has not been charged with a crime or con- victed of a crime, the EAP option should be left open. However, the question is whether a conviction for a misdemeanor is to be-treated the same as for a felony. Mrs. Hastings said there have been two situations within the last week of drinking in the workplace, and both employees were dismissed. The consensus of the Board of Supervisors was that the EAP is available on a voluntary basis or by referral from a supervisor unless an employee is charged with criminal activities outside the workplace. In that event, the EAP is available. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 14) 335 Mr. Martin then addressed the same issues to the School Board. Regarding the availability of treatment, Mr. Martin said he personally feels that getting caught has been the motivational factor for many people to seek treatment. Mr. Ward said he thought the question was what action is to result for use of drugs or alcohol in the workplace. Mr. Martin said at this point, the discussion is what happens when illegal drugs are used anywhere. Mr. Ward said he feels that if an employee is charged with using illegal drugs any- where, they should be suspended. If an employee is convicted of illegal drug use, his employment with the County is terminated. If an employee is caught using alcohol or drugs in the workplace, that triggers automatic termination. That's what he understood the Board of Supervisors agreed to. If that is so, he agrees with the Board of Supervisors. The majority of the School Board members present at this meeting agreed with the BOard of Supervisors. Mr. Martin said the consensus then is that the use of alcohol and drugs should have different sanctions applied. Alcohol-would apply only to the workplace, while illegal use of drugs would apply anywhere. Mrs. Hastings noted the exception for DUI charges for bus drivers. Mr. Bain said that police officers should be included in the exception. Mr. Bagby felt that possibly anyone driving a public vehicle should be included for DUI charges. Mr. Martin said many employees in the County drive a County vehicle from time to time and would be subject to losing their job if charged with a DUI. Mr. Ward suggested a segmented policy such that if the primary duty of an employee is to drive and they are convicted of a DUI, their job should be terminated. But if driving is not the primary function, then possibly driving privileges for County vehicles could be suspended. If that inhibits job performance, that in turn may lead to termination. Mr. Bowie noted that all the Supervisors were. nodding "yes" to Mr. Ward's suggestion. Mr. Martin said he would go along with some form of discipline, but every circumstance is different. Mr. Bagby said he feels Mr. Ward's compromise is a good one. There were no objections from other School Board members. Mr. Martin said he spent time trying to convince the School Board to reject pre-employment testing by focusing on legalities. He feels this is a moral issue, and this requirement sounds too much like "Big Brotherism". In order to get a job with the County, an applicant must surrender his bodily fluids. The implication is "guilty until proven innocent". Mr. Martin said basically there has been no problem with drug abusB in the County. He feels that pre-employment testing is not going to determine whether there is a drug or alcohol problem among County employees. Usually when no problem is apparent, that means that employees are being responsible. He said when Senator Joe McCarthy went on a "witch hunt" for communists in the 1950's, there was no apparent problem then. However, McCarthy felt that by asking the right questions and pumping people for information, he would uncover a problem. Mr. Martin said this drug policy is doing that same kind of thing, and he thinks it is wrong. Mr. Finley asked why private enterprise goes to the expense of drug testing if there is no drug problem. Mr. Martin said there are some places, like the railroad workers for example, where there is a problem. However, at the County, not one reason has been identified to ~how there is a problem. Mrs. Hastings said when the question was posed to the principals, they indicated that they do not feel there is a drug problem with the current staff. However, they feel strongly that there should be pre-employment testing because they believe we need to have the most careful selection procedure possible in hiring employees. If other places of employment are administering tests, the County runs the risk of getting cast-off applicants who could not get a job elsewhere. Mr. Ward asked if the County turns down applicants for other types of physical impairments such as bad backs or severe h~gh blood pressure. Mrs. Hastings said there are no pre-employment physical~examinations given except for bus drivers and police officers, but questions are asked on the applica- tion forms relating to health problems. Mr. Ward asked if bus drivers, for example, are turned down for employment because of physical ailments. Mrs. Hastings said they can be. April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 15) 336 Mr. Ward said there is a difference between a moral issue and a physical issue. He said the pre-employment testing is addressing safety concerns and trying to keep people who have physical impairments from working in safety- related positions. Mr. Ward said there is no way to test an employee's moral character to find out if they may start using drugs the day after they are hired. However, he has no problem looking for physical characteristics that hinder job performance. Applicants who have a physical examination already have blood tests and are screened for diseases. In that case, the County is already asking for "bodily fluids" for other types of physical conditions. In Mr. Ward's opinion the drug pre-employment test will be looking for physical impairments and is, therefore, justifiable. Mr. Martin said the testing will not be accuCate because drug users will quit drugs for the necessary time to get drugs out of their system and then apply for a job with the County. Mr. Ward said he is familiar with private organizations that test, and it generally holds true that people with a drug problem fail those tests because they cannot quit for sufficient lengths of time to allow the drug to clear their systems. Mr. Ward said another reason to test applicants is the statistics from national surveys on a cross-section of our population that from ten to 20 percent use drugs. Based on the statistics, Mr. Ward feels there is suffi- cient evidence for pre-employment testing of applicants. Even though the County has not identified drug abuse among its employees, there is the possi- bility that applicants come here from other organizations that are testing for drugs. Mr. Ward added that he is not an ultra-conservative like those involved in the "witch hunts" of the 1950's. Mr. Martin said the direction to Mrs. Hastings then from the School Board is to leave pre-employment testing in the policy. Mrs. Hastings said she would bring back another version based on the directions from both Boards. Agenda Item No. 5b. Executive Session: Acquisition of Property for Public Purposes. Mr. Agnor said it is necessary for all member~ of both Boards to be present for the status report on the proposed urban area elementary school. At 5:05 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Way to adjourn into Executive Session according to State 'Code section 2.1-344A.3 for discussion of the acquisition of real property for public purposes. 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 School Board then voted on a similar motion. Agenda Item No. 5c. Certification from Executive Session. The Board reconvened into open session at 5:20 P.M. with Mr. Bowie absent. Motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Way adopting the following resolution: 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; April 2, 1990 (Adjourned Afternoon Meeting) (Page 16) 337 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 we=e identified in the motion convening the executive meeting were heard, discussed or considered by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors. VOTE: AYES: Mr. Bain, Mr.. Bowerman, Mrs. Humphris, Mr. Perkins and Mr. Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT DURING VOTE: Mr. Bowie. ABSENT DURING MEETING: (Mr. Bowie left during the meeting.)' Agenda Item No. 6. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda from the Public and Board. There were no other matters presented at this time. Agenda Item No. 7. Adjourn to April 4, 1990, at 1:00 P.M. At 5:22 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Bain and seconded by Mr. Way to adjourn to April 4, 1990, at 1:00 P.M. 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: None. ABSENT: Mr. Bowie. CHAIRMAN