Loading...
1988-03-28 adjMarch 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) 65 (Page 1) A meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on March 28, 1988, at 1:00 P.M., Meeting Room 7, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was adjourned from March 25, 1988. PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., F. R. Bowie, C. Timothy Lindstrom, Walter F. Perkins and Peter T. Way. ABSENT: Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; Deputy County Executive, Robert W. Tucker; and Administrative Assistant, Roxanne White. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 1:06 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way. Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. Work Session: 1988-89 County Budget: Jefferson Area Board on Aging (JABA), Gordon Walker. Requested $95,525; Recommended $50,855. Mr. Tucker said JABA's FY 88-89 request, which is a 92 percent increase over last year's appropriation, provides increases for home delivered meals ($13,000), Home Safety Program ($570), adult day care ($10,469), transportation ($9701) and the local match ($410). The request would also fund two new programs, $4204 in congregate meals and $7355 for home care. Although the Program Review Committee f~els strongly about providing services to the needy, elderly citizens of the County, Mr. Tucker said, only a two percent increase in funding is recommended. JABA scored very low in the Program Review process, receiving low scores~in reasonableness of request, local share formula, and the Comprehensive Plan. The proposal lacked clarity and cohesion, and information was not provid~ in the requested format. Program expansion and increased funding were hot adequately justified; justi- fications for expansion were often based on a single example. Documentation and expenditure breakdowns for the Home Safety Program and the Adult Day Care Center were not provided as requested by the Committee in last year's com- ments. Mr. Tucker said that JABA had received an 18 percent increase in FY 1987-88, the highest of any agency. Mr. Tucker said the Program Review Committee recommends an appropriation of $50,855 to be used as follows: for home-delivered meals, level funding of $11,598, because the need for meals for additional persons was not justified; for the Safety Program, level funding is recommended; Adult Day Care, level funding because the original intent was that additional County funding would not be sought for this program, nor was the need for a site in Esmont justi- fied. In this year's Parks and Recreation budget, an allocation of $5858 is proposed for a part-time recreation aid at the Adult Day Center. This will provide five additional hours per week for that aid. As for the Home Care program, while the County may need such a service, Mr. Tucker said, it is not clear that JABA is the best-suited agency for the job. Since there is a need, the Committee recommends that the Board request ~a long-term care coordinating committee composed of representatives from the Health Department, JABA, the Northwestern Health Systems Agency, Region Ten Community Services, and the Planning District Commission to review the home care issue. The Committee also recommends that the Board set aside a comparable amount in a contingency fund in case a program such as Home Care is recommended by the long-term committee. Mr. Tucker said the Program Review Committee also requests that JABA submit a cost breakdown of the $9500 requested for the Home Safety Program in next year's budget request. Mr. Mark Reisler, President of the Board~of Directors for JABA, addressed the Board. He said that no agency in the County had a more difficult mission: to provide a lifeline for the frail and elderiy and to enable them to remain at home rather than suffer lnstltutmonalizatidn. He said that the staff's recommendation is inadequate and he questioned the rationale behind some of 6~arch 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 2) the cuts in funding. Last year, he said, JABA provided approximately $300,000 worth of services to County citizens. During that same year, the County provided just under $50,000 in support to JABA. For every one dollar the County gave JABA, JABA returned five dollars to the County in services. He said that the County recommended a six percent increase in general funding for JABA without recommending inflationary increases in three key programs: home delivered meals for the elderly, the home safety program, and adult day care. He said it is a severe blow to the elderly to withhold funding at a time when both the number and needs of the elderly are increas- ing. He asked that the County provide a six percent increase for these key programs, or $5620 over what staff has recommended. He said that the JABA Board is also concerned about the funding for transportation for the elderly in the County. JABA requires transportation to bring people to meal sites, .doctors, recreation programs and adult day care. Recently, JABA faced a 25 percent increase in JAUNT faresi Since last year, JAUNT fares have risen 38 percent. The staff recommended~a 25 percent increase in JABA's transportation allotment, or $680. JABA spends approxi- mately $15,600 on transportation for County residents. The recommendation of the staff covers only those dollars contributed directly by the County; it does not cover the other transportation services which JABA provides and which have been funded from other sources. This year JABA will not receive any additional money from federal sources for transportation.'i. Therefore, Mr. Reisler said, JABA must appeal to the County for help in covering the increase in JAUNT costs. He said that JABA requested a transportation allocation of $6622. The third area of concern for JABA, Mr. Reisler said,, is adult day care. He said that the elderly population of Esmont is not getting their share of services, according to JABA estimates. To remedy this de£iciency, JABA recommended in its initial budget request that an innovative partial day care program be established at the Esmont congregate meal site., This program would serve County residents in need of close supervision for at least two days a week. He said that JABA cannot remain silent to the staffi's denial of this request. He proposed an alternative to the Board: that hhe Board fund a scholarship geared toward Esmont residents for the existing adult day care center. Such a scholarship would cost $6240 and would provide one scholarship slot at the adult day care center which could be shared b~two or more Esmont residents over a period of time. Mr. Reisler said that the final area of concern to JAMA related to home care services. JABA requested $7355 for the expansion of ~the home care program in the County; the County staff recommended that this sum be placed in a contingency fund pending examination of the home care issue. He said that JABA approves of this process, but recommends that a time limit be placed on the examination. He said that the matter should be resolVed by July 1, 1988, so that funds can be released to whichever agency is judge~ to be the best suited to provide home care services. Setting a time limit, he said, would insure that a delay would not jeopardize the elderly who n~ed these services. Mr. Way asked Mr. Agnor what rate of inflation the staff used in develop- ing the budget. Mr. Agnor replied "four and one-half percent". Mr. Lindstrom said JABA is requesting about $12,000 more than the staff {ecommended. Mr. Reisler agreed, and said that this figure covered inflationary increases for the three key programs, the large increase in transportation costs and an adult day care scholarship. Mr. Lindstrom asked what transportation exp~nses JABA incurred that were not related to JAUNT. Mr. Reisler answered that all transportation expenses related to JAUNT. JABA receives funds for transportation costs from sources other than the County. The County recommended increasing the County's funding by 25 percent, but this increase does not cover the impact~JAUNT's 25 percent increase had on other sources of money allocated for Count~ residents. Mr. · Lmndstrom asked what were these sources and how much money,they accounted for. Mr. Reisler replied that of the $15,600 on transportation ~or County resi- dents, $2722 came from County sources and most of the rema{ning $12,878 came from federal sources. March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) 67 (Page 3) Mr. Bowie asked Mr. Tucker if JABA was requested last year to document expenditures for scholarships. Mr. Tucker said "yes". Mr. Bowie said he noticed that 3ABA did not meet this request in the budget presented this year. Mr. Lindstrom said according to the staff memo, JABA had requested a 38 percent increase in transportation expenses. Now, he said, JABA has lowered its request from $12,423 to $6622, which does not meet the increase JABA says it needs. He would like to know why JABA settled on this lower figure. Mr. Reisler said the 38 percent increase resulted from the actual percentage increase on an annual basis that JABA faced with respect to JAUNT costs. After hearing from the staff, he said, the JABA Board felt that the opera- tional figure is 25 percent and staff recommended that the existing County allocation be increased by 25 percent for transportation services. He said this 25 percent increase was added to a small base when compared to the $15,600 JABA spends on transportation for County residents through JAUNT. The fare increase affects not only the $2722 from the County, but across the board, every dollar spent for transportation services. While fares have increased, federal funding for transportation remains the same. He said he would like for the County to make up the difference. Mr. Lindstrom said JABA's overall revised request is a 26 percent increase, as opposed to the two percent increase recommended by the staff and the 90 percent increase first requested by JABA. Mr. Way said he supported the adult care program and thought there were residents in Esmont who could benefit from this program. One advantage he sees to this program is that it frees people~!for employment who would other- wise have to stay home and care for their elderly relatives. Mr. Lindstrom said he did not have enough information to recommend funding JABA's revised request. He feels that JABA did little to meet the criteria for funding as developed by the Program Review Committee. He said the staff should be given the opportunity t¢ JABA's revised request. Mr. Bowie said that $1550 was funded ti budget for adult day care; $7000 has been sE some of the services JABA supports; and, $3~ Carver Center through Parks and Recreation. second time the staff has requested informat answers. After some discussion, it was decided mation requested by April 6, 1988, the final Sexual Assault Resource Agency (SARA), Recom~emded $4570. Mr. Tucker said SARA pr( for confidential crisis intervention, counsE assault on a no-fee basis to members of the munity and Planning District 10. Volunteer~ ireview the new documentation for ~ough the Parks and Recreation aside in a contingency fund for .1 has been allocated to the !He also said this is at least the ~on from JABA and not received any .~at JABA would present the infor- ~budget work session. ~nette Gr~-~.. Requested $4570; ,vides a hot line/companion service ~ing and information on sexual ~harlottesville/Albemarle com- : staff the 24-hour hotline. The group also provides public education progr~ on all aspects of sexual assault for community groups, including educators, l,~ofessionals, students and parents at no charge. In 1986, SARA provided servi~s to 85 victims of sexual assault, only nine of whom reported their v%~timization tolaw enforcement. In addition, SARA fielded a total of 316 ca~s on its hotline. SARA is requesting $4570 from the Coun$~ to bring the Victim Service Coordinator's position to full-time (from 3~!hours per week) in order to meet increasing needs of both direct victim services and for recruiting and train- ing volunteers. Over half of SARA's fundin ~comes from federal sources. The Program Review Committee recommend ranked well in the Program Review process, tion, especially in the areas of data quant compliance with the Comprehensive Plan. Th~ full funding for SARA. SARA oviding a much improved applica- .fication, program description and ~sexual assault cases unreported to law enforcement represent a significant n~mber of victims (76 of SARA's 85 total in 1986) for whom SARA provides the only support system. The Committee also wishes to commend SARA for its extensiw and well-organized use of volunteers. 68 March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned f~om March 25, 1988) (Page 4) Ms. Grimm, Executive Director of SARA, spoke concerning what the agency planned to do with the funds requested. As evidence for the need for a full-time Victim Service Coordinator, she said seven County residents were waiting for the next support group and 26 volunteers wereawaiting the next training session. Another area to be expanded, she said, lis the supervision and follow-up of cases. The Victim Service Coordinator presently supervises 45 volunteers. In keeping with conditions attached to th~ federal grant received by the agency, the Victim Service Coordinator muSt herself spend one-third of her time providing direct services to the victims of sexual assault, so this person is not only managing her own cases, but those of 45 volunteers as well. Mr. Lindstrom said he is concerned that SARA may inadvertently discourage victims from reporting rape to the police, since the agency gives victims another outlet. He asked Ms. Grimm how the agency coordinated tasks with law enforcement agencies. Ms. Grimm says occasionally the agency is brought in on a case that has already been reported to County police. Then her agency tries to help the victim handle the emotional aftermath of being raped; the~.~Victim Witness~ program helps the victim deal with the legal aspects. Sometimes, she said' a third agency is involved: this year, three victims had t~ be placed in the Shelter. If a sexual assault victim reports to the agencM without reporting the crime to the police, the agency will contact a represe~ntative of the Victim Witness program if that is what the victim wants. Mr. Lindstrom asked if SARA's counselors encouraged ~!ictims to report rape to the police. Ms. Grimm replied "yes". She said her group feels more confident about encouraging rape victims to report the rap~ now that there is a Victim Witness program. She said it is unfortunate that; many times the Victim Witness coordinator spends lots of time working wi~.h a sexual assault victim and the case never goes to court. Mr. Lindstrom asked that future applications for funding from SARA document cases of victims who report the crimes committedi~against them and elaborate on the ways S~LRA encourages victimS to work with=the law enforcement system. He said if members of the agency did not feel comfortable referring victims to the police, that is a problem of which the BoaC~d and the County Executive should be made. !' During her two years of experience with SARA, Ms. Gr£mm said, she has found members of the police force to be sympathetic. She said the victims fear, not the law enforcement official, but the court process, because often a trial becomes a case of the victim's word against that of the assailant. (Mr. Bain left the meeting at 1:50 P.M. and returned at 1:52 P.M.) Virginia Relay Service, Barry McJ~erran. Requested $80,430; Recommended $-0-. Mr. Tucker said the Virginia Relay System would enable., deaf and speech-impaired individuals to communicate with the hearin~ world telephon- ically. If a deaf person has a TDD typewriter telephone a~d relay service, he or she can dial the relay service and tell the relayer theilname and number of the person he or she wishes to speak with. The relayer th~n reads the type- written words to the person called. The relay service operates statewide 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Mr. Tucker said the ServiLe estimates there are 579 profoundly deaf persons in the County and 2339 individuals with hearing impairments who may be able to benefit from the service. However, Mr. Tucker said, the Virginia Relay Service did not indicate h~w many persons actually use the service at this time, or how many they project to service in 1988-89. Virginia Relay requests $80,430, 45 percent of its to~al budget, from the County. In FY 1987/88, State revenues accounted for 57 percent of the budget, and private funding accounted for 43 percent. Projected f~gures for FY 1988/89 show the State contribution at 6.3 percent and pri~ate sources at 17 percent. ~ March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) 69 (Page 5) The County Executive recommends against funding this request. Staff questions the large commitment of local funds due to such drastic decreases in both state and private funds and the lack of information on the actual number of individuals who would use this service or their ability to pay for the - service. Mr. Barry McLerran, the Director of Virginia Relay Service, addressed the Board. In order to communicate over the telephone lines, he said, the deaf must use a TDD. He showed such a device to the Board and explained that it consisted of a typewriter keyboard, a visual display and a small printer unit. This device sends electronic signals over the telephone lines which can be picked up by another TDD. Since few businesses or individuals own TDD's, there is a need for a relay service to receive calls made with a TDD and transmit these calls to people who do not have such a device. He said the process is simple: the Virginia Relay Service operator uses the TDD to answer calls made with a TDD and then dials whoever the caller is trying to reach and acts as voice for the deaf person, relaying back and forth between the hearing and the deaf. He said that the County Executive's decision no~ to fund the Virginia Relay Service was based on several erroneous assumptions and on a budget that was not as refined as it could be. He said the high cost of communication had forced the Service to reevaluate the way it did things. It is much more cost-effective to operate a system of local centers rather than a single statewide center. He said using local cente~ lowered costs by one-third to one-half. When the Service decided to apply for local funding, he said, there was not much time to put together a detailed budget request. Mr. McLerran than handed out copies of a revised budget. Mr. McLerran addressed the County Executive's concern with the amount of local funds requested in light of the dwindling amount of state and private support. He said that he not asking that the~Board fund a "dying state service", but a service for the estimated 579 deaf people in the County. As for the lack of information on the number of people who use the service, he said, the deaf are difficult to number precisely because they are so isolated. Isolation, he said, is the primary hardship a deaf person faces. Virginia Relay Service can bring the deaf out into the world. He then responded to the County Executive's comments on the ability of.the deaf to pay for the service themselves. He said a deaf person must pay $232 just to get phone service and a TDD in his house; charging them for every local call would be unfair. He said that the deaf and hearing-impaired should enjoy equal access to telecom- munications. Virginia Relay Service can insure that the deaf are no longer isolated: they can contact their doctors, families, businesses and friends. Mr. Lindstrom asked if this service werebased upon financial need. Mr. McLerran replied that there was no attempt to!determine whether the deaf could pay for this service on their own for two reasons: his group believes that the deaf should be granted equal access to the telephone at no extra cost; and statistics show that the deaf generally exist'on a much lower income than the average citizen, because they have fewer job opportunities. Mr. Bowie asked who pays for the TDD equipment. Mr. McLerran said the deaf person does. Mr. Bowie asked how many County residents had purchased this equipment. Mr. McLerran said he did not know. Mr. Bowie asked how many calls from the deaf and hearing-impaired his service received each year. Mr. McLerran said before July 1987, when the agency handled only emergency calls, it averaged 65 calls a month on a statewide basis. Once the service became available on a regular basis, the number of calls began to increase, to 298 in July, 1987, and up to 1800 in December, 1987. He had no way of knowing how many of these calls came from the City-Countylarea. He said volunteers are now at work on a computer system capable of p~oviding such information in the near future. Mr. Bowie asked if all the deaf people ih the County had TDD's. Mr. McLerran said "no", but the TDD's were not much good to the deaf who did own them without a relay service. He said the State may decide to fund the purchase of TDD's for the deaf and the County'ishould have a relay service in place. He said the State had already allotted $250,000 for the purchase and distribution of TDD's; next year, this figure ~ill rise to $500,000. He added that the State will also begin to contribute Ko the cost of relay services as 70 March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 6) well. The first year, the State contributed only $40,000 because no one knew how much the con~nunication costs would be. He is confident, and has been assured by the Virginia Department for the Deaf and Hard of Hearing, that the State will allot $500,000 next year for statewide relay service. Instead of the $80,000 his group had originally requested, he is now asking that the County fund the Virginia Relay Service $57,000. He explained that the difference in requests was due to the savings the service would realize by going to local service centers. Mr. Bill Porter, Acting President of the Board of Trustees for the Virginia Relay Services, spoke of the gravity of language deprivation and said his service would put deaf people into contact with other!people again. Mr. Jerry Grissell, a deaf person, said he felt lost and helpless when the VirginiaRelay Service shut down in December, 1987. He said the service was a necessity for the deaf community in the County. Mr. Bain asked if the City were funding the Virginia~Relay Service. Mr. McLerran answered that City officials felt that the initial request for funding was too high. He said his group will present the revised budget to the City. Mr. Lindstrom asked what would happen to this service if it were not funded. Mr. McLerran answered that there would be no relay service in the County for another year. Next year, he said, the amount requested would drop from $57,000 to $32,000 due to anticipated state funding ~nd his group would then expand its service into the Northern Virginia and Richmond areas. Mr. Lindstrom asked if anyone else provided this service. Mril McLerran answered that no one else in the County-City area did. Mr. Lindstrom said he was sympathetic to the needs o~ the deaf, but he felt there was not enough information to act now. He wou~d like to wait until next year and see whether the State funds the service. Jefferson Area United Transportation (JAUNT), Linda Wilson. Requested $20,550; Recommended $20,550. Mr. Tucker said JAUNT's request represents a total decrease in funding of 2.5 percent under last year'S appropriation. This decrease occurred because the FY 1988/89 budget request does not include Saturday service to the handicapped, the 504 regulation t~t was included in JAUNT's FY 1987/88 appropriation. JAUNT has been paying ~he local match for this service to the City, who in turn contracts with YellOw Cab. Rather than channeling funds through JAUNT, the County will pay the s~bsidy for Saturday service directly to Charlottesville Transit Service (CTS) ibus service in the FY 1988/89 budget. JAUNT will continue to provide extend~ hours to the handicapped '(through 6:30 P.M.). Funds for the extended ~ours are included in this budget request, i! The Program Review Committee recommends full funding ~or JAUNT. JAUNT scored low in the review process; the initial submission c~ntained no budget projections, nor did it provide the information requested.i? Nevertheless, JAUNT provides essential transportation services and the f~nding request represents a decrease from the 1987/88 request. For these'~reasons, full funding is recommended. Mr. Tucker said that the Independent Resource Center (IRC) requested that the County provide a further fare subsidy of $42,000 through JAUNT for handi- capped citizens living near existing CTS routes in the urban area of the County. The current JAUNT fare for all the County's citizens living in the urban area is $2.50. IRC requests that the fare be reduce~ to fifty cents for the handicapped along those CTS routes, which is the same fare charged to handicapped City residents by JAUNT and charged to CTS riders in both the City and County. Based on projected ridership, JAUNT said thati~reducing fares to the handicapped within one-quarter mile of the current CTSilroutes in the County's urban area would require the following subsidy alternatives: March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 7) Fare 1st Year County Subsidy 2nd Year County Subsidy Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 3 $0.50/trip $42,000 $98,000 1.00/trip 27,000 54,000 1.50/trip 10,800 18,000 Mr. Tucker said the staff recommended Alternative 3 for three reasons: the revenue recovery ratio is similar to that of CTS; the City is considering raising its fare for handicapped riders from $0.50 to $1.50; and, other localities within the State charge a similar fare for the handicapped. Ms. Wilson then addressed the Board on behalf of JAUNT. She said that JAUNT is able to reduce the amount requested from $20,550 to $17,756, due to an increase in funding from the Virginia Department of Transportation. This decrease, she said, is in spite of a 45 percent increase in the number of people who use JAUNT. During FY 1985-86, there were 19,465 one-way trips taken in the County; there were 28,315 one-way trips taken during FY 1987-88. She said only one-fourth of these trips took place in the urban area. She is concerned that people who live in outlying areas of the County will not benefit from the reduced fares for handicapped riders in the urban area. Mr. Bowie asked what riders in the urban area paid. Ms. Wilson answered that most of the riders in the urban area were handicapped. Mr. Bowie asked if the fares were the same in the rural areas of the County for both handi- capped and non-handicapped riders. Ms. Wilson said "no"; only the handicapped receive the reduced rate. She said that there are three fare zones: handi- capped riders in the rural areas may pay $1.30, $3.00, or $5.00. Non-handi- capped riders may ride for the same fares only on special days; regular rates are $4.00, $8.00 or $12.00. Mr. Franz Stillfried addressed the Boar~. He said one of the major causes of unemployment among the handicapped in the County is the lack of affordable transportation. He favored a fare of $0.50, Alternative 1, for handicapped in the urban area of the County. Mr. Lindstrom said he could support a fare of $1.50 for handicapped users of JAUNT in the urban area, since this fare is in line with those of other localities in the State, and reducing fares for the handicapped by $1.00 in each of the remaining zones. Mr. Bowie requested that JAUNT determine how much it would cost to provide transportation for a fare of $1.50 to the handicapped throughout the County, not just in the urban areas. Both Mr. Bowie and Mr. Lindstrom said that the reduction in fares seemed arbitrary, without any basis in ration- ality. Ms. Wilson replied that the reduced fare rates were the product of a consultant's study. She said that the consultant originally recommended a fare of $1.00 for the handicapped in the urban area and $1.50, $3.00 and $5.0~ for thOse in outlying areas of the County. B~cause of the outcry from private transportation companies, she said Jaunt increased its fares to $2.50 in the urban area. Mr. Lindstrom asked that JAUNT summarize the consultant's study and forward this information to the Board. ~ (Mr. Bowie left the meeting at 2:50 P.M.) Madison House, Liz Courrain. Requested $3672; Recommended $3432. Mr. Tucker said this budget request is seven percent higher than last year's appropriation for the following reasons: a p~ojected service increase in the Migrant Aid Program; an increase in the number of County families assisted by the Christmas Project, which provides meals and baskets of food to the needy; and the withdrawal of funds from the Tutoringi~Program by the Alton Jones Foundation. .i The Program Review Committee recommends level funding for Madison House. Madison House ranked low in the review process because it lacked a local share formula and neglected to respond to previous qomments. Adequate justification for the increase in funds was not provided. The Committee does wish to 72 March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 8) commend Madison House for continuing to meet the County objectives of promot- ing the use of volunteers and addressing identified community problems. Ms. Liz Currain, Executive Director of Madison House, addressed the Board. She said that Madison House provides 98 percent of the volunteer labor for AHIP, which allows AHIP to direct its funds toward hiring skilled laborers. As part of the Migrant Aid Program, her group provides tutoring in English five evenings each week; five afternoons a week volunteers visit the migrants' camps and provide organized recreation, help with homework and an after-school snack for the children while their parents are working in the fields. (Mr. Bowie returned to the meeting at 2:54 P.M.) Youth Service Center, RoryCarpenter. Requested $9,206; Recommended $-0-. Mr. Tucker said the Youth Service Center offers services such as Project Soar, which provides intensive individual, family'and group counseling to youth in grades 4 through 8 who risk dropping out of sChool; and, Rent-A- Teen, which offers placement in temporary jobs to teenagers aged 14 through 18, regardless of income. The Youth Service Center requests $9205, 50 percent of which will provide direct services to youth in Project Soar and Rent-A-Teen. The remaining half will fund indirect services to improve co~unity services~to young people. The Program Review Committee does not recommend funding this request. Youth Service Center's initial application ranked very low in program descrip- tion, data quantification and attention to comments. While the Committee feels that Project Soar may be a valuable program, it doe~ not wish to fund the research and coordination function of the Youth ServiCe Center, the value or effectiveness of which has not been demonstrated. Dr. Tom DeMaio addressed the Board on behalf of the. Youth Services Center. He said areas the Center had investigated for th~ City included the drop-out rate and youth activity during the summer. He w~uld like the Board to work with the Youth Service Center to identify problem~ that youth in the County face. He said he does not understand why the Committee reco~mnends increasing funding to Outreach Counseling by fifty percent. He said i~Yor $9206, the amount requested by the Youth Services Center, the County~'~ould receive $18,000 worth of Outreach Counseling services, as well as ia research and coordination agency. The center is a flexible organizati6n, he said; the Board could make it what it wanted, by telling the Center iwhat the Board wished investigated. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Youth Services Center pro~ided the same services as Outreach Counseling for less money. Dr. DeMaiO said that Outreach requested an increase from $12,000 to $18,000. For $21,00~, the cost of funding the Youth Services Center, added to the amount fuJRed Outreach Coun- seling for FY 1987/88, the County would have received $12,!000 worth of Out- reach Counseling services and $18,000 worth of Project Soa~ services, plus the research and coordination package. He said that the Count~ must purchase the services of Outreach Counseling directly; the services pro.Vided by the Youth Services Center are matched by state funds, so the County Would receive more services for its dollar Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Tucker to explain the recommendation of the Program Review Committee. Mr. Tucker replied the Committe& felt that Project Soar was important, but the Youth Services Center could no{ accept funding for this project and not .for the research and coordination hal~ of the budget. That is why the County uses the services of Outreach Counsgling instead, despite the absence of state matching funds. Mr. Tucker s~id he would meet with representatives of Outreach Counseling and the Youth ~ervices Center to discuss the way in which these two groups could best serve{,the County. Mr. Lindstrom said that it makes sense to him to support this request if the Youth Services Center will provide the same services a~ a lower cost. Mr. Bowie agreed. March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) 73 (Page 9) Co~.,,~nity Attention, Paul McWhinney. Requested $29,855; Reco~nended $29,855. Mr. Tucker said Community Attention requested a 32 percent increase in funding from the County. This additional amount will fund approximately 85 percent of the need (up from 72 percent last year) and will provide services to two additional youths. The Program Review Committee recommends full funding of this request. Community Attention ranked very high in terms of data quantification, compliance with the Comprehensive Plan and local share formula. The agency has also successfully explored alternative funding sources for capital and special projects, using both state and local dollars for services to youth. Mr. McWhinney addressed the Board on behalf of Community Attention. Me said that services were denied to three County youths in the current year because the County's appropriation was already spent. He asked that the Board fund the amount requested by Community Attention. Outreach Counseling, Alan Segar. Requested $18,000; Recommended $18,000. Mr. Tucker said this request represents a 50 percent increase over the current year's allocation. The current amount would meet only one-half the need for Outreach Counseling's services as indicated from its waiting list. The Program Review Committee recommends full funding of this request. Outreach ranked very high in the review process as a result of a well-docu- mented program description, thorough population data, compliance with the Comprehensive Plan, and self-sufficiency. The Committee is also impressed by the numbers of children who are able to remaih in their own homes due to Outreach's efforts, thereby avoiding costly out-of-home placements. The Committee recommends that Outreach consider restating its local share formula to show a 50/50 split between County and City~based on the number of persons served. Mr. Segar then addressed the Board and said that Dr. DeMaio was right: if $9000 were appropriated to the Youth Services Center, the County would realize between $17,000 and $18,000 in Outreaah Counseling services, primarily directed toward youth in danger of dropping out of school. He said this is just one group his agency works with. While the services may be identical, there is a difference in the segments of population targeted by the services. He agreed that representatives from the Youth!Services Center and Outreach Counseling should meet with Mr. Tucker. ~ Mr. Lindstrom asked how the mix of services would change if the Board were to fund the Youth Services Center. He w6uld also like to know how many of the youth participating in Project Soar stay in school. He would like answers to these questions after the two agencies meet with Mr. Tucker. Mr. Segar said only 12 of the 80 youth who enrolled in Project Soar in the City have dropped out. (At 3:23 P.M., the Board recessed and re~onvened at 3:32 P.M.) Charlottesville-Albemarle Legal Aid $oci{ty (CALLS), Peter McIntosh. Requested $8739; Recommended $8739. Mr. Tucke~ said CALAS has requested a 9.9 percent ($788) increase to continue the services of the attorney who is jointly funded by Albemarle, Charlottesville a~d Fluvanna and who provides services primarily (85 - 90 percent) to these i~urisdictions. Federal funding has decreased slightly (six percent) and CALA~ has been unable to access funds from United Way. The Program Review Committee recommends full funding for CALAS. CALAS rankedhigh in the review process due to its a~herence to the Comprehensive Plan, use of volunteers, good program description and a good local share formula. The Committee also commends CALAS fokits efforts to secure Title XX match funds from the three counties which had hot contributed to the program before, and its efforts to obtain United Way fhnding. Mr. Bowie asked what percentage of the agency's clients were County residents. Mr. McIntosh said 27 percent of the clients who sought advice 74 March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 10) only, and 23 percent of those seeking full legal representation, were County residents. Mr. Way suggested that the Board move on to the Library's request for funding since Mr. McIntosh could answer any questions the Board might have in that area as well. Regional Library, Peter Mclntosh. Requested $830,590; Recommended $818,772, Mr. Tucker said the Library is requesting $156,373 more from the County this year. Based on increased circulation, Albemarle County's share of the main library and Gordon AVenue branch has risen 1.18 percent, while regional costs have risen 1.08 percent. The FY 1988/89 library budget is based on the following increases in operating expenses, plus additional projects and personnel: a 2.5 salary plan and three percent merit pool; an increase of $9000 in service contracts for additional cleaning and security; and, an increase of $6219 (15 percent) in data processing lcharges for operating the INLEX automated system for 12 months. Mr. Tucker said that the Library planned the following new projects: a consultant contract to develop a master plan outlining the long-range needs of the Library, including an analysis for the need of a nort~side branch library in the County; painting the outside of the Central and Gordon Avenue Library Buildings and renovating the restrooms; repairing and upgrading the heating, ventilation and air-conditioning system at the scottsville branch library; and providing a full-time library assistant to supervise the I{~storical Collection arc the central library. i' The County Executive recommends funding $818,772 of ~he request, which includes Albemarle's share of all new projects except the iHistorical Collec- tion ($11,819), which is not being recommended for fundingii:by the City. Mr. McIntosh said that a new Executive Director, Ms. Donna Selly, had been hired to head the Jefferson Madison Regional Library.I He said the Gordon Avenue Library, which is heavily used by County patrons, ii~ overloaded to the Point where service is beginning to suffer. Originally de!~igned to hold 20,000 books, this library now holds 54,000. Obviously, h~ said, the County needs another library branch and he thanked the staff for ~ecommending that funds be allocated for a consultant to study this problem. Mr. 'Bowie asked if the joint maintenance and Scottsvi~le branch projects were one-time costs. Mr. McIntosh replied "yes". United Way Child Care Scholarship program, Wade Tremb~ay. Requested $16,835; Recommended $16,835. Mr. Tucker said United Way'~ request will provide scholarships to five County families who cannot afford the full cost of day-care. The request reflects a $2.00 per week increase in the average scholarship. ~ Mr. Tucker said the Program Review Committee recommends full funding for the United Way Scholarship Program. United Way's applicat~on improved signif- icantly this yearwith better documentationand justification of need. Funding was not recommended fOr United Way last year, because its income and program guidelines were comparable to the income-eligible day-care program administered by the County Department of Social Services ('sS).~ Although guidelines remain the same, theCounty DSS program has not~een able to meet the increasing need for day-care subsidies, since its fund~ were exhausted by November. Moreover, United Way schOlarships can be used b~ADC mothers who work part-time, while subsidies from the Social Services ~ome-el~g~ble day-care program cannot be used by working Parents who alsO. receive ADC. The Committee recognizes the increased need for day-care servid%s in the community as more women with children become self-supporting, i~ Mr. Wade Tremblay, Chairman of the BOard for United W~y, addressed the Board and thanked the staff for its recommendation. ~ Mr. Bowie said that he has opposed funding this progra~ in the past because United Way has always relied on voluntary contributions and he did not think it was right to tax County residents to support this Program, thereby March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) 75 (Page 11) making contributions involuntary. He is not.sure he will support this request. He would like to be certain that United Way will not duplicate the services provided by Social Services. If the two groups provide the same service, he would like to keep it under County control as much as possible by leaving it up to Social Services. He would like proof that the United Way will help the ADC working parent. Mr. Tremblay said a parent must be working or enrolled in an ADC training program in order to qualify for a day-care scholarship. Mr. Bain asked if Mr. Tucker could explain why Social Services cannot meet the increasing need for day-care subsidies. Mr. Tucker said that the Social Services department does not have thelfunding necessary to help ADC working parents. He said that the County could retain its control over the program by having the Social Services department refer residents who qualified to the United Way program. Mr. Lindstrom said he supports this program because it gives parents a chance to work. Central Virginia Child Development AssoCiation (CVCDA), Ilene Railton. Requested $9650; Rec~.~ended $6650. Mr. Tucker said CVCDA would provide the following services to meet the growing need for child care services: increased counseling for low-income parents ($3000); increased training for child-care providers ($3000); recruitment and development of new child-care providers ($1825); and, development of emploMer participation ($1825). The Program Review Committee recommends !a total of $6650 be funded for increased counseling, recruitment of new providers and increased development of corporate participation. Recruitment of ~dditional providers would increase the employment potential of low-income persons and improve their ability to continue working. The Committee r~commends that the DSS request $3000 to purchase training for day-care providers from CVCDA. The quality of training has been very highly rated. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Tucker why the private sector could not meet the demand for day-care providers. Mr. Tucker said the problem was finding competent, qualified day-care providers at aprice low-income families can afford. Retired Senior Volunteer Program (~SVP),. Lida Pritchette-Arnason. Requested $10,235; Recommended $5000. Mr. TUcker said the information submit- ted by RSVP stated that: "$11,200 would be ~sed to provide transportation to 75 additional County volunteers through JAUNT; 20 additional volunteers would be recruited who would be eligible for mileage reimbursement totalling $2400; $525 would be spent on annual recognition; an~ $2100 would be spent to expand the LIFE Program into the County". This totals $16,225 although RSVP requested $10,235. No explanation was provided detailing what expansions $10,235 could provide. The Program Review Committee recommends level funding of RSVP. The agency did not reveal why or how an increase in funding was necessary. In the future, RSVP must follow the format of the application and provide data that clarifies the request. The Committee also redommends that RSVP update its list of all the places in the County that use~RSVP services, since some identified in the County are not current. Mrs. Pritchett-Arnason addressed the Board and said her copy of the funding application contained a page justifying the additional money. She said one of the reasons her agency needs more ,money is the increase in JAUNT fares. The LIFE program, she said, has been dompletely funded by the City with the stipulation that it be used for City.;residents only. She said that several County residents have asked for the peer counseling services which LIFE provides. She explained that the difference between the $10,235 RSVP requested and the $16,225 total was to show how much the se=vices actually cost without considering the fair-share formula. 76 March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 12) Mr. Bowie asked when RSVP was notified of the staff's recommendation for funding. Mrs. Pritchett-Arnason said Friday, March 25, 1988. Mr. Bowie wanted to know why the staff waited so long to inform RSVP of the recommenda- tion. Mr. Agnor replied that no final decision was made until the budget was balanced last weekend. Piedmont Virginia Comm, nityCollege, Brent Cool. Requested $6155; Recommended $6155. Mr. Agnor said this request for funding from the County represents 43.5 percent of the total local share of $13,000 or $5655 plus a $500 stipend for the County representatives who serve on the Board of Direc- tors. The County Executive recommends funding at the requested level. Parks and Recreation, Pat Mullaney. Requested $863,989; Recommended $726,021. Mr. Tucker said the total operating budget for Parks and Recreation increases by $72,235 (11 percent) over last year. Significant increases include: an increase of $900 (33 percent) in printing and copy services to cover the rising cost of the community tabloid and fliers for the Christmas Arts and Crafts Fair; an increase of $3846 (131 percent)in contract services to other governments, due to the County share of Therapeutic Summer Playground increasing from one-fourth to one-third, and salary increases for employees in the Kids on the Block Program and the Hearing Impaired SoCial; an increase in electrical services of $2839 (28 percent) due to underestimation last year and the addition of the County Office Building Workshop; and, ian increase of $936 (19 percent) to the Adult Day Care Center for five additional hours per week for a recreational aide. The County Executive recommends funding for existing:~operations, plus three new programs and one part-time person: Christmas A~ts and Crafts Fair Weekend and the Night Program for the Mentally Retarded, Senior Nutrition Program, and part-time Beach Manager. Start-up costs for ithe Southern Regional Park ($177,210) are not recommended, since the p~rk will not open until FY 89/90. .~ Parks and Recreation. Rivanna Park. Requested $86,283; Reco---ended $86,283. Mr. Tucker said the proposed amount reflects th~ County's share of FY 1988/89 operating costs of the joint County/City Park. li The decrease in the County's contribution reflects an overall ten percent dec,ease in operating costs, due to the large purchase of capital equipment in ~he FY 1987/88 budget. Other significant increases and decreases in the FY 1988/89 budget include: an increase in personnel costs due to funding of a full year's operation; an increase of $430 (17 percent) ' ~' ' in refuse service; an increase of $2500 (20 percent) in water services due to a full year i~rigation cycle; an increase of $20,300 (134 percent) in maintenance costs fox a full year's operation; and, a decrease of $77,150 in equipment costs. :I The County Executive recommends full funding for the County's share q~ Rivanna Park. Mr. Way asked if there were any plans to use the property surrounding the old Scottsville School for a park. Mr. Mullaney said the iParks and Recreation department had funds in the Capital Improvements budget to'. fence in the property and replace the backstop. He said they did not want to begin the work without either owning the property or having a long-t~erm lease on it. Mr. Lindstrom asked why there was a 50 percent increase in Park and Recreation's budget over that of FY 1986/87. Mr. Mullaney said the largest increase was due to the request for a pay raise for part-t'ime employees. He said that part-time employees had not had a raise for three years. This year, the department would like to raise the salaries of part-time employees to a level comparable to salaries in the City. Mr. Mullaney saiid raising these salaries would cost $17,000. Mr. Lindstrom asked if there were any plans for the S~hool Board prop- erty. Mr. Mullaney said his department would not expend a~y large amounts of money until the status of the property became clear. Mr. gindstrom said someone should contact the School Board to find out what they intended to do with the property. He said there was a lot of development concentrated in this area; if any place in the County needed a park, this was it. March 28, 1988 (Afternoon Meeting Adjourned from March 25, 1988) (Page 13) Mr. Bowie said he would like a better justification of the increase since July, 1987. He said there is a proposed increase of $78,000 in salaries and the Rivanna Park is not even open yet. Mr. Lindstrom agreed, saying he would like to see more detailed information before reaching a decision. Virginia Discovery Museum, Constance Palmer. Requested $10,000; Recom- mended $5000. Mr. Agnor said this request represents approximately five percent of the Virginia Discovery Museum's budget. With County funding, the Museum would be eligible for a matching grant of up to $5000 from the Virginia Commission of the Arts. The County Executive recommends funding $5000 of the request. This contribution, although $2000 less than last year, would enable the Museum to receive matching funds from the State. It is also recommended that the Museum continue to charge an admission fee so that the cost is partially borne by those who receive the service. Mr. Agnor recommended that an additional $2000 be funded by the School System. Ms. Constance Palmer addressed the Board on behalf of the Discovery Museum and showed a video tape highlighting some of the exhibits. Mr. Bain asked what other sources of revenue were available to the Museum. Ms.~ Palmer replied that revenues frOm a gift shop, admission fees and memberships purchased by families make up almost 50 percent of the Museum's budget. District Home, Guy Agnor. Requested $28,500; Recommended $28,500. Mr. Agnor said the request reflects an increase 6f $1000 (3.6 percent) and is based on resident services provided to County residents. The County Executive recommends that this request be fully funded. Mr. Bowie noted a fifty percent increasei in the amount recommended since FY 1986/87 and observed that the budget was predicted to increase another fifty percent in FY 1989/90. He asked if 100:percent more County residents would be using the facility in 1990. Mr. Agnor said the increase was due to a reduction in federal funding. .'i Agenda Item No. 5. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the Board or Public. There were no other matters brought before the Board. Agenda Item No. 6. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, motion was offered at 5:02 P.M. by Mr. iLindstrom and seconded by Mr. Bowie to adjourn to March 29, 1988, at 1:00 P!M. There was no further discus- sion. Roll was called and the motion carried~by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bain, Bowie, Lindstrom, Perkins and Way. NAYS: None. ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke.