Loading...
1984-01-03 adjJanuary 3, 1984 (Adjourned from ~ecember 21, 1983) An adjourned .meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors was held on January 3, 1984 at 1:00 P,M. in Meeting Room #7, of the County Office Building, 401 McIntire Road, CharlottesVille, Virginia; said meeting being adjourned from December 21, 1983. Present: Mr~ J. T. Henley, Jr.i C. Absent: None. Officers PreSent: AttOrney. Frederick R. Bowie, Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke, MesSrs. Gerald E. Fisher, Timothy Lindstrom and Peter T. Way. Guy B. Agnor, Jr., County Executive, and George R. St. John-, COunty Note- Copies of orders from the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Mrs. Shelby J Marshall, had been received!stating that F. R. Bowie and Joseph T. Henley, Jr. had both appeared before the Clerk On December 22, 1983, and been sworn and executed bond, likewise, Peter T. Way had appeared before th~ Clerk on December 27, 1983 and been sworn and executed bond. Agenda Item No. 1. Call to Order. The meeting was called to order at 1:00 P.M. by Mr. Agnor, serving as temporary Chairman. Agenda Item No. 2. for Chairman. Election of Chairman. Mr. Agnor ~sked if there were any nominations Mrs. Cooke preceded her nomination with a statement. Mrs. Cooke said for some time she has been concerned that the public's image of the Chairman has evolved into one of spokesman for the Board. Mrs. Cooke said she did not feel this was Mr. Fisher's intention. Mr. Fisher has served the Board in an outstanding and efficient manner for the past eight years. Further her reasons for a change in no way reflect on him personally or professionally. However, Mrs. Cooke felt a change is necessary in order to put the position of Chairman into proper perspective. Mrs. Cooke then nominated Mr. Lindstrom for Chairman because she feels his experience and length of service on the Board qualifies him to serve as chairman and also she felt it is necessary to offer an alternative selection to the other members of the Board. Mr. Way nominated Mr. Fisher. There being no other nominations, Mr. Lindstrom offered motion that the nominations be closed. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bowie. Mr. Lindstrom said he would like to comment. He stated that he would not vote since there is an additional stipend is attached for the Chairman's position; but regardless of that, he did not intend to vote anyway. He'accepted the nomination and thanked Mrs. Cooke. Mr. Lindstrom went on to say he shared Mrs. Cooke's respect for Mr. Fisher and his abilities. Mr. Lindstrom said he and Mr. Fisher share many of the same views on the planning and physical development of the community and he hopes they will continue to share those~ views. Mr. Lindstrom said he ~ould not let himself be nominated if he did not desire to serve, and he does, but more important are his public concerns. Also, after eight years with the same chairman, he feels there is a need for a change. Mr. Lindstrom said he feels the Board has become too closely identified with one personality and that distorts the public's perspective of how the Board actually operates. He said he did not know to what eXtent public perceptions can be corrected, he does feel that a change in the chairmanship would be al step in the right direction. Mr. Lindstrom said since he was elected in 1977, he has spoken with Mr. Fishe~ at least three times concerning the fact that the chairmanship does not carry with it the authority to speak for the Board of Supervisors unless that authority is specifically granted by the Board itself.~,~_tRmiDespite expressing these concerns, Mr. Lindstrom said he does not feel there has been any~6~nge in the way the chairmanship has been conducted. Mr. Lindstrom said if he is elected chairman, he will not use the chair to gain any special advantage for his own~personal philosophy or as a vantage point for wielding power. Although the chairman has the iresponsibility to brief the Board regarding more complex matters, it should be the role of the chair to defer to the individual Board members before making remarks or entering into a debate. Mr. Lindstrom said the Supervisors do work for the public. Therefore, meetings should be conducted with a maximum amount of deference to members of the public'whether their views are agreeable with the Board or not and this respect should also be extended to members of the staff. Mr. Lindstrom said he feels great care should be taken to avoid using the chairmanship to debate or argue with members of the public. In saying these things, Mr. Lindstrom said he does not mean to imply that the present Chairman has failed in these areas, but he wants the Board to know how he feels regarding these matters if he is to be considered for the position. Mr. Lindstrom said he is privileged to serve on this Baard, and he has respect and affection for those with whom he has served and he looks forward to working with the other Board members in the future. At this point roll was called, and the motion to close nominations carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Mr. Agnor said Mr. St. John, County Attorney, has researched the legalities of voting on an increased stipend for the chairmanship and is prepared to make a statement concerning whether or not a nominee voting for himself would be a conflict of interest. None of the Board members requested any response. Mr. St. John made no comment in that regard. Mr. Fisher stated that regardless of the legalities, the appearance of a conflict of interest was there and he did not wish to participate in the vote. Roll was then called on the nominations for the position of Chairman, elected by the following recorded vote: Mr. Fisher was Voting for Mr. Fisher: Messrs. Bowie, Henley and Way. Voting for Mr. Lindstrom: Mrs. COoke. Abstaining: Mr. Fisher and Mr. Lindstrom. Mr. Fisher said he did not wish to make a statement at this time, and then took the chair. January 3, 1984 (Adjourned from December 21, 1983) Agenda Item No. 3. Election of Vice-Chairman. Mrs. Cooke nominated Mr. Lindstrom. Mr. Lindstrom said that he had thought about this position, and for a lot of reasons he would not go into, he declined the nomination. Mrs. Cooke then withdrew her nomination. Mr. Way nominated Mr. Henley. Mr Lindstrom nominated Mrs. Cooke. Mr. Lindstrom said he would like to make a statement because some may feel there has been some arrangement, and there has not been. Mr. L~ndstrom said he has a great deal of affection and respect for Mr. Henley, but he feels that Mr. Henley~ farm and orchards create unexpected circumstances which restrain him from giving the Chairman the support that he should have. Mr. Lindstrom said he feels the Vice-Chairman could help on a regular and frequent basis. Also, by way of~-e~-~imri~y, Mrs. Cooke is next in line. Mr. Henley said Mr. Lindstrom has convinced him that he should no~ be vice-chairman and he would like to withdraw from the nomination. Mr. Way accepted Mr. Henley's withdrawal. Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Way, that nominations for Vice-Chairman be closed and Mrs. Cooke be elected by acclamation. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mrs. Cooke. Mrs. Cooke said this was totally unexpected and she appreciates the honor and will do all she can to assist Mr. Fisher and serve the County. Agenda Item No. 4. Appointment of Clerk and Deputy Clerk. Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Way, to reappoint Miss Lettie E. Neher as Clerk, and Mrs. Linda W. Leake as Deputy Clerk. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 5. Set meeting times, dates and place for calendar year 1984. Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to continue with the same schedule as in past years, specifically, the first and third Wednesday nights at 7:30 P.M. and the second Wednesday at 9:00 A.M. in the County Office Building at 401 McIntire Road. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 6. Set dates for hearing zoning text amendments requested by citizens. Section 33.10.2 of the Albemarle County Zoning Ordinance requires that in January of each year the Board set dates for hearing zoning text amendment requests from citizens. Motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to set June 6 and December 5, 1984, as these dates. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item No. 7. Rules of Procedure. Mr. Fisher noted that the Rules which the Board has been using for several years were forwarded to the Board for review and possible readoption Mr. Way said he feels that regular Board meetings should begin with some kind of formality and he believes strongly that there should be the pledge of allegiance to the flag. Mr. Way said he would like to have that as a regular procedure and would like to begin meetings with a prayer which simply states that the Board members acknowledge some kind of divine guidance and seek that wisdom. He suggested the prayer be written and agreed upon by the members of the Board or that the Lord's Prayer be used. Mrs. Cooke said that has been a concern of hers and she would agree that the Board needs a more formal beginning to the meetings. Mr. Lindstrom said when he was first elected he tried several times to begin meetings with a prayer, but feels attitudes had grown away from that and he now has some reservations. Mr~Lindst~om said he has strong personal religious beliefs and has never been sure how religious beliefs should be expressed as a public body. However, he did feel a moment of silent meditation would be appropriate before the meetings but he would feel uncomfortable beginning Board meetings with the pledge of allegiance. Mr. Lindstrom did not believe anyone would question the loyalty of the individual supervisors. He believes each supervisor is dedicated to the principles on which the government was founded, otherwise they would not be here tonight devoting their time and energy to that government. Mr. Lindstrom said the pledge of allegiance is a personal loyalty to him and would be part of his moment of silent meditation. Mr. Henley said he would feel comfortable beginning Board meetings with a moment of silence rather than having someone offer a prayer each time. He also has no problem with the pledge of allegiance and would like to try making that part of the meetings. Mr. Bowie said in their oaths of office, all the supervisors pledged to support and defend the Constitution of the United States. Therefore, he feels the pledge of allegiance is most appropriate. ~? January 3, 1984 (Adjourned from December 21, 1983) Mr. Way then moved to begin each regular meeting of the Board with the pledge of allegiance to the flag and a moment for silent meditation. Mrs. Cooke seconded the motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Motion was made by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom to readopt the Rules of Procedure as amended. The motion carried by the following recorded vote. AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. (The Rules of Procedure as adopted are set out in full below.) RULES OF PROCEDURE ALBEMARLE COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS A. Officers Be 1. Chairman. The Board shall, at its first meeting after election, elect one of its number as Chairman, who, if present, shall preside at such meeting and at all other meetings during the term for which so elected. (Virginia Code Section 15.1528) 2. Vice-Chairman. The Board shall, at its first meeting after election, also elect one of its number as Vice'~irman, who shall preside at meetings in the absence of the Chairman and shall discharge any other duties of the Chairman during his absence or disability. (Virginia Code Section 15.1528) 3. Term of Office. The Chairman and Vice-Chairman shall be elected for ~e~¥ear terms; but either or both may be regulated for one or more additional terms. Clerk and Deputy Clerks The Board shall, at' its first meeting after election, designate a Clerk and one or more Deputy Clerks, who shall serve at the pleasure of the Board and whose duties shall be those set forth by Virginia Code Sections 15.1-531 and 15.1-532 and resolution of the Board as adopted from time to time. Meetings 6. Annual Meeting. The first meeting held after the newly elected members of the Board shall have qualified, and the first meeting held in the corresponding month of each succeeding year shall be known as the annual meeting. At such annual meeting, the Board shall establish the days, times, and places for regular meetings of the Board for the ensuing twelve months. (Virginia Code Section 15.1-536) 2. Regular Meetings. Except as otherwise provided by law, the Board shall meet in regular session not less often than once each month upon such day or days as has been established· Provided, however, that the Board may subsequently establish different days, times, or places for such regular meetings by passing a resolution to that effect in accord with Virginia Code Section 15·1-536. Provided, also, that when the day established as a regular meeting day falls on a legal holiday, the meeting shall be held on the next following regular business day, without action of any kind by the Board· (Virginia Code Section 15.1-536) 3. Special Meetings. A special meeting of the Board shall be held when requested by two or more members thereof, such request to be made in writing, addressed to the Clerk of the Board, specifying the time and place of the meeting and the matters to be considered thereat. Upon receipt of such request, the Clerk shall transmit this information in writing to each member of the Board and to the County Attorney, by registered mail, not less than five days before the day of such meeting. Provided, that in lieu of registered mail, such notice may be served by the Sheriff of the County. Provided, further, that no matter not specified in the notice shall be considered at such meeting unless all members of the Board are present and agree to such action by a majority vote. (Virginia Code Section 15.1-538; Virginia Code Section 15.1-9.1:1) The ~Clerk shall also notify the general news media of the time and pl'gc'e'o'f such meeting and the matters to be considered· Order of Business The agenda for all meetings shall be established by the Clerk of the Board in consultation with the Chairman, with the first two items on the agenda for each regular meeting of the Board being the pledge of allegiance and a moment for silent meditation. January 3, 1984 (Adjourned from December 21, 1983) Em Quorum A majority of the members of the Board present at the time and place established for any regular or special meeting shall constitute a quorum for the purpose of adjourning such meeting from day to day or from time to time, but not beyond the time fixed for the next regular meeting. (Virginia Code Section 15.1-536) Voting 1. Ail questions submitted to the Board for decision shall be presented by appropriate motion of a member, seconded by another member, and deter- mined by a voice vote of a majority of the members present and voting; except that in the case of any matters involving the appropriation of any sum exceeding $500.00 a majority of the total membership shall be required. The Clerk shall record the name of each member voting and how he voted. Whenever any member wishes to abstain from voting on any question, he shall so state and his abstention shall be announced by the Chairman and recorded by the Clerk. (Article VI, Section 7, Virginia Constitution) 2. Since the Board has elected not to provide for the appointment of a tiebreaker, any tie vote shall defeat the motion, resolution, or question voted upon. (Virginia Code Section 15.1-540) 3. Matters requiring public hearings shall not be subject to vote by the Board before such public hearing has been held; provided that nothing herein shall be construed to prevent the deferral or continuance of consideration of any matter prior to the holding of such public hearing. 4. Amendments to a motion, unless accepted by the member making the original motion and the member seconding the same, shall be subject to vote by the Board before any action is taken on the original motion. 5. Discussion of any motion may be terminated by any member's moving the previous question, whereupon the Chair shall call for a vote on the motion and, if carried by a majority of those voting, shall then call for a vote on the original motion under consideration. A motion of the previous question shall not be subject to debate and shall take precedence over any other matter. 6. After a vote has been taken on a matter before the Board, any member may move for its reconsideration, provided such motion is made at the same meeting or an adjournment thereof at which the matter was originally acted upon. The effect of the motion to reconsider, if adopted, shall be to place the original question in the exact position it occupied before it was voted upon. 7. Any vote previously taken by the Board, with the exception of zoning matters (which shall be subject to reconsideration only as above stated) and ordinances, may be rescinded by a majority of total membership of the Board. Amendment to and Suspension of Rules of Procedure These Rules of Procedure may be amended by a majority vote of the Board at the next regular meeting following a regular meeting at which the motion to amend is made. By majority vote of those Board members present and voting, these rules may be suspended on any matter before it. NOT DOCKETED. At 1:35 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Bowie, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to adjourn into executive session to discuss personnel matters regarding appointments. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. The Board reconvened into open session at 2:35 P.M. Agenda Item No. 8. Appointments. Mr. Fisher said there were a number of appointments to make for the Board members as well as the School Board and Planning Commission. For the Consolidation Study Committee, motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mr. Way, to appoint Mr. Bowie to replace Mr. Butler on that committee. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mr. Bowie. For the JAUNT Board, motion was offered by Mr. Lindstrom, seconded by Mrs. Cooke to appoint Mr. Way to complete the term of Miss Nash on the JAUNT Board, said term to expire on September 30, 1984. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Lindstrom. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mr. Way. January 3, 1984 (Adjourned from December 21, 1983) For the Monticello Area Community Action Agency, motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Lindstrom, to appoint both Mr. Bowie and Mr. Way to replace Miss Nash and Mr. Butler. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley and Lindstrom. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mr. Bowie and Mr. Way. For the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission, motion was offered by Mrs. Cooke, seconded by Mr. Henley, to appoint Mr. Way and Mr. Bowie with terms to expire on December 31, 1987; and to appoint Mr. Lindstrom to replace Mrs. Cooke, said term to expire on December 31, 1985. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. For the Metropolitan Planning Organization, motion was offered by Mr. Henley, seconded by Mrs. Cooke, to appoint Mr. Lindstrom to replace Miss Nash on the Metropolitan Planning Organization. The motion carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. For the Albemar~ County Planning Commission, Mr. Henley offered motion to reappoint Mr. Richard Cogan as the representative for the White Hall District for a term to expire on December 31, 1987. The motion was seconded by Mr. Lindstrom and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES' NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Motion was made by Mr. Lindstrom to appoint Mrs. Cooke to serve as the Board's liasion to. the Albemarle County Planning Commission for the calendar year 1984. This motion was seconded by Mr. Way and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: Messrs. Bowie, Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. NAYS: None. ABSTAIN: Mrs. Cooke. For the School Board, Mr. Bowie offered motion to appoint Mr. Robert E. Taylor. to serve as the representative for the Rivanna District for a term to expire on December 31, 1987. This motion was seconded by Mrs. Cooke and carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. For the School Board, Mr. Way offered motion to appoint Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., to represent the Scottsville District for a term to expire on December 31, 1987. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion and same carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. Agenda Item Mo. 9. Request for Resolution re: Matter of Attorneys Fees in the Virginia Harris Case.' ThiS item was deferred until January 11, 1984. Agenda Item No. 10. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mr. Keith Mabe, Chief of Housing and Community Development, presented the following information on a report by the staff of the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission (JLARC) on the Equity of Current Provisions for Allocating Highway Construction Funds in Virginia. Mr. Mabe said that in the report, it is recommended that changes be made in the allocation processes rather than increase funds. Mr. Mabe said the report will be presented to the JLARC Commission on January 10, 1984 and localities have been asked for any written comments they may wish to make. The report consists of some forty recommendations but he has divided the recommendations into five subsections which are most applicable to Albemarle County and same are listed below: 1. Interstate Allocations. The JLARC report recommends that funds necessary to match federal interstate aid be set aside from the total funds available instead of deducting funds from a construction distri'ct's primary allocation. The advantage is that the necessary match would be met by spreading the burden over all construction funds, reducing the severe impact on a few areas. This change would have a positive impact on the Culpeper Construction District. 2. Unpaved Road's Allocations. The JLARC report found that the State presently uses a General Assembly formula in which 3.75 percent is allocated to unpaved roads. JLARC is recommending that the General Assembly increase this percentage to 7.6 percent. Current FY '84 funding for unpaved roads in Albemarle is $232,650. Under the JLARC proposal, that figure would have been $322,708 in 1984. While the level of funding would be greater for Albemarle, the percent of total State funding would reduce slightly from 2.48 percent to 2.47 percent based on the new allocation formula. Mr. Mabe noted that the increase of money to unpaved roads makes less money available for primary, secondary and urban systems in the area. January 3, 1984 (Adjourned from December 21, 198B)~ 3. Bridge Replacement Allocation. Currently, 'funds for bridges are~included in the locality's regular alloc~ation. Thus funds for bridges must be taken from the allocation ~ normally used for other construction purposes. JLARC is recommending that the General Assembly provide for funding special bridge needs outside of the locality's regular allocation. This would not increase funds for bridge allocation, since these funds are already available from the federal government, but this would insure that funds are expended on the current Highway Department Bridge Inspection Program. Virginia could loose one and one-half million dollars unless the allocation system is altered. 4. .Secondary System Allocations. Secondary System allocations are currently derived from a 1977 base year formula developed by the Department of Highways and Transportation. JLARC feels that the factors used in this formula produce some inequitable distribution. JLARC is recommending the following three options for consideration regarding changes in the allocation process: ~ a. Option S-1. This option is based on a Combination of population weighted 80 percent and area weighted 20 percent. According to this option, the allocation for Albemarle County would increase to $1,139,237. Staff feels this option would have a positive impact as the County growth rate is expected to be moderate through the year 2002. b. Option ~. This option places 80 percent weight on vehicle registration and 20 percent weight on area. The County's allocation under this option would be slightly under Option S-i, or $1,108,818. Staff is concerned that vehicle registration may not increase proportionately with demands placed on local roads. c. Option S-3. This option is based on a combination of demand.factors: 80 percent vehicle miles of travel and 20 percent area. Demands for this option are generated by both residents and non-residents. Because of the County's locat±on as a regional center and its position as a tourist community, staff feels that the third option is the most advantageous for Albemarle County. This allocation would provide $1,166,794--about two percent of the State's total secondary budget compared to 1.85 perce~t being received currently. Mr. Mabe said the reallocation of these monies will reduce funds for the primary system; arterial highways and extensions. In 1984, the state had $80 million for its primary system and if allocations were made in the above manner, this would have reduced the amount available for the primary system to about $61 million. Under these proposals, funding for the primary system in the Thomas Jefferson Planning District would decrease from $2.6 million to about $2 million. In terms of funding for primary roads in the Planning District, the Six-Year Highway Plan shows only about $1 million, so this proposed allocation method would be much better for Albemarle County. Mr. Fisher said the numbers show that the entire Planning District would lose $660,000 in funds for primary roads, while Albemarle County would gain about $200,000 for the secondary system. Mr. Mabe said that is correct. However, he feels that the $2.6 million figure is incorrect and has asked the JLARC staff to resolve this issue. Mr. Agnor noted that the JLARC Commission will recommend that the Highway Department deal with planning district areas for its statistical work rather than the current construction districts. Mr. Mabe said that is correct, but there is no recommendation to do away with the eight current highway construction districts. The JLARC Commission does feel that planning district areas would provide a more equitable basis for allocations. 5. Public Transportation Assistance. At the present time JAUNT does not receive funding for operating expenses. Allocations are distributed according to need at the discretion of the State, therefore funding is determined in a rather arbitrary manner. In order to change the current allocation process and provide funds for operating expenses, JLARC is recommending the following three options: a. Option PT-1. This option places 100 percent weight on passenger trips. Under this proposal, JAUNT would have ~ecaiYed $20,.394 in FY 1984. b. Option PT-2. The operating assistance formula consists of 50 ~e~cent weight on passenger trips and 50 percent on operating hours compared to Operating expenditures. JAUNT would receive $312,000 under this option. c. Option PT-3. This option places 50 percent weight on hours operated and 50 percent weight on passenger trips compared to operating expenditures. Under this proposal, JAUNT would receive $239,344. Mr. Mabe said JLARC is investigating the operational output of these systems in an effort~ to establish an efficiency rating of their performance throughout the State. He said the County staff feels that Options PT-2 and ~ would be advantageous for JAUNT because each provides some efficiency factor to gauge how well a system operates for each dollar of operating costs. Mr. Mabe said the Planning District Commission has already forwarded its comments on all of these proposals. If the Board wants to follow the recommendations of the staff, he had prepared a resolution which could be sent to the JLARC Commission when it considers the final draft of the report next Tuesday, and then to the members of the General Assembly. Mr. Lindstrom said according to Mr. Mabe's report, Option S-3 seems to be the most advantageous in the long run for the Secondary System. He asked if that option is the one recommended by the staff. Mr. Mabe said yes. Mr. Lindstrom then asked if the staff recommends one of the options for Public Transportation Assistance. Mr. Mabe said no. However, Option PT-2 is emphasized by the JLARC staff because it gives some incentive on hours of operation versus the amount of money put into the system. Mr. Lindstrom said he would like to see Options S-3 and PT-2 specified in the resolution. Mr. Fisher suggested the word "should" be inserted for the words "may wish to" wherever same appears in the resolution in order to strengthen the meaning of the resolution. Mr. Bowie agreed with Mr. Fisher's suggestion for a change of language and also that Options S-3 and PT-2 be used in the resolution. January 4, 1984 (Cancelled Meeting) January 3, 1984 (Adjourned from December 21~ 1983) Mr. ~Fisher asked for a motion to amend and adopt the resolution in reference to JLARC's Report on Equity of Current Provisions for Allocating Highway Construction Funds in Virginia with the suggested changes. Mr. Bowie offered motion to that effect. Mr. Lindstrom seconded the motion which carried by the following recorded vote: AYES: NAYS: Mr. Bowie, Mrs. Cooke, Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Lindstrom and Way. None. The resolution as adopted is set out below: WHEREAS, the 1982 Report of the Joint Legislative Audit. and Review Commission on Equity of Current Provisions for Allocating Highway Construction Funds in Virginia found that the present allocation system for highway funds is not responsive to the needs of each of the highway systems in the Commonwealth and would result in inequitable allocations; and WHEREAS, the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors has reviewed the Report and found that the recommendations represent a more equitable and responsive approach to the allocation of state highway construction funds, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors expresses its support for the following recommendations to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission and members of the General Assembly representing Albemarle County: (1) The General Assembly should amend the Code of Virginia to require that funds necessary to match Federal interstate aid be set aside from the total funds available for construction. Funds for the match should not be deducted from a district's primary allocation. (2) The General Assembly should amend Section 33.1-23.1:1 of the Code of Virginia to increase the percentage of funds for unpaved roads from 3.75 percent, not to exceed 7.6 percent. (3) In order to ensure the use of available Federal aid, the General Assembly should amend the Code of Virginia to provide for funding special bridge needs outside of the allocation process. (4) The General Assembly should amend Section 33.1-23.1B of the Code of vi~gi'~ia to adjust the proportion of funds provided to each system to one-third. (5) The General Assembly should amend Section 33.1-23.4 of the Code of Virginia to end the use of the Fiscal Year 1977 allocations as an ~llocation requirement. (6) The General Assembly should amend the current statutory formula for allocating secondary system funds and utilize Option S-3 which measures demands generated by non-residents as well as local residents. (7) The General Assembly should amend the Code of Virginia to revise the current statutory formula for allocating primary system funds to include independent factors which are weighted in proportion to their relationship to construction needs. (8) The Secretary of the Transportation should ensure that a reassessment of highway construction allocations is made on a periodic basis as part of the Statewide Transportation Planning process. (9) The General Assembly should amend Section 33.1-391E of the Code of Virginia to require the Directorate of Public Transportation to collect and report data which may be required for the allocation of public transportation assistance. (10) The General Assembly should amend Section 33.1-23.1 of the Code of Virginia to establish a public transportation allocation and utilize Option PT-2 which provides some efficiency factor to gauge how well a system operates for each dollar of operating costs. (11) In order to promote certain efficiency incentives, the General Assembly should adopt a formula for the purpose of allocating public trans- portation assistance. AND, FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of these recommendations be forwarded to the Joint Legislative Audit and Review Commission and members of the General Assembly representing Albemarle County. Agenda Item No. 11. Adjourn. There being no other matters ~o~'¢.ome before ~he Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:20 P.M. The regular meeting of the Albemarle County Board of Supervisors scheduled for January 4, 1984 was cancelled by vote of the Board taken on December 14, 1983.