1983-09-141983 (Regular Day Meeting)
A regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors, was held on September 14,
1983, at 9:00 A.M., in Meeting Room 7 of the Albemarle County Office Building, Charlottesville,
Virginia.
BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Mr. James R. Butler, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, Mr. Gerald E. Fisher,
Mr. J. T. Henley, Jr., Mr. C. Timothy Lindstrom and Miss Ellen V. Nash.
BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT:
County Attorney.
Mr. Ray B. Jones, Acting County Executive, and Mr. George R. St. John,
Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 9:04 A.M., by the
Chairman, Mr. Fisher. Before going into the main agenda, Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Jones for a
report on the condition of Mr. Guy Agnor. Mr. Jones said he had spoken with Mr. Agnor the
previous afternoon and that Mr. Agnor sounded very well. He was home from the hospital, but as
yet has no idea when he will be able to resume his duties.
Agenda Item No. 2. Consent Agenda.
Regarding Item No. 2,9, Mr. Lindstrom asked for the location of D.S. Tavern. He said he
had received the notice regarding this item but did not know the location of same. Miss Nash
answered that it is located on Route 250 West, next to the Peking Teahouse, the chinese res~
taurant. A motion was then made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to approve the
consent agenda which consisted of one item for-approval and eight items as information. The
roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Item No. 2.1. Statement of Expenses for the month of August, 1983 for the Director of
Finance, Sheriff, Regional Jail and the Commonwealth's Attorney were presented.
Item No. 2.2. Memorandum dated August 16, 1983, from the Emergency Medical Services
Council regarding Summary of Regional Mock Disaster, June 13, 1983.
Mr. Fisher referred to the report of the Mock Disaster exercise on June 13, 1983, and
called attention to page three regarding the response times of the various Medical Units. Mr.
Fisher, in reading from the report, noted that the Charlottesville-Albemarle Rescue Squad
reported at the scene in twelve minutes, the Western Albemarle Rescue Squad reported in fifty
minutes and Scottsville Rescue Squad reported at the scene in one hundred and thirty minutes.
He expressed concern and confusion at the delayed response to this disaster drill and asked Mr.
Jones if he knew of any reason why this would be so. Mr. Jones replied that since he had not
talked with any of the Rescue Squads he could not determine the cause of th~ delays, although
he agreed the response time was indeed very slow. Mrs. Cooke commented that Scottsville is
quite a distance from Charlottesville. Mr. Fisher said this specific statement raised a
question in his mind, and though he would not be too concerned over thirty minutes, he felt one
hundred and thirty minutes was a bit excessive. Mr. Henley suggested that perhaps the Scotts-
ville unit had been out on another call and Mr. Fisher noted this was a distinct possibility.
Item No. 2.3. Notice of State Corporation Commission Hearings:
a) Dated August 19, 1983, for the Chesapeake and Potomac Telephone Company
to increase and restructure its schedule of rates and charges for interstate tele-
communications services.
b) Dated July 12, 1983, for the Tourtime America, Ltd., for a license to
broker the transporting of passengers by motor vehicle.
c) Letter dated August 29, 1983, from J. D. Ogg, Vice President, explaining
why Centel has found it necessary to request rate relief; an increase to become
effective on October 1, 1983, through a 4.14 percent surcharge which will apply to
local rates and service, but not to optional calling plans or long distance service.
d) Dated September 1, .1983, for Centel re: authority to increase its rates
pursuant to the Commission's Financial Operating Review Procedure.
Ztem No. 2.4. Letter dated August 30, 1983, from the Division of Litter Control re:
article on Washington County's Convenience Centers.
Item No. 2.5. Letter dated August 30, 1983 from the Department of Taxation re:
Debt Collection Act, As Amended.
Set Off
- Mr. Jones provided the Board with an explanation of the term, "Set Off Debt Collection."
He explained that if a citizen due a tax refund is indebted to the County for taxes, the County
can claim the money first. The County must appoint a coordinator of the program and send that
name to the State. A motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Henley, to appoint
Mr. Jones coordinator to implement this program. The roll was called and the motion passed by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Item No. 2.6. Memorandums Dated September 8, 1983 from the Department of Finance listing
those persons who have received refunds of the following:
a) Real Estate Taxes.
b) Business and Professional Licenses.
c) Personal Property Taxes.
356
September 14:1983 (R~E~]l~ ~y ~eet!n~) ......
Item No. 2.7. Report of the County Executive for the month of July, 1983, was presented
as information in accordance with Virginia Code Section 15.1-602.
Claims against the County which had been examined, allowed and certified for payment by
the Director of Finance, and charged to the following funds for the month of July, 1983, were
also presented as information:
General County Fund
Federal Revenue Sharing Fund
Grant Projects Fund
Metropolitan Planning Grant
County School Fund
Joint Security Fund
Textbook Rental Fund
Capital Improvement Fund
$ 2,429,102.62
404,620.46
1,053,137.83
651.08
778,160.13
74,718.52
871.91
3~917,232.40
ACCOUNT BALANCE
$ 8,658,494.95
Item No. 2.8. Report of the Department of Social Services for the month of July, 1983, was
presented in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52.
Item No. 2.9. Letter dated September 9, 1983, from the Virginia Historic Landmarks
Commission placing D. S. Tavern on the Virginie Landmarks Register.
Agenda Item No. 3. Highway Matters.
Mr. Dan Roosevelt, Resident Highway Engineer, was present and introduced his new Assistant
Mr. Jeff Echols, a recent V.P.I graduate from the Highway Department's Engineer Training
Program. Mr. Roosevelt added that this is Mr. Echois first permanent assignment. Mr. Fisher
welcomed Mr. Echols and hoped his stay in this District will be educationalland satisfactory
for the public.
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Roosevelt if there were any highway matters to discuss or any changes
of estimates regarding finances. Mr. Roosevelt was not aware of any and updated the Board on
the Highway Department's secondary projects. The Hydraulic Road project is "moving along".
It is hoped to have the four lanes of pavement open for use before this winter. The work on
the sidewalk, curb and gutter is scheduled to begin next week. Mr. Roosevelt said the Route
618 project in the Scottsvitle DistriCt is expected to be completed within the next two weeks-.
The work on Route 769 (the back entrance to Key West) has been completed. Mr. Roosevelt said
the Highway Department is in the process of hard-surfacing Route 645 near Gordonsville which
was added to the budget by the Board.
Miss Nash stated that people are complaining about speeding near the lower end of Route'
631 (Old Lynchburg Road); specifically past Route 706. The Sheriff had informed her that if
the Highway Department posted forty or forty-five miles per hour signs, he would use radar in
the area. Mr. Roosevelt said a speed limit study has to be undertaken before any signs can be
posted, but the Highway Department is certainly willing to do the study.
Miss Nash said another complaint has been made by a Mr. Desper about excessive speeding
along Route 742 (within one hundred and fifty feet where it joins Route 20). Mr. Desper has
complained that it is impossible for him to exit his road without endangering himself. Mr.
Roosevelt said the entire section of road is already posted. Miss Nash said there is a speed
limit sign on the road but is just below the entrance to the Desper property and Mr. Desper
feels the sign should be placed above his entrance. Mr. Roosevelt said the location of the
sign is incidental but would be glad to check the location of same.
Mr. Fisher referred to the "No Parking" signs previously discussed with Mr. Roosevelt for
an area near the Hardware Rapids (at the intersection of Route 631 and 712). He has received a
call indicating that the signs have not been erected. Mr. Roosevelt registered surprise that
this had not been done but will check into the matter immediately.
Mr. Jones reported that the last payment for work on Route 637 (Ivy Landfill Road) had
been made and noted appreciation for Mr. Roosevelt's cooperation in obtaining participation by
the State to use its Revenue Sharing funds on the project.
Agenda Item No. 3a. Legislative Program - Virginia Association of Counties.
Mr. Fisher asked the Board members if anyone had a suggestion for legislation of a general
nature which would effect counties in Virginia, and if so, suggested the Board take action to
present the requests to VACo for consideration at its annual meeting. Mr. Jones mentioned that
many counties expressed interest in a meals tax; same already granted to cities. Mr. Jones
referred to a meeting of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Committee (JLARC) attended by
Mr. Russell Otis yesterday. He stated that JLARC will recommend to the General Assembly that
cities and counties be given equal taxing powers. With the exception of the meal~ tax, Mi~
Nash wondered what other taxing powers cities have which~.~,~,~,~are_net~granted~ ~.~~~ to. ~ counties_ . . Mr. ~,,~r~
Fisher said the City of Charlottesville has a threeFpercent motel and lodging tax. Mmss Nash
pointed out that the County also has such a tax. Mr. Fisher stated this is only a two percent
tax and Albemarle County is one of very few counties in the State granted this special legisla-
tion. Ail cities have authority to impose a four percent motel and lodging tax by r~ght.
35.7
September 14, 1983. (Regular Day Meeting)
Miss Nash suggested submitting a general request that counties be given the same taxing
powers as cities. Mr. Fisher said this has been the position of the Virginia Association of
Counties for years, but there remains a strong feeling among legislators that counties do not
require the same taxing powers as cities. This is based on the idea that counties do not
provide as many services as cities provide and consequently have less of a need for the tax
revenue. Mr. Fisher added that cities are treated differently with regards to highway funding
in that cities must generate local revenue for highways and counties are not required to do the
same. Mr. Fisher commented that whenever full taxing powers are considered for counties there
is the risk that the counties might have to assume expenses which had nov previously been
considered. He added that a step of this kind requires study because the full impact of same
is not quite clear.
Mr. Jones reported that in July, 1983 he had requested the County Business License section
of the Finance Department to determine the amount of sales which could be subject to a meals
tax. The study indicated that a meals tax ordinance could generate almost three quarters of a
million dollars. Mr. Fisher expressed surprise at this figure. Mr. Jones added that this type
of tax would be of benefit in solving the County's cash flow problems because monies would be
collected each month.
Mr. Fisher asked if the Board wanted to take a position favoring a meals tax for all
counties. Miss Nash pointed out that a request of this nature might place additional, unexpect-
ed financial burdens on the County were the County required to assume responsibility for its
own highways. Mr. Fisher shared the concern but said if a meals tax is desired, it should be
requested. Miss Nash felt it is a "good idea" and added that the fury over imposition of the
meals tax in the City seems to have quelled somewhat. Mr. Jones suggested the Board submit the
meals tax request as a single issue. He added that since JLARC is supporting uniform taxing
powers for all counties, the Board might consider a resolution supporting that position. Mr.
Fisher asked if any taxing powers the cities currently have will be deleted. Mr. Jones said
the intent seems to be to bring the cQunties up to the same taxing level as the cities on a
local option basis. Mr. Fisher expressed support for such a position.
Miss Nash offered motion to support the JLARC resolution for equal taxing powers between
counties and cities. Mr. Russell Otis was present and commented that this is in fact only a
JLARC Staff recommendation to the JLARC Commission. The Commission itself~has not taken any
action. Miss Nash asked when the report had been issued. Mr. Otis said it was issued by the
JLARC Staff to the JLARC Commission at the meeting he attended yesterday. He assumes the
report will be presented to the General Assembly within the next thirty days. Miss Nash then
reworded her motion to state: The Board goes on record as supporting the recommendations of
the JLARC Staff to the JLARC Commission at its meeting on Tuesday, September 13, 1983, as
contained in their report entitled Study of State Mandates and Local Financial Resources,
specifically recommendation #2 as listed on page 53 of said report. (Recommendation #2C reads:
"The General Assembly should consider equalizing the taxing authority granted to cities and
counties.") This motion was seconded by Mr. Henley. Roll was called and the motion passed by
the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
At the request of Mr. Jones, Mr. Russell Otis, Executive Assistant, summarized for the
Board the section of the JLARC Staff report entitled, "Local Fiscal Condition" concerning its
study of fiscal stress. He noted that Albemarle County is considered to be moderately stressed
and is recognized as an urbanizing county because of the demands for increased services placed
on the county by the population growth. Mr. Otis said a great deal of work would be required
to develop a state aid formula which would take fiscal stress into consideration. After a
short discussion concerning taxing powers, Mr. Fisher requested a copy of the JLARC Staff
report.
Agenda Item No. 3b. Law Enforcement Study.
Mr. Fisher reminded the Board of the study undertaken to consider the possibility of
consolidating the law enforcement functions of the City of Charlottesville and Albemarle
County. Although the report was received months ago, the Board has thus far taken no action on
the report. Mr. Fisher said City Council is interested in hearing the Board's~reaction to the
report. Mr. Fisher said he requested that the staff prepare a resolution as a possible respons
to the City on this question, and Mr. Fisher hoped the resolution expressed the sense of the
Board. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom and seconded by Mrs. Cooke to adopt the following
resolution terminating further consideration of consolidation of the law enforcement functions
of the City of Charlottesville and the County of Albemarle:
WHEREAS, on February 17, 1982, the Board of. Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, entered into an Annexation and Revenue Sharing Agreement"
with the Council of the City of Charlottesville; and
WHEREAS, that Agreement required that a committee be appointed to study
I!
the Desirability of combining the government of the two jurisdictions, or
some of the services presently provided by them;" and
WHEREAS, the committee recommended that the City and County conduct a
study of consolidating the Sheriff's Department of Albemarle County with the
Police Department of the City of Charlottesville; and
WHEREAS, the City and the County hired the Police Executive Research
Forum as consultants to study the merger of these two departments, which
report was received in two part~ earlier in 1983; and
358
September 14~ 1983 (Regular Day Meeting~_
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County has reviewed the
findings of the Police Executive Research Forum, on this subject; and
WHEREAS, due consideration has been given the matter of consolidation
between the Albemarle County Sheriff's Department and the CharlottesVille
Police Department; and
WHEREAS, the Board can find no significant merit to such consolidation;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors that further
discussion or consideration of consolidation of the law enforcement functions
of the County of Albemarle and the City of Charlottesville be terminated.
Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, M~ssrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 23. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Fisher said the Board had received invitations to attend a Solid Waste Management
Symposium and Equipment Exposition to be held on October 19 and 20 in Maryland. He asked if
anyone would like to attend. There was no response.
(Mr. St. John left the meeting at 9:52 A.M.)
With time remaining before the scheduled public hearing at 10:00 A.M. (Agenda Item No. 4),
the Board proceeded with other agenda items.
Agenda Item No. 10. Review: Employees Health Insurance Plan.
memorandum to the Board dated August 26, 1983:
Mr. Jones reviewed his
"A committee consisting of David Papenfuse, Assistant Superintendent of
Schools for Finance/Administration; Carole Hastings, Director of Personnel;
Bill Brent, Director of Albemarle County Service Authority; Mike McMahan,
Administrator of Joint Security Complex; Russell Otis, Executive Assistant;
and myself reviewed the financial status of the Health Plan through the third
quarter (June 30, 1983). Projections to the end of the current contract year
which ends on September 30, 1983 indicates the plan will end the year in a
sound condition. The reserve, which is defined as the excess of premium income
(revenue) over expenses (claims plus administrative expenses) increased from
$86,678 on June 30, 1982 to $182~204 on June 30, 1983. The carriers of the
plan ('Blue Cross/Blue Shield) will credit the plan with approximately $12,750
of investment income or an estimated seven percent rate of investment. The
Committee which was very aware of the plan deficit of approximately $370,000
several years ago recommends the retention of the above reserve in the plan
to cover any increased administrative expenses or excess claims.
The current rates of the plan are as follows:
Monthly Rates 12 Month Payment 7510 Plan
Rate
County Pays Employee Pays
Subscriber
Subscriber w/1 Minor
Subscriber w/Family
48.28 48.28 0
67.66 48.28 19.38
136.26 48.28 87.98
Monthly Rates 10 Month Payment (School System) 7510 Plan
Rate
County Pays Employee Pays
Subscriber
Subscriber w/1 Minor
Subscriber w/Family
57.94 57.94 0
81.19 57.94 23.25
163.54 57.94 105.60
Monthly Rates 12 Month Payment 6010 Plan
Rate
County Pays Employee Pays
Subscriber
Subscriber w/1 Minor
Subscriber w/Family
41.87 48.28 0
58.90 48.28 10.62
114.92 48.28 66.64
Monthly Rates I0 Mo~t~ 'Payment (School System) 6010 Plan
Rate
County Pays Employee Pays
Subscriber
Subscriber w/1 Minor
Subscriber w/Family
50.24 57.94 0
70.68 57.94 12.74
137.91 57.94 79.97
359
September 14~_1983 (R_~ular Daj[ Meeting)
The above rates which were increased approximately 12.8 percent effective
October 1, 1982 produced an income of 1.2 million dollars with an expense of 1.I
million dollars for the period July 1, 1982 to June 30, 1983. 0nly three quarters
of the new rates fell in this period. A full year under the existing rates should
produce additional premium income to help offset the administrative expense of
Blue Cross which will go from $3.22 per contract per month to $3.56. The annual
total administrative expense will increase from approximately $56,000 to $62,000
on the 1,453 subscribers in the County group contract.
Based upon the Committee's review and the Committee's discussion with
representatives of Blue Cross, it is recommended by the Committee that the contract
be extended for another year beginning October 1, 1983 at existing rates and
coverages. As you know, most organizations have experienced increased rates this
year. The Committee intends to review the plan from a financial standpoint again
after the second quarter of the contract year."
Mr. Jones noted that the School Board, Albemarle County Service Authority Board and Jail
~oard 'have all approved extending the contract for another year with the same coverages and
rates. 0nly the Welfare Board has not met to take similar action.
(Mr. St. John returned at 9:55 A.M.)
After a brief discussion, motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to
~uthorize the County Executive to extend the Blue Cross/Blue Shield Employee Health Insurance
Plan for another year, beginning October 1, 1983 at the existing rates and coverages. Roll was
called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
~YES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 4. PUBLIC HEARING. Ordinance to amend Sections 2-30 and 2-31 of the
Code of Albemarle (Airport Commission Ordinance). (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August
30 and September 6, 1983.)
Mr. St. John, County Attorney, said he had drafted an ordinance to conform to the language
of the City's Ordinance, after same was requested in July. The changes are minor and were
recommended so that the ordinance would coincide with practice and also to clarify staff
responsibilities.
The public hearing was opened. There being no one present to speak, the public hearing
~as ~closed. Motion was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Miss Nash, to adopt an ordinance
amending and reenacting Sections 2-30 and 2-31 of the Code of Albemarle, such sections relating
to the membership and administration of the Charlottesville-Albemarle Joint Airport Commission;
the-language submitted by the County Attorney, Mr. St. John.
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REORDAIN
SECTZONS 2-30 AND 2-31 OF THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE
SUCH SECTIONS RELATZNG TO THE MEMBERSHIP AND ADMINISTRATION OF
THE CHARLOTTESVILLE-ALBEMARLE JOINT AIRPORT COMMISSION
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that sections 2-30 and 2-31 of the Code of Albemarle are amended to read as
follows:
Section 2-30. Compensation and terms of members.'
Ail members of the airport commission shall serve without
compensation. Ail members will serve terms which expire on
December 1 of the third year following their appointment.
No member will be reappointed who has served as a member for
six consecutive years immediately preceding such reappointment.
Section 2-31. Officers and Staff~ minutes of meetings.
As soon after their appointment as possible, the members
of the airport commission shall convene and elect a chairperson
and vice-chairperson from their group for a term of one year.
The airport manager or his or her designee shall serve'as staff
to the airport commission and shall perform such duties as are
appropriate, including the keeping of proper minutes of the
meetings of the commission. Anyone designated by the airport
manager to perform duties for the airport commission shall report
to, and be subject to the supervision of, the airport manager in
the performance of such duties.
The roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
lYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 5. PUBLIC HEARING. An Ordinance to provide for the establishment of a
Deferred Compensation Plan for Employees, and the Supervision, Adminstration and Implementation
Thereof. (Advertised in the Daily Progress on August 30 and September 6, 1983.)
360
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting)
Mr. Russell Otis reminded the Board that several months ago it had authorized the hiring
of Stanley Clarke and Associates as consultants to create a deferred compensation plan for
Albemarle County employees. This plan has now been submitted to the Internal Revenue Service
and the State Deferred Compensation Commission Board, both of whom have approved the plan. He
said this plan will provide employees with the opportunity to defer paying Federal income taxes
on a portion of their salary through investment in various funds, although no decision has been
made as to what those investments will' be. The plan will not cost Albemarle County anything
since employees choosing to participate will be required to pay. a fee directly to the con-
sultants. The consultants operate solely on the fee, receiving no benefit from the sale of one
investment package over another. Mr. Otis concluded by saying that adoption of the ordinance
is necessary before work on this plan can proceed further.
Mr. Fisher asked what fees the employees will be required to pay. Mr. Otis said about
$48.00 per year to the consultant. For this fee, the employee will receive quarterly reports
on investments made in his behalf, including complete disclosures resulting from those invest-
ments. The fee also entitles the employee to speak with the consultant regarding transfer of
funds, changes in investment choices or any other related matters. Mr. Fisher suggested that
this consultant's fee should be based on the total value of investments, which would provide a
greater incentive to the consultant. The arrangement proposed is one where the consultant
takes his fee "off the top" and this provides no motivation for the consultant. Mr. Otis
commented that such a fee was considered and was balanced against having an appointed committee
oversee the plan and assess the consultant's successes or failures. Zf the committee should
deem the consultant ineffective, the Committee would have the authority to change consultants
at the end of a three-year contract period. Mr. Fisher asked if all department heads and staff
have reviewed and discussed the proposed plan. Mr. Otis responded that the specifics have not
been discussed, but when the County's Deferred Compensation Committee selects the investment
vehicles there will be discussion. While the Committee will control the actual investment of
funds, employees will be given the opportunity to choose among a variety of recommendations.
Mr. Fisher said that while he is in favor of providing County employees with the opportu-
nity to participate in such a plan, he does not want this Board to inadvertently create proble~
for the employees. Mr. Otis reiterated that the Compensation committee will make some of the
initial decisions relative to funding vehicles available. Once the deferred compensation
program is functioning, this Committee will be expanded to include eight participants. The
Committee as proposed by the County Executive, will be comprised of five members; the County
Executive, the Director of Personnel, the Director of Finance, the Executive Director of the
Albemarle County Service Authority, and a representative from the School division, Mr. Papenfus~
These are individuals who possess a good understanding of the world of finances and it is they
who will be making these initial choices. Following implementation anyone who is eligible to
participate in the plan is likewise eligible to serve on the Compensation Committee. Mr.
Fisher commented that if his worst fears are realized, the Board of Supervisors might become
the object of a law suit initiated by its employees. Mr. Fisher added, however, that if such a
plan is administered in the proper manner it can be a very positive experience. Mr. St. John
said it is not within legal framework for the Board to select the administrator of the plan, or
choose the types of investments which can be made. Actually, the Board has no responsibility
for the success or failure of the plan.
Mr. Jones said a staff committee had interviewed and taken three or four bids for this
plan. The administrator chosen had his plan approved by the IRS, and has said he will take
considerable time explaining all of the particulars of the plan to County employees.
The public hearing was opened. With no one present to speak for or against adoption of
the ordinance, the public hearing was closed.
Miss Nash referred back to the manner in which the consultant will be paid, and expressed
her feeling that an agent compensated by a flat rate might conceivably be more honest than one
who obtains "incentive money." Mr. Fisher commented that this is a decision of the Compensatio~
Committee.
Motion was then offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Mr. Butler, to adopt the ordinance as
advertised and drafted by Mr. St. John. (Complete text of the ordinance is set out below.)
AN ORDINANCE TO PROVIDE FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF A DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN FOR EMPLOYEES,
AND THE SUPERVISION, ADMINISTRATION AND
IMPLEMENTATION THEREOF.
BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
as follows:
ARTICLE I
Section 1. Establishment~ Execution and Amendment of Deferred
Compensation Plan. Pursuant to the Government Employees Deferred Com-
pensation Act, Section 51-111.67:14 et seq. of the Code of Virginia (1950),
as amended, the County of Albemarle hereby adopts and establishes a Plan
of Deferred Compensation for its employees. The purpose of the plan shall
be to provide for the deferral of compensation to the participants. The
plan shall exist in addition to all other retirement, pension or other
benefit systems available to the participants, and shall not supercede,
make inoperative or reduce any benefits provided by any other retirement,
pension or benefit program established by law.
On behalf of the employer, the county executive is hereby authorized
and directed to execute, and deliver the plan to the plan administrator.
The plan shall contain such terms and amendments as the county executive
may from time to time approve, such approval to be conclusively evidenced
by his execution thereof.
361
September ~4_ 1983 Re._ular Day Meeting)
ARTICLE II
Section 1. Designation of Deferred Compensation Committee to
Administer the Plan. There is hereby created a Deferred Compensation
Committee appointed by the County Executive of the County of Albemarle.
ARTICLE III
Section 1. Powers of Deferred Compensation Committee. The De-
ferred Compensation Committee is hereby granted the power to do all
things by way of supervision, administration and implementation of a plan
of deferred compensation, including but not limited to the power to contract
with primate corporations or institutions for service in connection
therewith; provided however, that nothing contained in this section shall be
construed to authorize the Deferred Compensation Committee to act beyond the
limits of the Plan.
Roll was called and the motion to adopt the ordinance set out above carried by the fo
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
(Mrs. Cooke stated for the record that she has reservations regarding
the manner in which the Administrator will be paid.)
Agenda Item No. 6. Report: Oakhill Water System.
Mr. Jones referred to a letter dated August 8, 1983, from Mr. Bruce Rasmussen, concerning
the 0akhill-Southwood Water System. Several members of the staff, (County Engineer, Director
of Planning and Community Development, Director of Finance, and County Attorney) met and
reviewed the history and status of the said water system. The memorandum dated September 9,
1983, from Mr. Maynard Elrod is a joint staff response to the questions contained in Mr.
Rasmussen's letter.
Mr. Elrod was present and proceeded to read the following staff report:
"Mr. Rasmussen's questions and the staff's answers are as follows:
Whether a central well or water system permit has even been approved
by the Board of Supervisors for the 0akhill-Southwood system, and if so,
for how many connections.
Answer: No formal action has been taken by the Board or County staff
to approve this well system. Tests on several of the wells were monitored
by the Engineering Department in 1977 (wells #1,2,4 and 7), however, no
approvals were given. The Virginia Health Department issued a permit to
the Oakhill Water Company, Inc., on October 3, 1977, for 286 equivalent
residential connections (E.R.C.). This number was based upon the existing
number of mobile homes and residences in the mobile home park and Oakhill
Subdivision as follows:
300 mobile homes
63 homes in Oakhili
225 E.R.C.
63 E.R.C.
288 E.R.C.
(There is a 2 E.R.C. discrepancy.)
Whether the Oakhill-Southwood Water System has unilaterally gone ahead
and expanded up to 456 connections in violation of the instructions of the
Board of Supervisors.
Answer: By actual count made by the Engineering Department in August, 1983
it was found that there are 372 mobile homes and 83 residential connec-
tions in 0akhill Subdivision. Some of the lots in the subdivision
have multi-family homes.
372 mobile homes
83 homes in Oakhill
= 279 E.R.C.
= 83 E.R.C.
362 E.R.C.
By this count therefore, the current status is that the system
is serving 76 more E.R.C.'s than the Health Department permit allows.
3. if unilateral and unauthorized expansion has taken place, whether this
expansion has come by pumping more water from well number 7.
Answer: The amount of water being pumped from Well number 7 has not been
verified. According to the Health Department permit, Well #7 is the only
well that serves the mobile home park. The monthly reports which the Oakhill
Water Company furnishes to the Health Department indicate the following
usage for the mobile home park system.
362
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting)
Month
Gallons Used
No. Connections
Feb/83 2?5,200 290
Mar/83 377,800 290
Apr/83 892,q00 290
May/83 1,756,700 290
Jun/83 1,459,100 290
Jul/83 913,600 290
These figures indicate that the water used per connection
varies from 34 gallons per day per mobile home up to 195'.
These figures seem very low.
Our conclusion is that the water system is probably in violation of the
Health Department permit and by copy of this report, we are notifying
the Health Department's Regional Office in Lexington of the above' informa-
tion and requesting that they investigate the system and inform us of their
findings. The County Staff feels' ~hat the system should be connected to the
Albemarle County Service Authority system and the wells abandoned for three
reasons:
The water from the wells has a high iron content.
The Health Department has instructed the system owner
to correct this problem.
The system competes with the ACSA within its operating
jurisdiction.
Fire protection could be provided by the ACSA to a higher
standard.
The County Attorney will discuss the legal position of the County regarding ground-
water supplies and the acquisition of this system if the Board so desires."
Mr. Elrod said he was able to verify all of the information stated in the report with the
exception of flows from the wells. He stated that County staff did nov enter the well houses
or attempt to meter well flows because the Health Department keeps records of this nature on a
monthly basis; these figures are stated in the report he just gave. Mr. Elrod said these
figures come directly from the owner and unless the Health Department feels the figures are not
valid, the Health Department does not monitor the wells either.
Mr. Rasmussen, in his letter dated August 8, 1983,-states that his clients feel their
groundwater supply is being effected by the water system the County has approved. Mr. Elrod
said the County has never officially approved this system. The Health Department's approval
and the permit that was issued by the Health Department was done under a grandfather clause in
the law. The permit was issued for the number of mobile homes and residences in existence when
~he survey was made, but there are now between seventy and seventy-five more equivalent res-
idential connections at the location than for which the permit was initially issued. In
addition to the residential connections, there is a laundromat, convenience store, and office
using the system. Mr. Elr~d pointed out that the laundromat could account for another eight or
Ten equivalent connections. Mr. Elrod said Mr. St. John will discuss the County's legal
position and whether the County has the right to initiate action on a Health Department permit
violation. Mr. Elrod commented that the water quality of this system meets drinking water
standards for bacteria count, but is low in terms of iron and maKganese content. This results
in red water coming out of the spigots at times. The Health Department has asked the owner to
install hydrants in order to periodically flush the system in an attempt to eliminate this
problem. Mr. Fisher said since the hydrants could not be used for fire protection, the purpose
of installing these hydrants would be misleading. Mr. Elrod explained that these "hydrants"
would essentially be "blow off valves". Mr. Fisher pointed out that the issue is really
quantity, rather than quality of the water. Mr. Elrod said he brought up the issue because if
blow off valves do not correct the situation, it may be necessary to install a treatment which
would then give the owner an incentive to connect to the public water supply system.
Mrs. Cooke asked what happens in terms of consumption when this discoloration occurs. Mr.
Elrod responded there would be no danger from a health standpoint because the iron content is
not high, however, too much iron over a long period of time could present a danger. Mr. Elrod
said the Health Department does not normally take action on discolored water unless complaints
are received. He added that this system met Health Department standards at the time the permit
was issued. Originally the permit covered service to one hundred eighty-eight equivalent
connections although the permit was issued for two hundred and eighty-eight because that was
the number of connections being served at the time. Mr. Elrod said there are now three hundred
and sixty-two equivalent connections being served although some of the homes are not occupied
continuously. He stated that some of the units are multiple dwellings and may have individual
wells but this has not been verified. He pointed out that even if there are fifteen or sixteen
individual wells, there are still more connections to the system than were originally approved
by the Health Department.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if any notice had been given to the owners of the Oakhill system
regarding this discussion today. Mr. Elrod replied in the negative. Miss Nash asked where the
Albemarle County Service Authority service boundary lies in the area. Mr. Bill Brent said the
waterline ends at the Holiday Inn on Fifth Street Extended. On the Old Lynchburg Road side
(Route 631) the waterline ends at Sherwood Manor. Mr. Lindstrom asks if that is also the end
of the service area. Mr. Brent replied no, most of the area in and around Southwood Mobile
Homes and Oakhill is within the service area.
September 14, 198~ (Regular Day
Mr. Fisher suggested discussing the matter with the County Attorney in executive session
before the Board takes any action. Miss Nash said there are other areas in the county which
also need public water and she feels the Board cannot wait another four years before taking
action. Mr. Lindstrom said he shares Miss Nash's concern. He feels the real problem is the
increasing numbers of individuals in an urban setting with urban demands and public water is
the only way to solve the problem.
Miss Nash offered motion to request that the Albemarle County Service Authority proceed
with a study. Mr. Lindstrom said he wanted the benefit of an executive session before voting
on such a motion. The Board could also deal with property acquisition at the same time~
There being nothing further to discuss at this time, Mr. Fisher stated the issue of South,
wood-Oakhill water system would be continued during executive session at lunch.
Agenda Item No. 7. Vacation of Ashmere Subdivision (Deferred from July 13, 1983).
Mr. St. John recommended that this matter be deferred to the October 12, 1983 meeting, as
the matter is still in bankruptcy court.
Motion was made by Miss Nash, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to defer vote on the vacation of=
a portion of Ashmere Subdivision to the October 12, 1983, meeting. Roll was called and the
motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Not Docketed.
Mr. Fisher recognized Ms. Mary Alice Gunter, member of Charlottesville City Council, and
Mrs. Elizabeth Scott. Mrs. Scott said she had served as a member of the Governor's Task Force
to Combat Drunk Driving, whose prime recommendation was to organize local task forces through-
out the State of Virginia. On September 8, 1983, a Steering Committee meeting was held and a
petition was drafted for submission to the Board of Supervisors. Ms. Gunter referred to the
petition which on September 12, 1983, Mrs. Patricia Cooke had presented to the members of the
City Council. Ms. Gunter read the petition as follows:
"TO:
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors
Charlottesville City Countil
FROM:
Steering Committee Concerned about the Problem of Drunk Driving in
Charlottesville and Albemarle County
RE:
Formation of Task Force
Drunk driving is generally understood to be one of the most serious problems
facing our society today. The statistics concerning death and injury, as well as
enormous economic loss, are appalling. Innocent people, including a disproportionate
number of our youth, are being violently killed, maimed and crippled on our streets
and highways.
It is true that stronger laws combined with more efficient administrative
changes can be created by the state to help combat this problem. However, the
enforcement of these laws and the systems involved in adjudication, rehabilitation,
education and public information are issues that can finally be addressed completely
only on the local level.
We therefore respectfully petition the Charlottesville City Council and the
Albemarle County Board of Supervisors to convene a Task Force to Combat Drunk
Driving.
Attached to this document are proposed goals for the task force.
If the Board and City Council are in agreement, we propose that Patricia Cooke
of the Albemarle Board of Supervisors, be appointed Chairman, and Mary Alice Gunter
of the City Council, Co-Chairman of this Task Force.
The ultimate goal of this Task Force will be to create a belief in the public
mind that excessive drinking, combined with driving a vehicle, is irresponsible,
preventable, and not to be tolerated by society."
Ms. Gunter then presented the suggested goals of the task force as follows:
i. Identify the extent of the drunk driving problem in Charlottesville
and Albemarle County.
2. Identify and assess current efforts to address drunk driving in
Charlottesville and Albemarle County. This study should encompass
both specific and general deterrance.
3. Determine how the coordination of management and resources can be
improved at the local level.
4. Review the state task force recommendations and determine the local
implications of their implementation.
5. Prepare a report on the findings of the local task force and recommenda-
tions for action to deliver to the Charlottesville City Council and the
Albemarle Board of Supervisors."
.365
September 14, 1983. _ _ _(Regular Da~ Meetin_~g)
Ms. Gunter called the Board's attention to a proposed list for membership on the Steering
Committee. The City Council passed the petition for formation of a Task Force, with a stipu-
lation that other names could be added to the membership list who would complete the list of
categories. Mr. Fisher asked if the list of attendees at the September meeting are intended~_~to~
be the initial appointees. Ms. Gunter replied in the affirmative. She said that the Tasklwill
be separated into small committees so the list can conceivably be much larger. Mrs. Cooke said
it is the intention of this committee to have an ongoing task force which will remain before
the public. Mr. Fisher suggested that if the Board wished to approve this request, the listed
appointees be approved for a definite period of time. Mrs. Scott suggested a report be made to
the Board of Supervisors and Charlottesville City Council in the Spring of 1984.
Miss Nash moved to appoint Mrs. Patricia Cooke as Chairman of the Task Force Committee
from the County of Albemarle and Ms. Mary Alice Gunter to serve as Co-Chairman from the City of
Charlottesville; to accept the recommendation of the Committee and to jointly appoint, with
the City of Charlottesville, all of the list of attendees for a period beginning September 14,
198~, and ending December 31, 1984. This motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom. Roll was
called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 11. Job Description and Specifications for Chief of Police.
Mr. Russell Otis, Executive Assistant, noted that a job description for the position of
Chief of Police had been drafted for adoption into the County Pay and Classification Plan. Mr.
Otis said a salary range was established for this position using the same techniques utilized
by the consultant in preparing the revised plan adopted by the Board to be effective in July of
1983. The salary range is indicated as a range 27.
Mr. Lindstrom asked if an individual could be hired at any level within this range. Mr.
Otis, said the Plan authorizes a department head to hire someone at the second step which is
five percent higher than the entry level, but only the County Executive has the authority to
authorize hiring someone at the third step. Anything beyond that point requires approval of
the Board of Supervisors. Miss Nash asked how the salary range was determined. Mr. Otis
answered that a weighted formula established by the consultant was used. Mr. Lindstrom asked
which other employee positions fall into the 27 range. Mr. Otis replied that there are
mately five department heads in range 27 or above. Mr. Lindstrom asked what positions are
comparable to a range 27. Mr. Otis answered that the Director of Inspections is a range 28,
the Director of Finance is a range 32, and the County Sheriff is a range 29. Mr. Lindstrom
asked why a range was established for a Police Chief two below the County Sheriff. Mr. Otis
answered it was because the Sheriff has both law enforcement and court service duties. The
Chief of Police would be relieved of court service duties. Miss Nash wondered how this salary
compares with that paid in other jurisdictions. Mr. Otis replied that studies indicate the
salary range for the County Chief of Police is within an appropriate range. Mr. Otis said the
Personnel Director had seen a copy of the final draft of the job description and salary range,
but no comment has been received. Mr. Fisher said the plan was designed so that an individual
is hired at the bottom step of a range allowing that person to progress through merit increases
to the top of the scale. Mr. Lindstrom commented that the bottom of the range 27 is a lower
salary than he would have expected for this type of job. Mr. Henley felt it was "a pretty
decent salary."
Mr. Jones said the "acid test" comes when the position is actually advertised and you see
the caliber of people who respond to the ad. Should the individuals applying not meet standard~
the salary range would have to be reevaluated and the process repeated again. Mr. Fisher
expressed concern regarding the time factor involved in a repeat process and noted the County
is to have a Chief of Police on the payroll by January 1, 1984. Mr. Jones assured the Board
the salary range had been assessed very carefully and in comparison with other localities is
considerably higher. Miss Nash felt it will be difficult to hire someone at what she regards
as a mediocre salary considering the responsibilities a Chief of Police carries. Miss Nash
asked how the salary proposed for the County Police Chief compares with that position in the
City. Mr. Jones replied that it is significantly less than the salary of the current City
Police Chief, but added he had been in that postiti0n for a long time.
Mr. LindStrom then offered motion to adopt the job description for a Chief of Police, same
furnished to the Board this date, and to set the salary range at 27 as propoSed by the staff.
The motion was seconded by Mrs. Cooke.
Miss Nash said she would prefer to set the salary at $30,000. Mr. Butler expressed
about setting a Pay scale too low which would later invite criticisms and complaints by the
individual hired. He would prefer to offer a salary range which is more comfortable to ail
parties concerned. Mr. Jones said the County Executive has the authority to hire the Chief of
Police at thirty thousand dollars, which is the C step, therefore, the proposed range of 27 can
stand. Mr. Lindstrom said he agreed with Miss Nash but he is willing to go with the recom-
i~mendation proposed by Mr. Jones and Mr. Otis.
Roll was called at this time and the foregoing motion carried by the following recorded
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 12. Reappropriation: School Fund
Mr. Jones said an appropriation was made in FY 82-83 for the Federal Program Secondary
Advocates for Gifted Students in the amount of $15,000 with an equal amount to be received in
revenue. As of June 30, 1983, a total of $6,836.83 had been expended leaving a balance of
$8,163.17. An appropriation of this amount is requested along with a revision of estimated
revenues in the same amount.
.366
September 14~ 1983 (Re~utar DaY Meeting)
Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to adopt the following resolution
reappropriating the sum of $8,163.17 for in-service training for gifted and talented teachers
(Secondary Advocates for Gifted Students):
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $8,163.17 be, and the same hereby is, reappropriated from the School Fund
coded as follows for a Federal Program entitled, "Secondary Advocates for
Gifted Students:"
EXPENDITURES
1 2002 63360 100203
1 2002 63360 201300
1 2002 63360 309900
1 2002 63360 545000
1 2002 63360 550100
Compensation Staff Development
Tuition Assistance
Miscellaneous Contracted Services
Instructional Supplies
Routine Travel
TOTAL
$ 4,500.00
2,291.00
769.00
443.17
160.00
$ 8,163.17
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Revenues section of the 1983-84
County budget is hereby amended by the addition of the following item:
REVENUES
2 2002 63360 330001 Federal Program Receipts
$ 8,163.17
Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 15.
Transfers:
School Fund.
Mr. David Papenfuse was present and explained the transfers being requested.
noted that the School Board had acted on this request August 23, 1983).
(Mr. Papenfu:
Transfer $11,468 from Central Administration Office Assistant
category to Central Office Secretarial category to cover the
salary of 'the Secretary II position in Personnel.
Transfer the balance of $3,720 from the Office Assistant
category to Elementary Education Directorship to offset a
portion of the local share of the Director Federal Programs
and Elementary Education.
Be
Transfer $2,360 from Enrichment Supervisor account to Elementary
Directorship account. The enrichment position was reduced from
twelve months to eleven months.
Transfer $2,877 from Staff Development to Elementary Director-
ship to complete local share funding of this position.
De
Transfer $2,025 from Media Center supplies and $1,258'from Media
Center Equipment to $915.00 Media Center Clerical for inventory
activity and $2,368 to Media Center noninstructional staff to cover
film cleaning activities.
Transfer $1,900 from Maintenance Materials to Maintenance Equipment
for the purchase of a small office copier to replace a unit that is
no longer repairable.
Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to adopt the following reso~:J
lution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia
that $25,618. be, and the same hereby is, approved to be transferred in the
School Fund as follows:
FROM
i 2000 60200 100122
1 2000 60740 100133
1 2000 60210 100203
1 2000 60800 545000
1 2000 60800 700100
1 2000 60900 541700
Administration
Other Instructional Program
Instruction
Instruction
Capital Outlay
Operation of School Plant
$ 15,198.00
2,360.00
2,877.00
2,025.00
1,258.00
1~900.00
TOTAL $ 25,618.00
S_~ptember 141~~~~_~ular Da~~
AYES:
NAYS:
TO:
1 2000 60200 100150
1~2000 60610 100130
1 2000 60610 100130
1 2000 60610 100130
i 2000 60800 10015o
i 2000 60800 100156
i 2000 60900 ?00100
Administration
Instruction
Instruction
Instruction
Instruction
Operation of School Plant
Capital Outlay
$ 11,468.00
3,730.00
2,360.00
2,877.OO
915.00
2,368.00
!~900.00
TOTAL
$ 25,618.00
Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Mr. Papenfuse called attention to a memorandum dated September 12, 1983, which he had
prepared regarding the 1983/84 10th Day Enrollment, copies of which were distributed among the
Board members. The essence of Mr. Papenfuse's discussion addressed a loss of state revenue
amounting to $172,576.00 resulting from a decrease of some two hundred and forty-five students
in the County schools this year. Mr. Papenfuse assured the Board, however, that this loss will
be recovered in the first quarter of the budget Cycle. He said that each of his cost center
directors is placing a ten percent reserve On funds in specific areas; this amount will be
rebudgeted. The balance of these funds will be maintained after the loss of revenue, in a
management reserve account which will be reserved until the third or fourth quarters. Mr.
Papenfuse concluded that while there is concern over loss of enrollment, there is presently on
hold, four point nine teaching positions, three aide positions and a considerable amount of
salary recoveries in the hiring of new positions for this year. Mr. Papenfuse said he feels
very confident that this recovery will be accomplished. (A copy of the memorandum dated
September 12, 1983, and addressed to the Albemarle County School Board is on file in the
Clerk's office.)
Agenda Item No. 13. Reappropriation: General Fund.
Mr. Jones called attention to the memorandum from Mr. Melvin Breeden, dated September 6,
1983, requesting the Board to approve the reappropriation of unexpended balances in several
General Government departments. Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Henley, to
adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that the following reappropriations are approved as requested by Melvin A.
Breeden in a memo dated September 6, 1983:
Engineering Department (for Berkeley-Four Seasons
Drainage Basin Survey)
Engineering Department (for KAYPRO 10 Computer)
Refuse Disposal (for June payment-Ivy Landfill)
S.P.C.A. (last payment on 1982-83 contract)
Social Services Department (Special jobs Bill Funds-
Emergency Food and Shelter)
Social Services Department (Special Jobs Bill Funds-
Unemployment Program)
Social Services Department (to purchase a one-way
mirror for new offices)
$ 3,050.00
$ 2,000.00
$52,200.10
$ 1,236.50
$ 4,759.00
$ 8,164.00
$ 8oo.00
lYES:
NAYS:
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 14. Transfers and Special Appropriations: General Fund.
Mr. Jones referred to the memorandum from Mr. Melvin A. Breeden, dated September 7, 1983,
requesting the Board to approve a transfer of funds to cover the reorganization of the Housing
Office and Planning Department. The memorandum further requests the Board to approve a special
appropriation for the Planning Department to cover personnel expenses resulting from the
reorganization. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Henley, to approve the
following transfer of funds and to also adopt the following resolution:
FROM:
HOUSING 1 1000 81030
100100 Compensation Regular $ 11,163.00
200100 FICA-Fed. 01d Age Ins. 1,496.00
200200 Retirement-VSRS 1,278.00
200500 Hospital & Medical Plan 300.00
200600 Life Insurance 113.00
201100 Workman's Compensation 50.00
TO:
TOTAL
COUNTY EXECUTIVE 1 1000 12010
$ 14,400.00
100100 Compensation Regular $ 11,163.00
200100 FICA-Fed. 01d Age Ins. 1,496.00
200200 Retirement-VSRS 1,278.00
200500 Hospital & Medical Plan 300.00
200600 Life Insurance 113.00
201100 Workman's Compensation 50.00
TOTAL $ 14,400.00
3'68
September 14~ 1982 (Re~ula.r
AYES:
NAYS:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $19,140.00 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the General Fund
and coded to the Planning Department as follows to cover personnel expenses
resulting from reorganization of this department:
1 1000 81010 100100
1 1000 81010 200100
1 1000 81010 200200
1 1000 81010 200500
1 1000 81010 200600
1 1000 81010 201100
Compensation Regular
FICA-Federal Old Age Ins.
Retirement-VSRS
Hospital & Medical Plan
Life Insurance
Workman's Compensation
$ 14,638.00
1,968.00
1,681.00
6oo.oo
148.00
6O.OO
TOTAL $ 19,140.00
Roll was called and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
At 12:27 P.M., Mr. Fisher suggested adjourning into executive session to discuss legal
matters and property acquisition. Motion was made to this effect by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by
Mr. Butler, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
The Board reconvened into open session at 1:35 P.M.
Agenda Item No. 19. PUBLIC HEARING. Reapproval of Industrial Development Authority Bond
Issue for Wellagain, Inc. (Notice of this hearing was published in the Daily Progress on
September 1 and September 8, 1983.)
The Board of Supervisors on July 8, 1983, approved a bond issuance for Wellagain Limited
Partnership for an eighty bed medical facility, in the amount of $3,500,000. Because the bonds
were not signed before July 1, 1983, the bond issuance has to be reapproved under the new law
which went into effect on that date. The Industrial Development Authority passed on this
request on August 25, 1983.
Mr. Butch Barbee, administrator of Mountainwood Residential Treatment Facility, Old
Lynchburg Road, was recognized as representing Wellagain Limited Partnership. Mr. Barbee said
the project had been broken into .two phases with Phase I, comprising twenty beds for the
treatment of alcohol and drug abuse patients, opening in October of 1982. The Phase I project
has met all expectations so the developer is in the planning process to build the remaining
sixty beds. Wellagain is in the process of securing financing with National Bank in Charlotte
ville and expects to complete this process within the next few days.
Mr. Fisher asked if there had been any changes since the time of the first application.
Mr. Barbee responded the dollar amount of the project has increased somewhat due to inflation
but this does. not effect the bond issue. Mr. Fisher noted that the Industrial Development
Authority held the required public hearing and reapproved this issue.
The public hearing was opened at this time.
the application, the public hearing was closed.
With no one present to speak for or against
Miss Nash asked Mr. Barbee if Phase II would be in a separate building. Mr. Barbee replie
that it would. Miss Nash commented she had heard very good things about this project.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to adopt the following
resolution reapproving the issuance of Bonds by the Industrial Development Authority:
WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County, Virginia,
(the "Authority"), has considered the application of Weltagain Limited Partnership
(the "Company") requesting the issuance of the Authority's industrial development
revenue bonds in an amount not to exceed $3,500,000 (the "Bonds") to assist in
the financing of the Company's acquisition, construction and equipping of an 80-bed
medical and rehabilitation facility (the "Project") to be located at 500 Old Lynchburg
Road, Charlottesville, Virginia, in Albemarle County, Virginia, and has held a public
hearing thereon on August 2~, 1983; and
WHEREAS, Section 103(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 as amended, pro-
vides that the governmental unit having jurisdiction over the issuer of industrial
development bonds and over the area in which any facility financed with the proceeds
of industri.al development bonds is located must approve the issuance of the bonds;
and
WHEREAS, the Authority issues its bonds on behalf of Albemarle County, Virginia,
(the "County"); the Project to be located in the County and the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia (the "Board") constitutes the highest~ elected govern-
mental unit of the County; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has recommended that the Board approve the issuance of
the Bonds; and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance of the
Bonds, subject to the terms to be agreed upon, a certificate of the public hearing
and a Fiscal Impact Statement have been filed with the Board;
369
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meet±~g)
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board approves the issuance of the Bonds by the Authority for the
benefit of the Company, as required by Section 103(k) and Section 15.1-1378.1 of
the Virginia Code, to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project.
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds does not constitute an endorse-
ment to a prospective purchaser of the Bonds of the creditworthiness of the Project
or the Company.
3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Roll was called and the foregoing motion carried by the following recorded vote:
~YES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Agenda Item No. 8. Discussion. Community Diversion Incentive Program.
Mr. Jones said Albemarle County has been the fiscal agent since the creation of the
Community Diversion Program in the County. In this role, Albemarle County has been merely the
bookkeeping agent for this operation. Mr. Jones, said that by action of the General Assembly
in the last session, (Section 53.1-181), agencies of this kind are now required to have a
sponsoring agent. If Albemarle County were to become the sponsoring agent, the County Executive
would be placed in a strong administrative position and the County itself placed in a signifi-
cant liability situation.
Mr. Jones said a proposed contract had been submitted to Mr. Agnor by the Jefferson Area
]ommunity Diversion Program Board, and the State Department of Corrections, which Mr. Agnor
subsequently referred to Mr. St. John for review. In a letter dated August 2, 1983, Mr. St.
John clearly states reasons why Mr. Agnor should not sign the contract. (Copy of letter is on
file.) Basically, the County Executive is in effect being asked to assume the ultimate responsi-
bility for the program. The State will not accept just the signature of the program director.
Furthermore, by so doing, the County Executive becomes responsible for the mission of the
program, yet it is not under him as a County Department and the County Executive has no authorit
to oversee its day to day operations.
Mrs. Cooke asked for an explanation of the Community Diversion Incentive Program. Mr.
Fisher explained that this program was designed to give convicted non-violent felons an oppor-
tunity to be released into the community to work. One concept of this program is to allow
reparation to the victims of these crimes. Another concept is to alleviate overcrowding in
State prisons. Mr. Fisher said this agenda item was merely intended as a discussion and no
action is required of the Board.
Agenda Item No. 16. Appropriation: Capital Improvement Program.
Mr. Jones summarized his memorandum dated September 9, 1983, on the above subject:
"The unallocated fund balance of the Capital Improvement Fund is $2.6 million.
This balance is after the transfer to the School Fund, and appropriations
to several projects since July 1, 1983. Of this amount, approximately $1.9
million will be needed for the improvements to the County Buildings on Court
Square on which improvements will be advertised for bid next week.
Department heads were requested to let Melvin Breeden, Deputy Director of Finance,
know their immediate capital needs. From those requests, Mr. Breeden composed
a list of requests totalling $418,111 for nineteen separate projects.
Mr. Breeden also requests action adding three additional sources of revenue
to the Capital Zmprovement Fund in the amount of $914,500. The largest of
these revenue sources is the transfer from the General Fund of $661,400
which was designated in the operating budget for FY 1983-84. This transfer
will take place after receipt of the property taxes in December."
Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to adopt a resolution a
ating Capital Improvement monies to certain Program projects as recommended by the COunty
Executive. A further motion was made by Miss Nash, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, authorizing the
amendment of the Revenue section of the 1983'1984 budget. The adopted resolution reads as
follows:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $418,111 be, and the same hereby is, appropriated from the Capital
Improvement Fund and transferred to the following:
3 7'0
CODE
PROJECT
AMOUNT
1 9000 97000 970901
1 9000 97000 970351
1 9000 97000 975203
1 9000 97000 973001
i 9000 97000 975403
1 9000 97000 975404
1 9000 97000 975405
1 9000 97000 975803
i 9000 97000 975100
1 9000 97000 970300
1 9000 97000 970350
i 9000 97000 971100
1 9000 97000 971200
1 9000 97000 971300
i 9000 97000 971400
i 9000 97000 971500
1 9000 97000 970800
1 9000 97000 970201
Henley Reroofing
Western Albemarle Roof Drain
Crozet Library Sewer
Energy Conservation
Airport-Property Acquisition
Airport-Sand Spreader/Sweeper
Airport-Quick Dash Vehicle
Fire Service Training Center
Computer Upgrade
Albemarle High School
Western Albemarle High School
Crozet Elementary
Greer Elementary
Rose Hill Elementary
Scottsville Elementary
Stony Point Elementary
Jack J0uett
Miscellaneous School Projects-
Welding Booths
$157,472
10,000
10,780
89,525
25O
350
3,000
25,000
26,600
34,650
17,300
7,000
4,000
6,345
75O
3,500
4,339
14,000
(It was noted that the above nine projects
comprise only a portion of the category called
"Miscellaneous School Repairs" and are projects
which are badly needed. The architect has said
that the repairs should be completed before
winter.)
1 9000 97000 975406
Airport-Automated Weather
System
3,250
TOTAL $418,111
AND BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Revenue section of the 1983-84
budget be amended by the addition of the following items:
CODE
2 9000 90000 51~oo
2 9000 90000 92000
2 9000 ooooo 94000
DESCRIPTION
Transfer from General Fund
Literary Fund Loan
Energy Conservation
AMOUNT
$661,400
240,000
33~100
TOTAL $934,500
Roll was called on the foregoing motion and same oarried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 20. Public Hearing: Ordinance to,amend Section 2-52 of the Industrial
Development Authority Ordinance to Increase Number of Bond Issuances, and also a Request from
Boar's Head, Inc. for Industrial Development Authority bonds. (Advertised in the Daily Progre
on August 30 and September 6, 1983.)
Mr. Thomas A. McQueeney, a member of the Industrial Development Authority read a letter
addressed to the Board from the I.D.A recommending approval of the applicant's request. The
recommendation as set forth in the aforementioned letter is based on several factors. The
applicant complies in every way with the guidelines of the Federal and State Acts. The Authorii
believes Boar's Head Inn is a valued citizen and that the County would benefit from its excelle~
growth record, a two million dollar payroll, employment opportunities for thirty-five to forty
residents and a one hundred percent increase in taxes paid to Albemarle County over the next
two to five years.
Mr. John B. Rogan, President of Boar's Head Enterprises and Boar's Head Inn said Boar's
Head Enterprises is embarking on an expansion program composed of three interrelated phases
with a total projected expenditure of nine million dollars. The Board is being asked to
approve industrial revenue bonds for about one-third of this amount. He explained that immedia~
construction of an office for the Amvest Corporation is anticipated. Phase II would start as
soon as possible thereafter and will involve efficiency suites over small shops. In Phase III,
building twenty-five or thirty luxury suites in cottages overlooking the upper lake is contem'
plated. Mr. Rogan stated that each of these phases will cost approximately one-third of the
total nine million dollars, but only the phase involving the Amvest Corporation national
headquarters offices qualifies for the use of industrial revenue bonds. The other two phases
will be financed through the private sector. Mr. Rogan reminded the Board that Boar's Head Inn
is twenty years old, and is a nationally respected business which has contributed to many
organizations in the State and the community'. Not to be ignored is the significant economic
factor Boar's Head has become in Albemarle County. Mr. Rogan mentioned the amount paid in
taxes by the Boar's Head complex to the locality and in State sales tax and added that the
expansion plans will increase this amount substantially.
371
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting)
Mr. Harry Frazier, from the firm of Hunton and Williams, discussed several aspects of
industrial bond financing on a federal, state and local level, assuring the Board that the
facility in question, clearly qualifies for this type of financing under the law. Mr. St. John
asked Mr. Frazier if he was the bond counsel for this issuance. Mr. Frazier replied that his
firm has been requested to be bond counsel and has had a retat'ionship with Amvest. His firm is
not bond counsel for Boar's Head. He feels that bond counsel is an independent party in this
matter, answerable to the Industrial Authority as issuer of the bonds and the people who purchas
the bonds. Boar's Head, as the applicant, has its own counsel.
Mr. Gordon Winfield, Senior Vice President of Amvest Corporation discussed the background
~f the Amvest Corporation and presented its reasons for requesting industrial bond financing.
He explained that four, fifths of Amvest's activity is in the mining, processing and marketing
of coal, with mines located in southwest Virginia and eastern Kentucky. Mr. Winfield explained
that in order for Amvest to be competitive in the coal market each element of cost must be
carefully controlled because of the ultimate effect on the market price of the product being
~roduced. This control applies to many things and most especially to office facilities or
shelter, but not at the risk of quality. Mr. Rogan has offered to build for and lease to
Amvest a facility which will cost in excess of two and one half million dollars. Mr. Winfield
continued that the fixed monthly payment allowed in Amvest's budget for shelter cannot finance
the required industrial bond financing. A fixed payment per month is necessary to allocate to
the market cost of coal. Mr. Winfield said this fixed payment will allow the building of a
facility much larger than the building that could be constructed using conventional financing.
Mr. Winfield feels it is in the best interests of Albemarle County for the money spent in
bricks and mortar added to the County tax base rather than be paid out in interest payments to
a private source. Mr. Winfield pointed out that the proposed building will house one hundred
or more employees and he assured the Board that the building will be a facility of the utmost
quality. This structure will generate many thousands of dollars per year in real estate and
personal property taxes for the County. In addition, direct employment for fifty or more
people in Albemarle County will be provided in addition to the indirect employment of builders
and merchants.
Mr. Charles Ancona, on behalf of the Boar's Head Inn, supplied the Board with information
?elative to the economic and employment impact of the project. He explained that the project
is comprised of three phases, the first phase being the Amvest National Headquarters facility,
to be followed by the shops and suites (Phase II), and finally the suites on the southwest side
of the upper lake (Phase III). This project will require the employment of fifty-four persons
during construction. Of these, eighty-five percent will be hourly employees currently residing
in Albemarle County. Mr. Ancona said this facility will not place an. additional burden on the
school system as current residents will be hired. The County will not have the expenses for
water, sewer or road maintenance, as the roads are internal and Boar's Head bears the responsi-
bility for the maintenance of same. Mr. Ancona mentioned for the Board the benefits of this
project in terms of tax dollars and jobs. Mr. Ancona reminded the Board that the Boar's Head
is willing to invest six million dollars of its own resources as a statement of continued faith
and confidence in Albemarle County. Mr. Ancona concluded tha~ since the three phases are
interdependent on each other it is imperative to have the support of the Board of Supervisors
in order to carry out this project.
With no one else present to speak on either the ordinance amendment or the inducement
resolution, the public hearing was closed.
Mr. Butler noted that he was very impressed with the presentation provided by the parties
involved, and given the County's need for revenues, he intends to support the application and
amendment to the ordinance.
Mr. Fisher noted receipt of a staff report from the Planning Department on this request:
"Proposal: This proposal is for bond authorization in connection with the
development of a national headquarters for Amvest Corporation. Their plans
envision a gross office area of 23,000 square feet.
Location: The office building is proposed to be located on the south side
of Route 250 West and on the west side of the Boar's Head commercial area, at
the northern end of the existing lake.
Current Zoning: This area is presently zoned HC Highway Commercial which
permits this type of use. A site plan has been submitted and is currently
being reviewed by the County for compliance with developmental standards and
regulations.
Comprehensive Plan: The Comprehensive Plan recommends commercial usage for
this area of Neighborhood 6.
Staff Comment: This site will be served by public water and sewer and as
proposed will meet the scenic highway regulations. This type of use would
also be more in keeping with the intent of the Scenic Highway Designation
on Route 250 West than most uses provided for in the Highway Commercial
District."
Miss Nash commented that she agrees wholeheartedly with Mr. Butler and added that what
money the United States Government would lose from issuance of these industrial bonds would be
a net gain for the County of Albemarle. She noted the County will not have to spend any money
to support this project. Miss Nash said she will support a motion to approve the application
and revise the ordinance.
372
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting)
Mr. Henley said he feels the project will be very good for the County, and he supports
it. Mrs. Cooke commented she could find no fault with the project and feels it fits all the
requirements of industrial bond uses. Mrs. Cooke said she finds no difficulty in supporting
both the application and the ordinance revision. Motion was then offered by Mrs. Cooke,
seconded by Miss Nash, to adopt an ordinance amending and reenacting Section 2-52, Article IX,
Chapter 2 of the Code of Virginia, relating to the number of bond issuances of the Industrial
Development Authority.
Mr. Fisher said that while he strongly supports the type of facility being proposed, he
does not feel there should be a loss of federal or state revenues when there is access to a
private market for financing. Mr. Fisher referred to some letters in the file written by
several banks which clearly state the willingness of these banks to lend money to the applicant
Mr. Fisher believes industrial bonds should be used only when there is no other source of
funding and he feels that the applicant is simply choosing a more attractive means of obtaining
financing. Mr. Fisher concluded by saying he cannot see that there is an overriding public
interest in this issue which offsets the loss of public funds. Mr. Lindstrom stated that he
shared Mr. Fisher's sentiments and added he sees evidence of a change in the tax exempt bond
market which will disadvantage the traditional users of that market. Mr. Lindstrom said he
cannot support the motion.
There bei~ng no further discussion, roll was called and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr. Henley and Miss Nash.
Mr. Fisher and Mr. Lindstrom.
(Note: The wording of the ordinance as adopted is set out below.)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND AND REENACT SECTION 2-52
ARTICLE IX, CHAPTER 2 OF THE CODE OF ALBEMARLE
RELATING TO THE LIMITATION ON NUMBER OF BOND
ISSUES OF THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, that Section 2-52 of the Code of Albemarle is hereby amended
and reenacted to read as follows:
Sec. 2-52. Limitation on number of bond issues.
There shall be no more than ten bond issuances of the Industrial
Development Authority of the county in existence at any one time.
Mr. Fisher asked Mr. St. John to comment on the proposed resolution submitted by the
Industrial Development Authority relative to the application of Boar's Head Inn, Inc. Mr. St.
John said he had reviewed the proposed resolution and had no comments. Mrs. Patricia Cooke
read the resolution as follows:
WHEREAS, the Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County, Virginia,
(the Authority), has considered the application of Boar's Head Inn, Inc.,
(the Company) for the issuance of the Authority's industrial development revenue
bonds in an amount not to exceed $3,000,000 (the Bonds) to assist in the
financing of the Company's construction and equipping of a national headquarters
office facility (the Project) for AMVEST Corporation to be located on the Boar's
Head Inn property, south side of U.S. Highway 250, west of the city of Charlottes-
ville in Albemarle County, Virginia, and has held a public hearing thereon on
August 25, 1983; and
WHEREAS, the Authority has requested the Board of Supervisors (the Board) of
Albemarle County, Virginia (the County), to approve the issuance of the Bonds to
comply with Section 103(k) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended; and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Authority's resolution approving the issuance of the
Bonds, subject to terms to be agreed upon, a record of the public hearing and a
"fiscal impact statement" with respect to the Project have been filed with the Board;
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, VIRGINIA:
1. The Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, approves the
issuance of the Bonds by the Industrial Development Authority of Albemarle County,
Virginia, for the benefit of Boar's Head Inn, Inc., to the extent required by
Section 103(k), to permit the Authority to assist in the financing of the Project.
2. The approval of the issuance of the Bonds, as required by Sect.ion 103(k),
does not constitute an endorsement of the Bonds or the creditworthiness of the
Company, but, as required by Section 15.1-1380 of the Code of Virginia of 1950, as
amended, the Bonds shall provide that neither the County nor the Authority shall be
obligated to pay the Bonds or the interest thereon or other costs incident thereto
except from the revenues and moneys pledged therefor, and neither the faith nor credit
nor the taxing power of the Commonwealth, the County nor the Authority shall be
pledged thereto.
3. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
Motion was then offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Butler, to adopt the resolution as
presented. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Mr~ Henley and Miss Nash.
Mr. Fisher and Mr. Lindstrom.
373
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting)
Agenda~Item No. 17. Claim Against the Dog Fund was received from Mr. Willard Johnson of
;he Sc'ottsville District for one shoat (pig) killed by dogs on August 24, 1983. Mr. Jones
said the owner of the dog remains unknown, therefore, Mr. Johnson is requesting payment in the
amount of $45.00. Mr. Henley said $45.00 is a reasonable figure and offered motion to pay this
claim. The motion was seconded by Mr. Butler. Roll was called and the motion passed by the
following recorded vote:
AYES'
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Agenda Item No. 18. Discussion: Broomtey Road.
Mr. Fisher said that Mrs. Shirley Benton, a resident on Broomley Road had called him
several times about the continued delays in repairing Broomley Road. Mr. Fisher said he had
asked the staff to make a report this date on the work and whether the bond held for the work
should be called.
Mr. Jones referred to the memorandum of Mr. Maynard Elrod, County Engineer, dated Se
2, 1983, which states his opinion that the original design of the road improvements did not
adequately address potential problems thus setting the stage for multiple construction problems
and delays. Mr. Elrod said the most recent problem is the slope failure on the west side of
the road in front of Mr. Harry Tarter's home. This slope is within a 50 foot right-of-way
owned by the County which was dedicated some years ago as a "restricted" private road right-of-
way. There are several other problems involving a roadside ditch and Mrs. Benton's water meter
which needs corrective work.
Mr. Elrod was present. He stated that many problems exist along this road due to the
failure of the engineering~plans to consider future problems. He said drainage was not con-
sidered, nor was enough attention given to existing property lines. Waterline locations were
unknown, and once placed, had to be relocated; this relocation of the waterlines is one of the
main causes of the slope failure. Mr. Elrod said it had been his intent to call the bond on
the first of September if the problems were not corrected, but the contractor has been working
and. he feels the problems will be taken care of by the fall. Mr. Elrod assured the Board he
will call the bond should the need to do so arise. He feels, however, the fault does not lie
with the contractor, but with the engineer, whose design was poorly created.
Mr. Fisher reminded the Board members that when the request came in for the Ivy Creek RPN
(developer Thomas Worrell) to use the existing private Broomley Road for access, he had been
opposed and felt the road should be upgraded and brought into the State Secondary System. The
residents were adamantly opposed to any such proposition and requested the Board to approve the
developer's proposal. He feels in retrospect this was a mistake on the part of the Board. Mr.
Lindstrom pointed out that the Board did not approve the engineering plans, as this was not the
responsibility of the Board. He said he has been out and looked at the road construction and
he has heard from adjacent landowners who are very pleased with the appearance of the road as
the reconstruction did not remove any trees. Mr. Fisher stated that these plans were approved
by the County Engineer's office. He asked Mr. Elrod to please keep him informed as to the
status and progress of the Broomley Road project.
Agenda Item No. 21. Executive Session: Personnel.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom at 3:10 P.M., to adjourn into
executive session to discuss personnel matters. Roll was called and the motion passed by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS.
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
The Board reconvened into open session at 4:43 P.M.
Agenda Item No. 22. Appointments.
Motion was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Miss Nash, to appoint Mr. Leo R. C!awson and
Mr. George A. Bates to serve as members of the Welfare Board for a term beginning immediately
and ending June 30, 1987. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Motion was made by Mr. Butler, seconded by Mr. Henley, to reappoint Mr. Dan Maupin, Mr.
Samuel Page and Mr. Montie Pace to the Land Use Classification Appeals Board with said terms to
expire on September 1, 1985. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to appoint Mr. Harry Dicki
to the Soil Erosion Advisory Board with said term to expire on June 30, 1984. Roll was called
and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
-374
September 14, 1983 (Regular Day Meeting)
Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Butler, to appoint Mr. Paul David to
the Advisory Council on Aging with said term to expire on June 1, 1985. Roll was called and
the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Motion was offered by Miss Nash, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to appoint Mr. Alan Rasmussen
to serve as a member of the Jail Board for a term of office beginning immediately and ending
May 22, 1987. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
NAYS: None.
Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Miss Nash, to appoint Mr. Harry Kennedy and
reappoint Mr. Walter Oslin to the Jordan Development Corporation with said terms to expire on
August 13, 1984. Roll was called and the motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Nash.
None.
Mr. Fisher commented that this completed all the necessary appointments with the exception
of the Resource Recovery Study Commission.
Agenda Item No. 23. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Fisher asked the Board to consider a temporary salary increase for the months of
September and October in the amount of $400 per month for the Acting County Executive, Mr.
Jones. Mr. Fisher feels this increase is justified since Mr. Jones is doing the work and
should be compensated in some way. If Mr. Jones continues in this capacity after October, the
Board can consider the matter at that time. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Lindstrom
seconded by Mrs. Cooke, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Butler, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Miss Na-sh.
None.
Agenda Item No. 24. ADjourn.
With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 4:50 P.M.
CHAIRMAN