Loading...
1987-01-21Janu~ary 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 1) A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on January 21, 1987 at 7:30 P.M., Meeting Room 97, County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Messrs. Gerald E. Fisher, J.. T. Henley, Jr., C. Timothy Lindstrom and Peter T. Way. BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None. OFFICERS PRESENT: Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Deputy County Executive; Mr. George R. St. John, County Attorney; and Mr. Ronald W. Keeler, Chief of Planning. Agenda Item No. 1. Chairman, Mr. Fisher. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 7:31 P.M. by the Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance. Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence. Agenda Item No. 4. -Consent Agenda. Mr. Bowie offered motion to approve Items 4.1, 4.la and 4.lb on the Consent Agenda and to accept the remaining items as information. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded Vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Item 4.1. Statement of Expenses for the Director of Finance, Sheriff, Commonwealth's Attorney and Regional Jail for the Month of December, 1986, were approved as presented. Item 4.2 Request to take Lake Park Road in Loftlands Woods Subdivision into the State Secondary System was approved by adoption of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following road in Loftland Woods Subdivision: Lake Park Road Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the centerline of Lake Park Road and the edge of pavement of Loftlands Drive, thence in a southeasterly direction 762.08 feet to station 7+73.08, the end of the cul-de-sac. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that' the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of- way and drainage easement along this requested addition as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 658, page 164, and Deed Book 909, page. 32. Item 4.lb. Request to take roads in Sections 4 through 8 of the Earlysville Forest Subdivision into the State Secondary System was approved by adoption of the following resolution: BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby requested to accept into the Secondary System of Highways, subject to final inspection and approval by the Resident Highway Department, the following roads in Sections 4 through 8 in Earlysville Forest Subdivision: Fox Ridge Drive Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Fox Ridge Road, thence in a southeasterly direction 442.26 feet to station 4+53.26 and continuing in a northeasterly direction 1870.34 feet to station 23+23.60, the end of the cul-de-sac. Rowan Court Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Rowan Court, thence in a northwesterly direction 367.77 feet to station 3+78.77, the end of the cul-de-sac. Paddock Circle Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Paddock Circle, thence in a northeasterly direction 309 feet to station 3+20, the end of the cul-de-sac. Trillium Road Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Trillium January 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) ~_~age 2 ) Road, thence in a southeasterly direction 249 feet to station 2+60 and continuing in a northeasterly direction 442.07 more feet to station 7+02.07, the end of the cul-de-sac. Hunters Ridge Road West Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Hunters Ridge Road West, thence in a northwesterly direction 334 feet to station 3+45, the end of the cul-de-sac. Hunters Ridge Road East Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Hunters Ridge Road East, thence in a southeasterly direction 1954.52 feet to station 19+65.52, the end of the cul-de-sac. Saddle Court Beginning at station 0+11, a point common with the edge of pave- ment of Earlysville Forest Drive and the centerline of Saddle Court, thence in a northeasterly direction 294 feet to station 3+05, the end of the cul-de-sac. Earlysville Forest Drive Beginning at station 41+72.57, the end of previous resolution of dedication, thence in a northeasterly direction 3,821.42 feet to station 79+93.99, the end of this dedication. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Virginia Department of Highways and Transportation be and is hereby guaranteed a 50 foot unobstructed right-of- way and drainage easements along these requested additions as recorded by plats in the Office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 748, page 417, Deed Book 755, page 710, Deed Book 756, page 417, Deed Book 764, page 557, Deed Book 779, page 587, Deed Book 792, page 225, Deed Book 796, pages 392 and 393, Deed Book 911, pages 300, 615 and 620, Deed Book 912, page 253, and Deed Book 918, pages 204 and 255. Item 4.2. Letter from Senator Paul Trible dated January 7, 1987, re: Aircraft Surveil- lance Radar at the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport, was received as information. "I am pleased to inform you that the Federal Aviation Administration has selected the Charlottesville-Albemarle Airport to receive an Aircraft Surveillance Radar. Funding for the radar has been included in the Adminis- tration's FY 88 budget. As air traffic throughout Central Virginia continues to grow, the radar is essential to ensure that all passengers receive safe and efficient service. I have been impressed by the strong local support for the project and I commend you for your leadership. The radar has been among my highest priorities and I am pleased that we were able ~o successfully present our case to the Federal Aviation Administration. As you know, the final version of the budget will be enacted this fall. Rest assured, the project has my full support and I will continue to work for you throughout the budget process." Item 4.3. Arbor Crest Apartments Monthly Bond Program Report for month of December, 1986, was received as information. Item 4.4. Letter dated January 12, 1987 from Mr. Dan S. Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, re: Project 90643-002-127,N503, was received as information. "I wish to advise the Board of Supervisors of the change in status on the above captioned project. I request that a copy of my letter be distributed to each Board member. This project was originally programmed to cover a one mile section along Route 643 from Route 649 near Proffit west to approximately the Bentivar Subdivision entrance. Right of way for this improvement was obtained by an interested citizen and the project was planned for construction this past construction season. The work was to be done by state forces. At the time the project was programmed there was one property approximately one half mile from Route 649 across which donated right of way had not been received. This property belonged to Henry L. and Agnes S. Martin. I initially thought they wished to delay donation of the necessary right of way until they were assured the project had a definite construction date. When my office approached them to obtain their signatures, however, I found out they would not donate until this project was extended to the west passing through the overpass of the Southern Railway and connected to the existing improvement approximately 0.3 mile west of the overpass. We have attempted previously to obtain right of way west of the overpass and been rebuffed. I am certain that right of way west of the overpass is not available through donation. January 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 3) !,97 Once I determined that the Martins were reluctant to donate the necessary right of way, I attempted to revise the alignment across their property frontage to the south thus bypassing the need for any land from their property. The property owner across the street was unwilling to donate any more than the 25' previously donated. It, therefore, appears impossible to constrUct this project beyond the first half mile unless plans are developed and the right of way necessary across the Martin property is purchased. Although Route 643 carries a considerable amount of traffic, I still believe it functions basically as a local road. For this reason I-do not recommend that right of way for this improvement be purchased. It is my recommenda- tion that this project be shortened to cover only the first half mile west from Route 649. Without further direction from the Board of Supervisors, it is my plan to undertake widening and hard surfacing of this first half mile using my own forces during the 1987 construction season. If the Board wants further information on this matter or wishes to discuss it more fully, I would suggest it be placed on the Board's agenda." Mr. Bowie said, for clarification, Mr. and Mrs. Martin would not donate the right-of-way because they wanted the road paved through the underpass, three-tenths of a mile west. The Martin's were not concerned with the road beyond the underpass. Item 4.5. Letter dated January 5, 1987 from Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive, addressed to all department heads, and copied to the Board, re: Projection and Allocation of Local Revenues, FY 87-88 Budget, was received, as information: "REVENUE PROJECTIONS The Department of Finance completed their projections of FY 87-88 revenues several weeks ago, and they have been carefully reviewed by the Executive staff. Local revenues are projected to be $41.5 million, an increase over FY 86-87 of $4.62 million or 11.13 percent. The bulk of the increase, $2.89 million, is derived from Real Estate taxes. Other major source increases are $868,000 from Personal Property taxes, $548,000 from Sales Taxes, and other minor increases from a variety of sources, all indicating a continuing strong economy in the area. One major decrease is projected to be $375,000 from a combination of lower interest earned on investment of funds, and a lesser amount of funds to be invested. From these revenues, the County must contribute to the City an additional $340,000 due to the Revenue Sharing Agreement. Furthermore, $200,000 of the Real Estate assessment will be deferred by the Land Use Deferral program. Accounting for these two obligations will leave $4.08 million for consider- ing tax rate adjustments, and for funding a known increase in debt service, inflationary operational costs, expansion needs of existing programs, and requests for new programs or services. TAX RATE ADJUSTMENT For the past two fiscal years, the Board of Supervisors has made an effort to relieve the increasing assessment costs of vehicles by decreasing the tax rate on Personal Property. The rate was decreased 12 percent in two incre- mental decreases from $5.00 in FY 83-84 to its current level of $4.40. While this was being done, the biennial Real Estate assessment increases, without tax rate decreases, have caused considerable difficulty for large numbers of property owners to carry their burden of paying taxes on real estate that does not produce income to them, and which is universally recognized as being a source of local tax revenue that does not reflect its owner's ability to pay those taxes. For example, since the County adopted a biennial reassessment procedure ten years ago, each reassessment, which is based on fair market property sales data, has resulted in double digit inflationary average increases to the real estate tax base. While the real estate tax base has continued to increase in double digit factors, the nation's economy, and our own local economy, has changed to single digit factors. The County's basic operating costs have also dropped to single digit factors. Because the fair market values of real estate, which are usually beneficial only to those selling their property, have continued to be higher than other inflation-related factors, I am certain the Board of Supervisors will turn its attention to the possibility of a real estate tax rate decrease to ease the burden of property owners, particularly the low or moderate income owner, and the increasing numbers of retired, citizens on fixed incomes, whose property usually represents their lifetime investments. The reassessment completed in late December 1986, effective for the 1987 tax year beginning January 1, shows an 11.42 percent increase in the 1985 base, a two-year change exclusive of new construction additions to the base. Of this 11.42 percent, 0.55 percent occurred in 1985 from division of pro- perties, and 10.69 percent occurred in ~1986, primarily from the reassess- ment. To remain revenue neutral from real estate taxes, a rate decrease of four-tenths of a cent would have occurred between FY 85-86 and the current FY 86-87. But to remain revenue neutral from the current FY 86-87 budget to next year's FY 87-88, a rate decrease of eight cents would be required. The combination of these two decreases over the two-year reassessment cycle would be 8.6 cents, rounded to nine cents, changing the rate from 77 cents to 68 cents. This does not consider retaining any portion of these revenues to help fund inflationary operational costs. January 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) If inflationary factors are considered for operational needs, a 4.95 percent average factor over the two-year reassessment cycle would be deducted from the 11.42 percent average reassessment increase, leaving a factor of 6.47 percent which would represent the real estate tax revenues that exceed inflationary operating needs. This 6.47 percent translates to a tax rate decrease of 4.98 cents, rounded to five cents, changing the rate from 77 cents to 72 cents. A five-cent rate adjustment would decrease revenues by $1.1 million. SUMMARY OF PROJECTIONS Increase in Local Funds Land Use Deferral Net Collectable Increase Millions $ 4.62 0.20 $ 4.42 Less City Revenue Sharing Less Real Estate Rate Adjustment Net Amount Available for Allocation - 0.34 - 1.10 $ 2.98 ALLOCATION OF LOCAL REVENUES To consider the allocation of local revenues for FY 87-88, three major categories of appropriations were examined using these parameters: Debt Service is an obligation that is considered before other alloca- tions. It is known that the debt service will increase next year by $160,000 (from $1.82 million to $1.98 million). Local funds for operations this year total $32.28 million, the School Division receiving 60 percent ($19.37 million), and General Government 40 percent ($12.91 million). Without examining requests for FY 87-88, which are not yet available, the 60/40 ratio of local fund allocations for operations will be used for budget planning purposes. With $2.82 million possibly available, 60 percent or $1.69 million is proposed for allocation to School operations, and 40 percent or $1.13 million to General Government operations. This allocation for operations repre- sents an increase of 5.64 percent over current operation appropriations of which two percent may serve inflationary costs, and 3.64 percent expanding needs. The Capital Improvement Proqram currently has $1.0 million allocated from local revenues each year of the five-year program. In this current fiscal year, $6.0 million from the carry-over balance of the General Fund was transferred to the Capital Fund. Even with this transfer, the Capital Program has a shortfall of $1.0 million over its five-year period, which needs to be funded by increasing the annual allocation of local revenues, or by transferring more carry-over funds from the School Fund and/or the General Fund. Early projections for the current fiscal year, made at the end of the first quarter (July - September), indicate a variation of 1.9 percent from budgeted esti- mates, which could create as much as a $750,000 increase in revenues over budgeted numbers. That, coupled with management of expenditures, could create a carry-over amount sufficient to fund the shortfall in the Capital Program. Therefore, no additional local revenues are being considered for allocation to the Capital Program in the FY 87-88 budget process. SUMMARY OF ALLOCATIONS Net Amount Possibly Available Allocation to Debt Service Allocation to School Operations Allocation to General Government Operations $2.98 million 0.16 million 1.69 million 1.13 million CONCLUSION I remind you that this process of allocating resources is for budget plan- ning purposes only. The ultimate decision on the use of our resources will be made by the Board of Supervisors after they have examined every depart- ment and agency request, and the County Executive's recommendations on those requests in producing a balanced, recommended budget for the Board. There- fore, these numbers will change as the budget process proceeds. For example, the retention of revenues calculated by using an average inflation factor of 4.95 percent over the past two years does not fully consider in School Division operations the ten percent average salary increase mandated by the State for public school teacher employees. Teacher salaries and fringe benefits account for over half of the School operating budget. It also does not fully consider ~hat mandate continuing into FY 87-88, the second year of the State biennium. Nor does it fully consider the funding needs of a career teacher incentive salary program, which is being considered by the School Division in lieu of the State's ten percent mandate. Such an incentive program, based on demonstrated employee com- petencies in addition to qualifications and experience, is something the Board of Supervisors has requested the School Board to consider for a number of years, and may be considered by the School Board for implementation in FY 87-88. In General Government operations, it does not recognize expansion of existing operations in social services, law enforcement, parks/recreation, finance and others, related to an expanding and aging population. All of January 21, ~987 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 5) 199 these needs will be considered as requests are reviewed this month and next month. State revenues, an unknown until late February, will play a critical role in that review. In my opinion, however, these allocations as shown above are considerable for meeting most, if not all, of our important requests. I will know more about that opinion after receiving and reviewing all requests. Your under- standing of the complexities involved in examining resources and allocating them for budget planning is important. Your interest in requesting realis- tic needs, and managing current appropriations is essential to a successful budget process. Thank you for your continued efforts." Item 4.6. Planning Commission minutes for January 6 and January 13, 1987, were received as information. Agenda Item No. 5. SP-86-86. G. F. and Marie M. Scruggs. To locate a single-wide mobile home on 16.910 acres zoned VR. Property is in north quadrant at intersection of Rt. 20 and Rt. 600. Tax Map 48, Parcel 11. Rivanna District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress January 6 and January 13, 1987.) Mr. Keeler said this application is complicated in that the mobile home is to be located on property that has two separate zones and there are two buildings located on the property. The staff has not yet met with Mr. Scruggs and the Zoning Department to see how best to approach the request. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion to remove SP-86-86 from the agenda and to readvertise when it is ready for Board action. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion. There was no one present from the public on this application. Roll was called and the motion was carried with the follow- ing vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 6. SP-86-90. Colonnade Associates. For a drive-in branch bank on a 0.57 acre parcel zoned HC, Highway Commercial. Property about 300 feet west of City limits on south side of Rt. 250 West. Tax Map 60, Parcels 40B1 and 40B2. Jack Jouett District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress January 6 and January 13, 1987.) Mr. Keeler commented that the applicant requested indefinite deferral at the Planning Commission meeting. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion to remove SP-86-90 from the agenda and request that it be readvertised when ready for Board action. Mr. Bowie seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion was carried with the following vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 7. SP-86-83. George Schmidt and Mark Foley. For construction of a veterinary clinic on a 2.2 acre parcel zoned RA, Rural Areas. Property located on south side of Rt. 22 at intersection with Rt. 231 in Cismont. Tax Map 65, Parcel 31E. Rivanna Dis- trict. (Advertised in the Daily Progress January 6 and January 13, 1987.) Mr. Fisher read the following letter dated January 16, 1987, from the applicant, re- questing withdrawal: "January 16, 1987 County of Albemarle Department of Planning and Community Development 401 McIntire Road Charlottesville, Virginia 22901-4596 Re: SP-86-93, Gregory R. Schmidt & Mark H. Foley Dear Sirs: Let this serve as notice to withdraw the above mentioned petition for consideration by the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors on January 21, 1987. Because of probable complications with the drainfield, this piece of property is no longer a consideration for our proposed clinic. Sincerely, (SIGNED) Gregory R. Schmidt, D.V.M. (SIGNED) Mark H. Foley, D.V.M." Mr. Bowie offered motion to allow SP-86-83 to be withdrawn without prejudice. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion was carried with the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. 2OO January 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) Agenda Item No. 8. SP-86-88. FHM Partnership. For a school of special instruction (piano lessons). Property on east side of Rt. 743 across from Albemarle High School. Tax Map 61, Parcel 27. Charlottesville District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress January 6, and January 13, 1987.) Mr. Keeler presented the following staff report: "Petition: FHM Partnership petitions the Board of Supervisors to issue a special use permit for a school for piano lessons (23.2.1.6) on 2.34 acres zoned CO, Commercial Office. Property, described as Tax Map 61, Parcel 27 is located at the intersection of Hydraulic and Whitewood Roads in the Charlottesville Magisterial District. Character of the Area: This building, currently under construction, will complete the Hydraulic Professional Center complex which consists of profes- sional and business offices. Adjoining properties are zoned C1, Commercial and CO, Commercial Office. Staff Comment: The applicant proposes to lease 700 square feet of floor area for usage by a piano teacher. Staff opinion is that this usage would not be obtrusive to the area and recommends approval subject to: Zoning Administrator approval of parking allocation prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy." Mr. Keeler said the Planning Commission, at its meeting on January 6, 1987, unani- mously recommended approval of SP-86-88 subject to the condition as recommended by the staff. The public hearing was opened. Dr. Larry Hund, representing FHM Partnership, introduced Mrs. Toko Duvall, a piano instructor who plans to lease the space. Mrs. Duvall said she is a private music instructor and plans to lease this space because the location is much more convenient for her and her students. There being no one else present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion to approve SP-86-88 subject to the following condition: Zoning Administrator approval of parking allocation prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion. following recorded vote: Roll was called and the motion was carried with the AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 9. ZMA-86-10. Ken Diepold. To amend condition ~9 under ZMA-77-12, to read as follows: "No dwelling unit may be closer than ~8-fee~ 75 feet to any adjacent dwelling units." Property in Jarman Gap Estates at intersection of Rts. 691 and 684 in Crozet. Tax Map 55, Parcels 64L, 64M, 64S, 64T, 64U, 64V, 64W, 64X, and 64Y. White Hall District. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on January 6 and January 13, 1987.) Mr. Keeler presented the following staff report: "Background: In 1977, Jarman Gap Estates Planned Residential Development was approved for 22 lots on 32.34 acres. Public water was extended to the project and three fire hydrants were installed. Due to inadequacy of fire flow in the area, a building separation of 150 feet was recommended by the Fire Marshal. (In 1985, fire flow at Route 691 in this area was less than 300 gpm at 20 psi.) Staff Comment: Currently, the Fire Official views the 150 foot building separation as excessive and recommends favorably on the following change to Condition 9 of ZMA-77-12. No dwelling unit may be closer than 75 feet to any adjacent dwelling units." Mr. Keeler commented that the recommendation is incorrect in the staff report. The recommendation should state: "9. No dwelling unit may be closer than ~8 100 feet to any adjacent dwelling units. The Planning Commission at its meeting on January 13, 1987, unani- mously recommended approval of ZMA-86-10 subject to the condition (100 feet) as recommended by the staff. Mr. Fisher asked what this change would do to the overall development density for the project. Mr. Keeler responded that there still would 'be the same number of lots, the density would remain the same. The public hearing was opened. Mr. Ken Diepold said he purchased the property for the purpose of finishing the nine home sites that were left because of bankruptcy filed by the original builder. He hired a surveyor to evaluate the land as it laid and his opinion was that the subdivision did not have side yard setbacks like normal subdivisions. Some of the land is very rocky and if he maintains 150 feet, there would be no room for adjustment of the foundation without losing another lot. In addition, there is adequate fire protection available. Mr. Fisher asked if each house will be served by public water. Mr. Diepold replied yes, with the furthest house from a fire hydrant being approximately 550 feet. There January 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) (Pag~ 7) are three hydrants; one to serve six houses, and two to serve eight houses. In addition, the 150 feet was a number with no real meaning, set by the Fire Official. He asked the Albemarle County Service Authority to run a pressure on the hydrants and measure the flow at 20 psi which indicated approximately 290 gallons per minute. There being no one else present to speak, the public hearing was closed. Mr. Henley offered motion to approve ZMA-86-10 subject to the following condition: 9. No dwelling unit may be closer than 1§0 feet to any adjacent ~' dwelling units. Mr. Way seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion was carried with the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. Agenda Item No. 10. Appointment: Industrial Development Authority. Mr. Lindstrom said he does not presently have a nominee to replace Mr. Frank McCulloch, who has asked to be relieved of serving another term. Mrs. Cooke offered motion to reappoint Mr. John Stewart Darrel as the At-large member of the Industrial Development Authority for a term to expire on January 19, 1991. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion was carried with the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mr. Fisher commented that there is one vacancy on the Community Services Board and a forthcoming resignation. He suggested that an advertisement be placed in the newspapers indicating the vacancy. Mr. Lindstrom commented that Miss Nash's term on the Visitor's Bureau expired about a year ago and asked if she is eligible for reappointment. Mr. Fisher suggested the Board wait to see what the future of the Visitor's Bureau will be. Mr. Lindstrom said he will find out if Miss Nash wish to continue serving. Mr. Fisher suggested that the vacancy on the BOCA Code Board of Appeals and the Fire Prevention Code Board of Appeals be advertised. Agenda Item No. 11. 1986. Approval of Minutes: May 1, 1985; September 15 and November 12, Mr. Lindstrom had read the minutes of September 15, 1986 and found them to be in order with the exception of a report that appears to be out of order on page two, and the cor- rection of a word on page four. Mr. Fisher read the minutes of November 12, 1986, pages 1 - 5 (Item ~8) and found them to be in good order. Mr. Bowie read the minutes of November 12, 1986, pages 5 (Item ~8) - 9 and found them to be in good order. Mr. Bowie offered motion, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to approve the minutes which had been read. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. Mr. Bowie said that in the minutes of November 12, 1986, page 8, Item ~12, Moderate Rehab, discussion it was pointed out that there might be more success with this program if the units were grouped at one site. He read the following statement from the minutes: "Mr. Bradshaw said that there is an individual in the area who would consider doing all of the units in one project. Mr. Fisher asked the staff to keep the Board informed on the progress of this program." Mr. Bowie asked for an update on the program at the Board's nex~ meeting. Agenda Item No. 12. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the Board and Public. Mr. Tucker said the budget for the Health Department was developed anticipating a five percent increase from the State, with the local match for both City and County based on the five percent increase. A letter has been received from Dr. Richard Prindle, Director, indicating that the State does not intend to grant the five percent increase to this area. Dr. Prindle requested in his letter that the County and the City still provide their match based on the five percent. Staff recommends notifying Dr. Prindle that the County will provide that match to the Health Department, however, with the reservation that the County needs to get some more information about the impact on any layoffs, changes or cutbacks in services. City Council is to discuss this matter next week. This cut will leave the Health Department short approximately $65,000. Mr. Bowie asked if salaries are to be increased. ' -202 January 21, 1987 (Regular Night Meeting) (Page 8) Mr. Tucker responded yes, based on the State increase. Dr. Prindle is concerned that if the County and City do not provide the local match, the Health Department will have to cut back services and possibly lay off employees. Mr. Way said for the past two years, the Board has appointed him t° meet with the Regional Library Board Budget Committee. A meeting is scheduled for next Monday and if the Board so desires he will attend the meeting. Mr. Lindstrom offered motion to reappoint Mr. Way to the Library Budget Committee. Mr. Bowie seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried with the following record- ed vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mr. Way said he has received a number of telephone calls from various citizens and heard rumors concerning the general status of the school building projects. He would like to have a brief report as to exactly what is going on and the progress of the projects. Mr. Fisher said he thinks that is a good idea. He commented that the Meriwether Lewis School site plan will be heard by the Planning Commission next Tuesday. Mr. Bowie commented that the update should include the status of all of the projects. Agenda Item No. 13. Adjourn. There being no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 8:05 P.M.