1975-01-164
1-16-75
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
was held on January 16, 1975, at 9:00 a.m. in the Board Room, County Office Build-
ing, Charlottesville, Virginia.
Present: MessrS. Stuart F. Carwile (arriving at 9:30 a.m.), Gerald E. Fisher,
J. T. Henley, Jr., William C. Thacker, Jr. and Gordon L. Wheeler.
Absent: Mr. Lloyd F. Wood, Jr.
Officers present: County Attorney, Mr. George R. St. John and Assistant to the
County Executive, Mr. Robert Sampson.
No. 1 and No. 2. Call to order and The Lord's Prayer.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler began by announcing that County Executive, T. M.
Batchelor and Mr. Lloyd Wood were in Washington D.C. attending an economic briefing
of President Gerald Ford.
No. 3. Approval of minutes. Mr. Fisher noted the following corrections: page
91, last line, change word to renewable; page 93, 1/4 down page, change word to
legislation; page 94, paragraph 2, change word to interpreted; page 94, paragraph 3,
change word to implementing; page 96, change word to Wittneble; page 172, after the
last word, insert the word access; page 175, paragraph 3, change word to speak; page
186, line 4, change spelling of word forty; page 186, line 5, change word to forty;
page 187, change word to buy-sell; page 188, change word to space; page 275, last
line, change word adopted to accepted. Motion was then offered by Mr. Henley,
seconded 'by Mr. Thacker to approve the minutes of August 28, September 1t (night),
September 19, September 26, October 9 (night), and October 16, 1974, with the
corrections noted by Mr. Fisher. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Carwile and Mr. Wood.
No. 4. Highway matters. Communication was received from the Jefferson Village
Community Association stating two safety hazards on Proffit Road. The first is a
stagnant water problem which hinders the passage of motor vehicles on the proper
side of the road. The second hazard exists approximately 2/10 of a mile east on
Proffit Road from Route 29 North. This location is characterized by a steep rise in
the narrow road surface which prevents visibility of approaching motorists at the
crest of the hill.
Mr. R. G. Warner, Resident Engineer, Virginia Department of Highways, said he
is aware of the problem with water. This is a long standing problem and has been
sent to the Attorney General's office for review. They are checking into the legal
ramifications as to how this can be corrected. An opinion from the Attorney General
is expected in the near future. Mr. Warner said he is not familiar with the other
problem and asked that the matter be deferred until the next meeting.
Communication was received from Richard L. Nunley asking that roads in Section
Three of Orchard Acres, Crozet, be accepted into the State SeCondary System of High-
ways. Mr. Charles Perry, Assistant Resident Highway Engineer, said he reviewed
these roads yesterday. There are items to be corrected and he has not written to
Mr. Nunley giving these corrections. He asked that the matter be carried over.
Mr. Sampson noted that a copy of the 67th Annual Report of the Virginia Highway
Commission, for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1974, is on file in the .LQffice of
the County Executive for review.
(Mr. Wheeler abstaining on the following matter). The next item before the
Board was discussion of the use of Milton Road (Route 729) as a boat launch point to
the Rivanna River. Mr. Sampson said this-was referred to the Parks Committee for
study. It will take a couple of months to prepare a report since they need time to
study the cost of land acquisition to go along with this project and to determine if
the project is feasible. Mr. Thacker asked if the Parks Committee has looked at
other access points to the River. Mr. Sampson said the University of Virginia has
been contacted about the possibility of using land at the Milton Airport instead of
this property. Mr.. Thacker asked that a report be made at the February 20 meeting.
1-16-75
3,7
Mrs. Mary Joy Scala, Senior Planner, was present. She read the following
letter from Mr. Daley Craig, concerning a bond on roads in Four Seasons:
"Please revise the estimated completion date of road completion
in Four Seasons to December 31, 1975. The surety bond has been
extended to that date. Within the next 30 days, I will provide
you with a detailed schedule indicating those items covered by
the surety bond which have been completed and the current
estimate of completion dates for the remaining items."
Mrs. Scala said the completion date for these roads was December 31, 1974.
Craig is requesting a one-year extension.
Mr.
Mr. Wheeler asked Mr. Warner for his comments. Mr. Warner said he met with Mr.
Craig in July, 1973. At that time, he gave Mr. Craig a list of items which needed
to be completed. He has heard nothing further from Mr. Craig since that time.
Mr. Thacker asked if the bond is in a form satisfactory to the County. Mr. St.
John said he recently received a copy of a letter from Mr. John Humphrey, County
Planner, addressed to Mr. Craig, saying that the bond is in default, as of December
31, 1974, and the County will either call on the surety to pay the bond or Mr. Craig
will have to get an extension of the bond. Mr. Wheeler said he also received a copy
and according to the letter the bond is in the amount of $38,223. Mr. Thacker asked
how the Board will determine if the amount of the bond is adequate. He has heard
from the residents of Four Seasons that there are a number of items which need to be
corrected.
Mr. Wheeler said he is not ready to give an extension of time on the bond. If
nothing is done at this time, the roads will deteriorate even further in another
year. Mr. Thacker felt the correct amount of the bond should be ascertained before
the Board makes a decision. He asked if the County would be in jeopardy if this
matter were deferred to the February 20 meeting. Mr. St. John said the matter could
be delayed that long. Mr. Thacker asked that the Highway Department make an inspection
of the roads and estimate the amount of bond required, then notify the County Planner,
the County Attorney and Mr. Craig.
Mr. Fisher said he is concerned with the wear on the roads and also the inflation
factor. Mr. Carwile said it may well be in the best interest of the County to call
the bond. Mr. St. John said he would notify the surety that the bond is in default;
not call the bond.
Mr. Warner said he has discussed the proposed improvements to be made on Route
637, by the County, with the County Engineer. A resolution is needed from th~ County
to get the work started. The Highway Department does not intend to develop a full
set~Of plans, only enough to negotiate for rights of way. Within 60 days, the
surveying work will be completed and construction can begin as soon as the weather
breaks. Mr. Wheeler asked that the proper resolution be prepared and that it be
included on the agenda for the afternoon of January 22, 1975.
Mr. Fisher asked if much right of way will be required. Several of the residents
in the area have expressed concern that their yards will be taken in the straightening
of the road. Mr. Bailey said a year ago aerial maps were made of the road and only
three places are involved. Mr. Fisher asked Mr. Bailey to inform him of those three
places.
No. 6. Report on the Ivy Landfill. Mr. Bailey said he has recently given City
representatives~a~r of the Ivy Landfill area. They were surprised that there is
so much usable land. The City is assembling personnel for taking over operation of
the Landfill on February 1. Notices have gone to the present contractor terminating
his services February 1.
Not. Docketed. Mr. ~ail~said bids were advertised and opened on the operation
of Landfill No. 2 at Keene on December 30, 1974. That contract will be awarded
today. There were eight bidders; the low being Deerfield Enterprises. Mr. Bailey
said he has discussed with Mr. Lafferty, the owner, the equipment called for in the
contract. Mr. Thacker asked if the low bid was in strict accordance with bid require-
ments. Mr. Bailey said yes. The bid requirements specify the bidder shall furnish
certain pieces of equipment or equal or have the equipment at his disposal. That
piece of equipment is the main workhorse of the landfill and is used for compacting
the fill. The bidder will, for the present, be hiring the opening of the trenchs,
which only occurs every three or four months. Mr. Bailey said he can see no reason,
with what the bidder plans to do and furnish, not to award the bid to him. Mr.
Thacker asked if investigation of the bidder indicates he is qualified and capable
of performing the work in a satisfactory manner. Mr. Bailey said Mr. Lafferty worked
for the Albemarle County Service Authority last fall and did that in a satisfactory
438
1-16-75
manner. He also worked for the City last fall as a subcontractor. The City found
some fault in the length of time it took to do the work, but Mr. Agnor said, although
he would not recommend him for any precise grading work, for other work he had no
doubt the bidder could fulfill.
Mr. Thacker said the County has been fortunate in the past with the operation
of the Keene Landfill. The sitation at Ivy shows some of the potential problems
which are inherent in such an operation. He personally has doubts about the low
bidder on this project and feels it is unfortunate the County is in this sitation.
Mr. Bailey said the present contractor at the Keene Landfill was third low bidder.
He would have some hesitancy to say the low bidder cannot do the work until the
bidder is proved wrong. Mr. Thacker concurred but said he feels this will take more
supervision from County staff to insure compliance with State and Federal Requirments.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said this Board has joined with the City in requesting
that Route 637 leading to the Ivy Landfill be policed and cleaned twice weekly. He
asked if this has begun. Mr. Bailey said for the present time, the County's Parks
crew is doing this. The City will take this over on February 1, 1975.
Not Docketed. Mr. Warner said he has worked up information on various highway
projects in the County and asked that the Board set a date to discuss these. Mr.
Wheeler suggested January 22, 1975, at 4:00 P.M.
Mr. Fisher asked about Ragged Ridge Subdivision and a soil erosion problem
caused by that development. In September, Mr. Warner had stated that the Highway
Department could take action if the developer did not take any action within a
reasonable period of time. Since it does not seem the zoning administrator has had
success in having the matter taken to court, he asked if the Highway Department has
looked at the situation. Mr. Perry said a representative of the County a represen-
tative from the Highway Department met with the developer after that meeting. The
developer did not have an entrance permit but haS since obtained one.i~The developer
put up straw bales to help cut down on the siltation problem and since there have
been no complaints, he felt the problem had been taken care of. Mr. Fisher said
this still appears on the zoning administrator's list of violations and he asked the
Highway Department to look at it again.
Mr. Fisher again mentioned changes to be made on the 250 By-pass ramp as it
enters Route 250 West at the entrance to Bellair Subdivision. He thought the High-
way Department was going to make some physical changes in the alignment with sand-
bagging. Mr. Perry said changes have been made. Sandbagging is usually a last
resort. Since the Highway Department has not received any telephone calls, he
assumed the problem had been corrected. Mr. Fisher said there are so many near
misses, he is concerned that someone will be killed.
Mr. Henley said the last time it snowed, there was a traffic jam on Route 240
at Crozet, when the two plants let out. He asked if the Highway Department would
salt the road sooner if it snows again.
No. 5. Matters not on the agenda, from the public. Mr. Matt Ritberg said he
did not represent any group but was present to discuss two items with the Board. He
feels the Board has a tax and land rebellion on their hands. The Board was negligent
by not making a statement to the people of the County that the tax rate will be
adjusted due to the new reassessment of real property. Also, the citizens feel the
proposed zoning ordinance is being rammed down their throats. Mr. Ritberg said the
average citizen cannot digest the proposed ordinance by discussing it only three or
~four times at public meetings. In February, the citizens will be allowed to go to
the assessor's office to discuss the reevaluation of their lands. He asked that the
work sheets on individual lots be available for inspection. Mr. Wheeler informed
him that they are available. Mr. Ritberg also asked that when the proposed zoning
ordinance comes to the Board that the word approval be changed to recommended and
that this be included on the ballot in November for a referendum.
Mr. Wheeler said he has been a member of the Board of Supervisors for seven
years. During those years, he has often spoken to citizen groups and has stated
over and over that the appraisal and assessment of property is one thing and the tax
rate is another. The amount of money in the yearly budget determines the tax rate.
State law now requires that all properties be appraised at fair market value. This
Board cannot change any appraisal. The citizens recourse is to the assessor, then
to the Equalization Board and then to the court. The Board cannot change this
procedure'. The tax rate for 1975 will be established after budget hearings during
the next two or three months. In reference to the proposed zoning ordinance, this
Board had expected to adopt the zoning ordinance last year. However, the Board has
waited over 18 months and will wait until the Board is satisfied that the ordinance
is in the best interest of the citizens. Personally, he will not support a referendum.
.1-16-75
439
Mr. Henley said there was a statement in the Paper from the County Executive
stating-that the tax rate would be lower. He assured Mr. Ritberg that it will be
lower.
Mr. Carwile agreed with the Chairman's remarks and said he will not support a
referendum.
Mr. Thacker said the tax base for 1975 is about double that for 1967. Based on
what is included in this year's budget, it might be concluded that the tax rate will
be one-half that of 1974, however, there are several undetermined items at this
time; one being land use taxa%ion. The Board will be having public hearings and
public work shops and he encourages the public to come and speak at these. Mr.
Thacker said the Planning Commission has been working on the proposed ordinance for
a number of months and have had many open meetings. There will be public meetings
before the Board before any action is taken. The Board will not pass the ordinance
until they know it is in the best inter~st of the citizens.
Mr. Fisher said he will not support a $7.40 tax rate with the appraisal the
County now has on real property. The question of the tax rate is quite a different
question from whether or not the appraisal is correct on individual properties.
Mr. Wheeler thanked Mr. Ritberg for appearing, and bringing these matters to the
attention of the Board. He said quite often the Board thinks the citizens understand
matters which they do not understand,
Mr. Charles Smith said there is presently a very thick errata to the proposed
zoning ordinance. He asked if this will be incorporated into the ordinance in the
near future. Mr. Wheeler said when the Planning Commission finishes their public
hearings they will need to go back and get all the changes into one package.
No. 7. Public Hearing: Sunday Closing Law Ordinance. Notice of this public hearing
was published in the Daily Progress on January 2 and January 9, 1975. The public
hearing was opened. No one from the public spoke for or against. Motion was offered
by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Carwile to adopt an Ordinance to declare that the
provisions of Section 18.1-363.1 of the Code of Virginia (commonly known as the
Sunday Closing Law) shall have no force or effect within the County of Albemarle, as
set out below:
WHEREAS on November 5, 1974, a referendum was conducted in ~he
County of Albemarle pursuant to Section 15.1-29.5 Code of Virginia,
1950, as amended, on the question "Shall the provision of Section
18.1-363.1 of the Code of Virginia (commonly known as the Sunday
Closing Law) be effective in the County of Albemarle?"; and
WHEREAS, the ballots of the referendum have been counted, returns
made and canvassed as in other elections, and the results certified
by the Commissioners of Election to the Circuit Court of the County
of Albemarle and t-he~"CO~rt thereupon having entered an Order-pro-
claiming the results of the election; and
WHEREAS, a duly certified copy of such Order has been trans-
mitted to this body, the governing body of the County of Albemarle,
proclaiming that a majority of those voting in such election voted
that the provisions of Section 18.1-363.1 of the Code of Virginia
(commonly known as the Sunday Closing Law) shall not be effective in
Albemarle County;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF
ALBEMARLE COUNTY that, the sense of its citizens being that the
provisions of Section 18.1-363.1 are not necessary in the County of
Albemarle, the provisions of Section 18.1-363.1 shall hereafter have
no force or effect within the County of Albemarle.
Mr. Thacker's motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 10. Zoning Violations Report for December, 1974. Mrs. Ruth Miller,
Zoning Administrator, was present and presented the following matters.
1) V-74-38.
Ragged Ridge-Camblos. Soil erosion violation. Mr. Camblos has
requested a continuance of the court case. No new trial date
has been set.
1-16-75
2) V-74-39.
Not complying with SP-363. No electricity, skirting or building
inspection, privy. Mrs. Miller said the Gray's have no money
for a septic tank and drainfield. Therefore, they cannot
obtain a certificate from the Health Department and VEPCO will
not connect their electricity without the permit.
Mr. Thacker said this family obtained a mobile home permit legally. They
moved the mobile home onto land owned by a member of the family not realizing they
would have to install a sanitary system and well. The electriCal work has been
finished but a meter has not been set because Health Department provisions have not
been satisfied. This situation came about from the newly adopted State Building
Code. There are no provisions in that code for a hardship case. Mr. Thacker said
he discussed this with Mr. Hartwell Clarke, Building Official, and understands that
not even the Governor can grant an exception. Mr. Thacker said for many years, the
citizens of this county and this country lived with no running water and pit privys.
To have it arbitrarily legislated, With no possible appeal, that a citizen must
have a septic tank and running water is unfortunate when there are citizens who are
trying to help themselves. He felt the Board should discuss this matter with local
members of the legislature.
Mr. Fisher asked if the mobile home depends on electricity for heating. Mrs.
Miller said that was correct; the Gray's have no heat. Mr. Wheeler asked if the
electric company would hook up the meter if the Board adopted a resolution. Mr.
Sampson suggested that Mr. Clarke come to the meeting to answer that question.
3)
V-74~42. James Shisler. Soil erosion. Mrs. Miller said she has been
~ ~ ~nable to contact Mr. Shisler. The erosion problem is on his
own land and does not involve streams or other landowners.
4) V-74-44.
Black Industries. Relocating heavy equipment in an A-1 zone.
This case is to come to trial tomorrow. Their attorney has
requested a continuance.
5) V-74-46.
CFM Corporation. Section 11-2. Still working with them.
have a siltation basin which needs to be repaired.
They
6) V-74-54.
H. H. Tiffany.
set.
Soil erosion.
Warrant obtained, no trial date
7) V-74-55.
Keswick Country Club. Banquet operation and conduct of motel
business. Trail on this case is Tuesday, January 21, 1975.
8)' V-74-59.
Richard Wingfield. Soil erosion. Mrs. Miller and Donnie
Woodson met with~iMr.i:~John~Smart and Mr. Wingield. Mr. Wingfield
will comply.
9) V-74-69.
James H. Williams. Mobile home sale. Mrs. Miller said she had
not checked this violation this week. This was a mobil~ home,
Mr. Williams took in on trade and parked on property which was
unoccupied.
10) V-74-72.
City of Charlottesville. Section 15-2. Mrs. Miller said she
wrote to Mr. Guy Agnor on December 12, 1974, and has received
no reply.
Mr. Wheeler suggested that a letter be sent to the Mayor, with a copy to
himself.
11) V-74-73.
Avis Rent-A-Car. Not complying with site plan. Mrs. Miller
said hh~e,~site plan calls for the ga~ pumps to be put in the back
of the building, however, the gas pumps are in front of the
building. She understands it was stated at the Planning
Commission that the gas pumps would be put in back of the
building if it was feasible and if not they would be screened.
She has asked for an amended site plan.
Mr. Thacker asked' if a certificate of occupancy has been issued.
said she was not sure, but would check.
Mrs. Miller
12) V-74-74.
Horseman's Saddlery. Horses in a B-1 zone. Mrs. Miller said
she f6~nd~iby checking records that this stable was put there
after the rezoning of the property occurred, therefore is in
violation. The owner was notified by certified mail. The
health department has found that the neighbor's well is polluted,
however, they only assume it is because of the horses.
Mr. Thacker said this is more serious than soil erosion problems and felt it
should be corrected promptly. Mrs. Miller said she has checked and the Health
Department has no powers of condemnation over a private well. Mr. Wheeler said if
441
the building is in violation and the horses are polluting the neighbors well, the
Board should be doing something about it. Mr. Fisher asked if Mrs. Miller could
get the horses moved off of the property today, or get a warrant and do it. Mrs.
Miller said yes. Mr. Thacker said he felt Mrs. Miller should do this. Mr. Wheeler
said he wanted to see some action taken. The Board will be meeting next Wednesday
night and he would like to have a report at that time. Mr. Fisher asked if the
Health Department had checked the well and feels the pollution is caused by the
horses. Mrs. Miller said that was their personal opinon. Mr. Fisher said he felt
Mrs. Miller would be justified by taking such action.
Mr. Sampson informed the Board that Mr. Clarke is on vacation and his office
is trying to get the chief electrical inspector here to discuss V-74-39.
No. 12. Public Hearing: Ordinance to refund personal property taxes for
certain farm machinery used in poultry farming. Notice of this public hearing was
published in the Daily Progress on January 2 and January 9, 1975. The public
hearing was opened. No one from the public spoke for or against adoption of this
ordinance. Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Carwile to adopt the
following ordinance:
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors for Albemarle
County:
WHEREAS, Albemarle County has exempted farm machinery and
farm tools used in poultry farming from personal property taxes;
and
WHEREAS, personal property taxes have been collected erron-
eously in 1971 for certain farm machinery and farm tools used in
poultry farming; and
WHEREAS, it is the desire and intent of the governing body
of Albemarle County that any and all personal property taxes
collected on farm machinery and farm tools used in poultry farming
shall be refunded as soon as practicable:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED that all personal property
taxes erroneously collected for certain farm machinery and farm
tools used in poultry farming from any and all taxpayers of
Albemarle County during the year 1971, together with all penalty
and interest paid thereon, be refunded to such taxpayers within the
first six months of the year 1975.
In lieu of direct refunds, the Director of Finance is em~
powered to give taxpayers an abatement or credit on 1974 or 1975
real estate or personal property taxes where practicable and at
the election of the taxpayer.
The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
No. 19. Resolution to General Assembly to Change Code Section 58-1142. Motion
was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Carwile to adopt the following resolution:
~3.~.?-~%L~R~AS, Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142 presently
allows the Commissioner or Revenue or other official
performing the duties imposed on Commissioners of
Revenue, if he be satisfied that he has erroneously
assessed an applicant with any levy as set forth in Code of
Virginia, Title 58, to correct such assessment and direct the
Treasurer of the county or City to refund any erroneous
assessment paid by the taxpayer to the taxpayer after ~'
following the procedure set out in Section 58-1142, provided
such time be within two (2) years from the 31st day of December
of the year in which this assessment was made; and
WHEREAS, Code of Virginia Section 58-1152.1 states that
the governing body of any city or county may provide by
ordinance for the refund of any local levies or classes of
levies paid when such payment has been determined by said
governing body or by judicial action to be erroneous, if less
than seven (7) years have elapsed since the 31st day of
December following the year in which such assessment was
made; and
1-16-75
WHEREAS, the discrepancy between the seven (7) year statute
of limitations in Code of Virginia, Section 58-1152.1 and the two
(2) year statute of limitations in Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142
often results in the additional expense~of advertising and the
additional time required to pass an ordinance when an erroneous
assessment has been determined which was made more than two (2)
years from the 31st day of December of the year in which such
assessment was made, but less than seven (7) years from the 31st
day of December following the year in which such assessment was
made.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County
requests that the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia
amend Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142 to read as follows:
SECTION 58-1142. CORRECTION BY COMMISSIONER OR OTHER OFFICIAL
PERFORMING HIS DUTIES. - If such commissioner of the revenue, or
other official performing the duties imposed on commissioners of
the revenue under this title, be satisfied that he has erroneously
assessed such applicant with any such levy, as aforesaid, the
commissioner or such other official shall correct such assessment.
If the assessment exceeds the proper amount, the commissioner or
such other official shall exonerate the applicant from the payment
of so much as is erroneously charged if not paid into the treasury
of of the county or city; and if paid, the governing body of the
county or city shall, upon the certificate of the commissioner or
such other official with consent of the town, city or Commonwealth's
attorney that such assessment was erroneous, direct the treasurer
of the county or city to refund the excess to the taxpayer,
provided such time be within ~w8 seven years from the thirty-first
day of December ~-~following the year in which such assessment
was made. If the assessment be less than the proper amount, the
commissioner or such other official shall assess such applicant
with the proper amount; provided, further, that if any ~assessment
be erroneous, because of a mere clerical error or calculation,
the same may be corrected as herein provided and without any
petition from the taxpayer involved, and without any limitation
as to time. A copy of any correction made under this section
shall be certified by the commissioner or such other official to
the treasurer of his county or the treasurer or city collector of
his city; provided, however, that when an unpaid erroneous
assessment of real estate is corrected under this section and
such real estate has been sold at a delinquent land sale, the
commissioner or such other official making such correction
shall certify a copy of such correction to the clerk of the
circuit court of his county or to the clerk of the court in
whose office deeds are admitted to record in his city, as the
case may be; and such clerk shall note such correction in the
Delinquent Land Book opposite the entry of the tract or lot for
the year or years for which such correction is made. No refund
of a State capitation tax shall be made under this section.
The motion to adopt the foregoing resolution carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 29. Refund of personal property taxes. Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher,
seconded by Mr. Carwile to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Assistant Director of Finance of Albemarle
County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and certified
that an erroneous assessment was made on a 1974 Datsun owned
by Joan Elizabeth Grant; and
WHEREAS, the County Attorney has examined supporting
evidence and consents that such assessment was erroneous;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the
Code of Virginia, Section 58-1142, the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby direct a refund of
$96,94 be issued to Ms. Grant.
FURTHER, all supporting papers verifying this request
are to be filed in the permanent records of the Board of
Supervisors.
The foregoing motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
1-16-75
443
Motion to adopt the following resolution was offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by
Mr. Fisher, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
WHEREAS, the Assistant Director of Finance of Albemarle
County, Virginia, has appeared before this Board and certified
that an erroneous assessment was made on a 1972 GMC Truck owned
by James D. Matheny; and
WHEREAS, the County Attorney has examined supporting evidence
and consents that such assessment was erroneous;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that pursuant to the Code
of Virginia, Section 58-1142, the Board of Supervisors of
Albemarle County, Virginia, does hereby direct a refund of
$227.18 be issued to Mr. Matheny.
PURTHER, all supporting papers verifying this request are
to be filed in the permanent records of the Board of Supervisors.
No. 30. Refund - Professional License Tax. Mr. Jones certified that
Dorothy G. Tompkins, M.D. is no longer practicing in Albemarle and Albemarle Medical
Associates, P. O. Box 457, Crozet, Virginia, is due a refund on a professional
license in the amount of $45.00. Pursuant to Albemarle County Code Section 11-
38(b) (2), Mr. Carwile offered motion to direct this refund be made. The motion was
seconded by Mr. Thacker and passed by the recorded vote as follows:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: No~e.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
No. 31. Agreement: School Bonding Authority. Mr. Jones said when construction
of Greer Elementary School first began, the Board authorized the Director of Finance
and the Superintendent of School to proceed with the necessary financing. A loan of
$7Q0,000 has been secured from the Literary Fund. The total cost of the school will
be $1,800,000. To issue bonds through the Virginia Public School Bonding Authority,
the Board must act on an agreement which authorizes the Bonding Authority to act as
the County's agent in this sale. The Board thereby agrees to pay the Bonding Authority
1/10th of one percent over the net interest cost to the Authority. These will be 20
year bonds with a redemption each year of $55,000. Interest on today's market is
expected to be between 6.3% and 6.5%. Mr. Jones outlined ~he following items to be
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
The Board must act on the agreement with the Virginia Public School
Authority.
The Board must act on the bond resolution.
A certified copy of the bond resolution must be filed with the Clerk
of the Circuit Court.
A public notice must be advertised one time prior to February 5 that
the BOard is selling these bonds.
A certified copy of all information must be sent back to the
Bonding Authority.
Mr. Fisher asked if this is the first time the County has sold bonds under this
Authority. Mr. Jones said he has talked with the State Treasurer and bond counsel
and been advised that this is better than selling through the Virginia Supplemental
Retirement System. The State pledges to the bonds and the County pledges to the
State. This is an advantage to the County.
Mr. Fisher said there are several alternatives for financing school construction.
He did not recall the Board establishing a policy on this. Mr. Jones said when the
Board took action on construction of Greer Elementary, the staff was asked to borrOw
by the cheapest method. The Public School Authority only sells on a six-month time
frame. The State Treasurer, Mr. Frank Miller, said his experience with the Virginia
Public School Authority shows this method of borrowing is preferred over the Virginia
Supplemental Retirement System. Mr. Jones said funds were used from the County's
General Fund to build this school and the General Fund must be reimbursed.
Mr. Fisher said he had not seen the agreement before today or heard an opinion
from the legal staff. He was not ready to vote to sell bonds through the Authority.
Mr. Wheeler asked that this matter be deferred until 3:00 P.M. On Wednesday, January
22, 1975.
44:4.
1-16-75
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said the Board had received a copy of a memo on
delinquent 1971 real estate taxes. The 1971 levy was $3,079,276.67 and the County
has collected all but $4,927.60. He said this is excellent work.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler also noted another memo from Mr. Jones in which he
stated that during the 1974 property tax collection period, there were 162 payments
postmarked after December 5th. The Finance Department processed these payments as
partial payments and applied the penalty of 5%. Many of these payments were post.
marked December 6 A.M. The Code of Virginia in Section 58-4.2 specifies that the
payments must be postmarked on or before midnight of the due date. Mr. Thacker noted
that this is a State law over which the Board has no control.
No. 32. Set new hearing date for Revenue Sharing proposals. Mr. Wheeler said
the Board had scheduled a public hearing on this matter for January 21. Because
several Board members have responsibilities in other places, this meeting must be
rescheduled and readvertised. Motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr.
Fisher, to cancel the meeting scheduled for January 21 and to advertise for a public
hearing on Revenue sharing~proposals at 7:30 P.M. on January 29, 1975. The motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Carwile and Mr. Wood.
No. 13. Civil Disorder Control Plan. Mr. Ron Dower was present. He said the'
Thomas Jefferson Planning District Commission is requesting the Board to indicate
their willingness to participate in a mutual aid agreement which is the means by
which a law enforcement assistance plan will be activated in times of emergency.
Primarily, this would give short term assistance until the State Police and the
National Guard could be called in. In the past, this has been on a ~handshake basis.
So far, the City of Charlottesville. and the Counties of Nelson and Greene have
indicated that they will participate.
Mr. Fisher said he has read the staff report and it seems to be an attempt to
put down on paper what is now going on between the sheriff's departments of the
various counties and the City Police. Mr. Dower said yes, this agreement would
formalize those arrangements. Mr. Fisher asked if Sheriff Bailey has approved this
agreement. Mr. Dower said the Sheriff is a member of the committee that is writing
the plan. The governing body is requested to make a commitment on the agreement
because they are paying the salaries of their personnel and own the equipment. This
resolution should only state that the Board is willing to sign a mutual aid agree~
ment. Prior to the signing, perhaps in July, a law enforcement assistance plan will
be presented for the Board to either approve or disapprove.
Mr. Thacker then offered motion to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, the Thomas Jefferson Planning Distr~Qt Commission
presented to the Board of Supervisors of Albem&rte County, Virginia,
on January 16, 1975, a proposal for a Civil Disorder Control Plan
which will provide a regional basis for coordination of actiOn
in times of civil disorder;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors
of Albemarle County, Virginia, hereby states that they will
consider signing a Mutual Aid Agreement to implement said plan,
after a law enforcement assistance plan has been drafted and
presented to this Board.
Mr. Thacker's motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Carwile and Mr. Wood. ~
No. 18. Certificate of Appreciation. Mr. J. Tevis Michie, recently resigned as
a member of the Albemarle County Electoral Board, was present to receive a Certificate
of Appreciation for his years of service. Mr. Wheeler noted that members of the
Electoral Board are appointed by the Judge of the Circuit Court, but in presenting
this certificate the Board is acting on behalf O~th~c~tizens of the County. Mr.
Michie expressed appreciation and said it had been a privilege to serve on the Electoral
Board for such a long time.
- 1-16-75
445
No. 14. Technical Assistance Project for Scottsville. Mayor of Scottsville,
Raymon Thacker, was present to discuss a report prepared by Balzer and Associates,
entitled, Scottsville on the James, A Flood Management and Revitalization Program
for Scottsville, Virginia. Mayor Thacker explained that this study was made to
examine alternatives and chart 'a cOurse of ac%ion t° alleviate future harmful
effects from flooding to the Town of Scottsville. The report was financed by the
Economic Development Administration. He said the Town of Scottsville suffered a $2
million flood 'damage in 1969 and $4.05 million in 1972. Balzer and Associates made
the study and arrived at the following recommendations:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
6)
Status Quo.
Occupation relocation-alternative uses.
Relocation of Occupants and Structures.
Corps of Engineers Floodwall.
Riverside Drive-Mink Reservoir.
Flood Plain Regulation Only.
Alternative %5 was selected. The major features of this selection were
construction of a new road designated as State Route 6 and 20, by-passing Scottsville
to the west and along the River's edge creating a floodwall. The State Highway
Department has already programmed funds for relocation and improvements of the
existing State Route 6 and 20 in Scottsville. An additional feature is the con-
struction of an impoundment on Mink Creek just to the east of the existing Town
corporate limits. This impoundment would be designed principally for flood control
purposes but could have the immediate supplemental benefit of recreation use and
the long range benefit of an additional clean water supply for municipal purposes
should that need ever arise. Based upon the impetus generated by the proposed new
highway -- called Riverside Drive -- and Mink Creek impoundment are several measures
designed to achieve economic development benefits. These economic development
measures are those deemed especially suited to the Scottsville area because of its
own peculiar features and personality. They are intended to recognize Scottsville's
limitations and to take advantage of Scottsville's assets. Also involved with this
approach would be limited redevelOpment of some portions of the existing flood
plain. Major advantages of this alternative are: reclamation of a major portion
of the flood plain, good flood protection for downtown, complete protection of
historic structures at their original sites, maximum economic development potential,
minimal disruption of the 230 year old sense of Community which is uniquely Scottsville
and the opportunities presented for public-private partnership 'efforts. There is
only one major disadvantage and that is the relatively high initial cost and the
lack of protection afforded the Uniroyal Plant. The cost on this as initially
presented by Mr. Balzer was $1,995,150. The first step in implementing the Balzer
plan would be to form a small professional coordinating activity group that will
assist the Town of Scottsvitle in the packaging ~f~the various state program activities
as well as Federal programs and the activities that are necessary ~ocmake~his plan
a reality. For example: State Highway Construction, Corp of Engineers activities,
etc. This can be a County of Albemarle/Town of Scottsville/P.D. 10 technical
assistance plan from the Economic Development Administration. The time frame
necessary should be at least three years.
Mayor Thacker said there are about 32 buildings in the Town of Scottsville
which were built prior to 1850 and are classified as Federal Republic architecture.
Thus, Scottsville has within its Corporate Limits the third largest concentration
of this type of architecture in the State of Virginia. These buildings should be
protected for future generations. At this time, Scottsville is mainly interested
in the County's participation in this program. It may be possible to get money
from the Economic Development Commission for the technical group and also a
possibility that HUD may be able to finance the total project. The first thing to
be done is to set up a professional group to administer the program. The Town
Council does not want to begin without participation by the County an the program~
part of the development would occur in the County.
Mr. Wheeler asked if this will require a financial contribution from the
County. Mr. Thacker said the Town Council would like to have participation from
the County Planning Department in setting up the technical group to help explore
the possibilities of funding this project. EDA would like to have the application
for funds as soon as possible, since ~t is possible a commitment can be made from
their 1975 funds.
Mr. Fisher said this presentation was also made to Planning District 10 asking
that they act as the covering agency in the hiring of a planner who would, under
Federal funding, help in coordinating the efforts of the various agencies who might
be able to furnish funding. Because part of this construction will take place in
the County, it seemed to be important that this be coordinated with the County
Planning staff, if that is their total involvment. He felt this should be brought
to the Board for a policy decision. Mr. Fisher said he not opposed and would like
for Scottsville to have an opportunity to attempt to find a way to solve the
problems of the downtown area, the historic district, the transportation problems.
He would support the County Planning staff working with the Town of Scottsvitle.
He was not ready to put any County financing in the project beyond this.
1-16-75
Mr. William Thacker said the Town of Scottsville is a vital part of the
County. It is one of the most historic areas in the State. He felt this group has
done a lot of work to get to this point. He agreed with Mr. Fisher that the County
Planning Staff should furnish assistance to the Town to get this established. Mr.
Thacker then offered motion that the Board offer the Town of Scottsville the
assistance of the County Planning staff. The motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher.
Mr. Henley said in voting for the motion he is not indicating he will vote for any
financing of this project. Mr. Thacker said that was not the intent of his motion,
since no one knows yet i~ the project is feasible or if any financing can be
obtained.
Vote was taken at this time and the motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs~ Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
No. 15. Absentee Ballot Voter District. Notification was received from the
State Board of Elections stating that the Board has the option of establishing a
Central Absentee Voter Election District for the year 1975. Miss Ellen Nash was
present and said that the Electoral Board still recommends against this proposal.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Carwile not to establish a Central Absentee Voter
Election District for all elections held from February !, 1975 to February 1, 1976.
The motion was seconded by Mr. Henley and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Henley and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Messrs. Fisher, Thacker and Wood.
No. 16. Personnel Handbook with Grievance Procedure. Mr. Sampson said this
booklet sets out some long established personnel policies concerning vacation, sick
leave, etc. and' also adopts a grievance procedure required by State law. Mr. Wheeler
said he served on the committee studying this and the committee recommended what
they feel is needed to be set out as the plicy of the Board. The booklet can be
amended from time to time.
Mr. Michael Carroll, Acting Personnel Director, said he has receiVed a commun-
ication from the Municipal League stating that Chief Justice Burger has temporarily
asked that the Fair Labor Standards Act not be applied to State and local governments
until the constitutionality is decided. He suggested that the section referring to
this be left in the booklet until the Supreme Court decicision is received. Mr. Fisher
said he has strong questions about requiri~g~the~~ee to be under life insurance
and the State Retirement plan. He feels it is arbitrary. Mr. Fisher did not feel
that VSRS is a good pension plan and he is concerned that all State and local
employees are forced to enter into a plan which pays them less than they would get
by investing their money in any other form of investment. Mr. Carwile agreed. Mr.
Wheeler suggested the Board take this up with the legislature. Mr. Fisher said he
realized this could not be settled today but felt it is unfair to the employees.
Mr. Fisher then offered motion to adopt the Employee's Handbook as set out
below. The motion was seconded by Mr. Carwile and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
ALBEMARLE COUNTY EMPLOYEES HANDBOOK
This booklet outlines the County's employment policies. You will find general
explanations of work requirements, work conditions and benfits. If you have any
questions, be sure to consult with your department head.
Employment policies peculiar to your department; situations not covered in this
booklet; or situations subject to special interpretation should be referred to your
department head.
It is hoped that you will find your association with Albemarle County both challenging
and rewarding.
The County of Albemarle was formed by an act of the General Assembly in 1744. The
County is named for William Anne Keppel, the second Earl of Albemarle, who was at
that time the Governor-General of the Virginia Colony.
Scottsville was the original county seat and remained so until 1761 when the county
government was moved to CharlottesVille, a~hoUgh~.~harlO~t~svi~le was ~ot f~mally
recognized as a town until 1762 and as a city until 1888, The present boundaries
of the County were established by the legislature in 1777. Albemarle County has been
447
the residence of such notables as George Rogers Clerk, Thomas.~Jefferson, Meriwether
Lewis and James Monroe.
The¥County of Albemarle lies in the central part of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
Charlottesville, which is located basically in the center of the County, is the
County seat. It is approximately 70 miles west of Richmond; 115 miles southwest
of Washington, D.C.; 189 miles from Virginia Beach and 21 miles from Skyline Drive.
Albemarle County is bounded on the north by Greene and Orange Counties, on the east
by Louisa and Fluvanna Counties, on the south by the James River, and on the west
by Nelson and Augusta Counties. The crest of the Blue Ridge Mountains forms the
northwestern edge of the County.
PERSONNEL RECORDS
Your record of services with the County is very important to assure that you will
be given proper consideration in matters dealing with promotion, compensation,
insurance, retirement, and the like. The Personnel Department, presently administered
through the County Executive's Office, keeps a file on all employees, including
your original application for employm~.nt~promo, tiOn~o~?tr~nsf~rs,~p~y~chan~s~
and performance evaluations.
Please keep the personnel office informed of any changes in your name, address,
telephone number, life insurance beneficiary, number of dependents or any Other
matter affecting your employment.
HOURS OF WORK
The normal work week of a full-time employee is 40 hours or five eight-hour days
from 8:00 A.M. to 5:00 P.M. One hour is allowed for lunch.
YOUR COMPENSATION
Employees are paid monthly on the last working day of each month. The pay period
is from the 16th of the preceding month to the 15th of the current month. All
employees are paid by check with their monthly deductions and accumulated totals
summarized on the check stub. Your compensation is determined by your classification
in the position and pay classification plan for Albemarle County. The classification
and salary of each employee will be reviewed annually for the purpose of determining
which employees will receive merit increases.
OVERTIME
The Fair Labor Standards Act requires that overtime be paid employees for work in
excess of 40 hours per week. Overtime will be paid at the rate of time and a half.
Compensatory time may be taken in lieu of cash payment, provided it is taken
within the same work week in which it is earned. Compensatory time is earned at
the rate of one hour for each hour of over%ih~e~ Like other time off, it must be
scheduled with the permission of the department head. Provisions of the Fair ~Labor
Standards Act do not apply to department heads and their professional assistants
nor to professional employees of the Department of Social Services.
The Act has allowed for special consideration of sworn employees of the Sheriff's
Department. The maximum number of hours that may be worked before overtime must be
paid will be reduced over a three-year period:
as of January 1, 1975; 240 hours over 28 calendar days.
as of January 1, 1976; 232 hours over 28 calendar days.
as of January 1, 1977, 216 hours over 28 calendar days.
Support personnel in the Sheriff's Department and animal control officers are not
covered by the exemption for public safety employees. They will be paid overtime
for work in excess of 40 hours per week.
INSURANCE BENEFITS
Employees are covered by a comprehensive health insurance program. The employee's
coverage is paid by the County. The employee's family may also be covered under
the plan for a nominal cost. A more detailed brochure on the insurance plan is
distributed upon employment.
1-16-75
Life insurance costs are shared by the County and the employee. Cost to the employee
is 60¢ per month per $1000 of coverage to the next highest $1000 above his salary.
The contribution of the County is 40% of the employee's cost. Employees under 65
are insured for two times the next highest $1000 of their annual salary. Thus, an
employee making $5640 annually would pay $3.60 a month for $12,000 worth of insurance.
This insurance is mandatory.
The County makes available to its employees a family policy that will assist them
in the event any member should develop cancer. Cancer care may be purchased by
anyone of any age, regardless of the present state of health, provided that they
have never had cancer. Full coverage under this plan is available 90 days following
the effective date of the policy. The policy pays in addition to any other insurance
the individual may have with other companies,~c~Uding~i~Medicare.
RETIREMENT
Albemarle County is a participant of the Virginia Supplemental Retirement System, a
plan which is mandatory for all County employees. The Commonwealth of Virginia
supplements Federal Social Security benefits with provisions for retirement due to
disability or age. The costs are shared by the employee and the County. The
employee contribution is at the rate of 5% of his total salary. The contribution
of the County is currently 1.8'1%, subject to change by the General Assembly. An
individual leaving government service before retirement may withdraw the total of
his own contributions to the Virginia Supplemental Retirement System plus the
accrued interest of 4% on his payments or he may elect to remain coVered. Each of
the above noted insurance and retirement plans are deducted from the employee's
salary on a month to month basis.
WORKMEN'S COMPENSATION
Ail County employees are covered by workmen's compensation. As stated in the Code
of Virgnia, Section 65.1-1: "the purpose of th~'~l.~rkme~-s~Compensation Act~is to
provide compensation to a workman for loss of his opportunity to engage in work
when his disability is occasion~d~byia$~i~jury suffered from an accident rising out
of and in the course of his employment." This disability insurance is effective
beginning with the eighth day of the disability. If the amount of compensation
receivable under workmen's compensation is less than an employee's regular pay, the
payment may be turned over to the County and a normal paycheck will be written. An
employee may not receive payment from workmen's compensation and sick leave at the
same time.
PROBATIONARY EMPLOYEES
The first year of employment is a trial period during which an employee is given
time to adjust to the County and an evaluation of performance may be made. Upon
successful completion of the probationary period, the employee, with the recommendation
of the department head, .will become a permanent employee.
Should it become obvious during the probationary period that the employee is unable
to perform the duties of the position to which he or she has been appointed,
appropriate personnel action will be taken. Every effort will be made to reassign
the employee to a position better suited to his or her talents. However, if this
is not possible within a reasonable length of time, the employee's service with the
County will be terminated.
FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES
Full-time employees work a full eight-hour day and a five-day week.
eligible for maximum fringe benefits.
They are
PART-TIME EMPLOYEES
Part-time employees work less than 40 hours per week, but have permanent status.
These employees earn annual leave and sick leave at rates corresponding to the
number of hours worked. They are eligible for the current health insurance plan;
however, they are not eligible for life insurance or Virginia Supplemental Retirement
benefits.
TEMPORARY EMPLOYEES
Temporary employees work either full-time or part-time in a job approved for a
specific period of time only. Temporary employees are not eligible for fringe
benefits including holiday pay or sick leave.
1-16-75
449
LEAVE
Delineated in the following paragraphs are several types of leave available to
those ~mpl~yed~ by, the County.
Holidays: Ail full-time employees are allowed ten paid holidays per year:
4)
5)
6) i"~
7)
8)
9)
10)
New Year's Day - January 1
Lee-Jackson Day - Third ~onday/in January
President's Day (Washington's Birthday) -
Third Monday in February
Jefferson's Birthday - April 13
Memorial Day - Last Monday-in May
Independence Day - July 4
Labor Day - First Monday in September
Veteran's Day - November 11
Thanksgiving Day - Fourth Thursday in November
Christmas Day - December 25
Other:3~liday~i. arsJ_Lg~Rted by special proclamation of the Governor and/or Board of
Supervisors. Full-time employees are eligible for holidays with pay as soon as
they begin work. If a holiday falls on a Sunday, the following day will be observed
as a holiday. If a holiday falls on a Saturday, employees will be granted a free
leave day within 12 months of the date on which it was earned. If a holiday falls
within your vacation, you are entitled to a free leave day within 12 months of the
date of the holiday.
~acat~ns'~f~Annual leave is accrued at the rate of one day per mont~'or 12 days per
calendar year during the first five years of employment. After five years of
continuous employment an individual is entitled to 15 days annual leave which is
accumulated at the rate of one and one-quarter days per month. After the accumulation
of 20 working days leave time, an employee will be required to take a minimum of 10
working days leave per year or the 10 days leave not taken will be lost. Leave
earned in addition to the first 10 days may be carried over. Upon termination of
employment, accrued annual leave will be paid to the employee.
An individual may take annual leave at his own discretion provided it does not conflict
with the work schedule of his department, in which case annual leave is granted on
a first-come, first-served basis at the discretion of the department head. Leave
is not granted during the first six months of an individual's employment except on
an emergency basis.
Sick Leave: Sick leave is a form of insurance against loss of pay during illness;
this benefit should not be considered an extra day _off each month. Full-time
employees begin to earn sick leave with pay at the rate of one and one-quarter days
per month of employment or 15 days per year which may be accumulated to a total of
90 working days. Upon termination of employment, no compensation is due for
accrued sick leave.
Illness or Death in The Family: Up to three paid working days can be charged against
sick leave when necessary because of serious illness or death in the immediate
family. The immediate family is defined as the employee's spouse, children,
parents, siblings and grandparents. Absence in excess of three days shall be
deducted from annual leave.
Leave of Absence: Leaves of absence fall into two categories;
those without pay. When authorized by the department head and the county executive,
employees will receive leaves of absence, with pay, under the following conditions:
1) Annual Reserve or National Guard Duty not to exceed
15 days during the calendar year in addition to the
2) Subpoena to court for jury duty.
If th~ amount of-gompensation for duty as delineated above is less than an employee's
regular pay, the fees earned for performing these services may be turned over to
the County and a normal paycheck will be written. The County does not pay regular
salary in addition to fees paid for such services. However, should an employee
wish to count time spent on such duty against annual leave, additional fees earned ~
may be kept.
Certain circumstances may warrant the granting of leaves of absence without pay.
All requests must be agreed upon by your department head, the county executive and
the board of supervisors, and requests mus< be presented in writing.
Maternity leave, without pay, will be granted at the discretion of the department
head and the county executive, provided satisfactory arrangements can be made to
replace that employee during her absence.
1-16-75
COURTESY
The impression you make on people depends on the way you treat them and in this
respect affects their impression of public employees in general. Since the people
of Albemarle County are your employer, you should always render them polite and
courteous service, no matter how trying the circumstances.
PUNCTUALITY AND ATTENDANCE
Regular attendance and punctuality are essential if we are to accomplish our objectiVe
of providing efficient services to the public. Since life does have its unpredictable
moments, there will be times when it is impossible to either be at work on time or
to be at work at all. In these situations, either notify your supervisor or make
arrangements for someone else to contact him as early in the workday as possible.
STANDARDS OF CONDUCT
The employees of Albemarle County are prohibited from engaging in any private
business or professional activitY, or having a financial interest in such activity,
which would be or appear to be in conflict with their public responsibilities.
Employees should avoid situations in which their actions might adversely effect the
confidence of the people in the integrity of their government.
If you are a permanent employee in good standing and resign giving adequate notice,
you will be entitled to receive full terminal vacation pay as previously explained.
Terminal vacation pay starts after your final working day, but will not include pay
for holidays occurring after your final day of work.
The County considers adequate notice as being a period no less than two working
weeks. A letter stating your reason for resigning and the date you plan to leave
the job must be given to your department head. Final pay checks are processed in
the routine manner and will be paid on the next regular pay day.
DISMISSAL
Under ordinary circumstances, if an employee is dismissed, he or she will be given
two weeks notice. Vacation leave accumulated to date will be gran~ted. Shoul. d an
employee be dismissed for e~trao,rd.$.n~ryi~'m~.Scondd~.t~-no notice will be given, but
leave accum~l~aed will be paid. Any employee who is dismissed, suspended or
demoted may appeal through established grievance procedures.
~RIEVANCE PROCEDURE
Albemarle County has established a procedure for the equitable and orderly handling
of employee grievances. If a permanent employee feels that a personnel action
against him was unfair or unwarranted, the employee has the right to a formal
hearing of the problem.
If an employee has a complaint regarding the application of personnel policies as
they affect his work activity, every attempt should be made to settle the problem
within his department. The employee should approach his department head and discuss
the problem fully. It is strongly suggested that written notes on this meeting be
kept by the employee and the supervisor.
If the matter cannot be resolved satisfactorily within the department, the employee
should present, in writing, a clear statement of the grievance to the county
executive. The statement should be submitted within five working days of the
completion of the discussions with the department head. The county executive, or
his designee, will discuss the matter fully with the employee involved and the
department head. The grievant may have a representative of his choice present at
the meeting~with the county executive, or his designee, who will meet with the
employee within five working days of the receipt of the written statement and will
give the grievant a written reply within five working days of that meeting.
Matters that cannot be resolved within the above framework, may be taken to the
Grievance Appeal Board. Within five working days of the receipt of the decision of
the county executive on contested demotion, suspension or dismissal, the aggrieved
employee should submit to the county executive a written request for a panel
hearing, the reasons for the request and the solution sought. Under the direction
of the county executive, a panel shall be chosen within five working days of his
receipt of the request. The Grievance Appeal Board will consist of three members:
one person chosen by the department head, one by the aggrieved employee, and one by
1-16-75
the two appointees. Members of the Grievance Appeal Board need not be county
employees. Members may not have been involved in any of the earlier phases of the
grievance. A chairman shall be elected by the members and a time for a hearing set
at as early a date as possible.
The panel has the responsibility to interpret the application of the appropriate
county policies and procedures in the case. It does not have the prerogative to
formulate or to change policies or procedures.
The grievant may have present at this meeting, at his own expense, a representative
or legal counsel.
The conduct of the hearing shall be as follows:
ae
The panel shall determine the propriety of attendance at
the hearing of persons not having a direct interest in
the hearing.
The panel may, at the beginning of the hearing, ask for
statements clarifying the issued involved.
Ce
Exhibits, when offered, may be received in evidence by
the panel, and, when so received, shall be marked and
made part of the record.
Do
The grievant and department head, ~or-their representative,
shall then present their claim and proofs and witnesses
who shall submit to questions or other examination.
The parties may offer evidence and shall produce such
additional evidence as the panel may deem necessary to
an understanding and determination of the dispute. The
panel shall be the judge of relevancy and materiality of
the evidence offered and the strict rules applicable to
the admissibility of evidence in courts of law shall not
be binding upon the panel. All evidence shall be taken
in the presence of the panel and of the parties.
F. ?The majority decision of the panel shall be final in all'-its~/.-~c~.-' ~-
determinations.
~-_ G. Failure. to comply with a panel decision, or reprisals
~--~ ~_ ? ~.~aken as a :esult of a panel decision, shall be grievable.
The panel chairman shall specifically inquire of all parties whether they have
any further proofs to offer or witnesses to be heard. Upon receiving negative
replies, the chairman shall declare the hearing closed.
The hearing may be reopened by the panel on its own motion or upon application
of a party for good cause shown at any time before the award is made.
Copies of the decision shall be filed in writing by the panel chairman with
the department head and the grievant not later than five working days after the
completion of the hearing.
Ail time periods listed in this procedure may be extended by mutual agreement
of the grievant and the county executive. However, the employee's failure to
process a grievance within the time limits shall constitute termination of the
grievance.
Nothing in this procedure is intended to circumscribe or modify the existing
right of the government of the County of Albemarle to do the following, provided,
however, that none of these rights may be exercised in an arbitrary or capricious
manner:
A. Direct the work of its employees;
Be
hire, promote, transfer, assign and retain employees in
positions within the agency;
C. demote or dismiss employees for proper cause;
De
maintain the efficiency of governmental operations;
relieve employees from duties because of lack of work or
for other legitimate reasons;
Pm
take actions as may be necessary to carry out the duties
of the agency in emergencies; and
determine the methods, means and personnel by which
operations are to be carried on.
An employ~'o~f~'t~n~a:l~gievan~eq~i~ ~ave the.~rlqht.~t~.~foilow~all,.~the~.steps of the
grie~a~M%'pr0ced.ure_.~ith complete freedom from reprisal. This does not, however, confer
the right upon anyone to make slanderous or libelous statements.
The term grievance used herein shall not be interpreted to mean negotiations
of wages, salaries or fringe benefits.
Prosecution of a grievance under this procedure shall in no way deprive employees
of any other avenue of redress, including legal action in a court of competent
jurisdiction.
'.}.,'~,}~'~:~?:~7<~:-~':~..~Pb!P~sg~am': .Re~ueSt~f~r~t>positions. Mr. ~arroll said the County has
redei.~ed~:a:~n~tifica~ion from the Virginia Employment Commission that the-C~untyhas been
~r~nted $45,020 in funds through the emergency jobs program. The staff has met and
'tried to determine the positions most advantageous to the County. The program is
1.00% reimbursable including the County's share on fringe benefits. Requirements
include 30 days unemployment and residency in the County. There is a limit of
$10,000 maximum salary for any employee. Salaries can be supplemented by County
funds. The State requests that the County either accept or reject these funds
immediately and if accepted that hiring begin immediately. Positions recommended
are: one electrician for the schools; ~wo food stamp, eligibility technicians for
social services; ~ne public assistance eligibility technican; one social work aide;
~ne accounts payable clerk for the Finance Department; 6ne Clerk II for Finance.
Mr. Sampson said several of these positions will be necessary to continue the
current service level into the 1975-76 budget. It will save money by funding in
this manner.
Mr. Wheeler said he had discussed this with the County Executive yesterday.
Most of these jobs will be included in the budget request for next year. He Said
local, State and Federal governments need to keep people in jobs. Mr. Thacker said
if there is a need for the positions and there seems to be, he will support the
program. He does not feel the County should create jobs just to obtain funding
which is available. Mr. Carwile then offered motion to adopt the following
resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that $45,013 be, and the same hereby is,
appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to the
General Operating Fund and coded to 1-F-123.1 to be used
for personnel hired under the PEP Program.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 11.-- O.A.R.-Request for funds. ~. Sampson advised the Board t~at t~e
staff has been working with the City in making a decision on how to fund the O.A.R.
request. They have just completed their report and the staff has not reviewed
same. He asked that this matter be deferred. The Clerk was ordered to include
this on the agenda for the afternoon meeting of January 22, 1975.
No. 8.--- Real Estate Assessment. (Date for work session).i~'l Miss Page Godsey
said if the Board meets on February 5, the staff would suggest this date. Mr.
Wheeler said a decision will be made on January 22.
Not Docketed. Miss Godsey presented the following report on bills before the
General Assembly at this date on real estate assessments. These bills were reported
out by the Senate Finance Committee on Tuesday, January 14. All of these bills
relate the Bendheim Commission on Tax Reform.
1. S.B. 557. This bill would require that notices of change in assessment
show the old and new appraised value of land and of improvements and the old and
and new assessments of each and the assessment ratio used by the locality. It also
amends law to require that only tenants must forward tax bills to property owners,
not mortgage companies, etc. The effective date would be January 1, 1976. The
staff sees no problem with this bill. The County would have to show the breakdown
of assessment between land and buildings as is already done for appraised values.
45'3
2. S.B. 558 and S.B. 561. Together these bills would require that all appraiser's
work cards be available for inspection by anyone and that any person be able to see
all of the appraiser's work papers on his own property. Excluded from the papers
available to persons other than the owner are working papers on commercial, apartments,
etc. property which give income information. The procedures followed by the County
assessment office and the staff's viewpoint are as follows:
(a)
Anyone can see the appraised values and assessments on any
parcel, broken down by land and buildings. This allows the
taxpayer to compare his assessment to other properties in ~u<~9.--. =~-
order to see that equity exists. ~
(b)
Only the property owner can see the appraiser card and all
other working papers on his property. Since the appraiser
card contains a very detailed description of the land and
buildings, the staff feels this information is privileged
information and should only be available to the owners.
3. S.B. 559. This bill would require that effective July 1, 1976, all assessing
officers shall attend training schools conducted by the State Department of Taxation.
Expenses will be paid by the State. The staff feels this is a good bill aimed at
improving real property assessment throughout the State.
4. S.B. 560. This bill requires the Department of TaXation to perform annual
sales-assessment ratio studies rather than biennial studies. Studies are to show
the ratio for each class of property and the degree of uniformity of assessments
within each class. The staff feels this provides useful information and will
provide more up-to-date ratios for use in determining State school aid to the
County and for assessment of Public Service Corporation property.
5. S.B. 597. This bill would require that beginning with the first annual
a~SesSm~nt after July 1, 1975, all localities must assess at 100% of fair market
value. When the assessment at 100% goes into effect, the tax rate must be lowered
proportionately. The bill also provides that the old tax rate will remain on that
Public Service Corporation property which is still at 40% assessment. Miss Godsey
said the the staff feels that requiring 100% assessment makes assessment easier to
understand, tends to lead to greater accuracy and equity of assessments and saves
the work of computing two differen~f~g~res. The provisions of lowering the tax
rate does not in any way interfere with the local governing body's authority to set
a higher tax rate at the time of budget review and tax rate adoption.
Mr. Thacker asked if there is provision for adjusting the tax rate on Public
Service Corporation, possibly taxing those properties at a higher rate. Miss Godsey
said the part of the Public Service Corporation property that is at the local assess-
ment ratio would go to 100% at the same time as the other properties and would be
taxed at the same tax rate. The part of the Public Service Corporation property that
is still at 40% be continued on the Bemiss formula. There is a provision that if the
effective tax rate on the other properties should go above the effective tax rate on
that 40%, the County c~n~aise the rate.
Mr. Fisher said in this County this bill will effect the relationship between
real property and personal property. At this time, $10,000 worth of personal property
pays at the tax rate. If that rate is $7.40/$100 it pays 7.4%, but $10,000 worth of
real property only pays about 1/7th of that. Mr. Wheeler noted that the County can
have two tax rates. He said that previous to his term on this Board, the County did
carry separate rates.
7. S.B. 601. This bill requires classification of properties according to a
C~ass~fication sFstem now being developed by State Department of Taxation. These
would be classes such as single-family residental, multi-family residential, etc.
The effective date would be July 1, 1976. The County staff anticipates no problems
with this bill.
8. S.B. 552. This bill requires that localities assess all exempt property.
~e~dments will be proposed to exclude State and Federal property and to place
effective date at January 1, 1977.
9. S.B. 553. This bill would allow local governing body to require annual
application of exempt property owners in order to retain the exempt status.
10. S.B. 533 and S.B. 600. (Public hearing on Tuesday, January 21). This bill
~ou!d require that when an annual assessment or general reassessment results in an
increase in real estate tax the locality shall reduce its tax rate proportionately.
If they wish to retain the same rate of levy, then they must hold a public hearing
and explain what, if any, public services would be eliminated if the tax rate not
continued or inCreased or what new services will be instituted.
Miss Godsey said the staff is concerned that the Board be allowed to set the tax
rate at whatever is needed and not take away the Board's authority to set the tax
rate. Mr. Fisher asked if this meant to set up a dummy tax rate at the time an
assessment goes on the books and then change it when the budget is adopted. ~
454
Miss Godsgy said this is essentially te way Senator Michael had exPlained the bill.
Mr. Wheeler said if that is what the bill means, he is opposed.
11. S.B. 534. Requires assessment at fair market, value and excludes all settle-
ment fees from inclusion in that market value.
No. 9. Tie Breaker. Mr. Wheeler said amendments were made to the Code of Virginia
in Sections 15.1-535 and 15.1-540 relating to the office of tie breaker. There have
been quite a lot of commentscon this recently. The Board may decide whether a tie
breaker shall be designated~ If no tie breaker is designated, a tie vote defeats the
motion, etc. or if the Board wants to designate a tie breaker, they have the option
of election at large or appointment by the circuit court.
Mr. Fisher asked what would happen on a zoning case if a negative motion is made
and the vote ties. Mr. Fred Payne, Deputy County Attorney, said such action does
not constitute approval. Mr. Carwile said a vote would still be needed on that
matter for approval. Mr. St. John said if no vote was taken, the applicant does not
have an approval; this action would not change the status quo. A motion to deny
which fails to pass does not change the status quo. Mr. Fisher asked if failure of
motion to deny is the same as failure of a motion to approve. Mr. Payne said no; a
motion to approve which ties would constitue denial of the application. An affir-
mative denial, in which case the application could not be returned to the Board for
one year.
Mr. Thacker asked if the motion were to deny and the vote tied, if this would
allow the applicant to reapply. Mr. Payne said in that case a member of the Board
could then follow up with a motion to approve. Mr. St. John said practically speaking,
in that case, a member of the Board voting on the dissenting side would make a motion
to approve the application and when the vote ties again, the application is denied.
Mr. St. John said in proceedings before other bodies who go by Roberts Rules of Order
the same thing can occur and there is no advantage to be gained by quickly making a
motion to deny and having that motion fail. This would ~at~gain~an~h~ng under
Roberts Ordinary Rules of Order. His office tried to decide some way this would lead
to manueuvering and could not find a way.
Mr. Fisher said he feels that the people who are elected to make the decisions
should make those decisions. If they tie, through honest'differences, then a major-
ity is not voting to change the status quo. He feels it is hard on someone coming in
cold to try to get the facts in a short period of time and make a decision. Mr.
Fisher said he personally leans toward not having a tie breaker. Mr. Carwile, Mr.
Wheeler and Mr Thacker concurred.
Mr. Payne said a resolution of this Board will be needed to abolish the office
of tie breaker. Mr. Wheeler asked that this be placed on the agenda of February 20,
1975, for a public hearing. Motion to this effect was offered by Mr. Fisher, seconded
by Mr. Carwile, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler named the following persons who have been appointed
to the Solid Waste (Resource Recovery Commission) Committee. Messrs. Bruce Hogue,
Preston Coiner and Mrs. Darlene Sams~il, County appointees; ~essrsii~ohR Gibson,
Joseph E. Gibson, and Henry Kinnier, University of Virginia appointees'; and Mr.
C. E. Anderson from the City. Two more people will be appointed by the City. The
County/City/University staff are working on charges to this committee. They will be
presented to the Intergovernmental Committee which consists of the Chairman of the
Board, Mayor of City, City Manager, County Executive, Vincent Shea, and the President
of the University on February 10 and should be approved by the three bodies.soon
thereafter.
~.C~N'ot DoCketed. Mr. Wheeler said concerning the study of the South ~ivan~a River
Re~vo~:h~.'.~a~S met with the MayorAadd staff and discussed this and hopes by the
February meeting to bring recommendations to the Board on that study and other studies
in co~ection with the same matter.
Not Docketed. Mr. St. John asked for authority to tell Mrs. Miller to look into
the matter of Horseman's Saddlery further. He understands Mrs. Miller has been ordered
to get accriminal warrant against those people. Mr. Wheeler said that is not what he
intended. Mr. St. John said the County does not have proof to justify such an order.
Also, the Commonwealth's Attorney should review the matter since he is charged with
prosecuting the case. Mr. Wheeler said he only understood the Board to request Mrs.
Miller to proceed in'~hhat manner if possible. Mr.~Fisher said the Board encouraged
this. Mr. Thacker said he thought the Board asked her to do everything in her power
to see that the pollution is removed as promptly as possible or at least that was his
intent. MrS. Wheeler asked Mr. St. John to talk with Mrs. Miller and state that the
Board was only showing concern.
455
At 12:17 P.M., the Board recessed for lunch and reconvened at 1:30 P.M.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said there were several students present from an
Albemarle High School government class. Present: Jeff Allman, Allan Coleman, Carol3_
Leonard, Darlene Tinsley, Joan Russell and Beth Snow.
No% 28a. Appointment: Emergency Medical Services Council. Mr. Wheeler said
Mr. John Adkins would not accept this appointment. He suggested that this be a member
of the Board and discussed ~his with Mr. Fisher. Mr. Fisher has volunteered to ser~e.
Motion was then offered by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr. Tha~k~r to appoint Mr. Fisher
to serve a<one-year term on the Emergency Medical Services Council of the Thomas
Jefferson Planning District Commission. The motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 20B. Appointment:
another meeting.
Airport Commission.
This was ordered carried over to
No. 20c. Appointment: Planning Commission. Mr. Wheeler said since Mr. Wood
was absent from this meeting, this item should be carried over to Wednesday, January 22.
No. 20e. Appointment: Manpower Council. Mr~ Sampson noted that the name of this
was changed from Manpower Board to Manpower Council. Motion was offered by Mr. Fisher
to reappoint Mr. Michael Carroll from the County Staff to this Council. The motion
was seconded by Mr. Carwile.~.
Mr. Carroll Was present. He said they have begun the preplanning cycle for funds
for%the next fiscal year under CEDA. He said he will be calling each member of the
Board individually to get ideas on manpower funding and unemployment needs in the
different districts within the County. Mr. Wheeler said he has asked Mr. Car~ll
to place the employee for the low income housing project under this program. Vote
was taken at this point and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile~..~Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
No. 20f. Appointment: Economic Development Commission. Mr. Wheeler suggested
that the members serving during 1974 be reappointed. Mr. Henley objected to having
so many bankers on this Commission. It was ordered carried over to the February
meeting.
No. 20d. Appointment: Equalization Board. Carried over.
No. 21. Resolution to clarify policy when making certain contracts. Mr. Sampson
said this has been a verbal policy of the Board for a number of years. The staff is
asking that this be put into a written statement. Mr. Carwile said under the Virginia
Conflict of Interest Act he has a conflict with respect to one of the local banks.
He asked Mr. Payne if this would preclude that bank from being a depository of funds
that are made on a bid basis, since it would not under the State Law. Mr. Payne said
this resolution adopts the statutory definition of a material financial interest.
For terms of making contracts, the ownership of a proprietary ~re~n a financial
institution~is specifically defi~ed/r~~al financial interest Th~s would prohibit
Mr. Carwile from voting on which 'banks would be involved in receiving deposits, but
would not prohibit the bank from being a County depository. Mr. Carwile then offered
motion to adopt the following resolution:
WHEREAS, there .have arisen certain questions as to the
policy of the County concerning the making of certain contracts;
and
WHEREAS, this Board wishes to clarify its policy to the
making of such contracts;
1-16-75
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
OF ALBEMARLE COUNTY, that it is the policy of this Board that
neither the County of Albemarle nor any agency thereof shall
contract with any person holding an elective or appointive
office under the County other than in a contract of employment
made pursuant to such election or appointment; nor shall the
County or any agency thereof contract with any firm, partner-
ship, corporation or other entity in which any such person has
a material financial interest as defined in Section 2.1-348(f)
of the Code of Virginia (1950), as amended. This policy is
intended to supplement the regulations of the Virginia Conflict
of Interests Act (Title 2.1, Chapter 22 of the Code of Virginia
(1950), as amended) and shall not be construed in such a manner
as to be in conflict therewith.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said he had received a copy of the following resolu-
tion which was adopted by the City Council of the City of Charlottesville on January
6, 1975:
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Council of the City
of Charlottesville does hereby join the Albemarle County Board
of Supervisors in authorizing the policing and cleaning of Route
637 from Interstate 64 to the Ivy Landfill site twice a week
as part of the operational cost of this landfill.
Mr. Wheeler said this policy will go into effect on February 1, 1975, when the
City assumes operation of the landfill. In the meantime, this work will be carried
out with personnel of the County's Parks Department.
No. 22. Statement of Expenses of the Director of Finance, the Sheriff's Office
and the Office of the Commonwealth's Attorney for the month of December, 1974, were
presented. On motion by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Carwile, these statements were
approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 23. ~tatement of'i-.EXuensesc~0f~S~e~:Regional Jail for the months of August and
December, 1974, were presented. Upon motion by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Carwile,
these statements were approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 24. Regional Jail Report. Statement of expenses incurred in the main-
tenance and operation of the Regional Jail for the month of December, 1974, was
presented. Also presented was statement of the Jail Physician and statement of
nurses' salaries. On motion by Mr. Carwile, seconded by Mr.' Henley,' all statements
were approved as read. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 25. Report of the Department of Social Services~, for the month of November
1974, was received in accordance with Virginia Code Section 63.1-52.
No. 26. Claims against the Dog Tax Fund. Claim was received from Mary Alice
Lewis for two (2) ducks and one (1) drake killed by dogs on December 20, 1974. On
motion by Mr. Fisher, seconded by Mr. Carwile, Ms. Lewis was allowed $7.00 for this
claim. The motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 27. Audit Report for the General District Court for the fiscal year ended
June 30, 1974, was marked received.
No. 28. Special Appropriation: Department of Social Services. Miss Godsey
said When the Board approved this budget last year, ~ertain WIN categories were~_~- ~ ~
approved which the State did not approve, therefore funds were not expended. The
Social Services Department now requests that those County matching funds be trans-
ferred to this program. Motion to approve this matter was offered by Mr. Henley,
seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler said the Board has set January 29 for a Revenue
Sharing hearing. He asked that the Clerk notify the members of the Housing Committee
to meet in the Board Room at 4:30 P.M., January 20, at which time they will be given
their charges.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler asked that Board members give him recommendations on
appointees to the Leaf Burning Committee. Mr. Fisher said he attempted to find
someone with this problem and cannot find anyone in his district who is interested in
serving on such a committee.
No. 33. Jail Cell Remodeling. Mr. Henley said there is a room at the Regional
Jail which will accommodate 20 additional prisoners but they need to have toilet
facilities put in that room. There are toilet facilities in another room which is
not being used and those facilities can be transferred. The Jail Board requests an
additional allotment of $585.00 for this change, one-half of which would be payable
by the County. Motion was offered by Mr. Henley to adopt the following resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle
County, Virginia, that $585.00 be, and the same hereby is,
appropriated from the Regional Jail Fund and coded to 190-603
for expenditure involved in transfer of toilet facilities at
such jail; and
FURTHER RESOLVED that $292.50 be, and the same hereby is,
appropriated from the General Fund and transferred to the
General Operating Fund, and coded to 6-C-299, for Albemarle
County's share of expenses of the Regional Jail.
The foregoing motion was seconded by Mr. Fisher and carried by the following recorded
vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
No. 34. Check Cancellation. Check No. I008567, dated December 30, 1974, made
payable to Richmond Hotels, Inc. in the amount of $485.00 was presented for cancel-
lation. Mr. Sampson informed the Board that when the Board members attended the
Virginia Association of Counties meeting in Richmond in November, he had signed for
all hotel bills and had turned these ~Rce~p~s 'in, to be p~id.- A check was issued for
these charges not knowing that all hotel bills were charged directly to the Virginia
Association of Counties. ~ACO requested reimbursement from the County for these
expenses, thus when the hotel received Ck. No. I008567, same was~returned to the
County. Motion to approve this check cancellation was offered by Mr. Carwile,
seconded by Mr. Thacker and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
Not Docketed.
today's agenda.
Mr. Wheeler noted the following memorandum which was attached to
DATE:
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
January 8, 1975
Thomas Batchelor, Jr., County Executive
Elwood Hall, Assistant Superintendent for Administration
Erosion at Red Hill School
In the Spring of 1974, the County Engineering Department prepared a
grading plan for a new play area at Red Hill School. The William H.
Chisholm Company was awarded the contract to construct this
play area. The job was completed according to the plan.
Shortly after the grass had begun to grow, a downpour of rain
caused considerable erosion. William H. Chisholm agreed to
repair this damage according to plans by the County Engineering
Department and me. Many attempts were made by both phone
and letters to get this work done by mid-fall, however, Chisholm
didn't get it done.
A plan prepared by the Thomas Jefferson Soil and Water Conser-
vation District and County officials will be carried out this
spring as soon as time is proper fOr seeding. This should
be late February or March."
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler noted that a memorandum had been received from Mr.
Sampson-concerning a loan to the Community Action Agency. Mr. Sampson said the
Board, in the last year's budget, appropriated $34,074 to this Agency to be used in
the event that Federal funds from the Office of Economic Opportunity were terminated.
Funding from O.E.O. was withheld from CAA with no guarantee that they would be
reinstated. Mr. Hudson of CAA requested funds to continue operation. Funds were
then authorized by Mr. Sampson, on a loan basis, in accordance with the provision
that the money would be expended only if Federal funds were terminated. Before the
check making this 10an was cashed, funds were reinstated, therefore, CAA returned the
check and same was cancelled by the Board on December 19, 1975.
Not Docketed. Licensing of Magazine Salesmen. Mr. Wheeler asked that this
matter be placed on the agenda for February 20 and the Sheriff be present at that
time.
Not Docketed. Letter from William W. Stevenson, President of the Ednam Forest
Owners Association, Inc. concerning real estate tax appraisal notices was noted
received.
Not Docketed. Mr. Wheeler requested that a copy of letter from the Piedmont
Community College concerning request for the 1975-76 budget be sent to each Board
member.
Not Docketed. The Clerk noted that on the approval just granted the Department
of Social Services, a resolution should have been adopted for the appropriation.
Motion was then offered b~ Mr. Henley, seconded by Mr. Carwile, to adopt the fol-
lowing resolution:
BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia,
that $16,700 be and the same hereby is appropriated from the General Fund and
transferred to the General Operating Fund and coded as follows:
80C799-$2,700; 80C799a-$7,000; 80C799b-$3,000; and 80C799c-$4,000
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the following transfer of funds between
categories is approved:
$1,914 is transferred from Code 80C703a to Code 80C799 ~ ~ ~ ~'-.~-
$ 386 is transferred from Code 80C705 to Code 80C799
The foregoing motion passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
NAYS: None.
ABSENT: Mr. Wood.
Not Docketed. Mr. Fisher noted that in reading the minutes he had read a
discussion last fall of how citizens would be notified of the proposed zoning
ordinance and reappraisal notices. One County landowner informed him that he had
received 17 separate pieces of mail, all first-class mail, and Mr. Fisher said he
feels people are concerned about this. Mr. Carwile said the people who have com-
mented to him are appreciative of receiving the information. They feel this to be of
more benefit than the cost. He understands an attempt was made to mail these notice
third class but because the contents of the different enclosures varied, the postal
service would not allow this. Mr. Fisher said he hoped that something better can be
worked out for the future. -
1-16-75
z .59
Not Docketed. Mr. Thacker said in the past this Board has discussed some form
of public transportation in Southern Albemarle County. Recently he has been contacted
by Mr. Kyle Allen, who in the past has operated a bus service from Scottsville to the
City and who for economic reasons discontinued that service. He is attempting again
to establish a bus line from Fork Union to Scottsvitle to Charlottesville with
particular application to working people. He is proposing that he arrive in Charlottes~
ville between 7:15 a.m. and 7:30 a.m. and depart at 4:30 p.m. with stops at Frank Ix,
University of Virginia, State Farm, Stromberg-Carlson and Sperry Piedmont. In establish-
ing such a run, he will have to go to considerable expenses. He has not applied for
a franchise from the State Corporation Commission at this time. He is concerned that
in the future the County may enter into a mass transit system that will preempt his
operation. Mr. Thacker did not feel this Board can obligate future Boards, but
requested the County Attorney to investigate to see if the Board can guarantee any-
thing to Mr. Allen.
Mr. Fisher said he has no objection to the County Attorney looking into the
matter, if any citizen feels he can make a system such as this work, the Board should
encourage that in the interest of helping people get to work and back and also in the
interest of transportation.
Not Docketed: Mr. Wheeler said his comments made earlier in the day with
reference to a referendum on the Zoning Ordinace, are personal comments, not those of
the Board. Mr. Wheeler said he does not support referendums on County affairs, but
feels those are duties of the elected representatives. He said he will not support
referendums on anything except School bonds.
At 2:16 P.M., motion was offered by Mr. Thacker, seconded by Mr. Fisher, to
adjourn this meeting until 3:00 P.M. on January 22, 1975. The motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
ABSENT:
Messrs. Carwile, Fisher, Henley, Thacker and Wheeler.
None.
Mr. Wood.
Chairman