2003-10-01(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 1)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October
1,2003, at 9:00 a.m., Room 241, County Office Building, Mclntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mr. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Dennis
S. Rooker and Ms. Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: Mr. Walter F. Perkins.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis,
Clerk, Ella W. Carey, and, County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 9:03 a.m., by the Chairman, Mr. Dorrier.
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
Agenda Item No. 4. From the Public: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Tom Loach said he was a member of the original DISC committee, is a member of the present
DISC Committee, and is a proponent of well-planned development. He became involved with DISC
because of the issue which surround development in Crozet. During the years before the final
Neighborhood Model was presented, it was clear that the requirement to improve utilization of the growth
areas without sacrificing the quality of life of the residents was to be based on the ability to provide
infrastructure. Therefore, infrastructure was listed as the number one concern in Crozet in drafting the
Master Plan. Recently the DISC Committee met to discuss which area should be the subject of the next
master plan, and he asked the status of the funding plan to meet the needs of the expected development
under the Crozet Master Plan, an increase of about 400 percent.
Mr. Loach said there has been no significant movement toward resolving the question of providing
infrastructure as outlined in the Master Plan. For that reason, he voted "no" on the resolution to the Board
recommending the next master plan. He appears today and makes his recommendation publicly that any
community asked to participate in the new master plan, refuse the offer. If master planning is to work, it
must work from the start. It cannot follow the current model to build now, and provide later, which has
proved detrimental to the growth area residents. Furthermore, he recommends to other communities that
they not support any new development where there is not clear evidence of adequate infrastructure funding.
When the issue of taking on a new master plan is discussed later today, he suggests that the Board take
Ms. Thomas' suggestion as to infrastructure, "and put up, or shut up!"
Agenda Item No. 5. Presentation by Thomas Jefferson HOME Consortium.
Mr. Bill Wannersaid he is with the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission. He said that
Mr. Harrison Rue, and Ms. Shea Garwood are also present today. This is the tenth anniversary of the
Thomas Jefferson HOME Consortium, and they wanted to recognize this Board for its foresight in
participating in the formation of the Consortium. He said the TJPDC is a leader in the State in participation
in affordable housing development. The Federal Home Program provides funds for affordable housing for
Iow and moderate-income citizens. Individually, each of the six participating jurisdictions in the TJPDC were
not eligible to receive these funds, but joining as a consortium met the threshold of eligibility, and it has
received Federal Home funds for the benefit of many citizens. He then presented to Mr. Dorrier a certificate
of appreciation for the Board's commitment to affordable housing opportunities.
Ms. Garwood said they also want to recognize the work of the Albemarle County Housing Office
and the Albemarle Housing Improvement Program (AHIP). The Housing Office plays a significant role in
the Consortium, directing its activities and helping to formulate policies. Also, using HOME funds over the
last ten years, AHIP has helped dozens of Iow-income residents of Albemarle County.
Ms. Dorrier said the Board appreciates the work of the HOME Consortium, and AHIP.
Agenda Item No. 6. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Mr. Rooker, seconded by Mr.
Bowerman, to approve Items 6.1,6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5 and 6.7 on the Consent Agenda (Item 6.6 had previoysly
been removed from the agenda), and to accept the remaining items for information.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Item 6.1. Approval of Minutes: March 17(A) and June 4, 2003.
Mr. Bowerman had read the minutes of June 4, 2003, pages 1 to 17 (ending at Item No. 7), and
found them to be in order as presented.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 2)
No other minutes had been read.
By the recorded vote set out above, the minutes which had been read were approved as
presented.
Item 6.2. Proclamation recognizing October, 2003 as Domestic Violence Awareness Month.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board approved the following proclamation:
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH
WHEREAS,
violence against women, children and men continues to become more
prevalent as a social problem in our society. In 2002, in the Commonwealth
of Virginia, domestic violence programs offered safe shelter to 3,583
families; 24-hour intervention and referrals in response to 52,449 hotline
calls; 67,895 hours of counseling and advocacy to children; and, 103,882
hours of family violence advocacy services to adults; and
WHEREAS,
in 2002, in the greater Charlottesville Community, the Shelter for Help in
Emergency offered safe shelter to 111 families; 24-hour intervention and
referrals in response to 766 hotline calls; 307 hours of counseling and
advocacy to children; and, 1,550 hours of family violence advocacy services
to adults; and
WHEREAS,
the problems of domestic violence are not confined to any group or groups
of people but cross all economic, racial and societal barriers; and supported
by societal indifference; and
WHEREAS,
the crime of domestic violence violates an individual's privacy, dignity,
security and humanity, due to systematic use of physical, emotional, sexual,
psychological and economic control and/or abuse. The impact of domestic
violence is wide-ranging, directly affecting women and children and society
as a whole; and
WHEREAS,
in our quest to impose sanctions on those who break the law by perpetrating
violence, we must also meet the needs of victims of domestic violence who
often suffer grave financial, physical and psychological losses; and
WHEREAS, it is victims of domestic violence themselves who have been in the forefront
of efforts to bring peace and equality to the home:
NOW THEREFORE, in recognition of the important work being done by
domestic violence programs, I, Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr., Chairman of the
Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, do hereby proclaim the
month of
October, 2003 as
DOMESTIC VIOLENCE AWARENESS MONTH
and urge all citizens to actively participate in the scheduled activities and
programs sponsored by the Shelter for Help in Emergency to work toward
the elimination of personal and institutional violence against women, children
and men.
Mr. Dorrier read the proclamation into the record, and then presented same to Ms. Whitlow, SHE,
who thanked the Board for the proclamation, and invited the Board members to attend some of their
scheduled events.
Item 6.3. Resolution to Confirm the Declaration of a Local Emergency in Albemarle County.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted the following Resolution:
RESOLUTION TO CONFIRM THE
DECLARATION OF A LOCAL EMERGENCY
INALBEMARLECOUNTY
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Section 44-146.21 of the Code of Virginia, the
Albemarle County Director of Emergency Services declared on September 17, 2003, that
a local emergency existed throughout Albemarle County because of the imminent threat
of heavy rain and winds of Hurricane Isabel; and
WHEREAS, the Board of Supervisors finds that the declaration of the Director of
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 3)
Emergency Services was appropriate and necessary and continues to be appropriate
and necessary to address the threat and actual damage caused by the heavy rain and
winds of Hurricane Isabel and to prevent or alleviate the damage, loss, hardship, and
suffering threatened or caused thereby.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Albemarle County Board of
Supervisors hereby confirms the Declaration of Local Emergency in Albemarle County
proclaimed by the Albemarle County Director of Emergency Services on September 17,
2003; and
IT IS FURTHER PROCLAIMED AND ORDERED that during the existence of this
emergency the powers, functions, and duties of the Director of Emergency Services and
the Emergency Services organizations of Albemarle County shall be those prescribed by
state law and the ordinances, resolutions, and approved plans of Albemarle County in
order to respond to and mitigate the effects of said emergency.
Item 6.4. Adoption of Whitewood Village Community Center Anti- displacement/relocation Plan.
It was noted in the staff's report that the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as
amended, requires localities using Community Development Block Grant funds to adopt a plan insuring that
all occupied or vacant, occupiable, Iow/moderate-income dwelling units which may be demolished, or
whose use is converted as a result of CDBG-funded activities, be replaced.
The County has received an award of CDBG funds for the construction of the Whitewood Village
Apartments Community Service Facility as a part of the overall renovation of Whitewood Village
Apartments. The apartment complex has been purchased by Albemarle Housing Associates, a partnership
whose managing general partner is the Albemarle/Charlottesville Development Corporation, owned by the
Albemarle Housing Improvement Program. Total project costs including acquisition, renovation and
construction of the community center is projected at approximately $11.0 million. R. L. Price (Roanoke)is
the general contractor for all phases of the project and plans to renovate two buildings (24 units) at a time.
Tenant attrition has provided sufficient vacancies to prevent displacement. Tenants are being temporarily
relocated in the six other buildings and moved into renovated units upon completion. If construction can
start by early November, it is expected that the community center will be completed by May, 2004 and
renovation of the residential units completed by December 31,2004.
All funding sources have been committed leaving a relatively small gap in funding that is expected
to be covered by cost savings and/or use of contingencies and reserves. Sources include interim
construction financing from First Virginia Bank, permanent financing from VHDA, Federal HOME funds
from DHCD, CDBG funds from the County, and investment by AHIP through cash and deferred developer
fees.
Although the community service facility will be constructed on a vacant lot situated between two
existing apartment buildings and there will be no demolition or relocation as a result of the activities funded
by CDBG, a plan must still be adopted by the Board and signed by the County Executive. Staff
recommends the adoption of the plan as presented to the Board.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted the following Residential Anti-
Displacement and Relocation Assistance Plan, as required:
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
Residential Anti-Displacement and Relocation Assistance Plan
The County of Albemarle will replace all occupied and vacant occupiable
Iow/moderate-income dwelling units demolished or converted to a use other than as
Iow/moderate income dwelling unit as a direct result of activities assisted with funds
provided under the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended. All
replacement housing will be provided within three (3) years of the commencement of the
demolition or rehabilitation relating to conversion.
Before obli.qatin.q or expending funds that will directly result in such demolition or
conversion, the County Of Albemarle will make public and advise the state that it is
undertaking such an activity and will submit to the state, in writing, information that
identifies:
(1) A description of the proposed assisted activity;
(2)
The general location on a map and approximate number of dwelling units by size
(number of bedrooms) that will be demolished or converted to a use other than
as Iow/moderate-income dwelling units as a direct result of the assisted activity;
(3)
A time schedule for the commencement and completion of the demolition or
conversion;
(4) The general location on a map and approximate number of dwelling units by size
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 4)
(number of bedrooms) that will be provided as replacement dwelling units;
(5)
The source of funding and a time schedule for the provision of replacement
dwelling units;
(6)
The basis for concluding that each replacement dwelling unit will remain a
Iow/moderate-income dwelling unit for at least 10 years from the date of initial
occupancy; and
(7)
Information demonstrating that any proposed replacement of dwelling units with
smaller dwelling units is consistent with the housing needs of Iow- and
moderate-income households in the jurisdiction.
The County of Albemarle will provide relocation assistance to each Iow/moderate-income
household displace by the demolition of housing or by the direct result of assisted
activities. Such assistance shall be that provided under Section 104(d) of the Housing
and Community Development Act of 1974, as amended, or the Uniform Relocation
Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as amended.
The County of Albemarle's FY '03 project includes the following activities:
Construction of a 3,295 square foot community center in the Whitewood Village
Apartment Complex. The facility will be constructed on a vacant lot adjacent to two
existing apartment buildings and will not result in demolition or relocation.
The County of Albemarle will work with the grant management staff, engineers, project
area residents, and the Department of Housing and Community Development to insure
that any changes in project activities do not cause any displacement from or conversion
of occupiable structures.
In all cases, an occupiable structure will be defined as a dwelling that meets local
building codes or a dwelling that can be rehabilitated to meet code for $25,000 or less.
Item 6.5. Adoption and Posting of Section 504, Non-discrimination Based on Handicaps, Adoption
of Grievance Procedure and Designation of Ron L. White as Section 504 Coordinator.
It was noted in the staff's report that the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has
adopted policies and procedures to assure non-discrimination based on handicap in programs and activities
receiving Federal financial assistance. These requirements, contained in 24 CFR Part 8, implement
Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 as amended. All local government recipients of Community
Development Block Grant funds awarded by the Department of Housing and Community Development
must take certain actions to insure compliance with these requirements.
The County of Albemarle has been awarded CDBG funds to construct a community service facility
in the Whitewood Village Apartment Complex. Actions required to comply with Section 504 include
adopting and publishing a Notice of Non-Discrimination Based on Handicap as a display ad in the local
newspaper, posting the notice near where applicants and employees can see it, adopting a grievance
procedure specific to Section 504, conducting a self-evaluation of facilities that the County will use in
administration of the grant, and identifying a Section 504 coordinator. For the purpose of this project and
future CDBG projects, Mr. Ron White (Grant Administrator) will serve as the Section 504 coordinator. A
self-evaluation was conducted on October 12, 1998, by Mr. Bob Brandenberger, who was designated the
coordinator. Staff recommends the adoption and posting of the public notice, adoption of the grievance
procedure specifically for this project, and designation of Mr. Ron L. White as the Section 504 Coordinator.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted and approved of the posting of the
public notice (copy on file in the Clerk's Office), adopted the grievance procedure specifically for
the project (copy on file in the Clerk's Office), and designated Mr. Ron L. White as the Section $04
Coordinator.
Item 6.6. Taco Del Rey Restaurant Dance Hall Permit Request. Removed from agenda.
Item 6.7 Authorize Chairman to execute Mutual Aid Agreement between Albemarle County and
Buckingham County.
It was noted in the staff's report that in October, 1999, Albemarle County proposed entering into
written mutual aid agreements for fire and rescue services with each of its neighboring counties. These
agreements assure the terms under which such aid is delivered and maximize the statutory immunity
provided by Virginia Code §§ 27-2, 27-4 and 27-23.6. A standard agreement was prepared and forwarded
to each county for review and approval. On September 8, 2003, Buckingham County approved the
Agreement. It is the eighth and final county to do so. Staff recommends that the Board authorize the
Chairman to execute the Mutual Aid Agreement on behalf of the County.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board authorized the Chairman to execute the
following Mutual Aid Agreement between Albemarle County and Buckingham County:
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 5)
MUTUAL AID AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT made this 1st day of October, 2003, by and between
Albemarle County, a political subdivision of the Commonwealth of Virginia, hereinafter
referred to as "Albemarle", and Buckingham County, a political subdivision of the
Commonwealth of Virginia, hereinafter referred to as "Buckingham",
WHEREAS, it is deemed to be mutually beneficial to Albemarle and Buckingham
to enter into an agreement concerning mutual aid with regard to fire and rescue services;
and
WHEREAS, the parties desire that the terms and conditions of this Mutual Aid
Agreement be established pursuant to §§ 27-2, 27-4 and 27-23.6 of the Code of Virginia;
NOW THEREFORE WITNESSETH, that for and in consideration of the mutual
benefits to be derived by Albemarle and Buckingham from this Agreement, Albemarle
and Buckingham hereby covenant and agree each with the other as follows:
1. That Albemarle and Buckingham will endeavor to provide fire
suppression, fire prevention, rescue, hazardous materials response, and other related
governmental services to the other county within the capabilities available at the time the
request for such support is made. Such response may be by county-paid employees or
by county volunteer company or department fireflghters and rescuers.
2. That nothing contained in this Agreement should in any manner be
construed to compel either county to respond to a request for services in the other county
when the resources of the county to which the request is being made are needed, or are
being used, within the boundaries of its own county, nor shall any such request compel
the assisting county to continue to provide services in the other county when its
personnel, apparatus or equipment are needed within the boundaries of its own county.
3. That each county acknowledges that it is fully capable of providing fire
services, rescue services, hazardous material response services, and other related
governmental services to adequately serve its respective county.
4. That neither county shall be liable to the other for any loss or damage to
property or personal injury or death of personnel resulting from the performance of this
Agreement.
5. That each county shall indemnify and save harmless the assisting county
from all claims by third parties for property damage or personal injury which may arise
out of the activities of the assisting county resulting from the performance of this
Agreement.
6. The county requesting assistance shall not be required to reimburse the
assisting county for apparatus, equipment or personnel occasioned by a response for
assistance, or for damage to such apparatus or equipment, or injuries to personnel
incurred when responding in the other county; provided, however, the county requesting
assistance under the terms of this Agreement shall pay the responding entity from the
other county the actual cost of specialized extinguishing or hazardous material mitigation
agents used in rendering assistance pursuant to this Agreement.
7. That the county requesting assistance pursuant to this Agreement shall
make such request to the emergency communications center of the assisting county,
which will then contact the appropriate county officials to determine its response.
8. That when a county elects to respond to a request for assistance, the
personnel making such response shall not become employees of the county requesting
assistance for the purposes of the Virginia Workers Compensation Act.
9. That when a county elects to respond to a request for assistance, the
personnel manning such responding units shall remain under the command of the senior
responding officer, and shall work as a unified company and shall not be split apart
during the emergency operations unless ordered by the senior responding officer.
10. That when a county elects to respond to a request for assistance and the
senior responding officer determines that the emergency operations are being conducted
in an unsafe manner, the assisting county may limit its assistance to a support service or
withdraw the assistance to ensure the safety of its personnel.
11. This Agreement may be modified only by the mutual written consent of
both counties.
12. This Agreement may be terminated at any time by either county giving
thirty (30) days written notice of termination to the other county.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 6)
IN WITNESS THEREOF, Albemarle's Chairman of the Board of Supervisors and
Buckingham's Chairman of the Board of Supervisors execute this Agreement, they being
authorized to do so.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
(Signed) By: Lindsay G. Dorrier, Chairman
Board of Supervisors
COUNTY OF BUCKINGHAM
(Signed) By: Joe N. Chambers, Jr., Chairman
Board of Supervisors
Item 6.8. 2003 Statement of Assessed Values for Local Tax Purposes for Railroads and Interstate
Pipeline Transmission Companies as prepared by the Department of Taxation (on file in the Clerk's office),
received for information.
Item 6.9. Copy of assessment made for year 2003 by the State Corporation Commission of
Virginia of real and personal property of electric light and power corporations, electric suppliers, gas and
pipeline distribution corporations, telecommunications companies and water corporations as of the
beginning of the first day of January 7, 2003 for Albemarle County, received as information.
Item 6.10. Draft copy of Planning Commission minutes for August 19, 2003, was received as
information.
Item 6.11. Draft 2004 Thomas Jefferson Planning District (TJPDC) Legislative Program, received
as information.
It was noted in the staff's report that the Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission works with
the County and other planning district members each year to develop a legislative program for the General
Assembly session. The Draft 2004 Legislative Program follows the same format as in prior years, with
priority "action items" and a section highlighting some of the most important ongoing concerns. The
County's major issues are included in the draft program. Staff recommends that the Board members
review the Program and submit any suggested changes to the County Executive. The Board will be asked
to approve the Program at its meeting on November 5, 2003.
(Discussion: Mr. Martin asked if the Board is supporting everything in the program or supporting it
only in general.
Ms. Thomas said if there is something about which a Board member feels strongly, it should be
mentioned specifically now. This program will direct David Blount's activities during the legislative session.
Mr. Martin said there were two proposals which attracted his attention. One was a request for
enabling legislation authorizing localities to require contractors, as a condition of public contracts awarded
through the procurement process, to pay employees a living wage. Another, was opposing legislation that
reduces or removes local government authority to limit the carrying of weapons in public buildings and other
public facilities. He is underlining those two things which he neither approves of, or disapproves of, but
which give him pause.
Mr. Davis said that last year, the General Assembly took away all of the authority concerning
weapons other than for public employees under personnel restrictions, so there is not much left for them to
do.
Ms. Thomas suggested that these comments be sent to David Blount who will be visiting each
locality. She has a concern about the following words under Economic Development, which is new
language: "We also support restored state funding for the Industrial Site Development Fund, the
Governor's Opportunity Fund and tourism initiatives that help promote economic development in localities
and regions." She said that last year Albemarle's funding of its ACE Program with funds from the lodging
tax came under attack by one legislator. She wants to be sure the wording of the proposal is not such that
the County cannot continue that battle. She said the PDC meets tomorrow night, and she will share these
thoughts with them.)
Item 6.12. FY 2004-05 Budget Calendar, was received as information.
Item 6.13. VDOT Monthly Report for October, 2003, received for information.
Agenda Item No. 7. Transportation Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Jim Bryan, Resident Engineer, said that in reference to the recent resolution adopted by the
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 7)
Board requesting VDOT to expedite the public hearing on the Meadow Creek Parkway, VDOT designers
have indicated that they need four months to do the design work which puts the hearing in March, 2004.
Once that work is completed, the CTB will be able to set a firm advertisement date. He said the
advertisement date is set for 2008 at this time. Hopefully, some of the money issues will solve themselves
and the project can be moved forward.
Mr. Bowerman asked if Mr. Bryan is referring to money for the project, or only for the planning of
the project. Mr. Bryan said it is money for land acquisition. Mr. Bowerman asked if there is not sufficient
money set aside in the Six-Year Plan at this time to build the project. Mr. Bryan said "yes." However, more
money is needed for the additional land.
Ms. Thomas said if the owner of the piece of land at the northern end on Rio Road could give an
easement and keep all of his development rights, or even have some rights added, with the new access to
the downtown area, it would greatly improve the attractiveness of his property. It is possible for this Board to
reduce the money outlay needed through zoning actions. There is a real question as to whether the dollar
amounts mentioned by VDOT are higher than will be needed.
Mr. Tucker said VDOT may not know about what Ms. Thomas just mentioned, and VDOT cannot
ensure those rights could be shifted or the land used for something else without the County's involvement.
Mr. Martin asked if money is available to build the road, but there is a need for a public hearing and
then acquisition of right-of-way, which may take and it is expected that getting that right-of-way will take until
2008, he wonders if there is any flexibility so the project could be advertised earlier than that. Mr. Bryan
said that is possible. Also, he thinks that some of the land issues will resolve themselves in the next six
months.
Mr. Martin said he would like to see the project begin as soon as possible. With every election,
particularly in the City, the whole thing can fall apart again.
Mr. Tucker asked if there is anyway to keep the additional land for right-of-way, grading easements,
and additional land for the parks, separate from the actual roadway, and have it phased in later.
Mr. Bowerman said there has to be something than can be done.
Ms. Thomas said she does not think the Board wants to split the project to the point where VDOT
just "washes its hands" of the park part of the project.
Mr. Bowerman said the Board does not want to have the City think it is not 100 percent behind the
actual size of 80 acres.
Mr. Martin said in the County the candidates running for office are basically supporting construction
of the Meadow Creek Parkway, but in the City there are candidates who run for office on an "anti-Meadow
Creek Parkway" platform, so if elected, their mandate is not to honor previous City Council promises. If the
money is available and there is anyway to move things around in a way to solidify the project, he thinks it
should be done.
Mr. Rooker said the Board needs to do everything possible to expedite the process. He thinks it
would be ill-advised for City Council to allow a project which has been decided upon, and on which the
State has spent substantial sums of money, on which the County and the City have both spent substantial
sums of money, to allow it to be subject to political whims every time an election comes around. Once
elected, the candidates cannot ignore that decisions have been made and huge amounts of public
resources have been expended relying on those decisions. He thinks the Board needs to do whatever
possible to expedite the public hearing date.
Mr. Bryan said he will do whatever is possible to speed up the process. He said Mr. Butch Davies is
very committed to the project, so VDOT has all the support it needs.
Mr. Bryan said he was proud of the job his area superintendents and their crew members did during
Hurricane Isabel. Mr. Dorrier asked if VDOT works with the volunteer rescue squads during such an event.
Mr. Bryan said they are linked in different ways. That is the epitome of decentralized operations. It is not
something that can be forced by the Residency. It is up to the individual superintendent to get with
someone in the volunteer fire department and figure out how they will do their sector. They rehearse that in
different ways. They have different ways of communicating; a lot of telephone and radio service was lost
during this event. A lot was done without telephone because people were very familiar with their individual
responsibilities.
Mr. Dorrier asked if the power outage affected VDOT's efforts. Mr. Bryan said it did not. It affected
communications and coordination, and life support in terms of water, but for the people who go out and
clear roads, they did it without power.
Mr. Tucker said Mr. Bryan's crews had an effect on how fast the power came back on because they
had to go out and open the roads so the power crews could get in to restore electric power. He witnessed
some of this personally, and had many people tell him what a great job the VDOT people did.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 8)
Mr. Dorrier mentioned a "pre-hurricane" meeting which was held. He asked if Mr. Bryan had any
recommendations for any future events. Mr. Bryan said efforts might be coordinated better. That is not a
criticism, but was a lesson learned in terms of visibility, communications, and coordinated responsibilities.
He said that when they work with the fire/rescue people, it is more than just teaming, but there is a synergy.
Mr. Dorrier asked if this was the first major regional planning effort. Mr. Bryan said it was the first
such effort with which he has been involved.
Ms. Thomas expressed a word of thanks to Mr. Matt Grimes who attended a meeting last night,
along with Mr. Juan Wade, of the Whippoorwill Hollow neighborhood. Mr. Grimes mentioned that there is a
provision in the State Code allowing local government to declare a certain area to be a particularly
significant law enforcement area for speed limit violations. The area can be set for a $200 fine for
speeding. She said Whippoorwill Hollow subdivision provides a classic cut-through. The road is posted for
25 mph, but the actual speed traveled is much higher. She asked for information as to the process for
designating it as a special enforcement area. She said staff can actually determine whether the offending
traffic is from cut-through traffic or from the actual residents in the neighborhood.
Mr. Bryan said that was done for Morgantown Road, and the results were surprising.
Mr. Davis said he is familiar with the State Code section, but will have to look at it to provide the
Board some advice.
Agenda Item No. 8. Regional and Local Economic Development Plans, Discussion of.
Mr. Tucker said that at the Board's recent strategic planning session, it discussed both the
proposed Regional Economic Development Plan developed through the Thomas Jefferson Planning
District Commission (TJPDC) and the County's current Economic Development Policy, which is part of the
Albemarle County Comprehensive Plan. It was requested that the regional plan be brought back to the
Board for further consideration. Although the regional plan includes information from the local policy, the
Board decided that consideration of the regional plan need not be delayed while the local policy was in the
process of being updated. The Plan was developed through a committee of the Thomas Jefferson
Planning District Commission and was completed in February, 2002. The committee included appointees
from each of the member localities and liaisons from the Thomas Jefferson Partnership for Economic
Development. To date, only Greene County has officially adopted the Plan.
Mr. Tucker said the stated goals of the regional plan are: (1) to create wealth within the region, (2)
to increase the ability of local government to provide services for citizens, and (3) to make living in this
region more affordable for its residents. Based on review of the document, staff believes that the plan is
consistent with the County's current policies. While the Thomas Jefferson Partnership for Economic
Development indicated that the Partnership did provide input and comment during the process, they have
not taken formal action on the Plan.
Mr. Tucker said regarding the County's current Economic Development Policy, staff will begin
working with the Albemarle County Planning Commission to review the current policy and provide an
update for the Board's consideration. Staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed Regional
Economic Development Policy as reviewed previously.
Ms. Thomas said the County's representative, Mr. Reuben Clarke, is in the audience today if the
Board members have questions. There are also staff members from the Planning District Commission
present today.
Mr. Rooker said he thinks this is a good regional plan. He thinks each Board member could go
through the plan and picks things with which they are not in total agreement, but he thinks it reflects a good
plan for the region that is something each of the member constituents of the Commission will adopt. It is an
excellent piece of work. He then offered motion to adopt the proposed Regional Economic Development
Policy as presented.
Mr. Martin said he agrees with Mr. Rooker and looks forward to reading the memorandums of
understanding between the localities concerning projects on their borders. He thinks those will probably
take 12 years or so, but thinks this is a good starting document. He gave second to the motion.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Agenda Item No. 9. Neighborhood Master Plan, Discussion of next area to be planned.
Mr. David Benish said that on August 19, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended that
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 9)
Neighborhoods 1 and 2, and Hollymead/Piney Mountain be the next areas master planned. This is the area
which is essentially north of the City limits, Hydraulic Road, Melbourne Road north to the GE-Fanuc area
along the Route 29 North corridor. The Commission believes that a larger "framework" plan over a larger
area, with emphasis on the Route 29 corridor, would be of greater utility than a detailed plan of any given
single or joint neighborhood.
Mr. Benish said the DISC II Committee discussed this issue at length over the last several months.
With the staff, DISC II identified the desired area for the next master plan and developed the concept for the
planning for a larger area with less detail. He said the DISC II recommendations and the staff's
recommendations are before the Board for action today.
Mr. Benish said this recommendation is based on development and redevelopment pressures
along the Route 29 Corridor. They are fairly great and require more consensus and detailed planning.
Neighborhoods 1 and 2 have in-fill needs, City/County issues, transportation and center designation issues.
The Hollymead/Piney Mountain area still has large areas that are unplanned, areas which have only
general directions listed in the County's Comprehensive Plan. It would be useful to have a more definitive
understanding of the expectations for those areas, particularly the area just west of Route 29 and the
Hollymead area south of the Town Center.
Mr. Benish said the proposed scope of work would be different than that for the Crozet Master
Plan. The Commission believes a two phased project may meet the needs of the County in these
communities better than a single phased project similar to that in Crozet. The first phase would provide a
more general framework plan, along with guidelines for development along the Route 29 North Corridor.
Phase 1 would identify areas which require more specific planning than those in the Phase 2 part. There
would be more detailed planning, but it would be focused in strategic areas under this concept.
Mr. Benish said staff recommends that the Board approve Neighborhoods 1 and 2 and
Hollymead/Piney Mountain as the next area for master planning. With that approval, staff could move
forward with developing the scope of work to better determine the resources available, and the cost of that
work. Then staffwould develop an RFP. One other issue is what to tell potential applicants for
development if the Board chooses to proceed with this area as the next area subject to master planning.
For the Crozet Master Plan, applicants were encouraged to delay their proposals, or to time review of their
proposals to completion of significant information within that study. Once this new area is designated for the
next master plan, staff will be asked how applicants should time their proposals. Staff recognizes there are
more unique characteristics to this area which is about three times the size, and has seven times the
population of Crozet. Much of the land all ready has some urban zoning, so there is the potential for these
properties to be used for by-right development essentially addressing market demand. There is less of an
incentive for an applicant to delay a project.
Mr. Dorrier asked if this area will encompass all the land between Hydraulic Road and the GE-
Fanuc facility. Mr. Benish said the four development areas which encompass the Route 29 North corridor
contains about 21,000 acres, and it is several miles long.
Mr. Bowerman said there will be no moratorium on new development. He wonders how long the
process will take because there are people in the community who want to file for new projects in the next
year or so. Mr. Benish said this is a new scope, so staff is not sure. Originally, they had anticipated that
taking on the areas individually would take about a year and a half. They think that for Phase 1 it would
take about the same time. To do Phase 2 would probably taken an additional year.
Mr. Bowerman asked if staff has looked at the Neighborhood Model in terms of reviewing any plans
filed, instead of the way it has been done in the past. Mr. Benish said "yes."
Ms. Thomas asked if certain aspects will be phased in. Will there be a road network before getting
other pieces? She said a road network could be shared with new applicants; it could even be adopted into
the Comprehensive Plan which would make it useful for staff and applicants.
Mr. Benish said that is at the core of this type of study. The idea is to get the Phase 1 portion
finished first which includes the road network, and location of the centers. Also important is how land uses
relate one to the other and where preservation areas that should be protected are located. The carrying
capacity of the area must be determined. All those steps would most likely be the first steps of Phase 1.
How quickly they are done may be dependent on how the consultant breaks down the process. He said it
takes three to four months to just get through the RFP process. Staff has to develop the background data.
Once some firm is under contract, this part could most likely be done quickly.
Mr. Martin said he thinks the things that can be done should be done as fast as possible. The road
network is the most important part, but note that the County is not ignorant of the area and just waiting for
some consultant to say what needs to be done. That area has been studied for a long time. He does not
think there needs to be a moratorium on anything; the process just needs to be moved along quickly. He
thinks this is a good plan.
Mr. Rooker said he does not disagree with anything that has been said. However, there are a
number of proposals that have been filed and are moving forward in various stages of approval. Those are
not being stopped at this point just because the area will be the subject of a master plan. That represents
millions of square feet of additional space. He thinks the Board should show a preference for slowing down
other proposals to make certain that they fit in with the first part of this plan. He said that is a personal
preference. When doing the master plan for Crozet, there were several applicants with large tracts of
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 10)
property in the early stages of development. They had not yet filed their plans; one developer actually held
off for more than a year to make sure his plan fit into the ultimate Crozet master plan. He thinks that is
important. The County does not want a lot of applications filed to "beat the deadline" for master planning.
That area is substantially developed out all ready.
Mr. Rooker said that in looking at how Route 29 has developed over the years, basically as a bunch
of properties with their own entrances off of Route 29, this has created a difficult traffic situation. For the
Hollymead Towne Center, the Board required that the property be developed in a unified fashion, with a
unified transportation network. It will have only two entrances onto Route 29, where it could have had 14 if
developed by-right. The master plan will provide the opportunity to plan for the rest of the undeveloped
portion of Route 29, and even some parts which are developed will be shown with a preference for
redevelopment. Ultimately, he thinks the area will be more valuable, as will Crozet.
Mr. Rooker said he disagrees with what Mr. Tom Loach said at the beginning of this meeting. He
thinks there is a lot of value to having a developed master plan for an area. It is important that infrastructure
needs throughout the County be funded, but to imply that there is no value to master planning, if a super
commitment is not made to capital expenditures in a particular area, is wrong. He thinks that ultimately
infrastructure investments need to be made based on the demand and acute need for that service in the
area, and the availability of resources to meet those demands.
Mr. Dorrier asked if the Board is to approve today the areas mentioned for the next master plan.
Mr. Tucker said "yes."
Mr. Bowerman said that philosophically he agrees with Mr. Rooker. He wonders how the Board
can show the benefit of such a plan if someone waiting to develop their property waits until after the first
phase of the plan is done?
Mr. Rooker mentioned a development where he worked through the master planning process with
the community, so when the plan came before this Board it was non-controversial because it fit into the
master plan.
Ms. Thomas said that development and what has happened to the neighboring properties is a good
example. The master plan called for interconnectivity with the road. This developer was about to build a
road at his expense that would have come to a dead-end. The road would not have benefited anyone. It is
only because the County has a master plan that it was able to say to the owner of the neighboring property
that a right-of-way had to be allowed for a connecting road. Without a road plan, and a master plan, she
does not think the County would have the ability to say that to the owner of the neighboring property. She
thinks each developer will feel they are put upon by this process, but it is like the entrance corridor
regulations. Each developer is not too happy with those regulations, but the entire impact is something that
increases the value of his property. With the framework plan, the County will take on the responsibility of
making sure the neighbor develops his property in a way that matches. The Board's ability to do that is a lot
weaker if there is not an adopted framework in the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Martin said Neighborhoods 1 and 2 will include a lot of in-fill. He knows staff has been looking
at the road network on Pantops, and then at Penn Park, and the developers have been looking at the
bigger picture. Out on Route 29 North, there were a relatively small group of landowners who knew what
the County was trying to accomplish.
Mr. Dorrier said a coordinated infrastructure plan makes more sense. If it is not coordinated, it will
be more expensive and more difficult for both public and private concerns. It is in the best interest of the
developers to "get on board" with the master plan.
Mr. Cilimberg said there is the potential in the next rezoning submittal period to get a request for a
project in this study area. Staff needs to be able to advise that applicant that they should work with the
County's master planning process through development of at least the framework plan. That is many
months away. If that is what the Board feels staff should do, that is what will be done. Staff cannot refuse
to take an application for rezoning, and if one is submitted, staffwill have to start the rezoning process. It
can create hard feelings sometimes. In the real world, the development community cannot always wait for
what they plan to do.
Mr. Bowerman said the County would not have to approve the application.
Mr. Davis said that in Virginia, there is no authority to establish a formal moratorium on zoning
applications. When an application is filed, unless the applicant consents to delaying processing of the
application, there is a time frame the County has to meet in order to process an application. Ultimately, a
board of supervisors has a reasonable amount of time, not to exceed 12 months, to take some action on
any plan before it. The Board does not have to approve a plan immediately, but can take time to consider
the application. It is a legislative decision as to whether it is an appropriate zoning action that the Board
wants to approve under the framework of the Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan the Board
would be dealing with at the time action is taken is the existing adopted Plan. Obviously, the Board has a lot
of flexibility in dealing with zoning cases. From a practical standpoint, this has not been a major problem in
the past because of the realization that a rezoning action is a legislative action and the Board has a lot of
discretion as to whether to approve the request.
Mr. Martin said the Board is having this conversation, and it has staff input, but it has no input from
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 11)
those people who might be thinking about presenting something in the near future. He would like to hear
from the general public, and not just from developers, to get their input before making a final decision.
Mr. Rooker said there are two issues being discussed. One is the issue of adopting staff's
recommendation to go forward with this area as the next area to be master planned. He then offered
motion to approve Neighborhoods 1 & 2 and Hollymead/Piney Mountain as the next area to master plan.
He said the second issue is what staff tells people who may come in with an application, and that is a
completely different issue.
Mr. Martin seconded the motion.
Ms. Thomas said it might be good to hold a public hearing on how the landowners of large tracts
and residents would like this to proceed. She thinks public input at this time would be appropriate.
Mr. Rooker said he would like for the Board to vote on the motion. He does not even know if the
Board will vote on advice to give staff for applications that may be filed. There was no vote taken on the
same issue for the Crozet plan. The Board might set aside ten or fifteen minutes at the next day meeting to
hear from people who may be impacted by this process.
Mr. Martin said he does not know that the Board needs to have a public hearing. Comments could
be taken by E-mail or telephone, etc, so the Board's discussion includes a little more thought about the
different parties.
Mr. Tucker said this item can be placed on the agenda for the day meeting in November. That will
give people more time to contact Board members. Also, the question can be put on the County's webpage.
vote:
At this time, Mr. Dorrier called for a vote on the motion which passed by the following recorded
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Mr. Bowerman said he thinks it is clear from what happened with the Hollymead Towne Center that
eventually all get to the same point. If somebody has a project coming forward (and he is thinking about
Bob Hauser and Frank Stoner), he thinks it behooves the developer to work with staff and the Board,
instead of against it. Even though there are by-right things that can be done, there would be a better final
product by going through this process.
Agenda Item No. 10. End-of-Year FY 2002-03 General Fund Preliminary Financial Report.
Mr. Melvin Breeden, Director of Finance, said the report presented today is a preliminary report still
subject to audit which will begin in the next couple of weeks. He said that revenues appear to be $1.793
million better than reported at the end of the third quarter. However, they are still $500,000 short of the
original budgeted amounts. He referred to Attachment "A" of the report (on file in the Clerk's Office) and
noted some reporting changes on that sheet. He ended by saying that the Preliminary Fund Balance
Available after Cash Flow Reserve at June 30, 2003, is expected to be $3.634 million, and after
reappropriations (next item on the agenda) there will be a Preliminary Projected Unobligated Fund Balance
of $1.635 million.
Mr. Dorrier asked what this can be attributed to. Mr. Breeden said there were some significant
changes in revenue projections, and there were some actions taken during the fourth quarter to adjust the
budget. These were primarily reductions in the use of the Fund Balance which incorporated a $980,000
reduction in the transfer to the School Fund based on the revenue sharing agreement for local tax dollars,
$970,000 in Debt Service that had been scheduled for the 800 MHZ Radio system was not needed in the
last fiscal year, and a reduction of $970,000 in the transfer to Capital Projects. There were also several
expenditure reductions made in General Government to deal with the shortfall.
Mr. Breeden said the housing industry has been very strong recently. The amount of new
construction was substantially larger than anticipated, and the 2003 reassessment was seven percent
greater than budgeted. Personal Property revenues continue to be below budget. Zero financing has
reduced the value of used cars, and in many cases, prices on new cars are not increasing. Some reduction
is being seen in revenues for Business Equipment.
Mr. Rooker asked about the emergency communication system. He mentioned a grant for $6.0
million which was recently received and asked how that will impact the planned cost of the system. Mr.
Tucker said that grant will defray some of the costs, but he is not sure of the actual amount. Mr. Breeden
said the grant is totally new so staff is not completely familiar with it. He understands that approximately
$5.0 million of the grant can go toward the radio project. The remaining $1.0 million would be split between
a telephone connection with Nextel, and the infrastructure added to the radio system to operate the Police
Department's mobile data terminals. The Board previously approved a lease/purchase agreement for up to
$12.0 million for the radio system. It was anticipated that about $7.0 million of that amount would be
borrowed waiting for the outcome of the grant, and now the additional $5.0 million will not have to be
borrowed. The actual details have not been finalized.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 12)
Mr. Breeden suggested looking at Page 4 of the report, item 2 which reads: "In September, 2001
the Board approved a carry-over policy that allocated 100 percent of unbudgeted revenues and 60 percent
of departmental expenditure savings (savings after all encumbered amounts are reappropriated) to the
Fund Balance to meet required cash flow needs with any funds over and above the necessary amount for
minimum cash flow to go to the CIP Reserve Fund for future capital needs, capital repairs and maintenance
items and/or debt service." He said there are no surplus revenues. There was $2.1 million in savings on
the expenditure side of the budget. That has been reduced by the '03 projects which will need to be
brought forward into the current year, leaving a $1.7 million expenditure savings. A 60 percent allocation of
that would move $1.0 million of that to the Capital Fund, leaving $0.714 million for projects in the current
year. The Board's next agenda item will include use of $0.548 million of the $0.714 which leaves $0.166
million. He said staff recommends that the remaining expenditure savings be retained in the Fund Balance
as uncommitted funds until after completion of the final audit.
Mr. Breeden mentioned Item 3 on Page 4 which deals with the transfer of funds to the Schools. It
reads: "Based on the third quarter revenue projections, which indicated a shortfall in local tax revenue of
$1.633 million, the 60 percent allocation of these revenues to the School Fund was reduced by $0.980
million. Due to the substantial improvement in local tax revenues during the fourth quarter, the actual
shortfall was only $0.281 million. The School Fund's share of this shortfall would be $0.169 million, a
difference of $0.811 million compared to the $0.980 million reduction previously required. A preliminary
review of the FY '03 school operations indicates a School Fund Balance of $2.3 million at June 30, 2003.
The FY '04 budget included the use of $0.660 million of that balance leaving an unobligated balance of
$1.64 million. Should the Board approve returning the $0.811 million to the School Fund the School
Board's Fund Balance would increase to $2.444 million, while the General Fund Balance would be reduced
to $0.825 million." He said that the Board needs to consider whether this action should be taken.
Dr. Kevin Castner said the Schools instituted hiring freezes, and did not allocate all of the money to
the Schools because of tight revenues during the last couple of years. They actually did a reduction in
effort in order to have that larger Fund Balance as protection. This last year things got a little better for
everyone. The reason the Fund Balance is up from the normal $1.5 million is because they sacrificed by
having the hiring freezes, etc. He doesn't want that to work against them, but he realizes that is the Board's
decision. He said this year was the first time in a number of years that the Schools actually got the money
which had been allocated to them because the previous year there was a reduction of about five percent in
their allocation. He said some of that balance came about because they were being frugal.
Mr. Rooker said the Board is not deciding today what to do with the Fund Balance. Mr. Tucker said
this report is simply to inform the Board of some decisions it may want to make. They just want the Board
to realize that they would be shifting funds from the General Fund Balance back to the Schools if that is the
decision the Board wants to make.
Ms. Thomas said she thinks the Board is looking forward to the time when salaries of General
Government employees can be increased. The Board had hoped it could happen in December or possibly
before. She does not think any decision the Board makes today will impact on that decision which was
made at the time the budget was adopted.
Mr. Tucker said there are two different revenue forecasts. This report deals with the end of the FY
2002-03 year. Information which will be presented to the Board about the salary increase will be based on
current year revenues.
Ms. Thomas asked if the decision could be impacted by the Fund Balance. Mr. Tucker said it could
be, but he would not want to use one-time revenues for that purpose.
Mr. Rooker asked how the next agenda item will impact the budget. Mr. Breeden said the $1.635
million shown at the bottom of Attachment A takes into account all of the appropriations requested. Mr.
Tucker said as much of the Fund Balance as possible is normally shifted to Capital for both schools and
local government.
At this time, Mr. Rooker moved to accept the Preliminary FY 2003 end-of-the-year Financial
Report. The motion was seconded by Mr. Bowerman. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
(Note: At 10:38 a.m., the Board recessed, and reconvened at 10:48 a.m.)
Agenda Item No. 11. Public Hearing: FY 2004 Budget Amendment. (Notice of this public hearing
was advertised in the Daily Progress on September 23, 2003.)
Mr. Breeden noted that Code of Virginia §15.2-2507 stipulates that any locality may amend its
budget to adjust the aggregate amount to be appropriated during the current fiscal year as shown in the
currently adopted budget. However, any such amendment which exceeds one percent of the total
expenditures shown in the currently adopted budget or the sum of $500,000, whichever is lesser, must be
accomplished by first publishing a notice of a meeting and holding a public hearing before amending the
budget. This proposed increase of the FY 2004 Budget totals $19,730,223.14. It is comprised of 19
separate appropriations: two appropriations (Nos. 2004-015 and 2004-021) for Education related
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 13)
donations, grants and programs totaling $214,852.50; one appropriation (No. 2004-016) for the 2003 Local
Law Enforcement Block Grant totaling $23,764.00; one appropriation (No. 2004-017) requesting
reappropriation of funds totaling $14,349,180.08 for uncompleted Local Government Capital Improvement
Projects; one appropriation (No. 2004-018) for $180,904.24 to reappropriate funding for outstanding FY '03
purchase orders; one appropriation (No. 2004-019) requesting reappropriation of $140,512.27 for
uncompleted FY '03 projects; one appropriation (No. 2004-020) to fund new projects and initiatives for FY
'04 totaling $547,692.00 (this includes $31,500 for a new citizens' survey like that completed a few years
ago); one appropriation (No. 2004-021) requesting reappropriation of $2,925,935.32 for uncompleted
School Capital Improvement Projects; and, one appropriation (No. 2004-022) requesting reappropriation of
$1,347,382.73 for uncompleted Stormwater Projects. A detailed description of these requests was
provided on Attachment A (on file in the Clerk's Office).
Ms. Thomas asked if staff thinks a new citizens's survey is a good use of funds. Are there better
results from such a survey than from the citizen participation process? Mr. Tucker said once such a
process is started, it is easier to continue it because there is then something to measure it by.
Ms. Thomas asked if there is multiple value by being able to make a comparison to the last survey.
Ms. White said this survey can be complemented by bringing people in to focus groups. This is the only
way to get a random sample. When doing it other ways, there is selected participation.
Mr. Dorrier said the last time the Board members participated in drafting the questions. He asked if
that will happen again. Mr. Tucker said "yes", the process will be the same.
Mr. Breeden said the Social Services Department has requested $252,000 for the Family Support
Program. The Board heard in June that there was to be a substantial reduction in Federal funding. At that
time, Social Services requested use of $187,000 in anticipated surplus revenues from FY '03, along with an
additional $17,000. Now, it appears that they will need $48,000 above that request to continue the
program.
Mr. Rooker said he would like to get a report from the School System as to whether or not they
think this program is a wise use of School funds. He said that it has been only three years since the
beginning of this program, and it will now cost three times the amount that had been planned to be spent.
He thinks the Schools need to reevaluate their participation in the program.
Ms. White said that until now this had been a Self-Sustaining program. It was funded with Federal
IV-E dollars. Those funds have to be targeted to a very specific population. It is not free money in the
sense that the locality can do with it as it pleases. There has been no local contribution so far into that
program. This year, because of some reimbursement changes, Social Services had to ask to use their
other state reimbursement dollars for this program. The only local investment now will be the $17,000.
This year, they hope to find other ways to get those Federal revenues built back up in order to keep the
program going. There is not much flexibility in the use of the Federal revenues.
Mr. Rooker asked if the $17,000 will be the first use of local dollars for the program. He said the
Board knows what has happened with the Comprehensive Services Act, and that makes him nervous.
At this time, the public hearing was opened. With no one from the public rising to speak, the public
hearing was closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Martin to approve the amendment of the FY 2004 budget
as proposed, and to adopt the following Resolutions of Appropriation. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Rooker. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION #2004-015
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: FUNDING FOR UPGRAGE TO CAMA SYSTEM
SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 9010 12140 950004 CAMASYSTEM J 1 41,973.00
2 9010 51000 510100 CIPFUNDBAL J 2 41,973.00
9010 0501 ESTIMATED REVENUE
0701 APPROP
1 1000 12144 332115 MAINTENANCE J 1 6,000.00
2 1000 51000 510100 G/F FUND BAL J 2 6,000.00
1000 0501 ESTIMATED REVENUE
0701 APPROP
TOTAL
41,973.00
41,973.00
6,000.00
6,000.00
95,946.00 47,973.00 47,973.00
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION #2004-016
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 14)
EXPLANATION: 2003 LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT BLOCK GRANT
SUB LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT
GENERAL LEDGER
DEBIT CREDIT
1 1538 31013 120000 OVERTIME WAGES J 1 22,075.25
1 1538 31013 210000 FICA J 1 1,688.75
2 1538 33000 300001 FEDERAL GRANT REV J 2 21,388.00
2 1538 51000 512004 TRNS FROM GEN FND J 2 2,376.00
1538 0501 ESTIMATED REVENUE
0701 APPROP
TOTAL 47,528.00
23,764.00
23,764.00
23,764.00 23,764.00
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION #2004-017
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: REAPPROPRIATION OF FY 03 CIP PROJECTS
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION
SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 9010 11200 800901
1 9010 12200 800700
1 9010 12200 800714
1 9010 21000 331000
1 9010 21020 800100
1 9010 21050 331000
1 9010 21060 800708
1 9010 31000 800306
1 9010 31000 800910
1 9010 31000 950150
1 9010 31010 800713
1 9010 31010 800714
1 9010 31010 800733
1 9010 32010 950092
1 9010 32010 950110
1 9010 32010 950140
1 9010 41000 312700
1 9010 41000 700006
1 9010 41000 800690
1 9010 41000 800960
1 9010 41000 950039
1 9010 41000 950059
1 9010 41000 950061
1 9010 41000 950116
1 9010 41000 950143
1 9010 41020 950024
1 9010 41020 950068
1 9010 41020 950081
1 9010 41020 950115
1 9010 41020 950158
1 9010 41020 950159
1 9010 43100 800666
1 9010 43100 800687
1 9010 43100 950102
1 9010 43100 950119
1 9010 43100 950127
1 9010 43100 950128
1 9010 43100 950141
1 9010 71000 800949
1 9010 71000 950003
1 9010 71000 950009
1 9010 71000 950034
9010 71000 950044
1 9010 71000 950050
1 9010 71000 950069
1 9010 71000 950121
1 9010 71000 950137
1 9010 71000 950148
1 9010 71000 950152
1 9010 71000 950155
1 9010 72030 568901
1 9010 72030 580416
1 9010 72030 950026
1 9010 72030 950055
1 9010 72030 950107
1 9010 72030 950111
1 9010 72030 950135
1 9010 73020 800949
1 9010 81010 580409
1 9010 81010 950053
1 9010 81010 950108
1 9010 81010 950136
1 9010 81010 950139
NEW COB RENOVATIONS J
IT-ADP EQUIPMENT J
IT-TECHNOLOGY UPGRADE J
COURTS-REPAIRS & MAINT J
GEN'L DIST CT-MAC & EQUIP J
JUV CT-REPAIRS & MAINT J
CIR CT-DOCUMENT IMAGING J
COMPUTER AIDED DISPATCH J
TRAINING CTR/FIRING RANGEJ
MOBILE COMMAND CENTER J
POLICE-COMP UPGRADE J
POLICE-TECH UPGRADE J
POLICE-VIDEO EQUIP J
F/R-BLDG & EQUIP J
F/R-RECORDS SYSTEM J
F/R INCIDENT REPORTING J
ENG- CONSULTANTS J
ENG-IVY LANDFILL J
ENG-SIDEWALK IMPV J
ENG-STREET LIGHTS J
ENG-MEADOWCREEK PKWY J
ENG-KEENE LANDFILL CLOS J
ENG-MEADOWCREEK PATH J
ENG-MCREEK PKWAY PHS 1 J
ENG-CORVILLE FARM J
LANDSCAPING-29 NORTH J
WAKEFIELD ROAD IMP J
REVENUE SHARING ROADS J
AIRPORT ROAD SIDEWALKS J
AIRPORT ROAD IMPV J
POWELL CREEK DRIVE J
FACILITY MAINT J
COB - CHILLER REPL J
COB-PARKING LOT J
BOARD RM RENOV J
DVLP DEPT RENOV J
COB ENTRYCORR BEAUTY J
P/W-CENTRALIZED FILING J
P&R-MAINTENANCE PROJ J
CROZET PARK IMPV J
SCOTTSV COMM CENTER J
TOWE PARK REC PROJ J
ATH FIELD STUDY/DEVEL J
SOUTHERN PARK DEVEL J
PVCC FACILITY RENOV J
SIMPSON PARK J
IRRIGATION-SCH FIELDS J
P&R-CASHIER BOOTHS J
REC FAC-NEEDS ASSMNT J
TOWE TENNIS COURTS J
VISITOR'S BUREAU-MAINT J
CONSERV EASEM-TOURISM J
RIVANNA GREENWAY J
RT 250/616 TURN LANE J
RIVER ACCESS IMPV J
GREENBELT-BOAT ACCESS J
CT SQ ENHANCEMENTS J
LIB-MAINT PROJECTS J
CONSERV EASEM-ACE J
NEIGHBORHOOD PLAN J
GREENBRIAR PED/BIKE PTH J
TRANSPORTATION PLAN J
PARCEL CONVERSION PROJ J
1 3,270,126.86
1 43,794.66
1 266,499.00
1 136,964.08
1 5,000.00
1 43,255.52
1 13,677.00
1 117,717.55
1 50,000.00
1 30,197.56
1 2,117.40
1 947,407.78
1 4,008.80
1 562,140.89
1 18,503.64
1 7,000.00
1 500.00
1 321 120.43
1 611 232.84
1 157 929.21
1 24 275.41
1 468 872.80
1 20 000.00
1 5 700.33
1 5 000.00
1 10 000.00
1 20 841.00
1 701 176.90
1 127 000.00
1 300 000.00
1 180 950.00
1 717 980.46
1 6,106.25
1 2 300.00
1 21 895.50
1 50 000.00
1 52 223.94
1 14 000.00
1 92 630.73
1 9 997.76
1 165 361.65
1 8 650.00
1 88 666.83
1 500.00
1 2 580.58
1 86 346.71
1 44 569.3?
1 23 000.00
1 61 848.30
1 87 900.00
1 2 584.00
1 435 850.00
1 93 876.00
1 110 000.00
1 30 000.00
1 369 745.50
1 250 000.00
1 104 269.23
1 1,521,195.10
1 977,582.57
1 75,000.00
1 200,000.00
1 43,289.85
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 15)
1 9010 81010 950147 GIS PROJECT J 1 64,473.58
1 9010 81040 950151 PERMIT TRACKING PROJ J 1 61,746.53
2 9010 24000 240231 VADEPT-TRANSPORTATION J 2 24,300.00
2 9010 51000 512023 TRSFR-E911 J 2 117,717.55
2 9010 51000 512037 TRSFROMUREFPROF J 2 79,500.00
2 9010 51000 512038 TRS FROM SPG RIDG PROF J 2 102,000.00
2 9010 51000 510100 APPROPRIATION-FUNDBAL J 2 14,025,662.53
9010 0501 EST REVENUE
9010 0701 APPROPRIATION
1 8524 93010 930026 TRSTO G/F CIP J 1 102,000.00
2 8524 15000 150101 INTEREST J 2 711.09
2 8524 51000 510100 FUND BALANCE J 2 101,288.91
8524 0501 EST REVENUE
8524 0701 APPROPRIATION
1 8525 93010 930026 TRSTO G/F CIP J 1 79,500.00
2 8525 15000 150101 INTEREST J 2 613.27
2 8525 51000 510100 FUND BALANCE J 2 78,886.73
8525 0501 EST REVENUE
8525 0701 APPROPRIATION
1 4101 93010 930010 TRSTOG/FCIP J 1 117,717.56
2 4101 51000 510100 FUND BALANCE J 2 117,717.55
4101 0501 EST REVENUE
4101 0701 APPROPRIATION
TOTAL 29,296,795.27
14,349,180.08
14,349,180.08
102,000.00
102,000.00
79,500.00
79,500.00
117,717.55
117,717.56
14,648,397.63
14,648,39.764
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION ://:2004-018
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: REAPPROPRIATION OF FY 03 GENERAL FUND PURCHASE ORDERS
SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 1000 12015 312390
1 1000 12015 312390
1 1000 12143 800201
1 1000 12144 800201
1 1000 21020 800200
1 1000 31013 601011
1 1000 31013 601011
1 1000 32015 600400
1 1000 32019 600900
1 1000 32019 601100
1 1000 41000 312700
1 1000 41021 332300
1 1000 41030 312341
1 1000 42040 390001
1 1000 53011 800710
1 1000 53012 800710
1 1000 53013 800710
1 1000 53014 800710
1 1000 53015 800710
1 1000 81010 312342
1 1000 81010 312342
2 1000 51000 510100
1000 0501
1000 0701
QUIP - TRAINING J
QUIP - TRAINING J
FURN & FIXTURES-REPL J
FURN & FIXTURES-REPL J
FURN & FIXTURES J
AMMUNITION J
AMMUNITION J
MEDICAL & LAB SUPPLIES J
VEHICLE & EQUIP REPAIRS J
UNIFORMS & APPAREL J
PROF SER CONSULTANTS J
REPL & INST STREET SIGNS J
GROUNDWATER STUDY J
CONTR SERV-KEENE LNDFL J
DATA PROCESS SOFTWARE J
DATA PROCESS SOFTWARE J
DATA PROCESS SOFTWARE J
DATA PROCESS SOFTWARE J
DATA PROCESS SOFTWARE J
DVLPMENT AREA'S STUDY J
DVLPMENT AREA'S STUDY J
G/F BALANCE J
EST REVENUE
APPROPRIATION
TOTAL
1 15,059.10
1 25,000.00
1 896.49
1 707.68
1 10,987.40
1 331.50
1 1,706.00
1 597.00
1 3,176.86
1 639.14
1 2,547.54
1 1 750.00
1 19 000.00
1 3 388.47
1 12 715.43
1 24 274.84
1 29 476.57
1 2 855.24
1 3 806.98
1 13 088.00
1 8 900.00
2 180 904.24
361,808.48
180,904.24
180,904.24
180,904.24 180,904.24
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION ://:2004-019
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: REAPPROPRIATION OF FY 03 GENERAL FUND UNCOMPLETED PROJECTS
SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 1000 81030 580417 HOUSING STUDY J 1 10,000.00
1 1000 12200 800710 I/TSOFTWARE J 1 2,000.00
1 1000 81010 312342 PLANNING DEV'LSTUDY J 1 42,965.50
1 1000 8010 312344 PLANNING SOUTH AREAB J 1 74,965.00
1 1000 21030 700003 MAGISTRATE J 1 1,250.00
1 1000 31013 800501 POLICEVEHICLE-REPL J 1 9,400.00
1 1000 32015 561415 FIRE/RESC CARS SEAT PGM J 1 1,931.77
2 1000 51000 510100 G/F BALANCE J 2 142,512.27
1000 0501 EST REVENUE
1000 0701 APPROPRIATION
TOTAL 285,024.54
142,512.27
142,512.27
142,512.27 142,512.27
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 16)
APPROPRIATION #2004-020
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: FY 04 SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST FROM FY 03 SURPLUS
SUB LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT
GENERAL LEDGER
DEBIT CREDIT
1 1000 12013 580030
1 1000 12030 312700
1 1000 12144 332115
1 1000 21060 130000
1 1000 21060 800101
1 1000 31013 580907
1 1000 31013 601011
1 1000 31013 800500
1 1000 32011 930200
1 1000 32011
1 1000 53013 930213
1 1000 81010 120000
1 1000 81010 800700
1 1000 81017 120000
1 1000 81017 800710
1 1000 81030 800200
1 1000 81040 600900
1 1000 81040 800301
1 1000 93010 900010
1 1000 93010 930010
2 1000 51000 510100
1000 0501
1000 0701
1 9010 12140 950004
1 9010 12200 800710
2 9010 51000 512004
9010 0501
9010 0701
2 1557 33000 330001
2 1557 51000 512004
CO EXEC CUST SURVEY J
H/R TOTAL REWARDS J
FINANCE CAMA MAINT J
CLK OF CT P/T WAGES J
CLK OF CT MAC & EQUIP J
POLICE NARCOTICS FUNDS J
POLICE AMMUNITION J
POLICE VEHICLE J
FIRE/RESC TRS TO GRANT J
FIRE/RESC J
SOC SER TRS TO FSP J
PLANNING O/T WAGES J
PLANNING ADP EQUIP J 1
PLANNING O/T WAGES J 1
PLANNING SOFTWARE J 1
HOUSING FURN & FIXTURES J 1
ZONING VEHICLE-REPAIR J 1
ZONING COMM EQUIP J 1
FINANCE TRS TO CIP J 1
I/T TRS TO CIP J 1
G/F BALANCE J 2
EST REVENUE
APPROPRIATION
FINANCE CAMA UPGRADE J 1
I/T SOFTWARE J 1
CIP TRS FROM G/F J 2
EST REVENUE
APPROPRIATION
FSP FEDERAL REVENUE J 2
FSP TRS FROM G/F J 2
TOTAL
1 31 500.00
1 25 000.00
1 6 000.00
1 6 000.00
1 16 254.00
1 4 000.00
1 10 000.00
1 82 000.00
1 89 615.00
1 (10,000.00)
1 252,000.00
1 2,300.00
3,550.00
400.00
10,000.00
6,000.00
1,200.00
800.00
41,973.00
163,000.00
741,592.00
41,973.00
163,000.00
204,973.00
(252,000.00)
252,000.00
1,893,130.00
741,592.00
741,592.00
204,973.00
204,973.00
946,565.00 946,565.00
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION #2004-021
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: FUNDING FOR VARIOUS EDUCATION PROGRAMS AND GRANTS
SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 2112 61102
1 3104 60201
1 3104 61311
1 3104 60252
1 3148 61311
1 3148 61311
1 3502 60606
1 3131 61311
1 3131 61311
1 3147 63330
2 2000 33000
2 3104 24000
2 3104 18000
2 3104 18000
2 3148 18000
2 3502 18000
2 3131 33000
2 3147 33000
2000
3104
3148
35O2
3131
3147
800701 ADP EQUP-REPL J 1 2,000.00
312500 PROF SVC INST J 1 525.00
580500 STAFF DEV J 1 5,500.00
312500 PROF SVC INST J 1 6,500.00
160300 STIPENDS-STAFF DEV J 1 3,044.83
210000 FICA J 1 232.93
601300 INST SUPPLIES J 1 8,656.00
160200 STIPENDS J 1 65,254.22
210000 FICA J 1 5,405.47
601300 INSTSUPPLIES J 1 267.00
330127 SP EDTECH EQUIP J 2 2,000.00
240362 VA COMM FOR ARTS J 2 525.00
181258 GOLDEN APPLE J 5,500.00
181221 FREDERICK UPTON AW J 6,500.00
181260 PROJECT BUILD J 3,277.76
181223 SHANNON FOUNDATION J 8,656.00
330125 NCLB AWARD J 70,659.69
330113 CATEGORICALAID-FED J 267.00
0501 EST REVENUE J
0701 APPROPRIATION J
0501 EST REVENUE J
0701 APPROPRIATION J
0501 EST REVENUE J
0701 APPROPRIATION J
0501 EST REVENUE J
0701 APPROPRIATION J
0501 EST REVENUE J
0701 APPROPRIATION J
0501 EST REVENUE J
0701 APPROPRIATION J
TOTAL 194,770.90
2,000.00
2,000.00
12,525.00
12,525.00
3,277.76
3,277.76
8,656.00
8,656.00
70,659.69
70,659.69
267.00
267.00
97,385.45 97,385.45
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION #2004-022
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 17)
EXPLANATION: REAPPROPRIATION OF UNCOMPLETE SCHOOL CAPITAL PROJECTS
SUB LEDGER GENERAL
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT
LEDGER
CREDIT
1 9000 60100 800665 SCH BOARDADA J 1 131,975.61
1 9000 60202 800901 BROWNSVILLE BLDG REN J 1 207,650.47
1 9000 60217 800200 BAKER-BUTLER FURN & FIX J 1 596.36
1 9000 60218 312350 SOUTHERN ELEM ENG J 1 40,000.00
1 9000 60251 800901 BURLEYBLDG RENOV J 1 88,358.12
1 9000 60253 800901 JOUETT BLDG RENOV J 1 1,456,672.39
1 9000 60254 800901 WALTON BLDG RENOV J 1 122,975.67
1 9000 60303 800901 MURRAYEDUC BLDG REN J 1 8,683.50
1 9000 60304 312350 MONTICELLO ENG J 1 549,856.17
1 9000 60410 800665 CATECADA J 1 8,772.34
1 9000 61101 800700 INSTRUC-REG ADP EQUIP J 1 84,258.50
1 9000 62190 800700 ADM-TECHADP EQUIP J 1 22,956.57
1 9000 62420 800949 FACILITY MAINT-MAINT PJ J 1 203,179.62
2 9000 51000 510100 TRANSFERS FUND BAL J 2 3,224,193.32
2 9000 51000 512032 TRANSFERS FR-PROFFERS J 2 (540,000.00)
2 9000 51000 512039 TNSR FR STILL MEADOW PF J 2 150,842.00
2 9000 51000 512040 TNSR FR GLENMORE PROF J 2 90,900.00
9000 0501 EST REVENUE J
9000 0701 APPROPRIATION J
1 8521 93010 930004 GLNMR PRFTRSTO SCH CIP J 1 90,900.00
2 8521 51000 510100 GLENMOREPROFFUNDBAL J 2 90,900.00
8521 0501 EST REVENUE J
8521 0701 APPROPRIATION J
1 8522 93010 930004 STILL MDWSTRS SCH CIP J 1 150,842.00
2 8522 51000 510100 STILL MEADOWS FUND BAL J 2 150,842.00
8521 0501 EST REVENUE J
8521 0701 APPROPRIATION J
TOTAL 6,335,354.64
2,925,935.32
2,925,935.32
90,900.00
90,900.00
150,842.00
150,842.00
3,167,677.32 3,167,677.32
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE
APPROPRIATION ://:2004-023
APPROPRIATION DATE: 9-3-03
EXPLANATION: REAPPROPRIATION OF UNCOMPLETE STORMWATER PROJECTS
SUB LEDGER GENERAL LEDGER
TYPE FUND DEPT OBJECT ACCOUNT DESCRIPTION CODE AMOUNT DEBIT CREDIT
1 9100 41000 800975 ENG STORMWATER IMP J 1 717,369.47
1 9100 41000 950093 ENG DRAINAGE STUDY J 1 220,997.32
1 9100 41036 312400 BIRN/WYNRIDGE PROF SER J 1 4,777.45
1 9100 41036 800750 BIRN/WYNRIDGE PCS PROP J 1 240,842.20
1 9100 41036 800975 BIRN/WYNRDG STMWTR IMP J 1 51,147.28
1 9100 41037 800975 IVY ROAD STMWTR IMP J 1 80,000.00
1 9100 41049 800975 WOODBROOKSTMWTR IMP J 1 26,105.00
1 9100 41054 800975 RICKYROAD STMWTR IMP J 1 4,170.06
1 9100 41057 800975 WESTMRLAND STMWTR IMP J 1 1,973.95
2 9100 24000 240540 CATAID-STCONS/RECGRT J 1 5,118.00
2 9100 51000 510100 TRANSFERS FUND BALANCE J 1 1,342,264.73
9100 0501 EST REVENUE J
9100 0701 APPROPRIATION J
TOTAL 2,694,765.46
1,347,382.73
1,347,382.73
1,347,382.73
1,347,382.73
Agenda Item No. 12. Public Hearing on the proposed issuance of general obligation school bonds of
Albemarle County in the estimated maximum principal amount of $7,205,000. The purpose of the
proposed bonds is to finance capital projects for public schools. (Notice of this public hearing was
advertised in the Daily Progress on September 15 and September 21,2003.)
Mr. Tucker said this public hearing is being held so the Board can ratify a resolution it adopted last
month. The bond issue is in the approximate amount of $7.205 million to finance certain capital
improvements to the County's public schools.
Mr. Dorrier opened the public hearing. With no one rising to speak, the public hearing was closed,
and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion was offered by Mr. Martin to adopt the following Resolution Ratifying the Issuance and Sale of
General Obligation School Bonds of the County of Albemarle, Virginia, in the Maximum Principal Amount of
$7,205,000, to Finance a Program of Capital Improvements to the County's Public Schools and Providing
Final Authorization for Such Issuance. The motion was seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll was called, and
the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 18)
RESOLUTION RATIFYING THE ISSUANCE AND SALE OF GENERAL OBLIGATION
SCHOOL BONDS OF THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, IN THE MAXIMUM
PRINCIPAL AMOUNT OF $7,205,000, TO FINANCE A PROGRAM OF CAPITAL
IMPROVEMENTS TO THE COUNTY'S PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND PROVIDING FINAL
AUTHORIZATION FOR SUCH ISSUANCE
WHEREAS, on September 10, 2003, the Board of Supervisors (the "Board") of the
County of Albemarle, Virginia (the "County"), adopted a resolution entitled "Resolution
Authorizing The Issuance Of General Obligation School Bonds, Series 2003A, of The
County of Albemarle, Virginia, In A Principal Amount Not To Exceed $7,205,000 To Be
Sold To The Virginia Public School Authority And Providing For The Form And Details
Thereof" (the "Resolution");
WHEREAS, after publication of the requisite notice in accordance with Section
15.2-2606, Code of Virginia of 1950, as amended, the Board has held on the date hereof
a public hearing on the proposed issuance and sale of general obligation school bonds of
the County in the estimated maximum principal amount of $7,205,000 (the "Bonds");
WHEREAS, the Board desires to ratify and amend the pricing parameters of the
Bonds contained in the Resolution;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
THE COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA:
1. Ratification of Resolution. The Board hereby ratifies all pricing parameters of
the Bonds and authorizes the issuance and sale of such Bonds in accordance with the
provisions of the Resolution.
2. Other Actions. All other actions of officers of the County in conformity with the
purposes and intent of the Resolution and in furtherance of the issuance and sale of the
Bonds are approved and confirmed. The officers of the County are authorized and
directed to execute and deliver all certificates and instruments and to take all such further
action as may be considered necessary or desirable in connection with the issuance, sale
and delivery of the Bonds.
3. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately.
Agenda Item No. 13. Board-to-Board Presentation, School Board Chairman.
Ms. Diantha McKeel, School Board Chairman, introduced Ms. Nancy Markos, elected 2002 National
Elementary Physical Education Teacher of the Year. Ms. Markos currently teaches physical education at
Broadus Wood Elementary School. She is also the 2003 Outstanding Elementary School Teacher of the
Year for the Curry School of Education. She has co-authored several books and articles for national
publication, along with being a member of the writing team for the Standards of Learning for Physical
Education and for the Physical Education Resource Guide for the State Department of Education. Ms.
Markos has conducted over 60 workshops in Albemarle County and in over 15 states. She then introduced
Ms. Markos to the Board.
Ms. Markos said she has been a physical education teacher for 31 years, and this year is also
President of the AEA. She then conducted a few exercises to show the Board members what she does in
the schools, and explained the value of these exercises to proper evluation of learning abilities of students.
Mr. Dorrier congratulated Ms. Markos on her awards.
Ms. McKeel said the Board had been furnished information about how the School's Transportation,
Food Services and Building Services departments prepared for and helped clean up after Hurricane Isabel
came through this area. The Schools had minimal damage and loss. Dr. Castner wrote a letter to the local
newspaper thanking Dominion Virginia Power and American Electric Power for their work in restoring power
to all schools in a timely manner. Only Baker-Butler was still without power on Monday following the storm,
and it was operated using generators. The School System only lost two days of school during this event.
Mr. Martin said the Hollymead Community really appreciated being able to get into Baker-Butler for
water after the storm.
Ms. McKeel said the Schools also opened the field house at Albemarle High School so people in the
community could take showers.
Ms. McKeel said she had given the Board a copy of the School Board/Superintendent Priorities for the
coming school year which were adopted on September 11,2003.
Ms. McKeel said the Commonwealth of Virginia, and each school and school division is required to
make Adequate Yearly Progress (ADY) under the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001. ADY is determined by
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 19)
considering Standards of Learning passing rates in reading and mathematics, and participation,
attendance, and graduation rates. In Virginia, school accreditation is based on SOL passing rates for the
overall population of students in a school. The No Child Left Behind Act takes school accountability further
by requiring targeted passing rates for the overall population and various subgroups. She suggested that
the Board members look at the materials furnished and ask questions.
Dr. Kevin Castner, Superintendent, explained how the program testing works. He said this is the first
Federal initiative of this type in the history of the country.
Mr. Rooker said if there is a high population of disabled children, he thinks these children would
actually be penalized by this system. Dr. Castner said some people have picked up on that reality and are
suggesting that "all children are above average." He thinks it is important that some of these kids not be
penalized, and that a place be found to show their successes.
Ms. McKeel said one of the issues in Virginia is that every child is required to take the test in English.
She said that Cale Elementary and Red Hill Elementary did not meet AYP for their school because they
have a higher population of children with limited English proficiency. She said Albemarle County and the
State this past year had an on-going argument with the Federal government over testing seven and eight-
year-old students with a test in a language that they do not speak. There is an alternative test being worked
on that at some point in the future may be used for these students.
Mr. Dorrier asked if meeting the AYP affects the amount of Federal funding received by the County.
Dr. Castner said that while this is a Federal mandate, the funding that accompanies that mandate has yet to
be seen in equal proportions. When the testing increases, it will show as a line item in the budget.
Ms. McKeel said the scores and the progress that an individual school makes ultimately track back to
Federal funds. She said there is the Leave No Child Behind mandate now, but 27 years ago, the Feds
passed the IDEA mandate and they have not yet funded that program at the promised level.
Ms. McKeel said that this year the School System will be participating in Make A Difference Day on
Saturday, October 25, 2003. This coming Tuesday, October 7, at 12:30 p.m. on the front steps at the
County Office Building, the Parent Council and some people involved in Make A Difference Day will hold a
kickoff for that campaign. The School Board will be issuing a proclamation, and she asked if the
Supervisors will agree to having their name added to that proclamation. All the schools participated in this
program last year, and were awarded a $10,000 grant for that participation.
Agenda Item No. 14. JAUNT Annual Report by Donna Shaunessey.
Ms. Donna Shaunessey was present. She thanked the Board for the support given to JAUNT. With
her today is Mr. Clifford Buys, a County appointee, who is treasurer of the JAUNT Board. This past year
they installed a new computer system in every vehicle. There are automatic vehicle Iocators attached so
they know where every vehicle is at any given moment. This has revolutionized and changed the job of
every JAUNT employee.
Ms. Shaunessey said as to the impact of this change on service, they now have instant information on
which to base their level of service. The computer predicts how long it will take to get to a certain place. It
is a good program and it is helping them to better manage service. One of the best things about this
change is that they did not request any funds from the County. This was a $1.0+ million project which was
paid for through grants, and from savings retained over the last eight years. They have another grant so
this year will add an integrated voice response system so people can call in and cancel rides without talking
to a person, and also check on the status of their ride. They will also be adding a feature which will call a
person about 15 minutes before their ride arrives so they do not have to stand outside waiting. Their on-
time performance has already gone up 10 percent.
Ms. Shaunessey said they have been struggling with the loss of the "Big Blue" route. There were six
passengers who came to a public hearing from the Camelot area when they were discussing this change.
They now have to call for a reservation, and they have to pay more. Almost everyone who used to ride Big
Blue is being carried by JAUNT on another route, it just costs them more to ride and is not as convenient.
They also had to discontinue the Crozet employment run because there were not many people riding the
bus. There is still a bus from Crozet coming into town every two hours, so it makes people ride the bus a
little longer. She said the Welfare-to-Work Transportation System is still working well. They have a grant
which is 50 percent Federal and 50 percent State, so there is no cost to the County. They are carrying
twice as many people in Albemarle as they did last year. It is 24 hours a day, seven days a week. This
means that everyone who wants to work is working. Transportation is not an issue. Eventually these
people will be off of welfare, and can buy a car, or ride on one of the other JAUNT busses. She said there
have been some impacts from the loss of Medicaid. Providers other than JAUNT are being used to provide
this service. She then offered to answer questions.
Mr. Dorrier noted that the next agenda item will be dealing with the aging population, and he asked if
JAUNT has any long-range plans to take people back and forth to the doctors' office. Ms. Shaunessey said
JAUNT's Strategic Plan, which was just completed by its Board, ties in well with what is being proposed by
JABA. They are also reaching out to the Hispanic community.
Ms. Thomas said people from the Southwood Mobile Home Park came to the MPO to ask for more
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 20)
bus service. She asked if there was anything JAUNT could do. Ms. Shaunessey said they have just hired a
new community relations person who speaks Spanish. They hope to make forays into the community to
see what kinds of things they can help with. Basically, JAUNT will go to anyone who telephones, so they
have not actually turned anyone down. They had a safety training session last Friday, and they trained the
drivers to say a few basic things in Spanish.
Ms. Dorrier thanked Ms. Shaunessey for the presentation.
Agenda Item No. 15. JABA Presentation of 2020 Community Plan on Aging, by April Holmes and
Ben Walter.
Ms. April Holmes said they have been working on the 2020 Community Plan on Aging for a couple of
years. JABA initiated this program because of the expected doubling of the senior population within the
next 25 years. The number of Virginians aged 60 and older is projected to increase from 1.1 million today
to 2.1 million in 2025, and will constitute over 20 percent of Virginia's population. The aging of this region
parallels national population trends and will bring with it profound changes.
Ms. Holmes said this effort started with a kick-off conference in March, 2001 that got community
leaders together to discuss some of the issues. Over the next three months JABA held seven additional
public forums, including at least one in every jurisdiction in the Planning District to get input from the public
as to what would make an ideal community for seniors. Out of those discussions four main areas were
identified: 1) Cultural and Recreational Opportunities; 2) Citizen Participation; 3) Health; and 4)
Infrastructure and Land Use. For each focus area, a work group was assembled to develop goals and
strategies. The work groups met every other month in 2002 to develop recommendations. In between
those times, a Steering Committee met to recommend either changes or going ahead with the planning
process, and the Committee eventually approved the final plan.
Ms. Holmes said she recently looked at the Plan to see what items might be of concern to Albemarle
County and thinks it would be interested in all the main goal areas. Concerning healthcare, the Health
Work Group recommended a Quality Community Council made up of people in the fields of medicine,
support services, local government and Social Services to look at issues such as access, providers, long-
term care, and lifelong health habits. Another area of concern is affordable and accessible housing for
seniors. Mixed-use communities designed so that it is easy to get around and let people mix better is an
important goal in the Plan. Transportation is an issue so that seniors have options other than continuing to
drive, as is recreational and social opportunities to reduce senior social isolation. That work group decided
that what is going on now in the County Parks Department should be assessed first to find out what venues
are available, and what seniors would like to have happen.
Ms. Holmes said a recommendation concerning senior participation was to expand Triad, which is a
partnership between seniors and law enforcement. The Plan contains a recommendation to form a
regional senior legislature which would make recommendations to the County and perhaps the State
governments about issues affecting seniors. There was a major concern expressed about lifelong health
so the Plan places a major emphasis on that concern. There is a focus also on inter-generational
collaboration.
Ms. Holmes said they are currently presenting the Plan in various locations to make the public aware
of it. They would like to work with local governments to see how the recommendations would fit into their
plans. She said many things are all ready being done in the community by different agencies. They will
only link with current efforts to strengthen those efforts. Where there are new initiatives which should be
started, JABA will work with the community to see how that can be done.
Mr. Dorrier referred to the Senior Center and said it is an outstanding center which was presented
with a national award. He asked if JABA interacted with people at the Senior Center. Ms. Holmes said
"yes." She said that in the document there is a major goal which contains the names of many planning
partners, and the Senior Center is listed in a number of different strategies under that goal. They will work
with community partners to see how the Plan can be implemented and phased in over a period of time.
She asked Mr. Walter to comment.
Mr. Ben Walter said they recently met with people at the Senior Center and got a lot of good ideas.
Like JAUNT, they also have a strategic plan, and they will look to see how this plan fits with their strategic
plan.
Mr. Rooker summarized for Ms. Holmes and Mr. Walter the vote taken earlier in the meeting to
choose Route 29 North as the next master planning area. He said active participation by JABA and its
partners in that process would be welcomed by the County. Mr. Walter said they plan to do that, staffing
permitting. The County is all ready involved with housing, so they need to discuss how accessibility fits, and
public open spaces.
Mr. Dorrier asked the percentage of the population which is 60 years of age or older in Planning
District 10. Mr. Walter said it is about 32,000 for all of the Planning District. Mr. Dorrier asked how many of
those people reside in Albemarle. Mr. Walter said in Albemarle the 2000 Census showed about 10,000
people who are aged 65 or older.
Ms. Thomas said she had a question about accessibility for seniors. She asked if when there are
major site plans for developments, if JABA has a check list of questions which should be answered for such
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 21)
developments. Ms. Holmes said that is something they would have to research. She said the idea of
mixed-use design is an important factor of their Plan.
Ms. Thomas said the MPO has profited by having a member of the public who is blind and attends
some of their meetings. He has raised issues that otherwise would not be brought up. For example, walk
signals should be audible as well as visual. She thinks it is important that some seniors attend meetings to
be sure these issues are kept in front of the Commission and staff when approving developments.
Mr. Walter said he thinks a checklist is a good idea. This is one of the reasons they are meeting with
the Supervisors and others. When they get ideas such as this, they will follow up on that idea. They will be
more diligent in attending certain meetings. Some communities actually have a "rating scale for senior
friendliness", so they will look at that to see how it could be adapted to this community. He said this is a
community-wide plan that depends on others to implement and help move it forward.
Mr. Dorrier asked if JABA has a planning session coming up where they need a joint sponsor. He
thinks the County would be glad to consider doing that. Mr. Walter said they do have a question about the
best way to proceed with the County. They will seek to meet with lead staff.
Mr. Tucker said Mr. Juan Wade was initially part of JABA's process, and he might organize a training
session of the County's planners. He said the County's web-site contains a listing of all major projects
coming through the process.
Agenda Item No. 19. Cancel October 8, 2003, Board meeting.
Mr. Dorrier asked if the Board should take action to cancel the meeting of October 8, 2003. Mr.
Tucker said "yes", but it is still not known if Albemarle Place will be on the agenda of October 15 or October
22.
Mr. Bowerman asked if that is due to advertising requirements. Mr. Tucker said "no." It is because of
their scheduling. They have indicated that October 22 may be better for them.
Mr. Davis reminded the Board that it will have to adjourn today's meeting until October 15 so that will
not have to be a special meeting.
Motion was offered by Ms. Thomas, seconded by Mr. Bowerman, to cancel the meeting of October
8, 2003, due to lack of agenda items for that night. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Agenda Item No. 20. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Ms. Thomas said she was recently at the County's sister county in Washington state (at no expense
to the County except for some mugs and T-shirts). Rhat is Pacific County where Lewis and Clarke first saw
the Pacific Ocean. She met with their three county commissioners. Their form of government is different
from Albemarle's in almost every way. In Washington State, the state government totally funds education,
and the local government has to totally fund transportation. They had good discussions, and realized that
unfunded mandates and changes in the tax code being revenue neutral are themes that both localities
carry to their respective states. They are suffering greatly because Salmon have to be allowed in certain
numbers to go past the mouth of the Columbia River so that the Indians can take out Salmon further up
river because of some treaties. Also, the Endangered Species Act has cut down drastically on the amount
of land that can be timbered. The county has a beautiful beach which is the longest beach in the world
(about 28 miles in length). The last part of the Lewis and Clarke trip on the Columbia River was the most
dangerous of their entire trip (taking eight days to complete the last 25 miles). She was presented with a
picture of the County Office Building in Pacific County which was built around the turn of the Century at a
tremendous cost, and she suggested that it be hung in the Supervisor's Office on the Fourth floor. The
dome of the building is made entirely of Tiffany glass. It is an incredibly beautiful building which they have
outgrown. They now have an annex. In their meeting room they have on the wall the resolution adopted by
this Board a couple of years ago. She also got the key to the City of Long Beach which is actually
Charlottesville's sister city. They invited the Board members to come back in 2005 for a big celebration.
Ms. Thomas said she was there because she was attending her high school reunion in an area close by.
Mr. Dorrier mentioned a letter received from Mr. John Casteen regarding aggressive dogs. He asked
if it is something the Board needs to look into. Mr. Tucker responded that the County Animal Control
Officers have looked at the situation and tried to work with the dog's owner. He said the County is doing all
it can legally do to help him; living in a rural area makes it difficult for the County to do more.
Mr. Tucker introduced Mr. Chris Beaver, a new member of staff in the Office on Management and
Budget. He comes to the County from South Carolina.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 22)
Mr. Tucker said Ms. Thomas had mentioned to him cost-sharing between the City and the County on
the issue of water supply alternatives. He understands the Albemarle County Service Authority has a final
report on how that will be handled. He will ask Mr. Bill Brent to make a presentation to this Board at its
meeting on November 5.
Agenda Item No. 16. Closed Session: Personnel and Legal Matters.
At 12:16 p.m., motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman that the Board go into Closed Session pursuant
to Section 2.2-3711 (A) of the Code of Virginia under Subsection (1) to consider appointments to boards,
committees and commissions; under Subsection (3) to consider the disposition of County-owned property
currently used for a public safety facility; under Subsection (3) to consider the acquisition of property for a
public use; and, under Subsection (7) to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding probable litigation
relating to an employment dispute. The motion was seconded by Mr. Rooker.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Agenda Item No. 17. Certify Closed Session. The Board reconvened into open session at 2:15 p.m.
in the Fourth Floor Conference Room.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bowerman that the Board certify by a recorded vote that to
the best of each Board member's knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open
meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the
closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Rooker. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Agenda Item No. 18. Appointments.
Motion was offered by Mr. Rooker to:
Appoint Ms. Babette Thorpe to the Public Recreational Facilities Authority, with said term to expire on
December 31,2006.
Reappoint Mr. David Carr, Jr., Ms. Bonnie Samuel, Ms. Diana Strickler, Mr. Charles Toms, Jr. and Dr.
Martin Schulman to the Route 250 West Task Force, with said terms to expire on September 5, 2006.
Reappoint Mr. Montie Pace to the Land Use Tax Advisory Board, with said term to expire on
September 1,2005.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Martin. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Agenda Item No. 20. From the Board: Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Davis said the Board members have requested that the County Attorney provide a brief update on
the status of the proffers relating to Albemarle Place. He advised that his office reviewed and provided
comments on the most recent draft of the proffers last Friday and have not received revised proffers
addressing those comments and other staff comments. He stated that substantial progress had been
made toward addressing most issues but that there are some issues which have not been adequately
addressed. He hopes the proposed CDA and cash proffers are satisfactory for the Board's review. Other
proffers relating to the reservation of right-of-way and the acquisition of property for intersection
improvements need more work. He anticipates receiving revised proffers this week. In response to
questions, Mr. Davis explained that the proposed proffers provide that the County would be reimbursed for
all costs of condemning the right of way needed for certain intersection improvements proffered to be
constructed. This is an important issue for the Board to consider because it might require the Board to
initiate condemnation proceedings to acquire land for road improvements that the County wants
constructed with this project.
(October 1,2003 - Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 23)
The Board then briefly discussed the implications and issues regarding this potential condemnation,
and then requested that staff further update the Board regarding the Albemarle Place proffers at its
meeting on October 15, 2003.
Agenda Item No. 21. Adjourn to October 15, 2003. At 2:33 p.m., with no further business to come
before the Board, motion was offered Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Martin, to adjourn this meeting until
October 15, 2003. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Rooker, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Mr. Martin.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Perkins.
Chairman
Approved by the
Board of County
Supervisors
Date
Initials