1985-11-13November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
on November 13, 1985, at 9:00 A.M. in Meeting Room 7, Second Floor, County Office
401 McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.-
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr.. F. R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Messrs. Gera]
Fisher (arrived at 10:10 A.M.), C. Timothy Lindstrom and Peter T. Way.
BOARD MEMBER ABSENT: Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; Deputy County Executive,
Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr.; County Attorney, Mr. George R. St, John; and Director of
Planning and Community Development, Mr. John T. P. Horne.
The meeting was called to order at 9:05 A.M. by the Vice-Chairman
Agenda Item No. 1.
Mrs. Cooke.
Pledge of Allegiance.
Moment of Silence.
Agenda Item No. 2.
Agenda Item No. 3.
Agenda Item No. 4. Consent Agenda. Motion'was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by
Mr. Bowie, to approve item 4.1, adopt a resolution under item 4.2 on the consent agenda,
and accept the remaining items as information and to remove item 4.10 for discussion later
on the agenda. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
Item No. 4.1. Statements of Expenses, in which the State Compensation Board partici-
pates, for the Director of Finance, Sheriff, Commonwealth's Attorney and Regional Jail for
the month of October, 1985 were approved as presented.
Item No. 4.2. Request was received from Mr. Charlie Schoolcraft for the residents of
Shadwell Estates and Milton Heights Subdivisions for a street sign to identify Shadwell
Road. Mr. Schoolcraft acknowledged that the residents will bear the cost of this sign.
The following resolution was adopted:
WHEREAS request has been received for a street sign to identify
the following road:
Shadwell Road (State Route 709) on the south side of its
intersection with U. S. Route 250; and
WHEREAS a citizen has agreed to purchase this sign through the
Office of the County Executive and to conform to standards set by the
Virginia Department of Highways-and Transportation:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, that the Virginia Department of Highways
and Transportation be and the same is hereby requested to install and
maintain the above mentioned street sign.
Item No. 4.3. Letter dated November 1, 1985 was received from Ms. Judy S. Gough,
Administrative Assistant, Department of Finance, of refunds on business and professional
licenses, real estate and personal property taxes made by the Finance Department from July
1 through December 31, 1985.
Item No. 4.4. Letter dated November 6, 1985 was received from Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr.,
County Executive, transmitting Quarterly Statistics on Employee Performance Evaluations
for July through September,- 1985 (evaluation of employees for merit increases in salary).
An analysis of the statistics indicate that the point thresholds for categorizing the
evaluations may need to be raised to higher point levels, but more than one fiscal year
quarter of statistics is needed to be analyzed before drawing such conclusions or consider-
ing amendments to the plan.
Mr. Bowie commented that the report listed 56 percent of the employees rated as
"outstanding" which to him actually means that 56 percent of the employees are "average"
and 44 percent are "below average". In his memorandum the County Executive stated the
threshold may need to be changed in examining performance evaluations, but it seems that
the County has no merit system when more than half of the people come out in the top
category.
Item No. 4.5. A copy of the Albemarle County Service Authority's Comprehensive
Annual Financial Report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1985 as prepared by the
Accounting Department, Raoul James Kister, Manager of Accounting, ~Charlottesville,
Virginia, was received as information.
Item No. 4.6. The following letter dated September 9, 1985 was received from Mr.
Donald R. Henck, Executive Director, James River Alcohol Safety Action Program, accompanied
by report of events and projects that occurred during fiscal year 1984:
Ls held
[ilding,
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 2)
"As I look over this past year for the events that were most signifi-
cant, two become very obvious: the Charlottesville Police Department
Checkpoint Program and James River ASAP's continuing status as a local
program.
The Checkpoint Program achieved a 13 percent reduction in alcohol-
related accidents for the City of Charlottesville during the first year
of operation. This achievement is a result of three factors: the
actual functioning of the checkpoints in detecting and removing drunk
drivers from the road, the outstanding role the local media played in
increasing public awareness of and knowledge about the drinking and
driving problem, and the positive support from the citizens of this
community for the Checkpoint Program.
James River ASAP serves Albemarle, Charlottesville, Fluvanna, Greene,
Louisa, and Nelson as a locally-controlled program via the ASAP Board.
Legislation was presented at this past General Assembly session that
would, in essence, change all the local ASAP programs in Virginia to
state-controlled programs. This legislative action was not successful
due to the efforts of many people in this area, but the issue has not
died. I feel strongly, as does the ASAP Board, that James River ASAP
can best serve the citizens of this area via local representation on a
Board that truly directs the operations of the program, I will be
looking for your feedback and support during the upcoming year."
Item No. 4.7. A copy of the James River Alcohol Safety Action Program Financial
Statements for fiscal year ending June 30, 1985, as prepared by Edward D. Garris,
Certified Public Accountant, 100 Court Square, Annex-Suite F, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Item No. 4.8. The following letter dated October 31, 1985, was received from Mr.
David L. Goodman, Cranston Securities Company re: Hollymeade Square II.
"John Ashton has asked me to explain the situation regarding the
Section 8 status on the above referenced project. Currently, it
appears very possible I may lose the Section 8 assistance somet~ime
after Mortgage Revenue Bonds are sold and before the start of construc-
tion~ This is due to the fact that it has been approximately four
years since the original Section 8 commitment was issued and the
commitment is now subject to recapture by the United States Department
of Housing and Urban Development. I will, nonetheless, be working
under the exemptions and constraints of Section 103b(4)a of the Internal
Revenue Code which will require that 20 percent of the units be held
for occupancy by persons of low or moderate income (as defined by the
Code and by HUD). This constraint will be in affect for at least ten
years after sustaining occupancy.
Ail factors contributing to the delay in moving forward on this project
have been overcome and I am moving ahead rapidly with the tax exempt
financing. It is currently my understanding that I must sell bonds
prior to December 5, 1985 in order to comply with the original con-
straints imposed by the County Bond Resolution and subsequent TEFRA
hearing.
I have spent considerable funds pursuing this project and must make a
significant further investment to meet the December 5 date. I would be
extremely disappointed if after I make this additional investment the
County pulls back its approval because I could not keep the Section 8.
John Ashton advises me that the Section 8 is not a legal requirement to
the bond issue but we did feel it appropriate to advise you and the
Board of Supervisors that we may well have to proceed without Section 8."
Item No. 4.9. Letter dated October 21, 1985, was received from Mr. John G. Kines,
Jr., County Administrator, Prince George County, requesting Albemarle County to endorse
Prince George's efforts to block annexation attempts that both the City of Petersburg and
the City of Hopewell have taken, and secondly, that Albemarle County support repealing
Virginia annexation legislation.
Mr. Way asked if anything happened at the recent VACo Annual Meeting regarding Prince
George County. Mr. Bowie replied yes. VACo backed the various efforts to block annexation.
Mr. Bowie read the following statement from the VACo meeting: "The Virginia Association
of Counties opposes the Virginia system whereby county territory can be annexed by a
municipality. This practice does not meet the needs of cities and diverts scarce resources
from meeting the needs of the residents of counties and cities. The Association proudly
urges the General Assembly to eliminate any annexation of county territory by a municipality
except in those cases in which the governing body of the county approves upon the mutual
consent." Mr. Bowie said annexation legislation is the highest priority of the policy
positions coming out of the Virginia Association of CoUnties meeting. Annexation is of
great concern in the state today. Supervisors wre present from Prince George County at
the meeting.
Item No. 4.10.
in the meeting).
Report on 1985 Tax Levies (will be discussed as a separate item later
108
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 3)
Agenda Item No. 5.
(night), 1985.
Approval of Minutes:
September 12, 1984, April 3 and July 17
Mr. Way had not read the minutes of July 17, 1985. These will be forwarded.
Mr. Bowie had read pages 1 through 13 (item 99), September 12, 1984 and said line
nine, paragraph 2, Not Docketed, the sentence should be amended to read: "Mr. St. John
said he had advised the Zoning Administrator to let them plant..." The remaining minutes
were found to be satisfactory.
Mrs. Cooke had not read the minutes of September 12, 1984, page 13 (item 21) through
page 27 (item 20). These minutes were forwarded.
Motion was offered by Mr. Bowie, seconded Mr. Lindstrom, to approve the minutes of
September 12, 1984, page 1 through page 13 (item ~9), as amended. Roll was called and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr.'Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 6. Highway Matters.
Mr. Bowie said he had a constituent telephone him several ~a~3 ago. The person has
a medical problem and is on oxygen. S~ lives on Rt. 641 and"the dust from the road is
causing complications. Mr. Bowie said he informed Mr. Roosevelt of this and within 24
hours the Highway Department had corrected the dust problem.
Mr. Roosevelt said the Highway Department has made a survey on the recent storm
damage (flooding). It appears that the storm caused about $2,000 damage to roads in the
Primary system. Most of that damage is in the Scottsville area. Approximately $150,000
worth of damage was done to the Secondary System primarily in the White Hall and
Boonesville are and Rt. 614, Sugar Hollow, towards the reservoir. He presented to the
Board several pictures of the damage that occurred on Rt. 614. Most of the damage was
done on gravel roads. The flooding washed away the smaller crusher stone which left round
boulders that undermine most of the roads. The Highway Department was able to get a
closer look at the Hatton Ferry and found that although the Ferry and tower are still
there, the cable across the river had snapped which caused the Ferry to sink. It will be
next week before the Highway Department will be able to bring the Ferry up. It appears
that the Ferry may have suffered some structural damage, but it is too early to tell. He
was also advised that one of the bridge abutments on Rt. 627 at Warren collapsed. An
engineer from Culpeper is on his way to assess that damage. The bridge on Rt. 627 is the
only bridge in Albemarle County that sustained damage. The Highway Department will be
eligible for Federal aid for both the temporary repairs and the permanent repair work to
roads. That means that the Highway Department will not have to use its maintenance funds
for repair work, nor will the department need to pay for the damages out of next year's
allocations. This means that the flood should have a relatively light affect on the
amount of construction funds available to the state as a whole and thus to Albemarle
County for secondary improvements next year. With the exception of the Ferry and the
bridge on Rt. 627, he expects to have all of the repairs substantially complete by this
Friday.
Mrs. Cooke asked if there were problems caused by the Rivanna River. Mr. Roosevelt
said there were no more problems than normally occur with high water. The water flooded
the bridges that are along the Rivanna River, Rt. 649, Rt. 641 and the tributaries that
flow directly into the Rivanna. This storm was different from past floods because the
water came over a long period of time and the small streams did not really overflow that
much. The one exception was in Sugar Hollow and it appears Sugar Hollow received more
water than anywhere else in the County. The stream that runs through the Berkeley Subdi-
vision (near the Starks house) was no problem at all this time. Most of the Highway
Department's blockages were along the major streams which are the Hardware, Rivanna and
the James River.
Miss Neher, the Clerk of the Baord of Supervisors, said the Board has been holding a
rural addition request (Rt. 611) for a year. A year ago it was decided that the Highway
Transportation & Safety Committee would act as the Road Viewers.. She received a call from
one of the owners who wanted to know when a report would be made. Mrs. Cooke said she
needs to set a meeting of the Committee before the end of the year, and if Miss Neher will
provide her with the necessary information she will bring the requests up at that meeting.
Mr. Roosevelt said he distributed information on the rural additions about two months ago.
From the review he made of pending applications, none of the applications are eligible to
be taken into the State Secondary System of Highways using Rural Addition funds. He wrote
the Board about a year ago and indicated that because of language in the Subdivision
Ordinance, the County is no longer eligible to add roads to the system where subdivisions
had occurred since 1949 using these funds. In his opinion, there is no need to bring the
Viewers together. If the roads are not eligible there is no point to look at them.
Agenda Item No. 7.
County.
Discussion:
Enforcement Policy - Erosion Control in Albemarle
Mr. Elrod said at the work session (November 6) he handed out a draft copy of a new
policy he put together to change the way the Engineering Department issues soil erosion
permits, particularly if the contractor has demonstrated he is willing and able.to police
his own project and take care of erosion control. AS an incentive, this policy would
leave the County out of the responsibility of having to police the projects and the
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 4)
109,
contractor would be able to start work much faster than he is able under the present
procedure. Presently the contractor must submit a plan which is usually prepared by an
engineer rather than the contractor doing the actual work, get the plan approved, post a
bond and hold a preconstruction conference, all of which usually takes a month. Under the
new policy a contractor can start to work a month earlier on some projects. This new
policy may appear controversial because of the chance of favoritism charges being leveled.
There will always be some judgment decisions made on whether a contractor will be allowed
to operate under this program. He has spoken about this program with people from the Soil
Conservation Service, five different contractors, some engineers, and the County Attorney's
office. Thus far, no one thinks the new policy is a great idea, but they think it sounds
good in theory. The policy .can be an advantage if the contractor sees it as an advantage
and takes hold of the policy. The following is an example of a potential problem
contractors have mentioned: The contractor gets into this program, goes through the
procedures outlined, starts a project and gets half way into it, a rain storm occurs and
he finds that a sediment basin needs to be cleaned. After reviewing the records of the
client, he finds that he has not been paid for the past two months. The contractor then
calls the client and informs him the sediment basin needs to be cleaned and asks if he
will get paid to do the work. The client replies no, he does not have any more money.
The contractor is then put in the position of doing the work without being assured he will
ever be paid.
Mr. Elrod said before work begins on any project, he thinks the County should require
that a bond be posted. If the contractor gets into a situation where he does not think he
will get paid, yet the work needs to be done, then the contractor would inform the County
and depending on the circumstances, the Engineering Department would be in a position to
call in the bond. Other than the problem of being paid, the contractors seem to be
receptive to the change. If this policy was implemented, it would probably be a year
before anyone could take advantage of it. He has not been able to come up with anything
else that would give contractors an incentive to police their own projects or to hire
competent people. The contractors are relying on the Engineering Department to tell them
what needs to be done. Mr. Elrod said he is looking at the situation more from a practical
standpoint than a legal standpoint.
Mr. Lindstrom commented that he likes the idea. When he first read the policy he
thought it provided the only incentive that is available. He understands that people may
claim that this is being administered arbitrarily which is a problem anytime someone has a
judgment to make. He feels that this is a fairly well-defined policy. He assumes the
County Attorney's office has made suggestions to make the policy less susceptible to
arbitrary applications. He supports the idea and would like to give it a try. If people
get into this program it may give them an incentive to address other problems. Mr.
Lindstrom asked if this policy is to be approved by the Board or to be approved administra-
tively. Mr. Elrod said that the Board will need to approve the policy. If the Board
agrees with the policy, the Engineering Department will send copies of it, along with the
Soil and Erosion Control Ordinance changes, to various groups and ask for comments before
implementation.
Mr. Bowie asked if the draft copy of the policy was written~ to the Boar~or if it
had been distributed. He found the "Summary" statement to be too offensive for a County
published paper, although the statement should state positively what is being done. He
agrees that before the Board takes any action, the policy should be distributed C~ to the
Home Builders' Association~contractors, and other people involved in this type of work.
Mr. Bowie said the beginning section on why the policy is being implemented is good. Mr.
Elrod replied okay. Mr. Bowie said he thinks there is the potential for favoritism
charges, but certain people do things and other people don't.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if Mr. Elrod needed the Board's authorization to distribute the
policy to the same people who are to receive the proposed ordinance revisions. Mr. Elrod
said yes. Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to authorize that the Erosion Control Enforce-
ment Policy be circulated. He agrees with Mr. Bowie that the summary needs to be revised
or deleted. Mr. Lindstrom then asked who will be reviewing the policy. Mr. Elrod said
the policy will be sent to the Blue Ridge Home Builders' Association, the Farm Bureau, the
Soil Conservation District, the association of surveyors, consultants and any contractors
that may not be members of the Home Builders' Association. Mr. Elrod suggested that the
Sierra Club or the Piedmont Environmental Council may also want to review the policy. Mr.
Lindstrom said he thinks there are many civic groups that may be interested in the policy.
Three groups that have been actively interested in this problem are the League of Women
Voters, Citizens for Albemarle and the Piedmont Environmental Council.
Mr. St. John asked at what point the Board wants comments from his office. Mrs.
Cooke suggested that the County Attorney speak now. Mr. St. John said he does not like to
wait until the last minute and appear to spring criticism on the policy. He has reviewed
the policy and thinks the policy is great in conception and if the County were a private
enterprise that is not subject to the equal protection of the law or Dillon's Rule, then
he thinks this would be fine. He has serious concerns that this policy could violate the
equal protection document on the constitutional side. He also seriously believes it
violates Dillon's Rule, and the County has no authority to do this, nor does the Planning
Commission have the authority to decide on a contractor ~for Level 3 status (part of policy
where the contractor would file a written application to gain eligibility, and which would
allow the contractor to begin work with a minimum of 48 hours notice). The State Code
states that the Planning Commission has no role in erosion control. In other words, the
County is just reaching out and picking a likely group of people to make this decision.
Who would get a Level 3 status among contractors, excavators, etc? There is no basis in
law to pick the Planning Commission which in turn creates a Dillon's Rule problem, by
asking them to do something they are not authorized by law to do.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if this is the only Dillon's Rule problem or are there others?
Mr. St. John said there is a general Dillon's Rule problem. This is an administrative
decision, and there is the presumption that all of these things are judicially reviewable.
As a local government, it is not possible to categorize contractors into groups, some of
110
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 5)
which have privileges others do not have under the Soil Erosion Control procedures. As a
local government, by virtue of the licenses contractors receive from the state in order to
be a contractor, they are entitled to the same procedure as other groups. This procedure
treats people differently whereas by law these people have to be treated the same. Mr.
Lindstrom said the County is not creating restrictions on a group of people where the
restrictions do not already exist. These policies are based upon actual practice and
experience that can be documented. Mr. Lindstrom said he likes the idea and he would like
to see the policy put into. e~ect to see how it would work. Mr~ St. John said he feels
the decision as to wheth~' as opposed to contractor "B" should be given a priviledge
based on his track record would require a record of facts, a permanent written record that
could be reviewed by an appellate authority, be complied. Every time these track records
are reviewed, written findings must be made based on that record so that an appellate
tribunal could review the fact record and the findings of fact, and decide whether the
decision is arbitrary or capricious. Keeping the records will be a real heavy work load.
Mr. St. John said he is not trying to kill the policy at this point, but just wants the
Board to be aware of some of the problems now.
Mr. Lindstrom said he had assumed that a written record would be kept in order to
make the distinction. He asked Mr. Elrod if this is news to him. Mr. Elrod said no, he
knew a record would have to be kept. Mr. Lindstrom asked Mr. Elrod if he has talked to
the County Attorney's office about the kind of records that would be needed. Mr. Elrod
said they have not talked in a lot of detail other than what is in the report. Mr.
Linds~rom asked if proper records are kept, does that take care of equal protection? Mr.
St. John said he is not talking about merely records of what happened on the site. All
people are entitled to a hearing before the Planning Commission every time a decision is
made on their status. There must be minutes of the Planning Commission on that and
findings of the facts by the Planning Commission as to contractor's shortcomings, or
whatever it is in his record that the Commission sees as not justifing his Level 3 status.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if it is impossible to take care of the problem no matter what kind of
records are kept. Mr. St. John said if the proper kind of records are kept that takes
care of the due process element in this case, but these records do not take care of the
Dillon's Rule question.
Mr. Lindstrom suggested that before the Board adopts the motion he just suggested,
that Mr. Elrod and the County Attorney's office revise this policy so the Planning
Commission is not given the kind of responsibilities set out in this policy and the kind
of recordkeeping that is necessary, be well defined. He would then suggest that Mr. Elrod
bring this back to the Board if he still feels that it is a manageable policy considering
the amount of paperwork involved. Mr. Lindstrom said he likes the idea and if the problems
can be dealt with, he would like to see it tried.
Mrs. Cooke agreed with the suggestion and said she sees no need to distribute the
policy until such time as all of the problems have been taken care of and brought back to
this Board for review.
Mr. Bowie said he would like to know what effect deleting or not deleting this policy
would have on the soil erosion program. In other words does this policy really make any
difference, or is this just a way to give an incentive?
Mrs. Cooke asked if it was the consensus of the Board to clear up these problems
before taking any action. The Board members present agreed.
Not Docketed. Mr. Agnor said the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority is preparing to
issue some bonds because of the lower rate of interest and a potential savings of $400,000.
During this process, the bonding attorneys discovered that the Articles of Incorporation
which created the Rivanna Authority, which were approved by the City Council and Board of
Supervisors, give the exclusive right to the Rivanna Authority to treat water and sewage
in Albemarle County; this was intended. The Articles of Incorporation of the Albemarle
County Service Authority (adopted before the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority Articles)
have language to indicate that the Albemarle County Service Authority is in the water and
sewage treatment business, which it was until the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority was
created. An opinion was sought from the Attorney General, and it was learned that it is
not whether there is competition between two authorities, but whether the language of the
Articles of Incorporation could be competition with these two tasks. Therefore, the
attorneys have recommended that the Articles of Incorporation be restated and readopted
for both the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority and the' Albemarle County Service Authority.
A 30-day advertisement is required. The ad was put in the Daily Progress this past
weekend so the Board of Supervisors could hear the request on December 11 and the City
Council on December 16. The advertisements were jumbled, so will have to be run again.
Mr. Harry Marshall, Attorney for the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority is present to
answer any questions. The problem is that even though the advertisement will be run again
today, in order to meet the 30-day requirement, the BOard~.'~to hold another meeting in
December. Mr. Agnor asked~if the Board will consider an extra meeting on December 16 in
order to have a public hearing so the Board can readopt the Articles of Incorporation of
the Albemarle County Service Authority and the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority. The
Board members present agreed that 4:00 P.M. on December 16, 1985 would be suitable.
Agenda Item No. 8. Deed Finalizing Sale of Berkeley Sewer Plant Site.
Mr. Agnor summarized the following memorandum to the Board dated October 28, 1985
from Mr. Ray B. Jones, Deputy County Executive:
"The Board of Supervisors granted an option to Charles W. Hurt in July
1981 to purchase the Berkeley sewer plant site for $5000. A payment in
the amount of $2500 was received at that time. An additional $2500 was
paid on June 7, 1984. The site consists of 1.77 acres, and was a
portion of the property purchased from Commonwealth Utilities, and is
situated on the southern portion of Branchlands."
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 6)
111
Mr. Agnor said Dr. Hurt has completed his obligation for exercising the option. He
then requested that the Board authorize the Chairman to execute the deed. Mr. Lindstrom
offered motion, seconded by Mr. Way, to adopt the following resolution authorizing the
Chairman to execute the deed finalizing the sale of the Berkeley Sewer Plant Site:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Gerald E. Fisher, its Chairman, is hereby authorized to
execute a deed, a copy of which is attached hereto as a part of this
resolution, conveying 1.77 acres, Albemarle County Tax Map 61, Parcel
03-3, to Charles William Hurt and Shirley L. Fisher, Trustees of the
Virginia Land Trust, pursuant to agreement dated May 18, 1984.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
(The deed as signed by the Chairman is set out below.)
THIS DEED, made this 20th day of September 1985, by and between
the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA, Grantor, and
CHARLES WILLIAM HURT and SHIRLEY L. FISHER, Trustees of the Virginia
Land Trust pursuant to agreement dated May 18, 1984, Grantees;
W I T N E S S E T H;
That for and in consideration of the sum of Five Thousand Dollars
($5,000.00), cash in hand paid, the receipt of which is hereby acknow-
ledged, the Grantor hereby CONVEYS with Special Warranty of Title unto
the Grantees the following described real estate:
1.77 acres, more or less, located on the east side of U.S. Route
29 North, approximately one (1) mile north of the city limits of
Charlottesville, Virginia, and described as Albemarle County Tax
Map 61Z, Parcel 03-3, and further shown on plat of O. R. Randolph,
Engineer, dated August 13, 1957, and recorded in the Clerk's
office of the Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 340
page 002. This property is the same property in all respects
conveyed to the County of Albemarle by deed of Commonwealth
Utilities, recorded in said Clerk's office in Deed Book 452, page
007.
The Grantor reserves from the above conveyance and conveys to the
Albemarle County Service Authority and the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority, their successors and assigns, as their interests may appear,
the perpetual right and easement to construct, install, maintain,
repair, and extend existing sewer lines consisting of pipes and appurte-
nances for the transmission of wastewater in and upon the Grantor's
property, together with the actual physical existing sewer lines
themselves as they now exist upon the property. The actual physical
locations of the easements are more exactly shown on one Plan and
Profile Sheet, Sheet 3 of 15, dated April 27, 1973, prepared by John
McNair & Associates, Consulting Engineers, which sheet is attached to
and is a part of this deed. The easements hereby conveyed are twenty
feet (20') in width, the center line being ten feet (10') on either
side of existing sewer lines. As a part of the easements conveyed, the
Albemarle County Service Authority and the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority shall also have the right to enter upon the property for the
purpose of installing, constructing, maintaining, repairing and extending
said wastewater lines and to make connections thereto. Whenever it is
necessary to excavate earth within these easements, the Albemarle
County Service Authority and the Rivanna Water and' Sewer Authority
shall backfill such excavations in a proper and workmanlike manner so
as to restore the surface conditions as nearly as practicable to the
same conditions existing prior to such excavation. The Grantees, their
successors or assigns, agree that new trees, shrubs, fences, buildings,
overhangs, or other improvements or obstructions shall not be placed
within the easements conveyed herein.
The easements provided for herein shall include the right of the
Albemarle County Service Authority and the Rivanna Water and Sewer
Authority to cut any trees, brush and shrubbery, remove obstructions
and take other similar action reasonably necessary to provide economical
and safe sewer installation, operation, and maintenance. The Albemarle
County Service Authority and the Rivanna Water and Sewer Authority shall
have no responsibility to the Grantees, their successors or assigns, to
replace or reimburse the cost of trees, brush, shrubbery or obstructions
if cut, removed or otherwise damaged.
The Grantor reserves from the above conveyance for the County of
Albemarle, Virginia, a sixty foot (60') right-of-way through the
property for the ultimate extension of a collector street through the
property, connecting to Greenbrier Drive, should such be necessary in
the future.
By resolution of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County on
November 13, 1985, Gerald E. Fisher, its Chairman, is hereby authorized
to execute this deed and Lettie E. Neher, its Clerk, is hereby authorized
to attest to the signature of the Chairman on this deed.
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 7)
The Board skipped ahead to Agenda Item No. 13. Resolution Declaring Albemarle County
a Disaster Area, awaiting Mr. Fisher's arrival at the meeting.
Mr. Agnor said that last week Mr. Fisher talked with the Governor's office and found
that the State was being declared a disaster area and it would not be necessary for each
individual locality to do this. Simultaneously, the staff was called by the Office of
Emergency Services indicating that a resolution was needed from the Board of Supervisors
declaring Albemarle County a disaster area. Mr. Agnor recommended adoption of a resolu'
tion just to be official.
Mr. Way asked if staff has any indication of when Federal people will arrive in
Scottsville, and if these people will be physically located in the community of Scottsville.
Mr. Agnor said they will be in Scottsville on November 22 and 23. Victims are to bring
information about their individual property damage. The Federal people will also spend a
portion of their time in the County Office Building. Mr. Agnor said he has been told that
it may be a team of 25 people. Mr. Way asked if the County has to also make an applica-
tion for damages sustained to any public building. Mr. Agnor said he does not know yet.
The staff ms preparing an assessment of damages for that purpose.. Mr. Lindstrom asked
what type of aid will be made available to those people? Mr. Agnor said low interest
loans, and grants to public agencies are also available. Mr. Way asked if the Scottsville
Rescue Squad can be considered as a governmental agency. A lot of structural damage was
done to the building and the Rescue Squad will probably have to move its headquarters.
Mr. Agnor said he assumes it would be considered a public agency since it is supported by
grants from the State. The Rescue Squad is not governmental in the sense of having a
charter, but they are quasi-governmental. Mr. Way suggested that the President of the
Rescue Squad contact Mr. Agnor so that he will be aware of the damage to the building
perceived,resolution: Mr. Way then offered motion, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adopt the following
WHEREAS, the County of Albemarle experienced heavy rainfall from
October 30 through November 5, 1985, with recorded rainfall measuring
in excess of twelve inches in certain areas and considerable rainfall
upstream on the major rivers and tributaries; and
WHEREAS, all rivers and streams were in flood stages for several
days with the James River cresting at approximately thirty-three feet,
six inches on November 6, 1985 - almost at the same level that the
James River crested during Hurricane Agnes in 1972; and
WHEREAS, there was considerable damage to public and private
property in many areas of the County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors
of the County of Albemarle, that Albemarle County is declared a disaster
area and the County Executive is authorized on behalf of the Board of
Supervisors to take all available actions to seek State and Federal
funding on behalf of its citizens;
FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Clerk is directed to forward a copy of
this resolution to the Governor's Office and any other State or Federal
agency deemed to be appropriate.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 20. Approve Job Description and Pay Range for New Employee in the
Data Processing Department.
Mr. Agnor summarized the following memorandum from his office dated November 8, 1985,
and memorandum dated November 8, 1985, from Dr. Carole A. Hastings, Director of Personnel:
"The attached memo from Dr. Carole Hastings provides the job description
and pay range for the additional position in Data Processing previously
recommended by the Data Processing consultants (McGladrey, Hendrickson
and Pullen).
This position is funded in the current budget for one-half year in
Range 26 at the E step (~2,000 annually).
The staff recommends your approval of the job description and pay range
in order that arrangements can be made to fill the position in January
1986, or as soon thereafter as possible."
"Attached please find a proposed position description for the position
of Manager of Programming/Systems Development in the Albemarle County
Data Processing Department.
Based on an analysis of similar positions across the State and the
relationship of this position to that of the Director, I am recommending
a pay grade of 26 ($29,066 - $41,070) for this position on the County
pay scale. This would place the position two pay grades below that of
the Director and will, I believe, yield qualified applicants."
November ~3, 19Sb (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 8)
JOB TITLE
Manager of Programming/Systems
Development - 078
LOCATION
Data Processing Department
IMMEDIATE SUPERVISOR
Director of Data Processing
GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF WORK
Supervise the systems development function; provides technical support
and guidance for the implementation and maintenance of all County
information systems; does other projects as required.
Supervises all programming staff.
Acts as Deputy Director of Data Processing and serves as the Director
of the Department when required.
TYPICAL TASKS
Studies user requests, makes personnel assignments, and supervises
project planning and scheduling.
Reviews analysis work; and project progress and documentation.
Submits status reports to superiors.
Insures all Data Center standards and procedures are accurately
followed.
Performs all tasks of a "Senior Programmer/Analyst" including
programming as required.
KNOWLEDGEt SKILLS AND ABILITIES
Comprehensive knowledge of all phases of system analysis and
programming.
Knowledge of computer operations.
Very strong logical abilities.
Strong in both oral and written communication skills.
Ability to perform under pressure.
Ability to work with people.
EDUCATION AND EXPERIENCE
Any combination of knowledge and experience equivalent to graduation
from an accredited four year college or university with a major in
computer science or data processing plus six years or more combined
experience as a Programmer, Programmer/Analyst, Systems/Analyst or
Systems Programmer in a similar hardware and software environment, with
at least two years of the six years functioning in a leadership
capacity.
Mr. Lindstrom asked how this position meshes with the Director's position. Mr. Agnor
said Mr. Kruger is responsible for the entire operation of the department. This person
will essentially be Mr. Kruger's assistant. Mr. Lindstrom asked how many employees are in
the Data Processing Department? Mr. Agnor said this person will be the tenth.
Mr. Bowie said the Audit Committee has been working with the staff and Mr. Kruger in
an attempt to tie these single decisions to the five-year plan for the Data Processing
Department. This new employee fits into the consultant's recommendation for the DP
Department, but that does not necessarily mean it fits into other plans. In this particu-
lar case, he does feel the new employee fits into the plans. However, a way has not been
presented to take these independent decisions and tie them into a total picture so the
Board really knows what it is approving.
Mr. Lindstrom said it would really be helpful to be able to do that. You almost feel
like when you get a computer it is the equivalent of an individual going on drugs. It
gets more and more expensive, you need more and more and you can't get off of it. It is
compulsive. He knows that a computer does a lot of wonderful things, but somehow there
needs to be a way to see what is going on.
Mr. Bowie said with as much time as he has spent studying the consultant's recommen-
dations on the DP Department, he does not really know why this is being done. Mr. Lindstrom
said he would like to talk with someone at another time to become more educated. Mr.
Agnor said this approval is just a procedural step. A position cannot be authorized until
it is part of the County's pay plan. The Board authorized the employment of this person
as part of the acceptance of the consultant's report.
Mr. Way offered motion to approve the job description for a new position entitled
"Manager of Programming/Systems Development" as outlined above and placing this position
in a pay grade 26. Mr. Bowie asked if the motion included advertisement to hire a person
for the position. Mr. Agnor said the Board has already authorized the hiring and once
this is done the staff will start the advertising to hire that person. Mrs. Cooke said
this action is to implement action already taken by the Board. Mr. Bowie seconded the
motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
None.
Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 21.
Classification Plan.
Transfer - Salaries and Fringe Costs - Revisions to Pay and
Mr. Agnor said when the pay and classification plan was revised in May, the budget
for the year had already been completed, and the monies for funding the revisions to the
Pay Plan were carried as a lump sum in the budget of the Personnel Department. He then
summarized the following memorandum dated November 4, 1985 from Mr. Melvin A. Breeden,
Director of Finance:
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 9)
"The Pay and Classification Plan which was adopted effective for July 1,
1985 resulted in some salary adjustments. The 1985/86 Budget included
funds in the Personnel cost center to cover these adjustments.
Based on reviews by each Department Head, as requested in the staff
meeting, I have received requests from four departments for a transfer
of funds as follows:
Social Services
Engineering
Parks and Recreation
Planning & Community Development
$ 543.52
498.92
4,693.12
3,917.12
$9,652.68"
Mr. Bowie asked how much of the $9,652.68 is in the pay plan reserve. Mr. Agnor said
that account has a balance of $16,000. Mr. Bowie offered motion, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom,
to approve salary adjustments per revisions to the pay and classification plan by adopting
the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $9,652.68 be, and the same hereby is, transferred from
the Personnel Budget code 1-1000-12030-201700 entitled Pay Plan Reserve
and transferred to the following:
Social Services
Social Services
Social Services
Social Services
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Engineering
Parks and Recreation
Parks and Recreation
Parks and Recreation
Parks and Recreation
1-1000-53040-100100
1-1000-53040-200100
1-1000-53040-200200
1-1000-53040-200600
1-1000'41000-100100
1-1000-41000-200100
1-1000-41000-200200
1-1000-41000-200600
1-1000-71000-100100
1-1000-71000-200100
1-1000-71000-200200
1-1000-71000-200600
Planning & Community Development 1-1000-81010-100100
Planning & Community Development 1-1000-81010-200100
Planning & Community Development 1-1000-81010-200200
Planning & Community Development 1-1000-81010-200600
Salary
FICA
VSRS
Life Insurance
Salary
FICA
VSRS
Life Insurance
Salary
FICA
VSRS
Life Insurance
Salary
FICA
VSRS
Life Insurance
454.56
32.27
52.14
4.55
417.26
29.63
47.86
4.17
3,925.00
278.67
450.20
39.25
3,276.00
232.60
375.76
32.76
$9,652.68
AND, FURTHER, that these transfers are effective this date.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
None.
Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 22. Appropriation - Soil and Water Conservation Grant
Mr. Agnor summarized the following memorandum dated November 1, 1985 Mr. Melvin A.
Breeden, Director of Finance, to the Board:
"Notice has been received from the Virginia Department of Conservation
and Historic Resources approving funding of the 1985/86 Chesapeake Bay
Cost-Share Program.
The total Grant for 1985/86 is $31,203.99 inclusive of the local match
of $7,051.00. This local match has already been provided for in the
Engineering Department's 1985/86 budget.
In approving this Grant, the Virginia Department of Conservation and
Historic Resources has taken into consideration that the County had an
unexpended balance on the 1984./85 Grant of $2,929.07 which will be
deducted from the 1985./86 Grant. Therefore, you are being requested at
this time to approve the reappropriation of the 1984/85 unexpended
balance in the amount of $2,929.07 in addition to approving the current
funding of $28,274.92."
Mr. Lindstrom offered motion, seconded by Mr. Way, to adopt the following resolution
to approve the reappropriation of the 1984-85 unexpended balance in the amount of
$2,929.07 in addition to approving the current funding of $28,274.92.
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $28,274.92 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from
the Grant Fund entitled Soil and Water Conservation Program as follows:
1-1222-82030-100100
1-1222-82030-200100
1-1222-82030-200200
1-1222-82030-200500
1-1222-82030-200600
1-1222-82030-201100
1-1222-82030-520100
1-1222-82030-520300
1-1222-82030-541700
1-1222-82030-550400
1-1222-82030-700100
Compensation
FICA
VSRS
Health
Life Insurance
Workers Compensation
Postage
Telephone
Fuel & Lubricants
Travel - Convention
Machinery & Equipment
$20,767.85
1,459.03
2,369.04
655.05
232.98
12.86
250.00
200.00
1,828.11
200.00
300.00
$28,274.92
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 10)
FURTHER RESOLVED that the Revenues section of the 1985-86 County
budget is hereby amended by the addition of $28,274.92 in the following
Revenue Codes:
2-1222-24000-240500
2-1222-51000-512004
Grant - State
Transfer-General Fund
$21,900.71
6,374.21
$28,274.92
AND FURTHER that the amount of $2,929.07 be reappropriated from
the Grant Fund as follows:
1-1222-82030-100100
1-1222-82030-200100
1-1222-82030-200200
1-1222-82030-200500
1-1222-82030-200600
1-1222-82030-201100
1-1222-82030-550101
1-1222-82030-541700
Compensation
FICA
VSRS
Health
Life Insurance
Workers Compensation
Travel - Pool Car
Fuel & Lubricants
$ 2,215.45
149.80
267.14
14.95
19.84
40.00
59.91
161.98
$ 2,929.07
AND FURTHER that the amount of $2,929.07 in Expenditures be offset
by the following Revenues:
2-1222-24000-240510
2-1222-51000-510110
Transfer-Fund Balance-State $ 2,252.28
Transfer-Fund Balance-Local 676.79
$ 2,929.07
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Henley.
(Mr. Fisher arrived at 10:10 A.M. and took over as Chairman.)
Agenda Item No. 9. July-September Quarterly Police Department Report.
Mr. Frank Johnstone, Chief of Police, summarized the following memorandum to the
Board dated November 4, 1985:
Following are the significant activities of the Police Department in
the third quarter of 1985.
1. Service Division Reorqanization; during this quarter we completed
the training of the two newest members of the Service Division staff.
This staff is now typing all of the investigative statements, memos,
etc. in-house as we eliminated a contractual arrangement wherein this
was being done by an independent contractor. This provides greater
security for sensitive investigative information.
The Traffic Management Information System will be installed, tested and
operating in the last quarter of the year.
2. Personnel Policies; the department suffered somewhat during this
quarter due to the extended illness of one officer, a severe injury to
the knee of another officer and the impact of the Fair Labor Standards
Act (FLSA). Each officer was lost for patrol duties for approximately
four months. One officer has returned to light duty and is undergoing
rehabilitation of his knee. He will probably not be able to report for
patrol duty until after the first of the year. The other officer is
expected to return to duty sometime in November.
The adoption of a twenty-eight day work cycle has helped to lessen the
impact of the FLSA, but it still is affecting our budget adversely.
We have been addressing this problem by trying to have the officers
take overtime off before the end of the work cycle. This is only
marginally effective because on occasion, that leaves us shorthanded.
It has also had an adverse impact on our training schedule. I do not
look for this situation to improve until after the new officers are
hired in January, trained and ready for patrol duty sometime in June, 1986.
The Personnel Department administered the Law Enforcement Officer
Selection Test on October 5. Eighty-seven persons applied when the
position was advertised in September. All were sent a study booklet
and invited to take the test but only forty-three responded. Twenty-
five passed the examination.
3. Communications; the new GE radio system is being installed and
should be operational sometime in November. That should significantly
improve our communications with the officers and provide a greater
margin of safety for them.
(Mr. Johnstone said because of the recent flooding in Scottsville, he called the FCC
in Gettysburg, PA, got emergency authority to go on the air with that channel temporarily.
Scottsville has traditionally been one of the Police Department's dead spot areas on the
low band channel and this really facilitated communication between the Police Department
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 11)
and the people at the scene of the flood. This shows there is promise in the new system
and what is going to develop. There has been one problem found with the interface between
the antennas and the equipment at the 911 Dispatch Center. Work has been going on for two
weeks. The Police Departments did not think it would take that long to resolve the
problem. Another minor problem developed on the tone control that allows the radios to
access the repeaters at the antenna site which are not controlled by any licensing or APCO
regulations. The engineers try to look for tone controls that are not being used by
surrounding communities on each separate installation. The engineers found that there was
a department in North Carolina that was blowing the Police Department's tests off the air
every time. That has now been tested by GE engineers and the Police Department assured
that there is now a new tone control that will be able to be implemented.)
4. Statistics; the nine month statistics for 1985 are attached.
are compared with the first nine months of 1984.
They
Nationwide and statewide, crimes against persons are on the increase in
spite of a decrease in total crimes. The County figures mirror this
national trend except that crimes against property are also up though
at an extremely low rate (four percent).
Mr. Johnstone said there were five homocides in 1985 as compared to two in each of
the preceding years, 1983 and 1984. The very large increase in the number of aggravated
assaults may be attributed to a variety of factors; general increase in the rates of
violent crimes, increased reporting of domestic problems and spouse abuse offenses, and
the Victim/Witness Assistance Program. This Victime/Witness Assistance Program has helped
to convey to the citizens that the County criminal justice system takes seriously the
plight of victims and is capable of directing services to those in need. The burglary
rate continues to show a significant decrease over last year. The Crime Prevention
section of the Police Department has been working tirelessly to organize Neighborhood
Watch Programs, to help to inform and educate the public, and to do security surveys for
local businesses and shopping malls, etc. An indication of a significant increase in the
workload of the County Police Department is the thirty-seven percent increase in the
number of warrants sent to the County Police Department for service. These are all
criminal warrants and/or bench warrants for the court; they do not include any civil
warrants which are only served by the Sheriff s Department. The Police Department has
been able to absorb the increase fairly well due to the implementation of a new warrant
service policy. Notification by mail is made to those for whom nonfelony warrants are
held inviting them to turn themselves in at the Police Department. This has resulted in
an increase in office and postage costs, but it has significantly decreased the amount of
time that officers have to spend serving warrants which permits them to utilize their time
for other serious or emergency matters.
COUNTY CRIME STATISTICS JAN. - SEPT.
OFFENSES
CRIME 1984 1985 %CHANGE
Homicide 1 5 +400%
Rape 4 5 + 25%
Robbery 8 5 - 38%
Assault 14 58 +314%
Burglary 293 173 - 41%
Larceny 790 942 + 19%
Auto Theft 43 60 + 40%
TOTALS 1153 1248 (+95) 8%
CRIMES AGAINST PERSONS
1984 27
1985 73 +46 +170%
CRIMES AGAINST PROPERTY
1984 1126
1985 1175
+49 + 4%
CLEARANCES
Homicide
Rape
Robbery
Assault
Burglary
Larceny
Auto Theft
1985 TOTALS
INDEX CRIMES
5/5
5/5
1/5
53/58
49/173
220/942
28/60
361/1248
100%
100%
20%
91%
28%
23%
47%
29%
1984 CLEARANCE RATE
204/1153 18%
Mr. Johnstone said comparative overtime figures are difficult to establish at this
point in time because the Police Department only began paying overtime in July of 1984.
Between July 1 and December 31, 1984, the Police Department averaged $1,720 per month in
regular overtime. In the first six months of 1985 that figure jumped to $2,110 per month,
primarily influenced by the effect of the Garcia decision on the FLSA. For the first
three months of the present fiscal year the average has jumped to $3,010 per month. This
is attributed to two officers being on extended sick leave and two officers being in basic
school. Mr. Johnstone said after another twelve to eighteen months of experience with
this, the Police Department should be able to predict more accurately what this annual
rate of overtime will be.
Mr. Johnstone then referred to an article published in the Daily Progress on the
purchase of weapons. One of the reasons for the article is the classification of these
weapons as machine guns. Most police departments and sheriff departments of any size
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 12)
have recognized in the last decade the need to have trained people and the proper kind of
equipment to handle certain tactical operations. Prior to last year, the Albemarle County
Police Department had an unofficial SWAT/tactical team operating primarily on the evening
shift comprised of five officers. The officers all provided their own weapons. There
were three AR15's, which is the civilian counterpart of the military M16 weapon, semi-
automatic rifles and with a $4.00 adjustment they become fully automatic and so are called
machine guns.
When the Police Department was evaluating and attempting to set priorities for
equipment needs in the department, serious examination was undertaken of the SWAT team in
terms of training and equipment. The Police Department wanted to standardize the weapons
that the SWAT team were using. In the hands of a person who is trained to use the equip-
ment, the equipment can be very affective. The equipment presently being looked at is
already being used in Virginia by Fairfax City, Fairfax County, Hampton, Henrico County,
Danville, Lancaster County, Prince William, Chesapeake, Falls Church, Fredericksburg,
Roanoke, Virginia Beach, The Federal Protective Service, FBI, Fire, Police and the City of
Charlottesville Police Department. All of the concern centers on the new equipment being
labeled a submachine gun. The term "submachine gun" frightens some people. The Police
Department is not trying to arm an invasion army, but is trying to equip its' SWAT team
with a similar type of weaponry that is being used by other departments in recognition
that there are situations where there must be control with force. In the last five years
the Police Department has had officers shot at with rifles, pistols, shotguns and assaulted
with knives, fists and clubs. All of the weapons that the Police Department has can give
high volumes of fire and are of 223 caliber. More than half of the SWAT calls come from
the urban area and the Police Department did not want a weapon that has the capability of
over-penetrating and ricocheting, therefore they purchased a 9mm gun. The rate of accuracy
is significantly smaller because the 9mm is intended to be used close up and not at long
range. The 9mm gave the Police Department the opportunity to use the same ammunition as
they carry for their side arms, so it helped to standardize the ammunition as well.
The Police Department looked at the four major manufacturers of the type of new
weapons they intended to purchase. Three of the four manufacture weapons fired from an
open bolt position, which has a tendency to pick up dust, dirt, snow, etc., and are harder
to maintain. The Department was impressed by the Agent K's ability to fire from a closed
bolt position which is one of the reasons they requested a sole source purchase.
Mr. Way said he was aware of how helpful the radio and communications were during the
recent crisis in Scottsville and he hOpes that the Police Department will be able to get a
good radio system for the entire County.
Mr. Lindstrom said he knows the machine gun debate has been triggered by the purchase
of these new weapons. He is surprised that similar weapons are not already being used by
the force. He does have a significant concern about the direction of the department with
respect to its' SWAT team, because he does not sufficiently understand the situations
where the SWAT team has been used or may need to be used in the future. He recognizes
that a number of communities have these types of weapons, but is not sure how relevant
that is to Albemarle County. He is very uneasy about the public image of a Police Depart-
ment that is carrying that kind of weapon even under very restricted circumstances, and
very concerned about weapons which can be repeat-fired, being used in Albemarle County.
Under those circumstances, the opportunity for error is increased dramatically even with a
trained operator. Mr. Lindstrom said he is not sure the benefit to the public, in terms
of safety, is that much greater by virtue of having weapons as opposed to not having these
kinds of weapons. He understands that when policemen are in jeopardy there is a need to
respond as effectively and efficiently as possible, but even in that type of situation a
limit must be placed. He would like to have more information as soon as possible.
Mr. Fisher asked if there are written procedures for the operation of the SWAT team.
Whatever information Mr. Johnstone has in writing would be good to distribute to the
Board. Mr. Johnstone said there has been a great deal of training on the supervisory and
command level. Not much has been written, but it is sufficient and if need be, it can be
expanded. Mr. Fisher asked that the information be sent to the Board members.
Mr. Bowie said he thinks the Police Department made a wise choice by not picking the
223 which is by far the most lethal weapon. A closed bolt is the type of weapon the
department should have. He would also like to receive some information on how the SWAT
team is being used.
Mr. Fisher said at the Annual Meeting of the Virginia Association of Counties they
were informed that the FLSA passed both houses and is being signed today by the President
with an effective date of next March. Localities that have not paid overtime in compli-
ance with FLSA are not liable to pay that overtime until March. While the County moved
towards compliance with Gthis new decision, the effect of the changed legislation is that
it was not required until March, 1986.
Mr. Agnor said staff will bring back the amended Personnel Policy to comply with the
new law to be put into effect now rather than waiting until March, 1986. Mr. Fisher said
that people from NACo have stated that the deferral of this liability is saving local
governments $1.6 billion, but many governments have gone ahead and complied with the
ruling.
Mr. Fisher said the Board will be looking forward to receiving the Police Department's
procedures for the SWAT team. Mr. Lindstrom said he would also like to receive information
on the number of times the SWAT team has been called into action and the circumstances of
the call.
Agenda Item No. 10. Public Hearing: Request to Connect to the Water Service Areas
of the Albemarle County Service Authority (Advertised in the Daily Progress on October 29
and November 5, 1986)
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 13)
Mr. Horne presented the following staff report (see also minutes of October 9, 1985):
"CURRENT REQUEST: Messrs. May, Pohl, Brockman and Scribner are requesting
amendment of the service area boundaries of the Service Authority in
order to connect their properties to public water. Enclosed (on file)
you will find letters from Messrs. May, Pohl and Brockman indicating
that they have had in the past and continue to have water quality
problems with an existing joint well which is now located on the May
property and serves all three of these properties. The May property is
currently within the jurisdictional boundaries for water only and
therefore would not be affected by this current request. The Pohl and
Brockman properties are not, however, within those boundaries. The
staff has contacted the Scribners and they have stated that the reason
for their request is that they wish to build an accessory apartment
above their garage for Mrs. Scribner's mother and would wish to connect
that to public water. They have not stated that they have any defined
water quality problems with their well at this time.
LOCATION AND ACREAGE: The Pohl and Brockman properties are located on
Old Ballard Road immediately east of the intersection of Old Ballard
Road and West Pines Drive. The May property is located on the corner
of West Pines Drive and Old Ballard Road.
The Scribner property is located on West Leigh Drive.
The May, Pohl, and Brockman property are all slightly larger than two
(2) acres and the Scribner is slightly larger than five (5) acres.
UTILITY LOCATION: A waterline is currently located on West Pines Drive
at the southwest corner of the May property which could serve the May,
Pohl and Brockman property. A waterline is currently located on West
Leigh Drive approximately 250 feet south of the Scribner property.
HISTORY: Ail the above properties were within the jurisdictional
boundaries of the Service Authority for water only until August, 1983.
The Pohl, Brockman and Scribner properties were deleted from those
jurisdictional areas at that time by the Board of Supervisors as part
of a general revision of those boundaries to bring them into confor-
mance with the revised growth areas in the Comprehensive Plan. The May
property was not effected by those jurisdictional boundary changes.
STAFF COMMENT: The principal public policy consideration involved with
this request is one having to do with a precedent that may be set
should the Board decide to grant certain types of requests for amend-
ments to jurisdictional boundaries of the Service Authority. The May,
Pohl, and Brockman properties have been experiencing some problems with
their existing well for a number of years and have in the past made
these problems known to the Service Authority. The enclosed (on file)
correspondence from these applicants indicate the types of problems
which they have been experiencing. The Scribners, however, have not
stated at this point that they are experiencing any defined water
quality problems. The staff feels that there would not be a significant
precedent set by the Board of Supervisors should they wish to grant the
request by the Pohl and Brockman properties, in that those properties
would be granted water service due to defined water quality problems.
The Board has taken similar type actions in the past where water
quality problems have existed. The request by the Scribners, however,
would in the staff's opinion, set a precedent for requests by many
properties in the County in that there does not appear to be any
problem with the existing well on that property. Should problems exist
in the future, the Scribner request could be considered in light of the
new circumstances.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the request to
amend the jurisdictional boundaries of the Service Authority for water
only to include the Pohl and Brockman properties. Staff does not
recommend approval of the request by the Scribners. The reasons for
this recommendation are outlined in the staff comments.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if the apartment the Scribner's intend to build can be construc-
ted without connection to the public waterline. Mr. Horne said yes, but there may have to
be some mechanical adjustments to the well.
The public hearing was opened. Dr. Pohl, one of the applicants, addressed the Board.
Dr. Pohl said Mr. Brockman is in California on business and so is unable to attend the
meeting. He asked Dr. Pohl to speak on his behalf. He is unclear about the definition of
a subdivision. It was mentioned that his lot and Mr. Brockman's lot are not considered a
part of West Wood subdivision and Mr. May's lot is a part of the subdivision. The entire
pie-shaped block originally was West Wood subdivision. The first three lots (Brockman,
Pohl and May) were sold to a developer who constructed houses on them in 1975 and provided
water service from the well that is on Mr. May's property. A year later the rest of West
Wood subdivision was developedtand a central water system was installed. It has always
been his understanding that ~hey are a part of West Wood subdivision. He is unclear as to
why he and Mr. Brockman were taken out the water service areas, and why Mr. May was left
in. Dr. Pohl said the well worked fine for a number of years, but in recent years the
well has been pumping a gritty substance that is sandy in appearance. It is an intermit-
tent problem. A lot of the sand will shut the well down which means someone has to go out
(often ten to twenty times a day) to turn the pump back on. The grit has also destroyed
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 14)
11,9
one pump and the cost to replace that pump was approximately $1,000. His hot water inlet
has become blocked and they cannot seem to get it open permanently. In order to do hot
water laundry he must fill the washing machine with buckets of water drawn from another
hot water tap. Dr. Pohl said a reliable water source is a reasonable expeCtation for a
resident of Albemarle County and they do not have a reliable water source. In fact, it is
a major nuisance. He does not feel there is any precedent setting in this situation. He
encouraged the Board to allow~him and Mr. Brockman back into the jurisdiction service
areas so they can have a reliable water source.
Mrs. Scribner, another applicant, addressed the Board. Mrs. Scribner said the main
reason they are requesting County water is because of the apartment they plan to build for
her mother. Knowing of the problems with surrounding properties and the wells, they were
concerned that the extra use would be put a strain on their well. The only problem they
have experienced with their well is that periodically there is mud in the water which has
been checked and there appears to be no explanation. They see that as a sign that perhaps
the well does have problems. She is also unclear as to why they were taken out of the
Service Authority jurisdictional areas. Mrs. Scribner said she does not know what the
problem is since their house is virtually surrounded by public water facilities.
With no one else from the public to speak for or against this request, the public
hearing was closed.
Mr. Fisher said the Board has been concerned about the use of public water system to
extend the growth area into public watershed areas. Mr. Fisher said he, Mrs. Scribner,
Dr. Pohl and others, live in an area that drains into the urban area's own drinking water
impoundment. The more people that build there, the more likely the water quality will get
worse. A decision was made two years ago to remove the houses in the watershed that were
not using water from the public system and to deal with case as those arose. Mr. Fisher
said he has considerable sympathy for the two properties on Ballard Road where there is a
real problem, and which is an extension of the problems that have been existing in this
area for at least the last 15 years. He has a different concern about the Scribner
property because there has been no demonstration of a serious need, but the property is
essentially developed.
Mr. Lindstrom said'he is concerned about the Scribner property. He is not sure of
its status as related to its subdivision surroundings. With five acres in the parcel, and
with the way the Zoning Ordinance is written with respect to the necessity for public
utilities for certain densities, that lot is not in a technical sense fully developed.
Approval may create the potential for an application at some future date for a higher
density if this utility is granted. He is always concerned about the way judges and the
courts are likely to look at utility extensions and he tends to agree with the staff's
report, particularly given the fact that the apartment can be provided with water without
the connection requested. He does not have any objection to approving the other three
applications. They are consistent with policy.
Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to accept the staff's recommendation to amend the
service area boundaries of the Albemarle County Service Authority to include the May, Pohl
and Brockman properties in the~water only areas, to include Tax Map 59, Parcels 58C-01-03,
58C-01-2 and 58C-01-1 of West Woods Subdivision. Mr. Fisher stated that there being no
second, the motion fails for lack of a second. He then asked if there is another motion.
Mr. Fisher said maybe he did not allow enough time for a second.
Mrs. Cooke asked how much land in that area is not developed. Mr. Horne said it
depends on the definition of "developed". Many of the lots on Old Ballard Road are about
five acres in size, so if they were provided with the necessary physical facilities could
in fact technically be divided. Most of those lots do have houses on them so in a practi-
cal sense he does not think they will be further divided. In terms of the precedent, if
there is no defined water quality problem, virtually any other property on the boundary
could technically get water by making the same argument. The staff report indicates there
may be future problems if the Board applies a decision not based on a water quality
problem.
Mr. Way said if a problem develops on the Scribner property, the Scribner.si will be
able to resubmit the request. Mr. Lindstrom then restated his motion which was seconded
by Mr. Way. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Lindstrom and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 11.
Farm.
Request to Release Soil Erosion Control Permit Bond - Leylight
This request came before the Board as a result of the following letter dated October 28,
1985 from David Watson:
"On October 18, 1985 I wrote a letter to the Albemarle County
Engineering Department requesting that we be released from the Erosion
Control Permit Bond that we have posted for Leylight Farm. I was
informed that only the Board of Supervisors has the authority to
release us from this Bond. Due to scheduling problems with the
contractor, the lateness of the season and poor finances, we will not
be able to construct the road at the present time.
To post the Bond, the original Owners of the property allowed us to
defer payment of $3,000.00 of our down-payment for 90 days. We fully
believed that we could build and stabilize the road within this time
period. Our 90 day note comes due on November 20th. We request that
you, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, release us from this
Bond at the present time. When we are financially able to build the
road, we will reaDDly for the Permit and Dost the required Bond."
120
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 15)
Mr. Elrod summarized the following memorandum from his office dated November 1, 1985:
"This subdivision was approved by the Planning Commission on July 23,
1985. Since the road to the home site on this lot is approximately
1500 feet long, borders the Rivanna Reservoir, and is on fairly steep
slopes, the Engineering Department recommended and the Planning
Commission approve a condition that the owner be required to obtain an
erosion control permit. Even without this Planning Commission condition
a permit would be required because the construction of private residences
and access roads in subdivisions are not exempt from the State erosion
control law. Also, the Subdivision Ordinance and the Erosion Control
Ordinance require that an erosion control permit be obtained before
approval of a final subdivision plat.
Mr. Watson submitted an erosion control plan on August 15, 1985, posted
a $3,000 bond, and was issued a permit on August 23, 1985. He has
since recorded the subdivision plat. Since the plat has been approved
and recorded we, as staff, cannot release the bond or permit without
being in violation of the Subdivision and Erosion Control Ordinances.
Of course, as long as no construction commences there will not be any
damage to the environment."
Mr. Elrod said when this plat came before the Planning Commission, the staff was
concerned about construction of the road, since the slopes on the property are steep and
there is potential for erosion getting directly into the reservoir. The staff requested
the Planning 'Commission to add the condition that an erosion control permit must be
obtained. The applicant applied for a permit which was approved, and then the applicant
posted the bond. The applicant is now requesting to have the bond released which means
the staff withdraws the erosion control permit, the lot will be sitting there and the road
can be approved by the Planning Commission. The staff would be required to enforce the
Ordinance with regard to erosion control. The staff does not have any objection to
releasing the bond and the permit, and does not see any environmental problems as long as
no construction takes place. The staff does not think this can be handled administratively
because it would be in violation of both the Erosion Control Ordinance and the condition
added by the Planning Commission.
Mr. Fisher asked if the bond obtained on this project is a standard process used for
every subdivision. Mr. Elrod replied yes. Mr. Fisher asked if the bond requirement is
waived if that will mean that anyone else having a similar bond could do the same. Mr.
Elrod said it could set a precedent.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if any construction has begun. Mr. Elrod said no. Mr. Lindstrom
then asked if construction can begin before the bond is reposted. Mr. Elrod said construc-
tion cannot begin legally until the bond is posted. Mr. Lindstrom said if this project
does not proceed for another three or four year, does the County have the ability to
increase the size of the bond to meet the actual cost at the time an application is made.
Mr. Elrod said yes, it would be an entirely new application. If the bond is released, the
permit will automatically be revoked. The applicant would then have to apply for a new
permit and go through the entire procedure.
Mr. Agnor said Mr. Watson's letter states when he is financially able he will reapply
for the permit and post the required bond. Mr. Bowie asked if that is considered a
proffer or just an offer. Mr. St. John said it is not a proffer, but it can be done. A
"tickler" can be put in the file so if someone goes to get a permit later the staff would
know the bond had been released. Mr. Fisher asked about the building permit? Mr. Elrod
said the Engineering Department has requested the building inspector to notify them before
a building permit is issued. The only procedure that worries him is that the Planning
Commission conditions state there must be an erosion control permit before recording the
plat. Mr. St. John said the applicant did comply. He received the erosion control permit
before recording the plat, even though the permit was not used. Mr. Fisher said this will
place the burden of keeping up with this situation on the staff. Mr. Elrod said the
building permit is the check point. Mr. Fisher said he is concerned with the precedent of
doing this and then it is up to the County staff to track this to make sure everything is
complied with. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Tucker~if this will cause problems. Mr. Tucker said
it has worked in the past, although some things have "gotten through the cracks". The
Inspection's staff makes a note on the plats, plans and maps if a single parcel or lot is
to be looked at by another department before the building permit is issued. In any
similar situation, the individual request would still have to come before this Board for
approval.
Mr. St. John said during inflationary times this could be a benefit to the County.
At one time the County was holding bonds of this type for years and the bonds became
inadequate in amount. This would allow the County to set a new amount for the bond when
the person reapplied for a building permit.
Mr. Lindstrom said he is willing to give this a try and if it-turns out that it is
not working, then the staff can come back and this not be done any more. He is willing to
allow this bond to be withdrawn conditioned upon the fact that before any building permit
can be issued, the bond must be reposted and the Soil Erosion Ordinance complied with,
and the building permit approved.
Mr. Bowie said because of the peculiar position of this particular piece of property
he has no problem with releasing the bond, but this is one of a dozen that lie directly on
edge of the Reservoir and the County does need the protection. He has no problem with
releasing the bond.
Mr. Way said he also has no problem with releasing the bond and then commented that
Mr. Watson is present today.
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 16)
121
Mr. David Watson, the applicant, addressed the Board. He said he is a landscape
architect and land planner. He said the land is very sensitive even to the way he intends
to build the house and they are trying to be very sensitive to the land. The bond has
placed a financial hardship and he does think that one is necessary. He initially
suggested that the bond be tied to the building permit. This land also has two division
rights, but is a single parcel which he has no intention of subdividing. The bond could
be tied to that piece of land. This is basically a private residential lot. He agrees
with Mr. Elrod's findings that some type of erosion control measures are definitely needed
to maintain the Reservoir quality.
Mr. Fisher asked the size of the lot. Mr. Watson said the lot is nine and one-half
acres. Mr. Fisher asked if the lot has additional development rights. Mr. Watson said
yes. Mr. Fisher said he can see every applicant for an erosion control permit not wanting
to post a bond until he is ready to start building and the burden will then be on the
staff to keep track of all of these things. Mr. Fisher said he has serious problems with
this.
Mr. Lindstrom said if this becomes a burden, there will be the opportunity to say
stop it. Mr. St. John said that is correct. Mr. Lindstrom said action by the Board is
required whenever an exception is granted. Therefore, it is not something that will be
happening without the Board's awareness.
Mr. Fisher asked if the Planning Commission has the right to change it~;~conditions.
There could be a lot of pressure put on the Planning Commission to have the Conditions of
approval state that no bond will be required until a construction permit is requested.
Mr. Elrod said the Planning Commission does not have that authority. Before the plat can
be recorded, an erosion control permit must be obtained to cover all of the required
improvements.
Mr. St. John asked if the road in question is a subdivision road or just a private
driveway to serve one house. Mr. Elrod said the road is private. Mr. St. John said that
is a distinction in this case.
At this point',~ Mr. Bowie seconded the foregoing motion. Roll was called and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Lindstrom and Way.
None.
Mr. Henley.
At 11:25 A.M. the Board took a recess, and reconvened at 11:32 A.M.
Agenda Item No. 12.
Covenant.
Request from Crozet Park Board re:
Signing of Restrictive
Mr. Patrick K. Mullaney, Director, Parks and Recreation summarized the following
memorandum addressed to Mr. Robert W. Tucker, Jr., dated October 23, 1985:
"During its meeting of January 9, 1985, the Board of Supervisors agreed
not to impose a restrictive covenant on Claudius Crozet Park.
At that time, the Park was in the process of renegotiating its debt and
a restrictive covenant would have made this impossible. The Park has
now successfully renegotiated its debt, with the lender agreeing that
the 8.81 acre parcel containing the swimming pool serves as sufficient
collateral.
Neil Snyder, President of Crozet Park Board, has suggested that we now
pursue the necessary approvals for entering into the enclosed
restrictive covenant on the remaining 13.62 acres containing the
ballfield, main building and picnic shelters.
It is my understanding that Mr. Snyder is going to be calling for a
special meeting of the Crozet Park Board next week, with the hopes of
getting approval to place this item on the County Board of Supervisors
agenda for November 13. He hopes to receive County Board approval on
this date and final Park Board approval at their regular meeting on
November 18."
Mr. Bowie asked Mr. Mullaney if funding being provided by the Board goes to support
the swimming pool. Mr. Mullaney said no. The agreement was that Department of Parks and
Recreation would mow and trim the park grounds, a person would sit on the Crozet Park
Board of Directors and Parks and Recreation would do capital improvements from time to
time that met with Board approval. The improvements would not have anything to do with
the swimming pool operation. Mr. Mullaney said it would be his recommendation that if the
restrictive covenant is signed on Parcel "B", the one with the ballfield, the capital
improvement request would be just for Parcel "B" until there is a restrictive covenant on
the rest of the property.
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. St. John if his office reviewed this covenant. Mr. St. John
Said he reviewed this with Mr. James Bowling. They drafted the agreement and he thinks
this is the most feasible way to accomplish what the Crozet Park Board wants done. Mr.
Fisher asked if the purpose of this restrictive covenant is to preserve the use of the
property for public purposes. Mr. St. John said yes.
Mrs. Kathleen Snyder, acting on behalf of the Crozet Park Board of Directors, said
they are very happy with the agreement.
122
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 17)
Mr. Bowie asked what will happen when the Parks debt is paid off. Is it the intent
that the property will become publicly dedicated? Mr. Mullaney said an attempt will be
made to have a restrictive covenant placed on the entire piece of property. The Board may
want to discuss the idea of a restrictive covenant on the swimming pool part of the
property because if, at a time in the future, there was a problem with the swimming pool
and the Crozet Park Board had to look into finding funds to take care of the problem, it
would cut out the option of going to an outside lender to do so. He understands that the
Crozet Park Board is never planning to get in debt on the pool again, but if an agreement
is signed on the swimming pool, one of the few options left for funding is to come back to
this Board and ask for assistance. There may be a need for more extensive discussion when
discussing Parcel "A" than was raised on Parcel "B".
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Mullaney about the maintenance being provided. Mr. Mullaney
said the Parks and Recreation Department has been maintaining the property since January.
They have been doing the mowing and trimming on the property, and in the Parks and
Recreation capital improvements program is funding for the construction of a backstop.
Mr. Fisher asked if this has worked well. Mr. Mullaney replied yes. Mr. Fisher asked
Mrs. Snyder if this has been satisfactory to the Crozet Park Board. Mrs. Snyder said the
Crozet Park Board realizes that each year the Board of Supervisors will decide which
capital improvements to fund, and they are at the Board's mercy, but it has worked so far.
Mr. Lindstrom offered motion, seconded by Mr. Way, to authorize the Chairman to sign
the restrictive covenant evidencing the County having agreed to and accepted same as
outlined below:
THIS AGREEMENT, made this 6th day of November, 1985, by and
between CLAUDIUS CROZET PARK, INC., a Virginia non-profit corporation
(the "Owner"), and the BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY,
VIRGINIA (the "County");
WITNESSETH :
1. The Owner is the owner of all those two tracts or parcels of
land, with improvements thereon and appurtenances thereto, known as
Claudius Crozet Park, designated as Parcel A, containing 8.81 acres,
more or less, and Parcel B containing 13.62 acres, more or less, as
shown on plat of John McNair & Associates, dated August 24, 1958,
revised December 4, 1975, and recorded in the Clerk's Office of the
Circuit Court of Albemarle County in Deed Book 587, page 55. The Park
is the same property in all respects conveyed to Claudius Crozet Park,
Inc., by deed of Dabney N. Sandridge, et. al., dated September 23, 1958
and recorded in the aforesaid Clerk's Office in Deed Book 343, page
381. The Owner presently operates a park on Parcels A and B for the
benefit of the residents of the community of Crozet and the surrounding
area of Albemarle County, Virginia.
2. The County proposes from time to time to make recreational
improvements to the Park that have been jointly agreed to by the Owner
and the County. The County will assist in the maintenance of the Park
and in the mowing and trimming of the Park grounds. Such improvements
are subject to annual appropriation by the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County.
3. The Owner proposes to place a restrictive covenant on Parcel B
restricting future use of Parcel B to recreational and public purposes.
NOW, THEREFORE, Claudius Crozet Park, Inc. hereby makes Parcel B
subject to the following restriction running with the land for the
benefit of the citizens of the community of CrOzet and Albemarle
County, Virginia, through the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia:
Parcel B shall be used for recreational and public use only
unless the Owner and the County jointly agree otherwise.
This restrictive covenant shall not be binding on the Owner
until this agreement is executed by the Board of Supervisors.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this agreement is hereby executed in behalf of
the Owner by Neil Snyder, its President, and its seal affixed by its
Secretary, this 6th day of November, 1985.
CLAUDIUS CROZET PARK, INC.
(SIGNED) Neil Snyder, President
(SIGNED) Kathleen Snyder, Secretary
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Lindstrom and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Mr. Way thanked Mr. Mullaney and his staff for cleaning up the County's property in
Scottsville during the flood. The Department of Parks and Recreation did a tremendous
job.
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 18)
Agenda Item No. 14. Discussion - Legislation
Mr. Fisher presented the following letter he received from Mr. George F. Allen, House
of Delegates, dated October 29, 1985:
"There are issues that have arisen in the course of my speeches and
forums with constituents this fall. I have taken certain positions
on these matters.
Nevertheless, I thought that you should be aware of these concerns and
possible action by the General Assembly. I would be greatly appreciative
of your Board's (and your) thoughts on the following issues.
Should the start of the school year be moved back until after
Labor Day? The tourist-related industry is strongly suggesting
this concept. I do understand their position, but feel that
this decision, at this time, is best made locally.
Should athletes in high school be required by State law to
pass 5 courses to participate in sports? I understand that
VHSL controls this matter with a present minimum of 4 passing
courses. Further, districts and individual schools can have
increased requirements as is the case with the Western
District (CHS & AHS).
I would appreciate your (and the Board's) view on these issues. It
would be helpful to me to have your valuable insight into these likely
upcoming concerns."
Mr. Fisher suggested that the Board pass this letter on to the School Board. Mr.
Lindstrom offered motion, seconded by Mr. Way, to refer the foregoing letter for consider-
ation by the Albemarle County School Board letting the Board of Supervisors know of its
response. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Lindstrom and Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 23. Clarion II System - Approval of Agreement
Mr. St. John said the Board has seen the proposal where the anonymous donor has
requested to make a charitable contribution to the County to provide an electrically
operated Carillon on the County Office Building. The donor has requested that the County
enter into an agreement where the donor will pay for installation and provide the first
year's tapes for the carillon. The understanding is that the County will be responsible
thereafter for the maintenance and rental of the tapes. Mr. St. John said that the Board
is unable under the law, to make any commitment that the Board will absolutely continue to
rent these tapes or to what standard it would maintain the system. The Board can accept
the responsibility, but it cannot commit to spend "x" dollars a year forever for tapes or
maintenance. Mr. St. John said if the Board did commit to a level of service, then there
would have to be a clause stating "subject to future appropriations by the then Board of
Supervisors", which would mean the same as if the clause were not there.
Mr. Bowie asked what would happen if there were complaints about the music. Mr. St.
John said he has no problem with the agreement.
Mrs. Cooke offered motion that the Board accept this donation as outlined in the
agreement. She remarked that it is a very fine thing to provide this to the community.
She cannot see this as being any more objectionable than riding down the highway having to
listen to rock music from passing cars. For 15 minutes a day a little culture in the
community is not a bad thing. Good classical music cannot be too objectionable for 15
minutes. Mr. Way seconded the motion. He said Christmas carols can be played during the
Christmas season.
Mr. Fisher said he is very hopeful that the music will be enjoyed by all of the
members of the community and he wants to extend his appreciation to the donor for having
made this offer to the County.
Mr. Lindstrom said he appreciates the generosity which this community has experienced
on a number of occasions from various donors and this particular donor. He thinks that it
is a wonderful blessing that the County has, but he cannot support this motion. He thinks
it is different than having somebody blaring rock music at him driving down the street,
but that is not the public. When the government starts to broadcast music in the middle
of town it is a little bit different than listening to somebody's private radio. He knows
a lot of people that do not like classical music at all, although he enjoys the music
himself. He thinks that 15 minutes or even five minutes of music is a very intrusive sort
of thing when it is impossible to shut off. As much as he appreciates this gesture he
cannot support.
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Fisher and Mr. Way.
Mr. Bowie and Mr. Lindstrom.
Mr. Henley.
(The agreement as signed is set out below.)
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 19)
THIS AGREEMENT, by and between THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE
COUNTY (the Board), first party, and JUNIUS R. FISHBURNE, ESQUIRE, as
agent for an anonymous donor, second party,
WI TNESSETH :
RECITATIONS
1. Donor wishes to make a charitable contribution to the County
of Albemarle in the form of an electrically operated Carillon to be
installed in the County Office Building at donor's expense.
2. Donor further wishes to provide the electronic tapes necessary
for operation of this Carillon, for the first year of operation.
3. The Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County wishes to accept
this charitable contribution and to provide donor with proof of the
contribution which will satisfy the IRS as to donor's eligibility for a
tax deduction in the amount of the value of the contribution.
AGREEMENT
1. The Board hereby agrees that upon installation of the Carillon,
the donor will be furnished a certificate executed by the County
Executive accepting the contribution at a value based upon documentation
furnished by the donor, and shall approve the Carillon and the work
performed in installing it, in order that donor pay for the installation
and treat the value thereof as a charitable donation to the County.
2. The County shall assume responsibility for maintenance of the
Carillon and rental of the tapes, after the first year of operation.
3. Donor shall proceed with the work and conclude it within a
reasonable time subsequent to the execution of this contract.
Agenda Item No. 15. AHIP Semi-Annual Report
Mr. Gary Oliveri, Albemarle Housing Improvement Program, addressed the Board. Mr.
Oliveri summarized the following AHIP Report for the period April 1 1985 through September 30
1985:
"Jobs Completed:
Number of families 10
Number of persons 37
Number/Percent Elderly
Number/Percent Disabled
Number/Percent Minority
13/30%
4/10%
30/80%
Total Cost of Materials & Subcontracts:
Total Albe. Co. Grants-to-families:
1986
$102,527
5,800/6%
1985
$24,729.33
7,843.61/32%
Average Cost of Materials & Subcontracts:
Average Albe. Co. Grant:
10,252
580
1,902.00
603.00
Cumulative Production: Oct 1, 1984 thru Oct 1, 1985
Target
-Albemarle/AHIP 0
-Office of
Community Services 10
-Community Development
Block Grant 4
-Joint funded 8
Total 22
Actual Previous Year
3 7 Majors
7 8 Minors
2 10 Repairs
6
18 25 UNITS
Mr. Oliveri said AHIP wants to do 20 renovations. In terms of completion, AHIP is
approximately seven units behind in the grant program as of the end of this period. In
addition AHIP has done more substantial rehabs and renovations than last year, the worst
jobs being done first. The average cost of each job this period is a little over $10,000
as compared to under $2,000 in the same period of last year.
Mr. Fisher asked if the OCS grants have been continued so long that they have severely
affected the schedule for the CDBG grants. The County has committed to a schedule for
CDBG grants he is very concerned about getting behind on the number of units funded. Mr.
Oliveri said AHIP is considering a rescheduling program for using the two funds as opposed
to just the one. AHIR is about four to six weeks behind, but he does not think it is very
critical at this point. If he is four to six weeks behind in another year and only has
six months to go before the end of the CDBG grant, he can still take some measures to
catch up. At this point AHIP is not in a bad position. Mr. Oliveri said he will
certainly keep the Board posted. Mr. Fisher said he was concerned about that decision
last winter and how it was going to affect the County. Mr. Oliveri said in each report he
will let the Board know where AHIP should be in terms of the original proposals and where
they actually are for comparison.
Mr. Way commented that AHIP has been doing a much better job, but on fewer houses.
He asked Mr. Oliveri to comment on what AHIP is accomplishing in terms of the total on a
per year basis. Are they just scratching the surface on all of this? Mr. Oliveri said
their waiting list consists of 88 families for the grant. It was hoped to do 55 units
, 125
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 20)
with the CDBG and with OCS money doing 65 of those 88 units. That is a way of cleaning up
their waiting list because some of these units have been on the list for four and five
years, and they have never had the funds and resources to work with those particular
families. As AHIP moves into areas to do work, more people get referred to AHIP. The
waiting list is well stabilized at approximately 80. By the time AHIP does four units
they get four new names to check out. Mr. Way asked if the 80 units would all qualify for
the grant if there were unlimited funds? Mr. Oliveri said yes. Some houses are in better
shape than others and some houses take less to fix up. As pointed out earlier, AHIP
wanted to do the worst houses first. They are taking care of the worst and most expensive
and the most time-consuming.
Mr. Oliveri then presented a slide presentation to the Board on the projects done
over the last six months. On file is a description of the work that was done, the
location and the cost.
Mr. Fisher commented that it was quite a presentation. Looking at some of the
structures on the "before" slides, makes a person wonder whether or not it is possible to
transform them so completely. It must be a substantial change in the quality of the lives
for people who have never had indoor water or bathrooms. Mr. Oliveri said the work of
AHIP now includes installing complete baths, drilling wells and installing septic fields.
He has never run across a perspective unit where it is cheaper to build a new unit rather
than rehabilitate the unit. There is always something there to work with and it will
always cost less than it would to build a new house.
Mr. Fisher commented that the most expensive project shown was $20,000 which included
materials and contract services. Mr. Oliveri said that is true. Mr. Fisher asked if that
amount included the cost of AHIP crews. Mr. Oliveri said the amount does not include the
labor costs of any crews. The total cost for the most expensive unit was approximately
$32,000 which included all the materials, subcontracts and all the paid labor that was
applied. In addition there was some volunteer labor and some family self-help labor that
was thrown in to keep the cost down. The particular project required three wells to be
drilled which cost $4,000.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if volunteer help is still available. Mr. Oliveri said yes. In
the last semester, AHIP has had more volunteer hours than any other semester. Over the
last three months AHIP had 2500 volunteer hours which is comparable to having three
additional helpers full-time. Mr. Lindstrom asked where most of the volunteers come from.
Mr. Oliveri said most of them come from the University of Virginia through Madison House.
They have some good steady volunteer coordinators and work groups that continue to come
back.
Mr. Fisher thanked Mr. Oliveri for his report and for the work he is doing and asked
that Mr. Oliveri keep the Board informed on how AHIP is doing on the CDBG schedule.
Mr. Lindstrom said he knows that the County does a lot of things that are much more
significant and long-lasting in terms of benefits to the public as a whole, but this is
the one tangible thing that he can see sitting here that really makes you feel good.
Mr. Oliveri said this has an immediate, tangible and profound effect on the lives and
quality of the lives of these people. The people are virtually all appreciative and
somewhat overwhelmed at a program that can come in and do major improvements to that
affect. The people are certainly appreciative of the County government that it is respon-
sive to those particular needs. Mr. Oliveri said he appreciates the Board's support.
Mrs. Cooke said she is very appreciative of Mr. Oliveri's dedicated work. One reason
this local project is so successful is because of the dedication he brings into it and she
wants to thank him personally.
Mr. Oliveri said AHIP has a lot of good people involved. They have a staff where
each person is good at what he does and that is what makes this program work.
Not Docketed: At 12:16 P.M., Mr. Bowie offered motion to adjourn into executive
session for discussion of personnel matters during lunch. Mr. Agnor asked to add the
discussion of property matters also, which Mr. Bowie agreed to in his motion. Mr. Lindstrom
seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Lindstrom and Way.
None.
Mr. Henley.
At 1:41 P.M., the Board reconvened into open session with Mrs. Cooke and Mr. St. John
being absent at this time. Mr. Ray B. Jones, Deputy County Executive, was present.
Not Docketed: Mr. Fisher said before beginning the afternoon portion of the agenda
he has the pleasure of bringing to the Board's attention a notable event involving one of
the County's employees. He read the following statement to the Board:
"The State Department of Social Services has established an awards
program whereby persons working in the human services field may be
nominated to receive an award. A committee reviews all nominations and
makes recommendations to the Commissioner, who makes the final
decision.
On November 6, 1985, Commissioner Lukhard presented a Meritorious
Service Award to Chris Walker, Adoption Social Worker in the Albemarle
County Department of Social Services. Attached is a complete copy.
The essence is captured in the last three paragraphs:
12'6
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 21)
In her work, Ms. Walker emphasizes special needs children, at-risk
adoptions, and advancing the continuum of substitute care and placement.
She firmly believes in the close relationships between foster and
adoption parenting and encourages the development of this continuum as
she works with parents, both individually and in groups.
Through developing her own professionalism, insisting on quality
services, effectively utilizing community resources, organizing
prospective and adoptive parents, staying abreast of state and national
issues, and providing leadership at the state and local level, Ms.
Walker has made a significant contribution to improving the lives of
many Virginia children."
Mr. Fisher asked that Ms. Walker come forward and he then read the last paragraph of
the statement as follows:
"For her professional expertise and commitment to the welfare of
Virginia children, Christine Walker is presented with a Meritorious
Service Award from the Virginia Department of Social Services."
Mr. Fisher commented that this is a very great honor and the County is very pleased
to have Ms. Walker present. Ms. Walker thanked~Mrs. Karen Morris, Director of Social
Services, for allowing her the opportunity to create the adoption program. She said it is
very nice that she received this award. She has an opportunity to work with a lot of
social workers throughout the state and there is no where in the state which has social
workers that are any more committed to professionalism or quality services than Albemarle
County.
Mr. Tucker said he appreciates the Board taking this opportunity to make this recog-
nition and the County is very honored to have Ms. Walker as an employee.
Mr. Agnor said the County is certainly fortunate to have Ms. Walker and he is sure
she has a great influence on her associates and peers in that department. He is also very
pleased that the state recognized her.
Mr. Fisher said the Board is very proud and thinks it is wonderful that the state has
recognized her efforts. He thanked her for the work she is doing.
Agenda Item No. 16.
Twombley.
Explanation:
Green Thumb Employment Program by Frederick
Mr. Agnor said Mr. Twombley was not present and he recommended that the Board take
this item up later if Mr. Twombley arrives.
Agenda Item No. 17. July-September Quarterly Financial Report.
Mr. Ray Jones, Deputy County Executive, summarized the following memorandum from Mr.
Agnor to the Board dated November 6, 1985 entitled "Quarterly Review of Budgets":
"The Deputy County Executives jointly conducted budget reviews of the
first quarter of FY 85-86 with Department Heads. The following are the
findings of those reviews:
General Operations
Board of Supervisors - The public liability insurance premium exceeded
the budget estimate by $6,680. This problem can be solved by transfer
of the excess budget allocation in Personnel for Workman's Compensation.
Clerk of Circuit Court - Mrs. Marshall, Clerk, was successful in her
appeal to the Compensation Board. The Compensation Board granted her
one new position (Clerk Typist I - $9,471 annually) plus an increase in
the salary of one employee from $14,145 to $14,790 annually, an increase
of $645. The total increase would be $10,116 for salaries plus fringe
costs. This will require an additional appropriation.
Mrs. Marshall also requested the re-appropriation of the balance of her
part-time help for FY 84-85 which was not included in the re-appropriation
requests for FY 85-86. She says it was necessary to utilize additional
~part-time help while her appeal was being finalized. Staff recommends
the approval of $2,000 in compensation of part-time help to solve this
problem.
Police Department - The number of special events, the fact that two
officers have had large amounts of sick leave, plus the large number of
extended investigations has resulted in much more overtime than antici-
pated. Also, the Fair Labor Standards Act has impacted overtime.
As of October 15, there had been $7,424 in regular overtime and $10,114
in reimbursable overtime. The use of $17,538 in overtime during the
first 3 1/2 months of the fiscal year means that 87.7 percent of the
budgeted amount ($20,000) has been utilized to date.. The original
budget estimate of $20,000 for overtime was broken down as $5,000 for
regular overtime and $15,000 for reimbursable overtime. Both categories
will exceed this estimate considerably. It was anticipated that the
addition of five officers in July and five more in January would reduce
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 22)
the need for regular overtime. However, one of the five officers hired
for patrol in July resigned to take an investigator'~ position at the
University of Virginia. Since it takes three to four months to train
an officer, this will have some impact on the work force. The Chief is
currently filling one existing position and five new positions for
January.
During the first nine months of the year, crimes against persons
(homicide, rape, robbery and assaults) were up 170 percent from 27 in
1984 to 73 in 1985. Crimes against property (burglary, larceny and
auto theft) were up 4 percent from 1126 in 1984 to 1175 in 1985. These
increases in crime reflect in the use of overtime. During this same
nine month Period, the clearance rate improved from 18 percent in 1984
to 29 percent in 1985. The addition of two investigators in July plus
long hours appear to have reflected in the improved clearance rate of
crime.
Based on the above factors combined with the addition of new officers,
it is requested that allowance for overtime be increased from $20,000
to $45,000. The requested additional amount of overtime is broken down
into an additional $10,000 for regular overtime and $15,000 for reimburs-
able. The additional $15,000 for reimbursable overtime would generate
that amount of additional revenue. Hopefully, by April or May 1986
when all of the ten new officers are trained and Congress has amended
the Fair Labor Standards Act, overtime can be more effectively managed
and controlled.
Sheriff's Department - There is some indication that deputies which are
not frozen in grade will get a salary increase of 4 percent in January.
No changes will be requested until official notice is received from the
State Compensation Board.
Staff Services - The responsibility of lawn care and snow removal at
the County Office Building and Court Square was-transferred from this
Department to Parks and Recreation effective November 1. This will
require the transfer of one position and some operating costs at a
later date. This was done to more effectively use manpower, equipment
and training of persons in the Parks Department, as well as to utilize
the manpower of Parks for snow removal during off peak work at Parks.
Redevelopment and Housing - Even though the narrative for the 1985-86
budget as well as discussion during work sessions included the use of
AHIP for inspections in the Section 8 Housing Rental Program, there was
no allocation included under contractual services in the line items.
The annual cost of this service is $6,815. Since it was omitted
entirely, it is requested that the amount of $6,815 be included as a
special appropriations.
Summary and Recommendations - General Government
While there were four departments requiring transfers and appropriations,
the other 22 departments and cost centers of General Government appear
to be adequately funded at the end of the first quarter.
The staff recommendations in General Government are as follows:
Transfer $6,680 from Personnel to Board of Supervisors to cover
the Public Liability.
Increase the appropriation of the Clerk of Circuit Court (Mrs.
Marshall's office) to include adjustment by the Compensation Board
and add requested amount for part-time help.
3. Increase the appropriation for overtime in the Police Department.
e
Add $6,815 to Housing budget to provide contractual services that
was omitted in the original budget.
School Fund (See Agenda Item No. 18 which follows this
discussion.)
The Assistant Superintendent, David C. Papenfuse, presented a quarterly
report to the School Board on October 14, 1985. The report indicates
the following:
1. Net increase in revenue of $71,406.30.
e
Net reduction in per pupil allotments for school supplies of
$2,160.15 due to adjustment in tenth day enrollment.
3. A net savings (reduction in need) of $313,829.23 in compensation.
A total of $387,396.38 (sum of items 1, 2 and 3) available for
unanticipated needs.
Newly adopted textbooks and replacement of worn textbooks, an
increased need of $38,060.
6. Insurance overruns will be $142,915.
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 23)
7. Transportation costs of $7,500 at the Ragged Mountain School.
8. Administrative interns at the two high schools costs $12,000.
A School Board goal to promote a positive public image costing
$25,000.
Recap of the Above
Revenue:
Prep Recovery
State Basic Aid
Incentive Aid
Foster Home
Gifted and Talented
Special Education
Remedial Education
Net Increase in Revenue
(20,993.00)
(36,309.00)
(234.00)
44,696.00
4,090.00
74,936.00
5~220.00
71,406.30
Expenditures:
Reduction in per pupil allotment
Reduction in compensation
Increase in textbook costs
Increase in insurance costs
Increase in transportation costs
Cost of 'Administrative Interns
Community Information Program
Net Change in Expenditures
$ (2,160.15)
(313,829.93)
38,060.00
142,915.00
7,500.00
12,000.00
25r000.00
$(90,515.08)
Reserve for Contingencies $161,921.38
(Revenue plus reduction in expenditures)
Summary and Recommendations - School Fund
The above recap shows that a contingency of $161,921.38 is being
requested after school is in operation and all current needs have been
filled. By recognizing the additional revenue of $71,406.30, and
retaining the contingency, the bottom line of the total budget is
increased by the amount of additional revenue or $71,406.30. Since
some of the major sources of revenue (Basic Aid) are subject to adjust-
ment from tenth day enrollment to Average Daily Attendance in May 1986,
it is questionable whether the bottom line should be increased at this
time.
Therefore, it is recommended that the Contingent Reserve be reduced
from $161,921.38 to $90,515.08 and retain the-original bottom line of
the budget. Then if revenues exceed the estimates at the end of the
year by $71,406.30, this amount would be included in the actual School
Fund balance on 6/30/86.
Based on the above, your official action will be to approve Exhibit D
(on file) as revised which does not recognize the additional revenues
($71,406.30), reduces the Contingent Reserve to $90,515.08, and does
not increase the bottom line of the school budget.
Mr. Bowie said in reference to police overtime, is part of that overtime as a result
of the Scottsville flood or is that just an example. Mr. Agnor said the overtime from the
flood ~h is not included. Mr. Bowie said he assumes the Fair Labor Standards Act will be
taken into account for the rest of the year. Mr. Fisher said hef~ it is too early in
the fiscal year to be increasing the total budget of a big department such as the Police
Department's for just one item. Isn't there anything that can be transferred within the
budget to cover this expense and keep from changing the bottom line? Mr. Jones said the
staff could find no way to pick up the requested $25,000 within this year. Mr. Fisher
asked if the yearly appropriation for overtime has already been used entirely. Mr. Jones
said it will be at the end of the month of November. Mr. Fisher said the Board has been
saying it will not increase department budgets until the end of the year and that every
attempt should be made to handle these things through internal transfers. He is not
convinced that $10,000 or $15,000 cannot be found somewhere in the budget. Mr. Lindstrom
agreed that the staff really ought to strain to do that. He is receptive if it can be
done. Mr. Jones said it is really impossible to manage and control overtime, but he can
appreciate what the Board is saying. The police officers cannot be pulled away from the
scene of an accident at a change of shift. It gets to that point in some instances. Mr.
Bowie said the County is one-third of the way through the accounting year. While overtime
may be 87 percent used, some other funds are still sitting there and have not been used.
He is not saying he will not support this request, but he thinks that if the Board is
going to require everybody to manage their budgets, then everybody must manage. Let's see
what can be worked out within the resources available before immediately jumping in and
adding more money. Mr. Jones said he does not have any problem with that concept.
However, it is the staff's duty to make the Board=aware of the overtime projections.
Mr. Bowie asked if the new position in the office of Clerk of the Circuit Court was
approved by the State Compensation Board or by the County. Mr. Jones said the Compensation
Board sets the annual salaries, the number of employees of the Clerk of the Court. Mr.
Lindstrom said even though the Compensation Board has funded an additional position, there
are still a couple of thousand dollars the County will have to pay to make up for the
part-time work the Clerk had to put in pending the State Board's approval. Mr. Jones said
the staff is trying to get the Compensation BOard to pick up that part-time pay. The
annual salary approved will not be used except from November through June. Mr. Bowie
(Page 24)
~=o~ ~gu±ar uay meeting)
noted that Attachment A (on file) indicates that all of the Clerk's funds are coming from
the appropriation fund balance, when in reality there will be more money coming to replace
that. Mr. Agnor said the funds the Compensation Board allots the Clerk come out of her
fees which are revenues to the County. Those revenues have to be shared with the state.
Mr. Jones said the Compensation Board approves certain expenses for the Clerk's office
which precludes compensation, which is the major item. At the end of the year the Clerk's
office is audite~ and the total amount of fees that come into the office and expenses are
deducted from those fees. The state then gets one-third of the excess revenues and the
County keeps two-thirds of the excess revenues. Mr. Jones said Mr. Breeden assures that
by this revision the County will get an additional $7,000 in revenues. Mr. Agnor said the
County actually gets reimbursed for other Compensation Board budgets, such as the
Commonwealth's Attorney and the Sheriff's office. Mr. Lindstrom said essentially this
means the state is subsidizing only one-third of the additional position. Mr. Agnor said
that is correct and the County is subsidizing two-thirds. Mr. Fisher asked why the Clerk
doesn't come to the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Jones said he did not know. The County
does get the money back in the form of fees. Mr. Agnor said they deal directly with the
Compensation Board. This Board can object and appeal the process.
Mr. Bowie asked what the impact would be if the Board did not allocate another
additional cent. Why give the money now? Mr. Fisher said the staff has the authority to
make transfers within its budget for the Police Department. Mr. Agnor said that is
correct. Mr. Fisher said that should be done until at least the month of May. Mr. Agnor
said he certainly would recommend that ~s what the Board should do. Mr. Agnor said he
thinks it would be appropriate to go ahead and clean up the budget of the Clerk of the
Circuit Court at this point. There is no point in waiting. Mr. Bowie commented that the
Board does not know how many fees the Clerk will collect and he does not see why the Board
should have to appropriate from the fund balance. Mr. Bowie said he appreciates this
information and would like to continue receiving it, but he cannot see appropriating
anything out of the fund balance to anybody. Mr. Fisher asked if the new position in the
Clerk's office needs to be recorded as a position in order to make the bookkeeping work
out right. Mr. Breeden said in dealing with the State Compensation Board it would appear
much better if the Board would approve the position at this point. Mr. Fisher said the
Board has made it clear the County is not going to fund this person.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if staff's recommendation for the Housing Department was to cover
a mistake or is it something that was omitted. Mr. Jones said this was due to omission.
The amount represents approximately one-fourth of the total budget for Housing. The
revenue was included in the budget but not included as a line item.
Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to approve an additional appropriation in the
amount of $10,841.34 for the Clerk of the Circuit Court and $6,815 for Redevelopment and
Housing as set out in the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that $17,656.34 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from
the General Fund and appropriated as follows:
Clerk of the Circuit Court
1-1000-21010-100100
1-1000-21010-100300
1-1000-21010-200100
1-1000-21010-200200
1-1000-21010-200500
1-1000-21010-200600
Comp.-Regular
Comp.-Part,Time
FICA
VSRS
Health Insurance
Life Insurance
Housing
1-1000-81030-301200 Contract Services-Other
6,959.00
2,000.00
636.10
724.22
458.88
63.14
6,815.00
$17,656.34
FURTHER RESOLVED that the Revenues section of the 1985-86 County
budget is hereby amended by the addition of $17 656.34 and Coded as
follows: '
2-1000-16000-160102
2-1000-51000-510100
Fees of Clerk
Appropriation From Fund Bal.
$ 7,000.00
10,656.34
$17,656.34
FURTHER, that this appropriation is effective this date.
Mr. Bowie seconded the motion.
following recorded vote:
Roll was called and the motion carried by the
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Mr. Bowie, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
None.
Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 18. Request for Transfer of Funds and Request for Additional
Appropriation of Revenue - Schools.
The following memorandum dated October 17, 1985 from David C. Papenfuse, Deputy
Clerk, Albemarle County School Board, was received:
"At it smeeting of October 14, 1985, the School Board received and
reviewed information relative to the financial position of the
Education funds through the first quarter of operation. These reports
indicte the following:
Revenue
It is anticipated that revenue will exceed current projections by
$71,406.30. This net increase reflects a decrease in Basic State Aid
due to a downward adjustment of Average Daily membership. As explained
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 25)
during the joint Board meeting of September 25, this adjustment to ADM
is the result of the placement of Albemarle County students in regional
special education programs which are funded elsewhere in the revenue
budget.
Items identified in Exhibit A (on file) with an asterisk are based upon
prior year's data and are not subject to further adjustment.
Per Pupil Allotments
Exhibit B (on file) entitled 'Per Pupil Allocation Adjustment FY 85-86'
delineates both the budgeted and entitled per pupil allotments based
upon the 10th Day Enrollment. Since these transfers cross cost center
boundaries, the School Board asks that the Board of Supervisors approve
these transfers. The net result to the school fund is a reduction of
$2,160.50 in budgeted expenses.
Compensation
Exhibit C (on file) 'Compensation Analysis' presents the full disclosure
of committed and anticipated compensation expenditures. The largest
single recovery item is, of course, the teacher compensation account.
The bottom line savings of all compensation accounts taken together
stands at $313,829.93.
Recap of Positive Budget Items
Revenue
Per Pupil Allotment
Compensation Recovery
+ 71,406.30
+ 2,160.15
+ 313,829.93
$387,396.38
Needs
At the same time the School Board reviewed unanticipated budgetary
commitments as follows:
Textbook Needs
Expenditures over and above the current budgeted level were necessitated
by partial implementation of newly adopted textbooks and replacement of
worn textbooks. As these purchases were made out of current operating
funds of individual cost centers, the School Board requests the
transfer of funds 'from above to reimburse the following departments"
Instructional Administration
Media Center
Western Albemarle High School
Textbook Fund (operation)
$22,852.00
12,482.00
1,485.00
1,241.00
$38,060.00
This amount of $38,060.00 is necessary to cover current commitments.
Future textbook fund needs will be addressed during the budget process.
Insurances
Ail invoices for insurance coverage for the current year have been
received and paid.
Workman's Compensation
Multi-Peril
Vehicular
Budget
49,000.00
47,300.00
42,000.00
Actual
80,113.00
99,171.00
101,931.00
Variance
31,113.00
51,871.00
59,931.00
$142,915.00
The amount of $142,915 needs to be transferred to balance these
insurance accounts which are, as of this date, exhibiting an overspent
status.
Ra99ed Mountain Transportation
Included in the Prep Recovery Revenue is a new item of $7,500 represent-
ing funds that are availabel for transportation of students in that
program. An expenditure item of the same magnitude needs to be .appropri-
ated.
Administrative Interns
Administrative interns were added to the two high schools for one-half
year each. One elementary administrative intern was budgeted at $6,000
under the assistant principal category. Since these funds are to be
spent in a non compensation account, this elementary position is not
included in the compensation analysis of Exhibit C, even though that is
where the funds are budgeted.
The School Board requests that 12,000 be transferred from compensation
for the payment of these services.
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 26)
131
Community Information
A goal fo the School Board is to promote a positive public image and
encourage community support of our schools. In order to facilitate
this goal, the School Board requests that $25,000 be transferred into
the Community Services department to offset the cost of newsletters,
public announcements and inservice in the area of community support.
Recap of Unanticipated Expenditures
Textbook Purchases
Insurances
Ragged Mountain Transportation
Administrative Interns
Community Information
$ 38,060.00
142,915.00
7,500.00
12,000.00
25,000.00
$225,475.00
The application of the current projected surplus against unbudgeted
expenses would indicate a reserve total of $161,921.38. The School
Board asks that this be placed in a contingent reserve account as
insurance against any unforeseen fiscal problems.
Exhibit C outlines the individual account adjustments necessary to
accomplish these requests by the School Board."
Mr. Lindstrom asked for an explanation of the $313,829.23 net savings in compensa-
tion. Mr. Papenfuse was present. He said the majority of the recovery was due to the
high rate of turnover and replacing a more experienced teacher with a younger teacher.
Another portion of the savings was due to recovery in the retirement plan for the perma-
nent, part-time employees. The School Division had budgeted the retirement plan at the
Virginia State Retirement System rates for retirement and insurance.
Mr. Fisher asked for an explanation for the high turnover rate. Mr.. Andy Overstreet,
Superintendent of Schools, said the turnover rate was a combination of angry teachers,
pregnancy, resignations due to spousal transfers, illness and retirement. The b~lk-of the
teaching force is female, and females were also the major turnover factor. Mr. Lindstrom
asked if the teacher evaluation program affected the turnover. Mr. Overstreet said in his
opinion the evaluation program had nothing to do with the turnover rate. There is a
pattern beginning and he is reluctant to commit himself to what that is at this time.
Several teacher contracts were not renewed, but that was no more than has been the case in
the past.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if all of the teaching positions requested and funded were hired.
Mr. Papenfuse said not teacher for teacher, but equivalent teaching positions were filled.
The reserve allocated for teaching positions was absorbed.
Mr. Lindstrom asked for an explanation of the Community Information program. Mr.
Overstreet said this promotional program is an enhancement of what was called Community
Education. He upgraded Community Education to give it a dual function of community
education and public information. The Community Education program was under budgeted,
hence the requirement for $25,000 in additional funds. Mr. Lindstrom asked what exactly
this person will do. Mr. Overstreet said the Community Education Coordinator handles the
volunteer program, the after-school program for children, and other programs. Another
development for this year is integrated partnerships, promoting increased partnerships at
the divisional level and the individual school level with businesses and industry.
Specifically in the public information area, this individual will be an in-house public
relations specialist. It is an individual who is a liaison with the media. This individ-
ual will be responsible for coordinating all of the public information disseminated from
the schools to a central clearing where it will go out to the media in a systematic
fashion. The person is working on brochures, school newsletters all aimed at recognizing
the achievements of teachers and students. Mr. Lindstrom asked if upgrading the position
triggered the need for an additional $25,000. Mr. Overstreet said yes. Mr. Fisher asked
about the budget. Mr. Overstreet said $8,000 worth of clerical costs, $9,000 worth of
printing and copying services, $400 worth of advertising, $2,700 worth of postal services,
$3,700 worth of office and copy supplies, $300 worth of instructional materials and $800
worth of staff and development expenses. Mr. Papenfuse said when the budget was reviewed
there was concern that there are nonparental taxpayers that the schools need to reach with
information. If the information were just to go out to parents, it could be included in
report cards, but the schools need to address a larger population.
Mr. Overstreet said the School Board identified as a major goal upgrading and enhanc-
ing its work in public relations and promoting achievements of the school system in the
County. Other than the fliers sent out by the principals, the public has to depend on the
news media for information. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the School Board has approved this
concept. Mr. Overstreet said yes. Mr. Lindstrom said he personnally has a negative
reaction to governmental advertising. Mr. Bowie said he has a problem with spending
taxpayers money to write letters to taxpayers that do not want their money spent in the
first place. A clearer message would be not to spend the money anyway. Mr. Overstreet
said the same taxpayers are coming to the schools and asking what is going on since they
do not have children in school any longer. Mr. Overstreet said if the schools are going
to communicate with the taxpayers, then the schools will have to send them newsletters and
keep them informed because the public media does not do an adequate job. This is a first
attempt at this for the School Division. If the clerical charges were deleted, the cost
would be brought down significantly. If newsletters were deleted that would be another
large item that would bring the costs downs.
Mr. Fisher suggested that the Board discuss this item with the School Board at their
next joint meeting. He is not convinced that this is the best thing to be promoting right
now. Maybe this is a grand idea, but he is not sure at this time.
13.2
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 27)
Mr. Way said when he was a member of the School Board six years ago, there was
discussion of a need for this type of program; need for better communication.
Mr. Overstreet said this program is a part of the School Board's communication goal. He
thinks that the best advertisement is the product. The school's primary consumer is the
business industry. The school's know that a good job has been done with the students.
For the first time in history there are more people in the County that do not have
children in school. There is no other way to reach these people than through the public
media. The bulk of the students leave the area and go to college which promotes the
product in another area, but it does not enhance promotion here. Mr. Lindstrom said he
does not agree with using taxpayers dollars to promote something that the taxpayers are
already paying for, and there should be satisfactory evidence of quality. Mr. Overstreet
said maybe promotion is not the best word. Mr. Lindstrom'said it is promotion and that is
what it is called. Mr. Overstreet said in the School Board's goal system it is part of
the communication network. Mr. Overstreet said the concept is to "toot our own horn". He
does not think that in most educational systems the horns have been tooted enough about
what the schools do and and the contribution'that is made. This would be a good topic for
the next joint meeting of the School Board and the Board of Supervisors. He can also
bring more information and present visual ideas of exactly what the Community Education
Coordinator does. Mr. Lindstrom said he would be glad to hear what the School Board has
to say.
Mr. Bowie said he has trouble giving official recognition to revenues that have not
been received just because it is thought they are going to be received. What happens if
there is no contingency? The Board informed the Police Department to "keep on trucking"
and let the Board know when the funds ran out. Mr. Papenfuse said the contingency reserve
is to insure that the School Division receives its' revenues. A few years ago the School
Board put together its budget and when the revenues did not materialize there was a big
panic at the end of the year. Since that point, the School Division has always held
monies in reserve and h~ not released those funds until the School Division was positive
that the revenues would materialize. Mr. Fisher asked if there was a reserve for contin-
gencies in the School Board's budget this year. Mr. Papenfuse said the reserve was not
budgeted. Mr. Fisher said this reserve is being created now without going through the
normal budget process. Mr. Papenfuse said the reserve is being put in as a placekeeper,
these funds are not available for expenditure, and it is recognized as a reserve and Will
take School Board action before releasing the funds. Mr. Lindstrom asked how the transfer
out of the contingency will occur. Mr. Papenfuse said through School Board action. If
the transfer were in compensation it would require School Board action. If the reserves
were to be applied to another cost center then it would have to come before the Board of
Supervisors. Mr. Lindstrom asked if the School Board could hire several more teachers
right now if it wanted to. Mr. Papenfuse replied yes.
Mr. Agnor said the contingency reserve is a balancing factor to keep the expenditures
and revenues in total balance. Mr. Lindstrom asked if a contingency would create a
separate a fund and require reappropriation for any transfer. If no-action is taken what
happens to this request? Mr. Agnor said the contingency stays in the school budget. Mr.
Lindstrom said there is more control over what happens to the contingency if it is put in
a special fund. Therefore, any appropriation of the fund balance would have to be approved
by the School Board and the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Agnor said yes. Mr. Papenfuse said
the funds are in the general compensation cost center. Mr. Overstreet said the contingency
is to alert both boards as to exactly what is going on in terms of underexpenditures,
overexpenditures and additional revenues.
Mr. Lindstrom said he has no trouble with the staff's recommendation, except to hold
the $25,000 for the Community Information Program for further discussion. Mr. Fisher
commented that if the Community Information Program is deleted from the approved expendi-
tures, the net change in expenditures would be $115,515.08. Mr. Agnor said that is
correct.
Mr. Bowie said when the Board of Supervisors approves a budget and there are "x"
dollars for salaries and there is $300,000 left, why do the funds not revert to the
General Fund? Why are the funds available for anything? Mr. Fisher said the funds are
not available unless some action is taken to that effect. Mr. Lindstrom said it is the
flip side of the Board's policy about additional appropriations. Nothing is being changed
in the bottom line. He thinks it is consistent with the policy about shortfalls and he
appreciates it being identified. He feels much more comfortable about that approach
rather than not identifying it at all. The only other alternative would be to put in a
separate category so that any movement of the money would have to be approved by both
boards. Mr. Overstreet said the Board should understand that the School Board is not
requesting authorization for an additional level of appropriation or expenditure. Mr.
Fisher said that is not his understanding of the request from the School Board. Mr.
Papenfuse said the School Board is not requesting additional money to spend, just alerting
the Board to the fact that the School Board is calculating receipt of additional revenues.
Mr. Lindstrom said the School Board is asking to spend some of the money that will be left
over from these other programs and he is not sure he is comfortable with that approach.
Mr, Fisher said the request is for $71,406.30 of increased revenues to be placed in the
budget on both the revenue and expenditure sides. It would also be a $71,406.30 increase
in total expenditures. The staff is recommending that it not be allowed. He then asked
if there is a way to set up the contingency fund so that it is a separate cost center.
Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance, said it has been the policy of the Finance
Department that once the money is in a contingency code, the money will require the Board
of Supervisors' approval to make that transfer. The only transfer 'that did not apply was
out of the individual cost centers in the schools budget last year where it was left up to
the individual principals to decide whether the money would be spent for a temporary
situation.
Mr. Agnor said he understands Mr. Papenfuse to say that if the funds are in the
compensation account and the School Board wishes to spend the money for compensation
purposes, the School Board would not come back before the Board of Supervisors for any
authorization since the money is already in a compensation account. He understands Mr.
Breeden as saying the Finance Department would not allow the monies in the compensation
November 13, 1985 (RegUlar Day Meeting)
(Page 28)
133
account to be spent without the Board of Supervisors approval. He does not know how the
money can be controlled. If the School Board decides to spend the money, the Board of
Supervisors will not know it has been spent. Mr. Breeden said the Finance Department
would not be able to control the money spent from a particular line item, but the
Department could stop the transfer of the appropriation from a contingency line item which
would result in an overexpenditure on the School Board's part.
Mr. Lindstrom said if the Board of Supervisors approves a line item contingency fund
in compensation of $115,515.08, any transfer from that line item will require the approval
of both the School Board and the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Overstreet said that is
correct. Mr. Lindstrom said that amount does not include the $25,000. Mr. Papenfuse said
this is all based on the compensation needs at this time. Mr. Fisher said the Board is
considering the recommendation from its staff, deleting the Community Education Program
and placing those funds also in the reserve for contingency. Mr. Overstreet said
Community Services is a joint operation of Community Education and Community Services.
The first item on compensation for clerical help of $8,000 is imperative to the function
of the entire department. The request was not due entirely to the expansion to include
Community Information. Mr. Fisher asked if the $8,000 has already been approved in the
budget somewhere before today. Mr. Overstreet said the $8,000 would be a new expenditure.
Mr. Fisher said the Board wants to discuss the entire area of Community Education with the
School Board.
Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to approve a line item contingency fund in the
School Board's Compensation accounts in the amount of $115,518.08 with the understanding
that any transfer from this line item will require the approval of both the School Board
and the Board of Supervisors. Mr. Lindstrom said the $313,829.93 (Compensation Recovery)
is a fixed figure because the School Board knows exactly how much is saved on contracts,
therefore, there may be other compensation needs that have not been anticipated. Mr.
Papenfuse said that is correct. Mr. Bowie seconded the foregoing motion. Roll was called
and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley.
Mr. Bowie offered motion for approval of Exhibit "D", which follows, as amended by
the County Executive's staff with the exception of $25,000 for Community Services. Mr.
Lindstrom seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley.
(Exhibit "D" as amended is set out below.)
Account Tranfer Details
1 2000 60000
1 2000 60120
'1 2000 60130
General and Compensation
100126 Compensation-Principal
100127 Compensation-Assistant Principal
100135 Compensation-Teacher
100140 Compensation-Clerical
100141 Compensation-Para-Professional
100142 Compensation-Custodial
200100 F.I.C.A.
200200 Retirement
200500 Health Insurance
200600 Life Insurance
201500 Administrative Merit Reserve
300300 Administrative Interns
· 999999 Contingent Reserve
Personnel
100122 Compensation-Director
100123 Supervisor
100203 Staff Development
200100 F.I.C.A.
200200 Retirement
200500 Health Insurance
200600 Life Insurance
Business and Finance
100121 Compensation Asst. Superintendent
100122 Compensation-Director
100123 Compensation-Supervisor
100140 Compensation-Clerical
100143 Compensation-Maintenance Staff
100144 Compensation-Garage Staff
100145 Compensation-Bus Driver
200100 F.I.C.A.
200200 Retirement
200500 Health Insurance
200600 Life Insurance
201100 Insurance-Workman's Comp.
530200 Insurance-Multi-Peril
530500 Insurance-Vehicular
37,595.00
15,624.00
(262,521.00)
(38,390.00)
12,312.00
(10,707.00)
(23,796.60)
(46,613.41)
(3,109.46)
(2,222.36)
(94,000.00)
12,000.00
115,515.08
(288,313.75)
2,970.00
1,602.00
59.50
313.94
425.75
216.02
40.14
5,627.35
3,254.00
2,639.00
1,411.00
1,072.00
(2,745.00)
-(1,473.00)
18,043.00
1,658.98
(29,195.25)
(6,402.33)
(13,611.10)
31,113.00
51,871.00
59~931.00
117,566.30
134
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 29)
1 2000 60140
1 2000 60155
1 2000 60157
1 2000 60180
1 2000 60761
1 2000 60763
1 2000
60621
60622
60623
60625
60626
60627
60628
60629
60630
60631
60632
60633
60634
60635
60751
60771
60772
60773
60774
Instructional Administration
100121 Compensation-Asst. Superintendent
100122 Compensation-Director
100123 Compensation-Supervisor
100124 Compensation-Psychologist
100125 Compensation-Visiting Teacher
100140 Compensation-Clerical
100148 Compensation-Media Technician
200100 F.I.C.A.
200200 Retirement
200500 Health Insurance
200600 Life Insurance
541200 Instructional Materials
Ragged Mountain Program
100125 Compensation-Visiting Teacher
100135 Compensation-Teacher
100141 Compensation-Para Professional
200100 F.I.C.A.
200200 Retirement
200500 Health Insurance
200600 Life Insurance
580900 Misc. Transportation Expenses
C.B.I.P. Severe Program
100135 Compensation-Teacher
100141 Compensation-Para Professional
200100 F.I.C.A.
200200 Retirement
200500 Health Insurance
200600 Life Insurance
Division Media Center
541100 Books and Subscriptions
Western Albemarle High School
541100 Books and Subscriptions
Western Albemarle Activities
100315 Field Trip Driver
Contingency Reserve
Broadus Wood
Brownsville
Crozet
Greer
Hollymead
Meriwether Lewis
Murray
Red Hill
Rose Hill
Scottsville
Stone Robinson
Stony Point
Woodbrook
Yancey
Albemarle High School
Burley Middle School
Henley Middle School
Jouett Middle School
Walton Middle School
Total Increase In School Fund Expenses
1 7000 63070 541100 Books and Subscriptions
Total Increase In Textbook Fund Expenses
Transaction Balance
2,778.00
3,155.00
(8,656.00)
17.00
(2,551.00)
513.00
665.00
(1,149.02)
(2,748.04)
1,535.75
(91.96)
22~852.00
16,319.73
2,053.00
11,148.00
5,021.00
1,296.88
2,991.98
(523.60)
193.52
7~500.00
29,680.78
55,671.00
28,587.00
5,894.57
13,476.71
(1,714.80)
854.44
102,768.92
12,482.00
1,485.00
3,302.82
(322.70)
230.50
(922.00)
(645.40)
(875.OO)
875.00
(829.80)
(1,521.30)
(533.20)
(322.70)
1,060.30
737.60
(414.90)
(507.10)
901.55
(521.95)
1,281.15
1,186.25
(996.45)
(2,160.15)
(1,241.00)
1~241.00
1,241.00
0.00
Not Docketed: Mr. Bowie said he had requested earlier that Item No. 4.10 on the
Consent Agenda be discussed. He said he no longer thinks a discussion is necessary. Mr.
Bowie then offered motion that Item 4.10, Report on 1985 Tax Levies be accepted as infor-
mation. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley.
"The 1985 tax bills were mailed on October 10, 1985. This mailing
included a total of 53,936 bills which were mailed to approximately
30,000 individuals or businesses.
On file are schedules and graphs showing 1985 actual tax levies, a
comparison of budgeted revenues from lOcal taxes to revised estimates
and comparisons of the 1985 tax levies to prior years.
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 30)
135
These schedules show that the total 1985 local tax levies from all
assessment types is $22,560,299.00, a 20.06 percent increase over 1984.
Revenues from local property taxes should exceed the budget estimates
by approximately 1.4 million dollars. The substantial variance from
the original budget estimates can be partially attributed to the
general reassessment of real Property. The large increase in personal
property taxes was unexpected and can only be attributed to increased
sales of new vehicles and increase vehicle values."
Agenda Item No. 19.
Reorganization.
Revisions to Pay and Classification Plan - Department of Finance
The following letter dated November 6, 1985 from Mr. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County
Executive was received by the Board:
"You will recall that when the revisions to the Pay and Classification
Plan were approved several months ago, I advised you that Melvin
Breeden had discussed with me his need to restructure some positions on
the Finance Department staff, and that those changes would be presented
to you upon completion of a review of his plan by this office and the
Personnel office. Attached (on file) is that plan for your consideration.
The plan essentially redefines job responsibilities, distinguishing
accounting positions from tax assessment positions. It adds a technician
level of position above clerical positions and recognizes responsibilities
more equitably. The plan will improve supervisory and management
authority within the department. It will shift one operation, the
payroll staff, from being supervised by the Director's office to the
supervision of the Accounting Division. There is no additional staff
being added, and the cost for reclassification is minimal, $2,320
annually, which is 2/10 percent of the department's current personnel
budget of $972,250."
Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance, summarized the following letter dated
October 31, 1985 addressed to Mr. Guy B. Agnor, County Executive, and Dr. Carole Hastings,
Director of Personnel, to the Board:
"After one year experience as Director of Finance it has become apparent
to me that some shifting of job responsibilities and duties as well as
more specific and redefined job tasks is needed in order to more
effectively manage the Finance Department, to delegate the proper
duties, and to more equitably recognize their responsibilities.
The organization of the Finance Department currently uses the job title
of 'Account Clerk I, II, or III' for most clerical jobs. This
necessarily results in a very wide range of job duties due to the many
functions assigned to Finance, (i.e., taxation, accounting, payroll,
purchasing). This makes it very difficult to recognize those areas
which require a certain expertise not normally found in the local job
market.
Attached to this memorandum (on file) are revised job descriptions for
the following positions: Account Clerk I, Account Clerk II, Account
Clerk III, Appraiser I, Appraiser II.
Job descriptions are also attached (on file) for the following new -
positions being requested: Tax Clerk I, Tax Clerk II, Tax Clerk III,
Tax Technician, Tax Supervisor, Accounting Technician, Accounting
Supervisor, Appraiser III.
The general concept used for these job titles is as follows:
Level
Newly hired employees who, based on previous experience or
education, have the basic skills and ability to perform the job
tasks but have no specific experience in governmental accounting,
taxation or appraisals.
II.
Employees with some specific experience with the job tasks either
from training with the County or another similar employer.
Persons hired in the Level I category would normally advance to
this category after one to two years experience based on the
recommendation of their immediate supervisor and Department Head
approval and compliance with any specific job requirements.
III.
Employees in this category will be those with considerable
experience with the specific job task and whose responsibilities
include substantial direct contact with the public and/or the
handling of cash collections from the public.
Technician:
Employees in this category will normally have an expertise
in a specific job task and the responsibility to see that
a specialized job is performed. Examples of this would
be: Business License Assessments, Business Personal
Property Assessments, Tax Relief Programs, Payroll,
Investments, Bank Reconciliations.
136
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 31)
Supervisor:
These employees would be in charge during the division
managers absence and have extensive knowledge and experi-
ence with all tasks within the division. Also, the
ability to assist the Division Manager with supervision
and job assignments.
The attached schedules (on file) show the requested ranges for these
positions and the current personnel to be assigned to each. These
reassignments would result in actual salary increases of $2,320.80 with
the cost for the remaining portion of FY 85/86 being $1,353.80.
I have attempted to relate the job titles, job descriptions and salary
ranges to those in the Charlottesville pay plan with some input from
other localities based on the Virginia Association of Assessing Officers
Salary Survey. In most positions, job duties are very similar to
Charlottesville, however, due to the difference in the form of govern-
ments some variances were required. Hopefully, this will make future
salary comparisons easier and more equitable."
Mr. Breeden said there are several changes that will result in an individual receiving
a pay increase to meet the "A" step of the new range. Mr. Agnor said there is one individ-
ual in this department who is not in a range or step at this time. This change will put
that person into the range of the top step of the proposed position. Mr. Fisher commented
that he noticed one individual goes from a range 8 to a range 13, and that seems to be an
enormous change for just a redefinition of duties. Mr. Breeden said this is a change that
has been needed for some time. Over the past years, this person has been given substantial
additional responsibilities including additional supervisory duties. Mr. Fisher asked if
this is a promotion. Mr. Breeden said he would consider it a promotion. Mr. Agnor said
as far as administering the Pay and Classification Plan is concerned, this is technically
a reclassification of that person's job duties. This is not technically a promotion.
Mr. Lindstrom then offered motion to approve the revised job descriptions for the
following positions: Account Clerk I, Account Clerk II, Account Clerk III, Appraiser I
and Appraiser II; to approved job descriptions for the following new positions: Tax Clerk I
Tax Clerk II, Tax Clerk III, Tax Technician, Tax Supervisor, Accounting Technician,
Accounting Supervisor and Appraiser III, and to approve ranges for these positions as
follows:
Job Totle
Account Clerk I
Current Range Requested Range
6 6
8 8
14 11
n/a 6
n/a 8
n/a 11
15 15
18 17
n/a 19
n/a 13
n/a 13
n/a 16
n/a 16
Account Clerk II
Account Clerk III
Tax Clerk I
Tax Clerk II
Tax Clerk III
Appraiser I
Appraiser II
Appraiser III
Tax Technician
Accounting Technician
Accounting Supervisor
Tax Supervisor
Mr. Way seconded the motion. Roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Lindstrom and Mr. Way.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mrs. Cooke and Mr. Henley.
Agenda Item No. 24. Appointments. There were no names presented for appointment.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if the Board members have given any consideration to the hearing
that the Board of Supervisors under Virginia State Code is now required to hold on School
Board appointments. Mr. Fisher said the new State law requires that a public hearing be
held prior to making the appointment of School Board members. The law does not state what
the subject is other than an opportunity for the public to speak on this matter. Mr.
Fisher suggested that the hearing be held on December 11, during the day meeting. Mr.
Lindstrom said he would prefer to hold the hearing at a night meeting because it will
limit participation during the day. Miss Neher, Clerk of the Board, said December 18
appears to be a sufficient date for the public hearing. Mr. Lindstrom suggested that the
public hearing be set tentatively for December 18. Miss Neher said the public hearing has
to be held seven days before the appointments are made and the advertisement must be ten
days before the public hearing. Mr. Lindstrom said then let's do it.
Agenda Item No. 25. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda From the Board and
Public.
Mr. Agnor asked Mr. Fisher if he wanted to discuss the extra meeting set for January
1986 at this time. Miss Neher said there is the possibility that the extra meeting in
January will not be needed. Mr. Fisher said the VACo Board of Directors is meeting on the
afternoon of January 29, 1986, with members of the legislature, and they are asking that
county administrators and Board members be present in Richmond. He would like to attend
that meeting
November 13, 1985 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 32)
137
Mr. Agnor asked if the Board wished to extend an invitation to Senator Tom Michie,
Mr. George Allen and Mr. Mitch Van Yahres to attend the Virginia Association of Counties
and the Virginia Municipal League regional legislative meetings. Mr. Fisher said he
thinks the issue is whether any of the Board members are available to attend these
meetings. Mr. Agnor said the closest meeting is in Harrisonburg, next Tuesday, November
19. No one volunteered to attend that meeting. Mr. Fisher said the other meetings are in
Richmond and he thinks Senator Michie would prefer to attend one of those meeting. There
is a registration fee.
Agenda Item No. 26. Adjourn.
meeting was adjourned at 3:11 P.M.
With no further business to come before the Board, the