2000-10-04October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 1)
A regular meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on October
4, 2000, at 9:00 a.m., Room 241, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia.
PRESENT: Mr. David P. Bowerman, Mr. Lindsay G. Dorrier, Jr. (arrived at 9:06 a.m.), Ms.
Charlotte Y. Humphris, Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter F. Perkins and Ms. Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Attorney, Larry W. Davis,
Senior Deputy Clerk, Laurel Bentley, and, County Planner, V. Wayne Cilimberg.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 9:04 a.m., by the Chairman, Mr. Martin.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 2. Pledge of Allegiance.
Agenda Item No. 3. Moment of Silence.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 4. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda.
Mr. Bob Watson was present to comment on the Historic Preservation Plan. He said County staff
was directed on August 2, 2000, to rewrite certain segments of the plan based on public input. At the same
time, the Board indicated to the public that it was amenable to accepting written comments from the public.
He then presented a list of written recommendations from the Charlottesville Area Legislative Action
Coalition (CALAC).
_______________
Agenda Item No. 5. Consent Agenda. Motion was offered by Ms. Humphris, seconded by Mr.
Bowerman, to approve Items 5.1 through 5.6, and to accept Item 5.7 as information. Roll was called, and
the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
__________
Item 5.1. Proclamation recognizing October 10, 2000, as World Mental Health Day.
By the recorded vote set out above, the following proclamation was approved. Mr. Martin
read the proclamation and then presented it to Mr. John Walters, President of the Mental Health
Association of Charlottesville-Albemarle:
WORLD MENTAL HEALTH DAY
WHEREAS,the World Federation for Mental Health has designated "Mental Health
and Work" as the primary focus of World Mental Health Day 2000-2001;
and
WHEREAS,the International Labor Conference's 1999 Report of the
Director-General defined as one of its goals the promotion of
opportunities for women and men to obtain decent and productive work,
in conditions of freedom, equity, security and human dignity; and
WHEREAS,October 10, 2000, has been designated by the World Federation for
Mental Health and the World Health Organization as World Mental
Health Day 2000-2001 in order:
to take action to increase public awareness and understanding of the
physical, mental and emotional health needs of all workers;
to improve the quality of access of mental health care for workers
throughout our community by providing effective mental health services
that are appropriate and meet local needs;
bring about the recognition and enforcement of the rights of people with
mental disabilities as established by international human rights treaties
including the rights to: freedom, security, reasonable working conditions,
participation, self-fulfillment and dignity;
NOW, THEREFORE,I, Charles S. Martin, Chairman, on behalf of the Albemarle
County Board of Supervisors, do hereby proclaim October 10,
2000, as WORLD MENTAL HEALTH DAY in the County of
Albemarle, and urge all our citizens to take part in the activities
designed for the observance of Mental Health throughout the
month of October, 2000.
(Mr. Walters said that in his line of work, he thinks about the mental health of individuals every day.
In recognition of this proclamation, the Mental Health Association is sponsoring a series of workshops
through the month of October. He said the community is blessed with a lot of good resources, but no one
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 2)
resource will meet the needs of all the people all of the time. The citizens can come in on October 10,
2000, and see a sample of resources at no charge to them and let them know that if they or someone they
know gets into trouble, these resources are available. )
__________
Item 5.2. Proposed FY 2001-02 Operating Budget Calendar and FY 2001-02 through 2010-11
Capital Improvement Program Calendar.
It was noted in the staffs report that a proposed schedule for the upcoming budget season was
=
being presented to the Board and the public showing the principal phases of the budget process including
key meeting dates for the proposed FY 2001-02 Operating Budget and the Capital Improvement Program
(CIP). There are some significant changes from last years' budget process.
In the past, the County's recommended CIP budget was reviewed by the Board in
January/February, and a public hearing held in February. Subsequently, the recommended Operating
Budget was reviewed by the Board and a public hearing held in March.
In an effort to better connect the County's Operating and CIP Budgets, staff is recommending that
the Board simultaneously review both recommended budgets during its March, 2001 budget work sessions
with combined public hearings scheduled in March and April. This will provide the Board with the ability to
review both budgets at the same time and make adjustments as necessary. In addition, it will assist in
fostering public awareness of the competing demands the County faces between its CIP and Operating
Budget needs. It is recommended that both the CIP Budget and the Operating Budget be adopted on the
same date in April. This combining of the budget reviews will facilitate a better understanding of the
County's entire fiscal plan for FY 2001-02. Staff recommends that the Board approve the proposed CIP
and Operating Budget calendar.
(Ms. Humphris said she likes the new calendar presented by staff. She thinks going through the
two budgets at the same time will be very helpful.
Ms. Thomas said when she was a member of the School Board, they worked very hard to separate
the two budgets because of confusion that occurred during hearings. She said that since Debt Service is
the fastest growing portion of the budget, this is probably a good way to handle the two.
Mr. Dorrier said the CIP Technical Committee had trouble deciding what was a capital
improvement. Perhaps, the Board can give some guidance to the staff on this subject. The Committee
debated whether the ACE Program is a capital program. Mr. Tucker said that is something staff can bring
back to the Board if the Committee gets bogged down during discussions.)
A@
By the recorded vote set out above, the budget calendar was approved as presented.
__________
Item 5.3. Appointment to the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Citizens Advisory Committee.
A memorandum had been forwarded to the Board by the Clerks Office stating that the term of Ms.
=
Jan Sprinkle to the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority Citizens Advisory Committee should have been for two
years, through December 31, 2001, instead of December 31, 2000, as previously reported.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board approved revising the term of appointment.
__________
Item 5.4 Fire and Rescue Inspector/Investigator.
It was noted in the staffs report that an additional inspector position was approved in the current
=
fiscal year for the Fire & Rescue Division. The scope and responsibilities of the position do not currently
reflect the actual job requirements. Over a number of years, the responsibilities of the current assistant fire
marshals (who handle both inspection and investigation responsibilities), have changed dramatically. The
County is not currently able to conduct fire inspections in many public buildings due to the increasing
number of businesses, permit requests, fire investigations and complaints received. Fire investigations
alone have experienced an 83 percent increase. With a steady increase in demand being placed on
personnel, it is difficult to meet objectives and maintain the level of service enjoyed in the past. In addition,
fire prevention staff has experienced an increased work load due to the need for additional assistance with
volunteer coordination and supervision of emergency response personnel in the field. As a result, staff
believes there is a need to upgrade the recently approved position from inspector to inspector/investigator.
The proposed upgraded position will act in the capacity of the Assistant Chief of Fire Prevention in
his absence. It will also give the other inspectors potential for upward movement within the organization.
The reclassification will allow this person to assist in fire investigations, as well as fire inspections, which will
help reduce the workload currently placed on the fire inspectors and the assistant chief of fire prevention.
Staff recommends reclassification of the newly-approved inspector position to that of inspector/investigator.
(Ms. Thomas said the Board continues to get many unhappy comments about volunteer
coordination. She hopes this new position will either take on those responsibilities, or free up the time so
that other people on staff can help with that problem.)
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board approved the reclassification of the newly-
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 3)
approved Inspector position to that of Inspector/Investigator.
__________
Item 5.5. Appropriation: Education, $235,683.76 (Form 99087).
It was noted in the staffs report that at its meeting on August 28, 2000, the School Board approved
=
the following appropriations:
Federal Funding for the Adult Basic Education Grant was increased by $932.00 from the original
budget amount of $57,027.00. It is requested that these funds be appropriated in FY 99-00 to cover
expenses.
The Standards of Learning Training Initiative Program provides the implementation and
evaluation of a comprehensive teacher training program to be conducted within the School Division in the
core content areas and leadership training for administrative staffing implementing the Standards of
Learning. The program collected $5192.00 in tuition fees. It is requested that these funds be appropriated
in FY 99-00 to cover expenses.
The General Adult Education Program is a Federally-funded program that provides instructional
services to meet the needs of adults who are working toward a high school diploma. The actual revenues
received exceeded the anticipated revenues by $8475.50. There is also a Fund Balance from FY 98-99 in
the amount of $4736.17. It is requested that $13,211.67 be appropriated for FY 99-00 to cover the
expenses of the Program.
Federal Funding for Title VI Grant was increased by $3731.00 from the original budget amount of
$45,896.00. In addition, the Title VI Grant was not fully expended in FY 98-99. The grant carryover amount
of $2617.09 may be appropriated for FY 99-00. It is requested that $6348.09 be appropriated for FY 99-00
to cover expenses.
During its May 22, 2000, meeting, the School Board approved a contract for Albemarle County
Food Services to provide catering services for the Association for Investment Management and Research
(AIMR) staff during Rental of Monticello High School. The majority of the expenses for this program were
incurred prior to the end of the FY 99-00 fiscal year. The remainder of expenses was to be incurred in FY
00-01. Since this operation was a summer program, it was charged to the Summer School Food Services
area. However, separate codes were established to track specific expenses and revenues for this program.
Since this project was established at such a late date, appropriations were not changed to match the
revenue and expenditures anticipated for meeting the needs of AIMR. Also, since the program is the first of
its kind operating within Albemarle County Schools, an appropriate budget was difficult to project as
negotiations for menus, etc. were in continuous flux. The contract for Food Services was on a "cost plus"
basis where AIMR was responsible for all expenses and would provide a percentage margin of return
based on expenses. The program would receive a greater percentage of return for all expenditures under
$400,000.00 and lesser percentages above $400,000.00 of expenses. At the current time, it appears that
expenses will be significantly less than $400,000.00. The AIMR food contract should provide additional
revenue for use by Albemarle County Schools for the purchase of capital equipment for Food Services or
for other items. Preliminary estimates of available additional revenue from the provision of these services is
approximately $100,000.00; however, all expenses have not yet been finalized or discussed with AIMR.
The use of any remaining balances, beyond direct expenses generated by this contract, will require
additional action by the School Board and Board of Supervisors.
As a result of higher operating costs and significant renovation needs across the division, Food
Services requested an increase in its fees following the approval of the FY 99-00 budget. During its June
14, 1999, meeting, the School Board approved a $0.25 across-the-board increase in school lunch fees.
During this time, the Food Services budget was not updated to reflect the additional revenue generated by
this increase nor the additional capital purchases that the increase would allow. The additional revenue
approved by the Board was used to upgrade the Western Albemarle High School (WAHS) cafeteria,
replace refrigeration equipment across the division, and install the Computer-Assisted-Food-Service
(CAFS) system in three additional schools. Total expenditures for equipment exceed $150,000.00. This
appropriation request is to meet the requirements of the appropriation ordinance. No new fees are being
proposed, nor are new expenditures being proposed beyond those outlined previously. Adequate revenues
have been realized to meet these expenditures. The Food Services Fund is self-sustaining from Federal
funds for school lunches and student lunch fees. It is requested that $80,000.00 be appropriated for FY
99-00 to cover these expenditures.
The Comprehensive Services Act (CSA), implemented in 1993, is the primary funding source for
at-risk children and families who are either in foster care, involved with the juvenile court system, or require
residential or day treatment services because of their special education needs. The CSA Committee of the
Commission on Children and Families (CCF) has requested supplemental funding for the CSA Program for
FY 99-00. The total supplemental request is $1,136,019.00, of which 45 percent is the local match, or
$841,616.00. Of the required supplemental local match, $100,000.00 is requested from the School
Division to pay for special education costs associated with the CSA children. Final costs for this program
have not yet been determined; however, any remaining balances will be applied to the school system's
share for next fiscal year. As projected in the financial reports provided to the School Board during the year,
there have been some savings associated with the retirement of teaching staff for FY 99-00. The funds
allocated for use for this teacher salary code were not required to meet expenses and, therefore, can be
reallocated to meet this unanticipated expense. It is requested that a transfer of $100,000.00 be
appropriated for FY 99-00 to cover expenses for the Comprehensive Services Act.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 4)
Staff recommended that the Board of Supervisors approve the appropriations, totaling
$235,683.76, as detailed on Appropriation Form #99087.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted the following Resolution of
Appropriation:
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR: 1999-00
NUMBER: 99087
FUND: GRANTS/PROGRAMS
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: VARIOUS SCHOOL GRANTS AND PROGRAMS
EXPENDITURE
CODEDESCRIPTIONAMOUNT
1 3115 63322 601300 ED/REC SUPPLIES$932.00
1 3139 60607 580500 STAFF DEVELOPMENT 5,192.00
1 3133 63321 132100 SALARIES10,208.71
1 3133 63321 210000 FICA789.39
1 3133 63321 601200 BOOKS/SUBSCRIPTIONS2,213.57
1 3102 61311 132100 SALARIES5,896.97
1 3102 61311 210000 FICA451.12
1 3000 60302 800100 MACH/EQUIP60,000.00
1 3000 60253 800100 MACH/EQUIP10,000.00
1 3000 60251 800100 MACH/EQUIP10,000.00
1 2100 61101 112100 SALARIES-TEACHER(100,000.00)
1 2112 93010 930206 TRANSFER-CSA FUND100,000.00
1 3002 63115 139320 PT CAFE SP EVENTS22,200.00
1 3002 63115 210000 FICA1,698.00
1 3002 63115 301210 CONTRACT SVCS2,000.00
1 3002 63115 550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE82.00
1 3002 63115 580000 MISC EXPENSES5,000.00
1 3002 63115 600000 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES6,000.00
1 3002 63115 600100 OFFICE SUPPLIES320.00
1 3002 63115 600200 FOOD SUPPLIES75,000.00
1 3002 63115 600500 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES500.00
1 3002 63115 601100 UNIFORMS200.00
1 3002 63115 800100 MACH/EQUIP17,000.00
TOTAL$235,683.76
REVENUE
CODEDESCRIPTIONAMOUNT
2 3115 24000 240225 ADDT ABE FUND$932.00
=
2 3139 16000 161201 REVENUE5,192.00
2 3133 16000 161232 REVENUE-TUITION3,190.50
2 3133 24000 240240 REVENUE-STATE5,285.00
2 3133 51000 510100 APPROP FUND BALANCE4,736.17
2 3102 33000 330105 ADDT TITLE VI FUNDS6,348.09
=
2 3000 16000 161204 SCH CAFETERIA SALES80,000.00
2 3002 16000 161247 AIMR SUMMER FOOD SVC130,000.00
TOTAL$235,683.76
__________
Item 5.6. Appropriation: Education, $203,500.00 (Form 20015).
It was noted in the staffs report that at its meeting on August 28, 2000, the School Board approved
=
the following appropriations:
Western Albemarle High School received a donation in the amount of $1000.00 from the Crozet
Lions Club. This donation will be used to help defray the cost of transportation for the band's spring trip to
Disney World.
Henley Middle School received a donation from the Henley Middle School PTO in the amount of
$2500.00. These funds will be used for salaries for the At-Risk Program and Library Night.
Albemarle County Public Schools, in partnership with the Stafford and Fairfax County Public
Schools and the Virginia Department of Education have received the Partnership in Character Educa-
tion Pilot Project: V-CEP Grant. This three-year pilot will support the development, implementation,
evaluation and dissemination of comprehensive K-12 character education programs. Albemarle County
Public Schools will receive grant funds in the amount of $100,000.00 annually. Ms. Jo Vining and the
School Division's Character Education Committee will coordinate the project. Participating schools are:
Agnor Hurt, Brownsville, Greer, Hollymead and Meriwether Lewis elementary schools; Burley, Henley,
Jouett, Sutherland and Walton middle schools; Albemarle High School and CATEC.
During its May 22, 2000 meeting, the School Board approved a contract for Albemarle County
Food Services to provide catering services for the Association for Investment Management and Research
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 5)
(AIMR) staff during the Rental of Monticello High School. The majority of the expenses for this program
were incurred prior to the end of the 1999-00 fiscal year. The remainder of expenses was to be incurred in
FY 00-01. Since this operation was a summer program, it was charged to the summer school food
>
services area. However, separate codes were established to track specific expenses and revenues for this
specific program. Since this project was established at such a late date, appropriations were not changed
to match the revenue and expenditures anticipated for meeting the needs of AIMR. Preliminary estimates
of available additional revenue from the provision of these services is approximately $100,000.00; however,
all expenses have not yet been finalized or discussed with AIMR. The use of any remaining balances,
beyond direct expenses generated by this contract, will require additional action by the School Board and
Board of Supervisors.
Staff recommended that the Board approve the appropriations totaling $203,500.00, as detailed on
Appropriation Form #20015.
By the recorded vote set out above, the Board adopted the following Resolution of
Appropriation:
APPROPRIATION REQUEST
FISCAL YEAR: 2000-01
NUMBER: 20015
FUND: SCHOOL
PURPOSE OF APPROPRIATION: VARIOUS SCHOOL PROGRAMS AND DONATIONS
EXPENDITURE
CODEDESCRIPTIONAMOUNT
1 2302 61101 420100 FIELD TRIPS$1,000.00
1 2252 61101 160300 STAFF DEVELOPMENT 2,500.00
1 3146 61101 131400 P/T WAGES-OTHER MANG25,000.00
1 3146 61101 210000 FICA1,912.50
1 3146 61101 221000 VRS3,652.50
1 3146 61101 231000 HEALTH1,517.50
1 3146 61101 232000 DENTAL INS48.50
1 3146 61101 312700 PROF SER CONS3,000.00
1 3146 61101 550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE3,000.00
1 3146 61101 550400 TRAVEL-EDUCATION7,000.00
1 3146 61101 580500 STAFF DEVELOPMENT10,000.00
1 3146 61101 601300 ED/REC SUPPLIES44,869.00
1 3002 63115 139320 PT CAFE SP EVENTS60,000.00
1 3002 63115 210000 FICA4,590.00
1 3002 63115 301210 CONTRACT SVCS400.00
1 3002 63115 550100 TRAVEL-MILEAGE50.00
1 3002 63115 580000 MISC EXPENSES1,000.00
1 3002 63115 600000 MATERIALS/SUPPLIES100.00
1 3002 63115 600100 OFFICE SUPPLIES100.00
1 3002 63115 600200 FOOD SUPPLIES23,060.00
1 3002 63115 600500 JANITORIAL SUPPLIES500.00
1 3002 63115 601100 UNIFORMS200.00
1 3002 63115 800100 MACH/EQUIP10,000.00
TOTAL$203,500.00
REVENUE
CODEDESCRIPTIONAMOUNT
2 2000 18100 181109 DONATION$1,000.00
2 2000 18100 181109 DONATION2,500.00
2 3146 24000 240364 CHARACTER ED GRANT100,000.00
2 3002 16000 161247 AIMR SUMMER FOOD SVC100,000.00
TOTAL$203,500.00
___________
Item 5.7. Final Report on Results of Expanded Hunting Enforcement Program for General Rifle
Seasons in FY 1998-99; Update on FY 2000-01 Program, was received for information.
It was noted in the staffs report that last year, in response to citizen concern, for the second straight
=
year the Board authorized additional county resources to supplement the effort of game wardens to
address illegal hunting during the deer hunting season. The Albemarle County Sheriffs Department
=
provided specially trained auxiliary and off-duty deputies to heighten law enforcement visibility in the field,
speed the response of officers to calls and respond to routine calls for service so that game wardens and
police officers could concentrate their efforts on responding to more serious hunting-related incidents.
Statistics gathered from the Police Department and the Sheriffs Office and from the State game wardens
=
during the last two seasons indicate that efforts to increase contact and visibility, as well as actual
enforcement, were successful. This year the expanded hunting enforcement effort will be managed and
tracked by the Albemarle County Sheriff's Department and Sheriff Ed Robb will make results available to
the Board when the hunting season is over. No action is required by the Board regarding this item.
(Ms. Thomas said it was good to get information about the general rifle seasons for 1998-99 and
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 6)
1999-00. However, last year the Board asked for information on disposition of cases, and the fines and
sentences. She said the Board asked for greater effort by law enforcement personnel, but these officers
feel that anyone taken to court gets only a small slap on the wrist. It is then difficult for them to keep up the
enforcement effort this Board requests year after year. The only way the Board has of telling the court it is
serious about this is simply to ask for the information.
Mr. Bowerman said he was impressed by the increased public contact with the deputies. The
increase in citizen complaints was dramatic. But, there needs to be court dispositions which are favorable
to the Boards increased enforcement efforts.
=
Mr. Martin said the Board members had discussed taking turns looking at and observing court
hearings just to put across a point. That would be difficult to do without having information on dispositions
that have taken place in the past. Mr. Tucker said Sheriff Robb is present this morning. Staff will work with
him to determine the best method of getting the information the Board has requested.
Mr. Martin asked Sheriff Robb to speak. He said the Board had requested the prior Sheriff for
information on disposition of cases. Sheriff Robb said he has put into place a plan to provide that
information next year. There is a computer program, and a form which all of the deputies and other law
enforcement people will use to transfer the information to the computer so the case can be tracked all the
way through disposition.
Mr. Bowerman said the Sheriff had concentrated on the spotlighting of deer. He asked if that
program was more successful this year than it was last year. Sheriff Robb said he has little information on
past years. Mr. Perkins said the Police Department had set up a dummy animal. This was designed to free
the time of game wardens. Mr. Bowerman said spotlighting is one area the courts do not look favorably on.
Sheriff Robb said his deputies will respond to calls this year thus freeing time for the game wardens so they
can do their job. They have a schedule set up, and during the first week of hunting season there are six
deputies who will be out in the field.)
_______________
Agenda Item No. 6. Approval of Minutes: August 2, August 9 and August 16, 2000.
Mr. Perkins had read August 2, 2000 (Page 16 to the end) and noted a couple of typographical
errors.
Motion to approve the minutes which had been read was offered by Mr. Perkins, seconded by Ms.
Humphris, and carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 7b. Other Transportation Matters.
Mr. Bill Mills, Acting Resident Engineer, said he has not followed up on an August request for a
traffic signal study on Route 760 (at Rio Road and on Huntington Road/Old Brook Road). He will do so
soon.
__________
Mr. Martin said he had begun working with Ms. Angela Tucker about a plan of action for the Route
29 North project, and getting more information out to the communities. Mr. Mills said he was aware of this.
He will talk with Mr. Martin in the near future about this plan.
__________
Mr. Perkins said there are problems with the traffic light recently installed in Crozet. Mr. Mills said
there has been a lot of concern in that area about pedestrians crossing the road. His office has a lot of
work to do with making that crossing handicapped accessible. They had studied installing a light where the
pedestrian pushes a button to have the light come on. However, the residents from Windham trying to
cross that road create a problem so they will be installing a light that actually stops the traffic so pedestrians
can cross the road at that point.
__________
Mr. Perkins said he has received complaints about the roads in Earlysville Heights. He was told
that the roads have not been paved recently, and they have potholes. Mr. Mills said he will have someone
look at those roads.
__________
Mr. Dorrier said residents along Route 726, the road from Scottsville to the Hatton Ferry, say the
road is too narrow to safely support increased bus and farm vehicle traffic. Also, because of the James
River Runners, there are many vehicles towing boats using that road. Mr. Mills said the road probably has
only a 30-foot right-of-way and unless the Board makes it a project and assigns a priority number to it, there
is little VDOT can do. Mr. Perkins said it usually helps to just have the brush cut back from the fences. Mr.
Dorrier said it has deep ditches on both sides, and no shoulders at all along the road.
__________
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 7)
Ms. Thomas said she appreciates Mr. Mills' assistance with the Whippoorwill and Batesville issues
(no details provided). She added that Ms. Tucker had commented about putting in paved shoulders,
particularly for bicyclists, whenever there is a major paving job. It sounded like a new policy. Mr. Mills said
that on the primary roads being paved over the next year, VDOT will be adding paved shoulders. On
secondary roads, it is difficult to add anything to the road because they dont have the width needed.
=
__________
Ms. Thomas asked when Dick Woods Road is to be paved. Ms. Tucker had indicated that the road
would also be striped on the shoulder to show that it is part of a bicycle circuit. Mr. Mills said that project is
to start on October 16. That road is probably wide enough for a centerline.
__________
Ms. Humphris said Bennington Road in Hessian Hills was paved some time ago, but has not been
center striped. Mr. Mills said he will speak generally about centerlines on subdivision streets. He and Ms.
Thomas have been through this before. Someone called his office and asked for a centerline, so VDOT
checked the street and it met the warrants for that centerline. Now another person has called, and they do
not want a centerline. That centerline cannot be removed easily after it has been installed. He would like
to have a consensus from the Hessian Hills neighborhood to be sure they really want a centerline. Ms.
Humphris said there was a centerline on Bennington Road before this last paving. She knows of no one
who was opposed, but she will leave this matter to Mr. Mills.
__________
Ms. Humphris said there has been a new centerline installed on Old Garth Road (21 Curves). It
looks as if it were done freehand.
__________
Mr. Bowerman said the VDOT contractors did a good job on Rio Road.
__________
Mr. Bowerman asked when the permanent Resident Engineer will be employed. Mr. Mills said the
application time has expired, and he believes VDOT hopes to fill the position by December.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 7a. Transportation Matters: Recess and Reconvene in Room 235 for a VDOT
Presentation on the widening of Route 29 between Route 643 and Route 649.
At 9:37 a.m., the Board recessed and reconvened in Room 235 for the presentation.
Mr. Jimmy Mills of VDOT made the presentation. In reference to Route 643, he said that if no work
is done, by the year 2012 the service level will drop to a Level D, which is close to failure. He said VDOT
plans on building access roads along Route 29 North as two-lane rural roads. Development in the area
calls for this design. There will be shoulders and bikeways, and the two lanes will give the County more
land use flexibility than a four-lane design. He said there had been a Citizens Informational Meeting on this
project, but VDOT has not had a public hearing because not all documents have been approved at this
time.
Mr. Martin said the citizens in this area are concerned that the east and west roads dont go
=
anywhere. Where do these roads eventually go? Mr. Mills said this design is a work in progress. They do
have some alternatives to address citizen concerns. There is a need to reduce access points to Route 29.
Ms. Thomas asked if truck traffic will increase because Route 29 is improved. It has been
assumed that after the Western Bypass and the Meadow Creek Parkway are built, the traffic on Route 29
North will be at 75,000 cars per day.
Ms. Humphris asked how much right-of-way will be bought on the west side of Route 29. Mr. Mills
said they should buy enough land for two-lanes. It will then be up to developers to get any additional right-
of-way. When the area builds up with businesses, VDOT expects the access roads will become four-lane
roads with bicycle lanes.
Ms. Humphris said the County Planning Commission is dealing now with planning for the Route
649/29 quadrant. VDOTs plans will impact the Commissions plans. Mr. Mills said VDOT is taking this into
==
consideration because there will be landlocked properties.
Mr. Bowerman asked if there would be an impact if the Countys Comprehensive Plan were
=
amended to take this decision out of VDOTs hands. Mr. Mills said if development occurs before the road is
=
improved, the County and VDOT can make requirements fit the need for both east and west access roads.
The goal is to limit the number of access points to Route 29.
Mr. Dorrier asked if another lane could be added to Route 29 all the way to Greene County. Mr.
Mills said they are going to do that, but its not enough.
=
Ms. Humphris said Albemarle County needs the Meadow Creek Parkway first. Why is VDOT
pushing this project? She added that she had talked to Mr. Don Askew about VDOTs public hearing
=
notices where nothing was said about any new roads. She thinks the advertisement was misleading. She
asked that the public be given more information in the future. Mr. Askew said he responded to the Board by
holding a meeting. The residents knew about the access roads.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 8)
Mr. Bowerman said some other projects have made Route 29 a road of national significance.
There is a need to cut down on the access points. Mr. Askew said he first thought this would be a six-lane
road. However, the public did not want the limited access concept. VDOT agreed to work with the County
on controlled access. Mr. Mills said the design was done only to make sure all of the various plans fit
together.
Mr. Martin asked Mr. Cilimberg for an update on the Countys plans. Mr. Cilimberg said the access
=
management study came out of the Route 29 Corridor Study in 1995. It was realized that the road had to
be widened to serve the development occurring along the corridor. The Countys plans are constantly
=
changing, so the Planning Commission realizes that the urban concept does not work with just two parallel
roads. The County made recommendations to VDOT that have not been followed. Staff is working with the
Commission to bring something to the Board. There may be a need for additional roads. The Commission
has to deal with development and with a connection to that development. Mr. Mills said VDOT cannot build
a series of roads just to meet development needs. The County can deal with any additional roads.
Mr. Martin said he is thinks it is necessary that the County and VDOT cooperate on this project.
Mr. Askew said VDOTs and the Countys goals are the same. VDOT will work with the Countys
===
access management plan. They did the same with Greene County.
Mr. Martin said there is no mention of pedestrian access in these plans. Ms. Thomas said the
conflict is that VDOT and the County have their own priorities. She is concerned that this project will lead to
having isolated big box stores which will just create more traffic on Route 29. Mr. Mills said the County has
to deal with the use of property through its zoning. It will still have to have roads. He hopes the County will
not provide direct accesses to Route 29.
Mr. Bowerman said construction standards for secondary roads dictates land use policy. There
needs to be more flexibility. Mr. Mills said that more pedestrian-friendly roads are wanted.
Mr. Perkins asked what traffic count is necessary to justify interchanges. Mr. Mills said
interchanges would be needed if the traffic on Route 29 and the side roads became problematic. He said
the next step is to work with the Countys planning staff, then hold a public hearing, possibly in the spring of
=
2001.
There was no further discussion of this item. (Note: At 10:30 a.m., the Board recessed. They
reconvened in Room 241 at 10:43 a.m.)
_______________
Agenda Item No. 8. Ivy Landfill, Presentation by Art Petrini.
Mr. Petrini distributed updated information on tip fees for burial of construction debris (see graph
entitled Transfer vs. Burial Tipping Fees which is on file). He said the graph compares the C&D tip fees
A@
for the two most cost-effective scenarios. It shows that the burial scenario has a relatively consistent tip fee
increase through the year 2020 while the transfer scenario increases immediately and doesnt stabilize until
=
the year 2010 and then remains above the burial scenario tip fee. For FY 2001-2002, the C&D tip fee for
burial in a new cell (Cell #5) at the Ivy Landfill is projected at $36.00 per ton and for the BFI transfer station
it is projected at $58.00 per ton.
Mr. Petrini said they have looked at many alternatives. What is shown on the graph is that the tip
fee for burial of C&D at future Cell #5 is consistently, on a year-to-year basis, lower than other alternatives.
Shown on the graph is an orange line which shows that the cost of C&D burial goes up at a constant rate. It
also shows other lines which are transfer station alternatives. No matter what alternative is chosen, whether
it is a transfer station built and operated by RSWA, one that uses a current commercial facility such as BFI
at Zion Crossroads, whether money is taken out of Financial Assurance (there is $5.0 million in that State
Fund), it always shows that a transfer station on a tip fee basis is higher than a C&D analysis for cell burial.
He assured the Board that the analysis was a rigorous study. All costs and factors were included on the
spreadsheet: bond payments, closure and post-closure. All data is up to within the last few days. It was
performed with a consultant who specializes in solid waste management. GBD was the firm used, and is
the same consultant who worked with the RSWA about five years ago when initially deciding what to do. At
that time, about 15 alternatives were studied. The information presented is accurate. He is giving no
conclusions.
Mr. Bowerman said in looking at operational costs, remediation costs and ongoing costs, what will
the fund balances be in the year 2020. Mr. Petrini said in all the alternatives before the Board, they have set
what the fund balance would be, and that is from $1.0 to $2.0 million in their checking account for operating
costs. They dont have profits like a regular business.
=
Mr. Bowerman asked how much money has been provided to do the remediation and all of the
things that are being done at the site (orange line on graph noted as being burial at Ivy) and still have $2.0
A@
million left at the end of twenty years. Mr. Petrini said he does not have a ready answer to that question.
However, the tip fee is a revenue to help pay for all expenses and all tips fees for MSW go to all expenses.
He said they just looked at Cell #5 by itself and its revenue and expenses carried out for the life of the cell
including paying off all of the bonds, and post-closure which is between ten and thirty years after the cell is
closed depending on how DEQ rules. It shows between $12.0 and $13.0 million in revenue over expenses
when the cell is being closed. That money is not profit. Mr. Bowerman said if the Board chose to continue
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 9)
with C&D here, the mitigation fees and costs could cover the whole landfill operation for the next 20 years.
It is important and if it is not done and the revenues dont come in, it then falls on the public sector to deal
=
with. That is what he is getting at. Mr. Petrini said if an option other than the C&D cell is chosen, then the
tip fees are what they are. Mr. Bowerman said if the revenues come in, there is still the same operating
costs, the same amount left over to go against other operating costs. Mr. Petrini agreed.
Mr. Martin said the County needs to consider whether to subsidize the tipping fee to keep it lower.
Mr. Bowerman said under any of the scenarios shown, the tipping fee has to be eliminated. Under the
orange line scenario that is enough to pay for all of the operating costs for 20 years with a fund balance left
over. Any other scenario would either be higher payments by the public, or subsidy by the locality. Mr.
Petrini said yes.
A@
Ms. Thomas said she wanted to explain why this item is on the agenda. She said that in November,
1997, the Board discussed CDD burial at her request. The City and Board had already decided to bury
CDD, but not to bury MSW. There has been no change in that decision, except that, at that time the Board
said it would look at the question again in two and one-half years. It was assumed that two and one-half
years would be when the new CDD cell had been built and it would have paid for its expenses. It would be
the time to decide whether to continue with CDD, and if it was decided to stop, there would be no loss to the
RSWA. As it turns out, the Board is no where near that stage, there is not even a new CDD cell. Instead of
shutting up the cell being operated three years ago, RSWA has been operating with it all this time. What
she wanted in 1997 was a time to assess how the burial was done, its impact on the neighbors, it financial
contribution or drain on the RSWA, and whether the community wanted to continue that operation. It was
also thought that the expenses of the CDD cell and the expenses of RSWA would be manageable enough
so that they could be covered by the operation after two and one-half years. Instead, the expenses of
RSWA have risen tremendously. The recycling, the remediation, the lawsuit, the gas and water collection,
and these things do not pay for themselves. There is a need to have an increased revenue stream coming
into RSWA. Back in 1997, she argued that taxpayers should pick up some of these expenses, but the other
Board members did not agree. She thinks it is not an unreasonable point of view, and the Solid Waste
Advisory Committee agrees with her. She said what the Board has in front of it today is a way to continue
without having taxpayers dollars go into the operation. She said that is something the Board can discuss
=
today, but she has no reason to think the other Board members have changed their minds, so will not
belabor the point.
Mr. Dorrier said the CIP Technical Committee, at its budget work session yesterday, talked about
recycling, and the possibility of having recycling centers set up in the County. That was debated, and the
question was put aside for the time being. However, he believes the Board needs to rethink its policy about
what will be done with solid waste and recycling in the County. He suggested a committee be appointed to
deal with that question. He said it is a growing problem. He thinks there was an intention for the County to
deal with it. It also involves the City. Mr. Bowerman said every trash hauler also picks up recycling. There
is a recycle center, and stumpage is ground into mulch rather than buried. Mr. Tucker said he thinks Mr.
Dorrier is asking for additional convenience centers such as the one off of McIntire Road, and possibly
having one further north where people can bring recyclables which are not picked up by the haulers. Mr.
Bowerman said that does not deal with the issue before the Board today.
Ms. Thomas said several years ago the Engineering Department agreed to do a study of the true
costs of solid waste handling. With the lawsuit and other things going on, that study was dropped or
discontinued. If Mr. Dorrier wants to look at changing what is being done, one thing that should be looked
at is the true cost taking into account environmental issues. Mr. Dorrier said the City has a recycling center
and RSWA is in charge of that center and is supposed to give recommendations. There is no overall,
coordinated policy dealing with this issue. He said the Board is talking about tipping fees, but they overlap.
The private haulers need to have input on recycling, and pickup. Mr. Tucker said the McIntire Center is not
the Citys, but belongs to RSWA and both City and County citizens can use it. It just happens to be located
=
in the City.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the Board had not mandated that all haulers pick up certain items for
recycling. Ms. Thomas said they are required to offer that service. Mr. Tucker said the citizen sometimes
has to pay more for that service and have the opportunity to decide if they want to use that program.
Mr. Martin said he would like to summarize. He said the Board has been given a presentation by
Art Petrini which shows the benefit of maintaining burial at Ivy under the current conditions, and at this time,
this appears to be basically an informational report. The Board needs to move on to the next agenda item.
He said that a lot of what Mr. Dorrier has mentioned has already been done, and suggested that Mr.
Dorrier be updated to this point in time, and then the Board can discuss whether it wants additional recycling
centers around the County. Mr. Dorrier said the committee, which is dealing with capital improvements is
unsure of the Boards policy dealing with recycling. Mr. Bowerman said the County does not have a policy,
=
the RSWA has a policy. Mr. Martin suggested that staff provide a summary of where this question stands.
Mr. Bowerman said the McIntire Recycling Center has grown into a very sophisticated center. To
duplicate that in other places would not be cheap, but it would be effective. Ms. Thomas said the RSWA
Citizens Advisory Committee did a postcard survey and it got a good response. Mr. Tucker said the reason
this is in the CIP is because they would be looking to the County to subsidize much of the cost of the
location of another convenience center. That has been worked on by the Citizens Advisory Committee with
County staff.
Ms. Thomas said there is a second reason the Board had said it would revisit this question, and that
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 10)
had to do with the final site plan that came to this Board in March, 1998. That Board said it would look
specifically at requiring installation of a left-turn lane to serve the site. The other thing had to do with using
the site for recreational purposes. Mr. Martin said he has always been opposed to that idea.
Ms. Thomas said the Boards official action was that use of the property was consistent with the
=
Comprehensive Plan, but that no County expenditures would be incurred on any recreational use until a
complete master plan for the landfill had been approved. It was felt that a master plan might take years to
complete, but with public input. Now, in the spring, it is possible that a master plan may be ready. She
encouraged RSWA to use its Citizens Advisory Committee in developing that plan, and assume there will
be a public hearing on that plan at that time.
Mr. Perkins said he thinks this whole thing ties in with the illegal dumping problems in the outlying
parts of the County. The County needs to offer free tipping days and also follow through on enforcement.
Mr. Tucker said that item is part of the reappropriations which are on the agenda later today.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 9. School Board Presentation. (Moved to 1:45 p.m.)
_______________
Agenda Item No. 10. Public Hearing on an ordinance to amend Chapter 15, Taxation, of the
Albemarle County Code by amending Article VI, Utility Tax, to conform the County utility tax on purchasers
of electricity and natural gas to the new State Code requirement effective January 1, 2001, that the tax be
based on the amount of consumption of electricity and natural gas rather than on the amount of the bill for
such services. (Notice of this public hearing was given in the Daily Progress on September 18 and
September 25, 2000.)
Mr. Tucker said legislation deregulating the electric and gas industries passed the 1999 and 2000
sessions of the General Assembly. This legislation affects several local taxes, the local consumer utility tax,
the utility license (or gross receipts) tax, and real and personal property taxes. Local ordinances and
revised tax rates, effective January 1, 2001, are required to generate revenue neutral receipts. The
legislation exempts Federal, state and local governments from paying the tax. The tax rate changes were
advertised for a public hearing on this date. After holding the required public hearing, staff recommends
adoption of the revised Utility Tax Ordinance.
Mr. Bowerman asked how the 911 surcharge is collected. Mr. Davis said that is not covered by this
ordinance. He will provide Mr. Bowerman information if so desired.
Mr. Martin opened the public hearing. With no one from the public rising to speak, the hearing was
immediately closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion to adopt an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 15, Taxation, of the Code of the County of
Albemarle, Virginia by Amending Article VI, Utility Tax, was offered by Ms. Humphris, seconded by Mr.
Dorrier, and passed by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
(Note: The Ordinance, as adopted, is set out in full below.)
ORDINANCE NO. 00-15(3)
AN ORDINANCE TO AMEND CHAPTER 15, TAXATION, OF THE CODE OF THE
COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, BY AMENDING ARTICLE VI, UTILITY TAX
BE IT ORDAINED by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Albemarle,
Virginia, that Chapter 15, Taxation, is hereby amended and reordained by amending
Article VI, Utility Tax, as follows:
CHAPTER 15. TAXATION
ARTICLE VI. UTILITY TAX
Sec. 15-600 Definitions.
Any term not defined herein shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise,
have the meaning ascribed to it in Virginia Code 58.1-3812(I), and any future
'
amendments thereto. In addition, for the purposes of this article, the following words and
phrases shall have the meanings respectively ascribed to them by this section:
(1) . The term "CCF" means the volume of gas at standard pressure and
CCF
temperature in units of one hundred (100) cubic feet.
(2) . The term "commercial" means for use not defined as
Commercial
residential or industrial.
(3) . The term "industrial" means for use in mining, manufacturing, or
Industrial
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 11)
processing of raw materials. For purposes of classifying electrical services, the demand
load must be greater than 50kw based on the connected load for a new purchaser and a
history of purchasers exceeding 50kw for three (3) months out of a twelve (12) month
period for an existing purchaser.
(4) The term "kilowatt hours (kWh) delivered"
Kilowatt hours (kWh) delivered.
means 1000 watts of electricity delivered in a one-hour period by an electric provider to
an actual purchaser, except that in the case of eligible customer-generators (sometimes
called cogenerators) as defined in Virginia Code 56-594, it means kWh supplied from
'
the electric grid to such customer-generators, minus the kWh generated and fed back to
the electric grid by such customer-generators.
(5) . The term "purchaser" means every person who purchases a
Purchaser
utility service.
(6) . The term "residential" means for use by persons primarily for
Residential
domestic purposes in buildings having single or multiple meters for electricity or natural
gas or for local telephone service and used as a single dwelling unit or in normal farming
operations.
(7) . The term "seller" means every person, whether a public service
Seller
corporation or a municipality or private corporation who sells or furnishes a utility service
in the county.
(8) The term "utility service" means local telecommunications
Utility service.
service, mobile service, electric service, and natural gas service furnished within the
county.
(6-22-67, 1; 6-20-68, 1; Ord. No. 94-8(2), 11-2-94; Code 1988, 8-12; Ord. 98-A(1),
'''
8-5-98; Ord. 00-15(3), 10-4-00)
Sec. 15-601 Imposed; amount.
There is hereby imposed and levied by the county upon each and every
purchaser of utility services as set forth herein a tax for general purposes in the following
amounts:
A. . On purchasers of electric service for
Electrical Services - Residential
residential purposes, the tax shall be in the amount of $0.031283 per kWh for the first
128 kWh and $0.000000 per kWh exceeding 128 kWh delivered monthly by a seller not
to exceed four dollars ($4.00) per month.
B. . On purchasers of electric service for
Electrical Services - Commercial
commercial purposes, the tax shall be in the amount of $0.006161 per kWh for the first
48,693 kWh and $0.001636 per kWh exceeding 48,693 kWh delivered monthly by a
seller.
C. . On purchasers of electric service for industrial
Electrical Services - Industrial
purposes, the tax shall be in the amount of $0.005265 per kWh for the first 56,980 kWh
and $0.000934 per kW exceeding 56,980 kWh delivered monthly by a seller.
D. . On purchasers of local telephone
Local Telephone Service - Residential
service for residential purposes, the tax shall be in the amount of twenty percent (20%) of
the charge made, exclusive of any Federal or state tax or mileage charges thereon,
made by the seller against the purchaser with respect to such residential telephone
service; provided however, no tax shall be imposed on any amount of such bill in excess
of twenty dollars ($20.00) per month for residential purposes.
E. . On purchasers of local
Local Telephone Service - Commercial or Industrial
telephone service for commercial or industrial purposes, the tax shall be in the amount of
ten percent (10%) of the charge made, exclusive of any Federal or state tax or mileage
charges thereon, made by the seller against the purchaser with respect to such
commercial or industrial telephone service; provided, however, that in the event any
monthly bill submitted by the seller for telephone service for commercial or industrial
purposes exceeds three thousand dollars ($3,000.00), the tax computed on the amount
of such bill in excess of three thousand dollars ($3,000.00) shall be two percent (2%).
F. . On purchasers of natural gas service for
Gas Service - Residential
residential purposes, the tax shall be $1.25 per CCF for the first 1.6 CCF and $0.00 per
CCF exceeding 1.6 CCF delivered monthly by a seller.
G. . On purchasers of natural gas
Gas Service - Commercial or Industrial
service for commercial or industrial purposes, the tax shall be $0.0638 per CCF for the
first 4,500 CCF and $0.0110 per CCF exceeding 4,500 CCF for non-interruptible service,
and $0.0588 per CCF for the first 4,770 CCF and $0.0110 per CCF exceeding 4,770
CCF for interruptible service.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 12)
H. . On mobile service purchasers with a service address within
Mobile Service
the county, the tax shall be ten percent (10%) of the monthly gross charge; provided
however, that in the event a monthly bill submitted by the mobile service provider exceeds
thirty dollars ($30.00) in gross charges, there shall be no tax computed on the amount of
the bill in excess of thirty dollars ($30.00). All taxes imposed by ordinances in effect prior
to the adoption of this section shall remain valid and in full force and effect.
(6-22-67, 2; 6-20-68, 2; 11-2-68, 1; 4-21-76; Ord. No. 94-8(2) of 11-2-94; Code
'''
1988, 8-13; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98; Ord. 00-15(3), 10-4-00)
'
State law reference--Va. Code 58.1-3812, 58.1-3814.
''''
Sec. 15-602 Utility bills.
Bills shall be considered monthly bills if rendered twelve (12) times annually with
each bill covering a period of approximately one (1) month or a portion thereof. If bills for
utility services are submitted less frequently than monthly, covering periods longer than
one (1) month, the maximum amounts of such bills which shall be subject to the tax
levied by this article shall be increased by multiplying the appropriate maximum fixed by
'
15-601 for the utility service involved by the number of months of service covered by such
bills.
(6-22-67, 3; 6-20-68, 3; 11-2-68, 2; Code 1988, 8-14; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
''''
Sec. 15-603 Telephone service.
The tax imposed and levied by this article on purchasers with respect to
telephone service shall apply to all charges made for local telephone service except as
follows:
A. . The total amount of the guaranteed charge on each bill
Coin box telephone
rendered for semi-public coin box telephone service shall be included in the basis for the
tax with respect to the purchaser of such service, but no other tax shall be imposed on
telephone service paid for by inserting coins in coin-operated telephones.
B. . With respect to flat rate service, the tax shall apply to only
Flat rate service
the amount payable for local area service and shall not apply to any specific charge for
calls to points outside the county or to any general charge or rate differential payable for
the privilege of calling points outside the county or for mileage service charges.
C. . Where purchasers of telephone service are charged
Message rate service
on a message rate basis, the tax shall apply only to the basic charge for such service and
shall not apply to any charge for additional message units.
(6-22-67, 4; 6-20-68, 4; Ord. 94-8(2), 11-2-94; Code 1988, 8-15; Ord. 98-A(1),
'''
8-5-98)
Sec. 15-604 Duties of seller generally.
A. It shall be the duty of every seller in acting as the tax collection medium or
agency for the county to collect from the purchaser for use of the county, the tax imposed
and levied by this article at the time of collecting the purchase price charged therefor.
The seller shall remit monthly to the county the amount of tax billed during the preceding
month to the purchaser.
B. In all cases where the seller collects the price for utility service in stated
periods, the tax imposed and levied by this article shall be computed on the amount of
purchase during the month or period according to each bill rendered; provided, the
amount of tax to be collected shall be the nearest whole cent to the amount computed.
C. A seller of local telecommunication services shall collect the tax from the
purchaser by adding the tax to the monthly gross charge for such services. The tax shall,
when billed, be stated as a distinct item separate and apart from the monthly gross
charge. Until the purchaser pays the tax to the seller, the tax shall constitute a debt of the
purchaser to the county. If any purchaser refuses to pay the tax, the seller shall notify the
county. After the purchaser pays the tax to the seller, the taxes collected shall be
deemed to be held in trust by the seller until remitted to the county.
(6-22-67, 7; 6-20-68, 7; Ord. No. 94-8(2), 11-2-94; Code 1988, 8-16; Ord. 98-A(1),
'''
8-5-98)
Sec. 15-605 Records to be kept by seller.
Each seller shall keep complete records showing all purchasers in the county,
the price charged against each purchaser with respect to each purchase, the date of
each purchase, the date of payment for each purchase and the amount of tax imposed
hereunder. Such records shall be kept open for inspection by the duly authorized agents
of the county during regular business hours on business days. The duly authorized
agents of the county shall have the right, power and authority to make such copies or
transcripts thereof during such times as they may desire.
(6-22-67, 8; 6-20-68, 8; Code 1988, 8-17; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
'''
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 13)
Sec. 15-606 Extension of time for filing return.
The director of finance may extend, for good cause shown, the time for filing any
return required to be filed by the provisions of this article; provided, however, no such
extensions shall exceed a period of ninety (90) days.
(6-22-67, 9; 6-20-68, 9; Code 1988, 8-18; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
'''
Sec. 15-607 Exemptions from article.
The United States of America, diplomatic personnel exempted by the laws of the
United States, the state and political subdivisions, boards, commissions, the authorities
and agencies thereof, volunteer fire companies and volunteer rescue squads are hereby
exempt from the payment of the tax imposed and levied by this article with respect to the
purchase of utility services used by such governmental agencies.
(5-14-80; Code 1988, 8-19; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
'
Sec. 15-608 Collection of tax.
The director of finance shall be charged with the power and duty of collecting the
taxes imposed and levied under this article.
(6-22-67, 5; 6-20-68, 5; Code 1988, 8-20; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
'''
Sec. 15-609 Forms for reports, etc.
The director of finance may prescribe forms for filing of any report or the
payment of any funds set forth in this article.
(6-22-67, 6; 6-20-68, 6; Code 1988, 8-21; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
'''
Sec. 15-610 Penalty; continuing violations; conviction not to excuse payment of
tax.
Any purchaser failing, refusing or neglecting to pay the tax imposed or levied by
this article and any seller violating the provisions of this article and any officer, agent or
employee of any seller violating the provisions of this article shall be guilty of a class 1
misdemeanor. Such conviction shall not relieve any person from the payment, collection
and remittance of such tax as provided by this article.
(6-22-67, 11; 6-20-68, 11; Code 1988, 8-22; Ord. 98-A(1), 8-5-98)
'''
This ordinance shall be effective on and after January 1, 2001.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 11. Public hearing to authorize the County to grant the City of Charlottesville Gas
Division a gas line easement on Brookway Drive. Jack Jouett Dist. (Notice of this public hearing was given
in the Daily Progress on September 18 and September 25, 2000.)
Mr. Tucker said the City of Charlottesvilles Gas Division requested an easement from the County
=
for natural gas lines to be installed upon and across the public right-of-way known as Brookway Drive which
lies in the County. The request is for a 15-foot side easement for a two-inch P.E. gas line. After holding the
public hearing required by Code 15.2-800, staff recommends approval of the request.
'
Ms. Humphris noted that the reference to Jack Jouett District in the advertisement is incorrect. The
land actually lies in the Rivanna District.
At this time, Mr. Martin opened the public hearing. With no one from the public rising to speak, the
public hearing was immediately closed, and the matter placed before the Board.
Motion to authorize the County Executive to sign the following deed of easement on behalf of the
County was offered by Ms. Humphris and seconded by Ms. Thomas. Roll was called, and the motion
carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
THIS DEED OF EASEMENT, made and entered into on this 6th day of March,
2000, by and between the COUNTY OF ALBEMARLE, VIRGINIA, Grantor, and the CITY
OF CHARLOTTESVILLE, VIRGINIA, a municipal corporation, Grantee.
WITNESSETH:
That for and in consideration of the sum of One Dollar ($1.00), cash in hand
paid, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the GRANTOR does hereby GRANT and
CONVEY with SPECIAL WARRANTY to the GRANTEE, subject to the reservations
hereinafter set forth, the permanent easement of right of way to construct, maintain,
operate, alter, repair, inspect, protect, remove, and replace certain natural gas line
improvements, upon and across the public right of way known as Brookway Drive in
Albemarle County, Virginia, and more particularly described as follows:
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 14)
Permanent natural gas line easement in the public right of way known as
Brookway Drive, located off Rio Road in Albemarle County, Virginia, as
shown on the attached plat of the City of Charlottesville Gas Division,
dated February 29, 2000, and identified as "A 15.0' Wide Easement for a
2" P.E. Gas Line"; said roadway being dedicated to the public by
recordation of a plat dated February 1, 1974, of record in the Albemarle
County Circuit Court Clerk's Office in Deed Book 546, page 272.
The GRANTEE reserves unto itself, its successors and assigns, all of the
aforementioned rights until such time as the Virginia Department of Transportation has
issued a permit to the GRANTEE subject to the following two conditions which shall also
be covenants running with the land:
1. That the above-described improvements of the GRANTEE may continue to
occupy such street or highway in the existing condition and location.
2. The GRANTEE shall at all times indemnify and save harmless the County of
Albemarle, its employees, agents, and officers from any claim whatsoever arising from
GRANTEE'S exercise of rights or privileges stated herein.
3. In the event GRANTOR shall hereafter require, for its purposes, that GRANTEE
alter, change, adjust, or relocate the above-mentioned improvements, across or under
such street or highway, the nonbetterment cost only of such alteration, change,
adjustment, or relocation will be the responsibility of the GRANTEE.
This deed is exempt from state recordation taxes imposed by Virginia Code
''
58.1-801 and 58.1-802, pursuant to Virginia Code 58.1-811(A)(3) and 58.1-811(C)(3).
''
The City of Charlottesville, acting by and through its City Manager or his designee,
duly authorized by resolution of the City Council of the City of Charlottesville, does hereby
accept the conveyance of this easement, pursuant to Virginia Code 15.2-1803, as
'
evidenced by signature hereto and the City's recordation of this deed.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the GRANTOR has caused its name to be signed
hereto and its seal to be affixed and attested by its appropriate officers, all after due
authorization, on the day and year first above written.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 12. Presentation by Dr. Frank Friedman, President PVCC.
Dr. Friedman thanked the Board for its continuing support of the College. He introduced Mr. Fred
Copeland and Mr. Chuck Gross who serve as Albemarle County representatives on the Piedmont
Community College Board. The other representatives, Mr. Clark Jackson and Mr. John Davidson could not
be present together. He said these are excellent Board members.
Dr. Friedman said there has been a tremendous growth in enrollment. The 1999-2000 year had
the largest enrollment of any year in the history of the college. Each new semester sets another record.
He said the 2000 fall session will set a record by having over 4500 students, with over 2000 full-time
equivalents. Enrollment growth is good for the college. Part of the mission of a community college is to
bring individuals into higher education.
Dr. Friedman said one-third of PVCCs students are from Albemarle County. In 1999-2000, 7367
=
students were enrolled in credit courses. There were 2441 from Albemarle County. That represents 3.1
percent of all the Countys residents. The state average is between 2.0 and 2.5 percent. Of all County
=
residents attending colleges and universities in Virginia, 51.3 percent are enrolled at PVCC. Of all County
high school graduates in 1999, 22.9 percent enrolled at PVCC immediately.
Dr. Friedman said the college has continued its contract training work with companies and business
in the area and in the County. Last year two new work force programs were begun, one in bio-technology
and one in surgical technology. There were 50 students in the introductory course for bio-technology in that
first year, 15 of whom went into the advanced course. Another 15 needed additional preparatory work.
These 15 are still students at PVCC, but are not yet ready for the advanced course. There was one person
who graduated recently who immediately received two job offers. The first class in surgical technology has
10 individuals enrolled; that is as many people as can be taken into a single class.
Dr. Friedman mentioned the Grove Street Technology Center. He said there will be three
instructional spaces in that facility. One is a lab space to handle the two programs outlined above. Then
there will be two, 25-station computer labs in the facility. PVCC cannot handle on campus the demand for
computer technology courses. This center will allow them to have the labs, move some of their corporate
training into the facility, as well as serving some of the residents in the area.
Dr. Friedman said that last year, PVCC completed a Strategic Plan. Twenty-two initiatives were
developed which are very important to the future of the college. He mentioned three of those initiatives.
One of those is taking education to the people to make it more accessible. At Albemarle High School this
fall, they have 28 classes taking place in the evening. With 20 students per class, that is over 500 students
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 15)
this semester alone. At Western Albemarle, they have the first dual-enrollment class. A high school
student can take a class at his/her school during the day taught by a high school teacher who is qualified by
PVCC standards. The course earns graduation credits toward high school, but also earns college credit.
That student will have three college credits when they graduate. The best part is that it does not cost the
student or parent any money. It also costs the school nothing. He believes a student might be able to
graduate from high school with as many as 15 credits which will be fully transferrable to any
college/university.
Dr. Friedman said another part of taking education to the people has to do with technology. This is
the first time they have offered ten courses entirely on the Internet (they have enrolled 90 students and 25
of them are Albemarle County residents), or using technology which is like a two-way audio/video
conference scene (compressed video) where the faculty member might be at PVCC and the student could
be at any place which is outfitted with the same equipment. They hear and see each other, and interact
live. He said that as technology advances, it will be easier to bring this directly to the persons computer
=
desktop rather than to a classroom setting. This is called the Extended Learning Institute. They see this as
a key initiative for the future. If anyone wanted to expand the use of compressed video, this technology
could be set up in community centers or any appropriate type facility in the County. It is being done in
Fluvanna, Greene and Nelson counties. The appropriate equipment is being installed in schools in those
counties as part of the Blue Ridge Governors School. PVCC will offer courses during the day to high
=
school students, and dual-enrollment courses using that technology, and then the facility will be opened at
night to other residents. That starts in January, 2001. The equipment is being installed at this time.
Dr. Friedman said another second initiative has to do with work force development. There are two
approaches which are important. At this time they are working with banks on financial services, retail
management and they have a program at State Farm Insurance. One approach to work force
development is having the right program matched to employer need. For the long-term, they need to work
better with CATEC and with the public schools to insure that individuals are being informed about the
programs, making it possible for those individuals to have a smooth transition from high school to college.
They are trying to work with the I.T. Academy to develop it better in terms of a linkage. In the future, they
may work on an allied health academy.
Dr. Friedman said he is on the Workforce Investment Act. A centerpiece of that activity will be a
one-stop career center. It will offer counseling and assistance. It will also link people with training and
employers.
Dr. Friedmen said PVCC needs to do a better job with its students, and will start a career services
office on campus to better link students with knowledge of local companies and opportunities. Lastly, with
the enrollment increase, the buildings and grounds of PVCC are taking a beating. The building is 27 years
old and shows it. They have almost $2.0 million to do a renovation of the building. That amount is
insufficient for the need. New furnishings and equipment are needed, and the $2.0 million is just for
construction. Through the PVCC Foundation, they will be raising funds. They may also seek support from
the jurisdictions.
Dr. Friedman then distributed some materials which showed much more detail. He offered to
answer questions.
Mr. Dorrier asked if the County can do anything to encourage the placement of long-distance
learning centers in the County. Dr. Friedman said he would be happy to discuss that with the Supervisors
individually, or continue discussions with any of PVCCs educational partners. It is not likely that PVCC
=
would initiate anything for certain locations. It would only be done in conjunction with the Board. The other
counties worked mainly through the funding they received from the Blue Ridge Governor's School, which
made it possible for them to acquire the equipment needed for that Compressed Video Instruction.
Ms. Thomas asked if PVCC looks into salaries which will probably be paid to students in the
programs. Dr. Friedman said there are some employment areas where the employers are requiring
college-level work and/or an associate degree, but the pay scale is not commensurate with that type or
preparation. PVCC has to be careful not to put its eggs into that basket. If PVCC is going to invest in
A@
equipment and programs, it wants to know that at the end of the programs, the students will receive a wage
that is appropriate for that level of education. Otherwise, there might be an influx of students at the start of
the program who upon completion only receive $8.00/hour for an associate degree, then the word will get
out, and the source of students will dry up quickly. They have to be careful when starting a new program to
take that into consideration.
Mr. Martin thanked Dr. Friedman for the report.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 13. Sheriff's Request for Additional Part-time Funds, Discussion of.
Mr. Tucker said Sheriff Robb has requested $40,000 in additional part-time funds in the current
budget. In considering the request, staff felt it would be helpful if the Sheriff provided additional information.
He believes the Sheriff will provide that information this morning.
Sheriff Robb said the Department is doing well. He has reviewed mandated tasks of the office
having to do with the transport of prisoners and mental patients, courtroom security, and expedient delivery
of business-oriented delivery of civil process. After doing that, the operation of the office has been
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 16)
revamped. Study of safety and security of the courtroom revealed surprising results. There was a metal
detector in the J&D Court and no one was manning it. Nationwide, it has been agreed that the J&D court is
the most dangerous. Now, the metal detector is being manned all the time that the court is in session.
They have moved 1116 prisoners just since June throughout the entire court system. The J&D Building
was never designed to be a court, so that complicates security factors. They now have cameras in the cell
blocks on the first floor, and that has helped some. He still must have one deputy moving prisoners from
upstairs to downstairs, and then transporting them to various facilities. He said there is a need to have
someone man the metal detector, and two bailiffs in the courtroom, essentially five days a week.
Sheriff Robb said a metal detector will soon be hooked up in the General District Courtroom, but he
has no one to operate the detector during criminal trails on Wednesdays and Thursdays in that court.
Judge Steve Helvin will be leaving the bench later this year. By his own admission, he is not interested in
security at all, but is interested in moving that courtroom. He moves more than 300 people through that
court in one day. There must be deputies handling all of that movement. There will be a change when the
new judge takes office, and he will request better security than what is presently being provided.
Sheriff Robb said he is embarrassed by the fact that his office cannot provide better security. He is
expecting an increase in the need for security during high traffic periods. There will not be a need for
someone all of the time. He said that for some reason, they are getting more civil process papers to deliver
than ever before. He believes this may have occurred because those papers were not correct in the past.
Now, every paper coming in is stamped for the date, entered into the computer, and is routed to the
deputies, so they know how many papers are on hand, and how many papers have gone out at any given
time. He thanked the Board and the Executive staff for the help they provided in giving equipment. He said
there were no computers in the Sheriffs Office before, but they have computers now. Every deputy has
=
access to a computer, and he personally uses a computer. He said they are doing a better job of tracking,
but every paper coming in takes five minutes, and looking at the fact that they are getting 30,000 papers, it
is a 10.5 hour day for office staff to just handle papers.
Sheriff Robb said the transport process for mental patients, where only one deputy was used in the
past, has been changed to use two deputies for that transport. They also use two deputies to transport
juveniles from the Detention Home in Staunton.
Sheriff Robb said he thinks the budget left him short of two deputies. He is asking for part-time
money because it is more cost-efficient to pay part-time employees than to pay overtime for full-time
employees. He does not have the manpower to allow for compensatory time. He is asking for a pool of
funds to be used judicially to fund a part-time position to help during the peak periods in the courts, and so
his office can provide security, and to help during peak periods in the office concerning service of papers.
Mr. Dorrier asked if for certain events (such as the Foxfield Races), compensation is paid by the
event itself. He also inquired about helping at University football games. Sheriff Robb said the help at the
University is contractual overtime. However, if working outside of the Foxfield grounds, that is plain overtime
which is charged against his budget. Inside of the Foxfield grounds, that is contractual overtime, and the
County charges them.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the Sheriffs office has volunteers. Sheriff Robb said he has 40
=
professionally-trained volunteers. He has no idea how many hours are put in by the volunteers, including
those working on hunting. He said the Board gave him $15,000 to help fund the hunting program. Mr.
Bowerman asked if the Sheriff needed someone in the courtroom, and there was no one on staff who could
work that shift, if he could call in a member of the auxiliary who is fully-trained, but not paid. Sheriff Robb
said that is right, but those people have other jobs.
Ms. Thomas said staff had drafted a good list of questions requesting additional information.
However, the Board does not have the answers.
Mr. Martin suggested that the answers be forwarded to the Board so they have a week to study
them, and then put this request on the consent agenda at another meeting.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 14. Additional Registrar Staffing, Discussion of.
(Note: At 11:50 a.m., Mr. Bowerman left the room.)
Mr. Jim Murray said he is the Chairman of the Electoral Board. He introduced Ms. June Knight and
Mr. Al Archer, the other members of the Board. He said the Electoral Board is requesting that a full-time
staff position be funded to take on the responsibilities formerly performed by Mr. Cliff Anderson in his home
office. The cost for the position for eight months, assuming the position could not be hired under November
1, would be approximately $20,700, including benefits. The ongoing annual costs of the position will be
approximately $31,000. He said that after this falls presidential election, will be next years redistricting. A
==
minimum of four precincts will be split or significantly modified. Several new polling places will need to be
identified and coordinated. An anticipated 25,000 to 30,000 voters will experience some sort of legislative
change. There will be a board of supervisors election in the year 2001, so they are on the fast track for all
A@
of these changes. Intensive work on redistricting will need to be addressed immediately following this
Novembers elections. (Note: See list of duties of the Electoral Board and the General Registrar, which is
=
on file in the Clerks Office.)
=
Mr. Murray said there is a candidate waiting for this position as Assistant to the Electoral Board, Mr.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 17)
Preston Banks. He just graduated from the University of Virginia with a B.A. in Government and Foreign
Affairs. He wrote a dissertation on voting and election laws with a focus on Virginia politics. He is fluent in
Spanish and proficient in Microsoft Office 1997-2000. He offered to answer questions.
(Note: At 11:53 a.m., Mr. Bowerman returned to the room.)
Ms. Humphris said she felt the report furnished to the Board was excellent. Mr. Murray said they
have an excellent registrar.
Mr. Dorrier said he noticed that since the Registrars Office moved, it has been hard to locate and
=
there has been no publicity about the new location. Mr. Murray said there was some publicity about the
move. There may be another registration site in the County Office Building if they can get the needed office
space. All locations have to cleared by the Justice Department.
Mr. Martin asked the Boards thinking about this request. Motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman,
=
seconded by Ms. Humphris, to fund the request. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
Mr. Tucker said the actual appropriation will be put on the October 18 meeting for approval.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 15. Voting Credentials for VACO.
Mr. Tucker said the Board must designate a member to vote for the Board at the Annual VACo
meeting.
Mr. Martin asked if the same people will serve again this year.
Ms. Humphris said the person must stay until Tuesday when votes are taken. She plans to stay as
she will stand for reelection as Director of Region Four.
Mr. Bowerman suggested appointing Ms. Humphris as that individual. He volunteered to be the
alternate. Mr. Dorrier seconded the motion. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following
recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 16. Closed Session: Legal and Personnel Matters. At 12:00 p.m., motion was
made by Mr. Bowerman that the Board go into Closed Session pursuant to Section 2.1-344(A) of the Code
of Virginia under Subsection (1) to consider appointments to boards and commissions; under Subsection
(3) to consider the acquisition of properties for school sites and other public uses; and, under Subsection (7)
to consult with legal counsel and staff regarding pending litigation relating to the Ivy Landfill and regarding
probable litigation relating to other property. The motion was seconded by Ms. Humphris.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 17. Certify Closed Session. The Board returned to open session at 1:45 p.m.
Motion was immediately offered by Mr. Bowerman that the Board certify by a recorded vote that to
the best of each Board members knowledge only public business matters lawfully exempted from the open
=
meeting requirements of the Virginia Freedom of Information Act and identified in the motion authorizing the
closed session were heard, discussed or considered in the closed session.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Humphris. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 18a. School Board Presentation.
Mr. Stephen Koleszar was present to make the presentation. He said the most important thing
taking place during the summer was the School Board setting its School Board/Superintendent Priorities.
He said this document gives the thrust of what the Division wants to accomplish over the next two years. He
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 18)
noted the following priorities. They have set for Standards of Accreditation that all schools will be
accredited by the year 2002. The rising freshman class will be the first class to be under the guidelines for
the new standards of accreditation. They are committed to having all of these freshmen succeed and
graduate under the new criteria.
Mr. Koleszar said another goal to work on is academic progress for high achieving students. The
standards of accreditation are minimum standards. They want to be sure that all students achieve to their
full ability. They are also working on areas of school climate. They have an Equity and Diversity Committee
working. The School Board will also go through equity and diversity training in the next few months. They
will be working to eliminate the gap between minority and white performance in standardized tests, and also
for students in the free and reduced lunch program.
Mr. Koleszar said there will be an audit of middle school programs. In working on staff
development, they have created a Leadership Academy where the principals for the next generation can be
trained.
Mr. Koleszar said those are some of the highlights, but the document is with the materials he
handed to the Board members this morning. He invited them to read it carefully. He said that each year it
is said that the opening of school is becoming easier. They have worked hard to be sure the teachers are
ready to go on the first day of school so that no time is wasted. This year, enrollment was under projections
by 177 students. Because enrollment is down, the Schools will receive less funding from the State, but in
the reverse, less staffing is needed. In the net, there will probably be a reduction in costs. He said they had
to hire a large number of teachers this year. The System had 160 teachers leave this year which
necessitated this hiring. He noted that there are 94 beginning teachers among these hires, many more
beginning teachers than are usually hired. He said in the competitive pool for teachers, there is not the
same pool that they had to choose from in prior years.
Mr. Dorrier asked if this will be the same prediction for next year. Mr. Koleszar said he does
anticipate the number of teachers leaving the system to increase, but it is a number they cannot project at
this time. A lot of things have been put into place to support the beginning teachers.
Mr. Bowerman said the School Board is usually very close on its enrollment projections. He asked
if the difference is spread out over all of the grades. Mr. Koleszar said the overall numbers are fairly
consistent, but it is erratic from school to school. It is very hard to predict. He said that this year the
principals staffed to their enrollment, rather than to projections, so there are no cases where a school is
over staffed.
Mr. Koleszar noted that the School Board has been reviewing Burley Middle School and has
concluded that it can be renovated and be a successful middle school. The building has storage, it is a very
solid building, so should last for a number of years. With the renovations and expansion, the school will be
comparable to the other middle schools. They will be taking a final vote on this project next month.
Mr. Koleszar said the School Board has looked at staffs proposed capital improvement projects.
=
The projects are based on projected revenues, but this caused a couple of projects to be pushed into future
years. Also, some maintenance projects had to be put off. Staff will rework this list into a needs list, and
A@
the School Board will then decide which projects can be deferred and which will be requested of the Board
of Supervisors.
Mr. Koleszar said for the new Northern Elementary School, they have set up a redistricting time line
and are now soliciting input into the naming of the new school.
Ms. Thomas said in reference to the number of teachers leaving, she knows exit interviews are
optional so it is not always known why they leave. She recently spoke with some parents and teachers and
was amazed at the poor morale of some of the teachers. She said that affects retention drastically. She
hopes the School Board is working on retention methods by polling the teachers to see what is important to
them. She is frustrated because she feels there are many things that could be done along those lines. Dr.
Castner said they would be interested in suggestions. The entry-level salary, which has been bumped up
A
somewhat is still behind that of Charlottesville and Fluvanna County. The upper end of the teacher scale
@
has not been added to due to budget constraints. The gap in salaries with those in Northern Virginia is
about $10,000. The morale issue came about because of the teachers at the upper end of the scale. That
can only be solved if the scale itself is changed. They are concerned because those are the teachers who
are leaving.
Ms. Thomas suggested polling the teachers for suggestions as to what would make their job more
nearly bearable. Sometimes, it is just time constraints. Dr. Castner said being a teacher now is harder with
the accountability of the Virginia testing system. In some schools, the populations are not all the same, so
the kids are harder to teach. The professionalism of the teachers in wanting to do well, as well as the
School Board having ambitious goals to get all schools accredited, is creating tension here and throughout
the Commonwealth. He believes the goal of the School Board is a worthy one.
Mr. Dorrier asked if exit interviews are held with each teacher. Dr. Castner said no; they do
A@
selective interviews. They don't have time to interview all those who leave.
Mr. Bowerman asked if teachers are concerned that they are being held to the same standard even
when some school populations are different, but the expectations are the same. He asked if there were
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 19)
more teachers leaving those schools. Dr. Castner said he does not know that to be true. If a teacher in one
school has only two students who are below grade level in reading, and another teacher has seven
students in the same position, that will cause that one teacher to put forth more effort. A few years ago that
was addressed by differentiating staffing and funding to help those teachers, and there were resources
allocated toward certain areas where that might happen. There have been some excellent results where
that was done, but they are still working on this problem.
Mr. Martin said he has had many teachers tell him the SOL's put an incredible amount of pressure
on them. Whether that is good or bad, that is not known yet. It did reek havoc with their lives. Mr.
Bowerman said there is a variable there, and that is the children.
Mr. Dorrier asked if there are any plans this year to participate in the Governor's Virtual School. Mr.
Koleszar said the Governors School has been having many problems. It is probably good that Albemarle
=
County did not get into the school this year. He hopes that as they develop their curriculum, the County will
participate. Mr. Dorrier asked about long-distance learning. Mr. Koleszar said they do a lot of long-distance
learning, usually with the gifted students at the high schools taking classes over the Internet.
Mr. Martin said he would like to acknowledge that there are three other School Board members in
the audience, as well as the Assistant Superintendent.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 18. Appointments.
Ms. Thomas moved the following appointments:
For the Joint Airport Commission, reappoint Mr. Michael R. Matthews, Jr. for a new term to begin
on December 1, 2000, and expire on December 1, 2003.
For the Equalization Board to represent the Samuel Miller District, reappoint Mr. W. Ivar Mawyer for
a term to begin January 1, 2001, and expire on December 31, 2001.
For the Housing Committee, reappoint Ms. Betty Via, Mr. Nick Munger and Ms. Dolly Prenzel for
terms to begin on January 1, 2001, and expire on December 31, 2003.
For the Jail Authority, reappoint Sheriff Ed Robb for a term to begin on January 1, 2001, and expire
on December 31, 2001.
For the Public Recreational Facilities Authority, reappoint Mr. Richard G. Piccolo, Mr. G. David
Emmitt and Mr. Christopher J. Robinette for new terms to begin on December 14, 2000, and end on
December 13, 2003; and to reappoint Mr. John E. Davidson for a new term to begin on December 14,
2000, and end on December 13, 2002;
For the Rivanna Solid Waste Authority (RSWA) Citizens Advisory Committee, reappoint Ms. Leslie
Reed for a new term which begins on January 1, 2001, and expires on December 31, 2002.
For the Thomas Jefferson Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Council, reappoint Mr. Patrick F.
Cornell to a new term which begins on January 1, 2001, and ends on December 31, 2003.
At Mr. Martins request, for the Industrial Development Authority to represent the Rivanna District,
=
appoint Ms. Ellora Young to replace Mr. Ken Clarry, term to expire on January 19, 2002.
At Mr. Martins request, for the Equalization Board to represent the Rivanna District, reappoint Ms.
=
Tracey Corea to a new term to begin on January 1, 2001, and expire on December 31, 2001.
The motion was seconded by Ms. Humphris. Roll was called, and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 19. Financial Advisors, Presentation by.
Mr. Tucker said at the May 3 meeting of the Board, the financial advisors, Davenport & Company,
presented the first phase of their work for the County. That was an overview of Albemarles financial
=
position relative to other AAA or AA localities throughout Virginia. That presentation was a prelude to the
second phase of their work which was to develop a capital financing plan within agreed upon financial
parameters. That data has been complied, and Mr. Jamie Traudt and Mr. Courtney Rogers will present
that second phase at todays meeting. After hearing the presentation, staff requests direction from the
=
Board as to the preferred capital financing plan. The proposed plan will be used by the Capital
Improvement Program Technical Review Team in their work on the FY 02 to FY 06 Capital Improvement
>>
Program (CIP).
Mr. Traudt said since the May 3 meeting, they have prepared three additional pieces of information.
He will review the Countys existing debt policy guidelines, an evaluation of the Countys debt capacity, and
==
address the issue of the affordability of the Countys capital improvement program.
=
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 20)
The first debt policy is that Net debt as a percentage of the estimated market value of taxable
A
property should not exceed two percent. They recommend no change in that policy.
@
The next policy concerns the Fund Balance as a percentage of revenue. The policy states: The
A
Undesignated Fund Balance, plus the designation for fiscal cash liquidity purposes, at the close of each
fiscal year should be equal to no less than ten percent of the Countys total operating budget. They are
=@
recommending that the ten percent be changed to eight percent, and that the term total operating budget
A@
be clarified to include the General Fund plus the School Fund. He said when looking at the bigger budget,
that will reflect the overall growth in the Countys financial needs and is a more appropriate target, and it will
=
not result in any change at the present time. At the end of each fiscal year, they will identify where the
County should be in order to have sufficient reserves to meet needs on an ongoing basis. That number will
grow as the overall budget grows. In the past, it has been defined as ten percent of the total operating
budget. Eight percent of the combination works out to about the same requirement.
Ms. Thomas said the chart shows that it is at about 12 percent right now. Why is it better to have it
at eight percent than at 12 percent? Mr. Traudt said they are setting a floor in terms of what the minimum
should be. Eight percent is as low as it should go. This does not represent a fundamental change. In the
future if the budget grows faster overall, the number will increase slightly. There would then be money at
the end of the year going toward increasing the fund balance.
Mr. Traudt said the third guideline is Debt Service as a Percentage of Revenues. The current
policy states: The ratio of debt service expenditures to General Fund revenues should not exceed ten
A
percent. They are recommending that the word General Fund Revenues be changed to General Fund
@A@A
and the School Fund Revenues. He said this reflects the overall size of the budget rather than just the
@
General Fund. This is important since the Schools are such a large portion of both the operating and the
capital budget. This is not saying there should be a ten percent debt service, only that the overall ceiling
should be no more than ten percent of the overall budget. That is a ceiling the County could bump up
A
against over the next decade.
@
The fourth guideline is Debt Per Capita. The current policy reads: Net debt per capita should
A
remain under $1000. They recommend that this guideline be deleted. It is not necessary since debt will
@
be regulated by Debt Service as a Percentage of Revenues guideline. In Albemarle County, the economy
has been growing faster than the population. As a result, this is a guideline which acts as an inhibitor, when
in fact debt service as a percentage of revenuesis the inhibitor.
A@
The last policy is the Capital Reserve Policy. They recommend that contributions be made to the
Capital Reserve periodically to provide flexibility in meeting debt service and capital requirements and to
mitigate tax rate increases related to future capital projects. This is a general recommendation, but by
putting aside some money it gives the County flexibility and will allow it to do more things in the future. Ms.
Thomas asked if there were any recommendation as to the amount this should be. Mr. Traudt said no.
A@
They are not making any recommendation as to the previous policy of setting aside three percent for capital
purposes.
Mr. Traudt said they are looking for alternatives, and in order to evaluate the debt capacity and
affordability of the Capital Improvement Plan over a ten-year time frame, it is necessary to make certain
assumptions about the growth rate, and the economy. Debt capacity is the theoretical ability to issue debt
within a set of reasonable guidelines. Affordability is what can actually be paid out of the budget. The
assumptions they have used are fairly conservative compared to what has actually taken place during the
last five years. Even if they changed all of the assumptions (population, valuation, income, expenditures) by
a modest amount, it would not influence the ultimate conclusions of this analysis.
Mr. Traudt said the consultants knew in May that the County had significant, unfunded capital
projects that have been identified for the next ten years. That number is over $100.0 million. If funding is to
be provided for additional capital projects, the money will have to come from one of three sources. The first
source is to divert funds from the current operating budget to the capital budget. That is not an option the
consultants considered, nor one that is being recommended. The second source of revenue is to increase
revenue by increasing taxes. The third option is to shift a small portion of the future growth in the budget
from the operating side to the capital side in order to gradually increase funding for capital projects. This is
the alternative that is being recommended to the Board today.
Mr. Traudt mentioned the following assumptions. The first is the tax rate. They have assumed
there will be no change in the current tax rate over the next ten years. That is not a guarantee, but they
assumed that the tax rate will not change. The second assumption is that the operating budget will grow at
a rate of one-half of one percent per year less than the growth in revenue. The one-half of one percent
difference will be shifted to the capital side of the budget. By doing that, it builds up the ability to fund future
projects. If this course were pursued, the Countys maximum debt capacity would reach $218.0 million of
=
new debt over the course of the next ten years. That money would be available to fund capital projects
either through debt service or pay as you go funding.
A@
Mr. Traudt referred the Board to Page 9 of the handout, Debt Capacity Alternative-Case 1. He said
that debt capacity and pay as you go gets the County to $264.0 million, which is the current sum of all
A@
capital projects which have been identified. Ms. Thomas asked how the consultants made the assumptions
shown on this chart. Mr. Traudt said they tried to determine the Countys maximum debt capacity. In doing
=
so, they assumed that a certain portion of funds available for capital would always go into pay-as-you-go
A@
funding, and the balance would go into debt service. There is about $35.0 million of pay-as-you-go
A@
funding shown on the chart, or $4.5 million per year and the balance of the funding is debt capacity. This
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 21)
also assumes retirement of debt. At the end of year 2010, new debt is up $218.0 million for the ten-year
time frame, adding the pay-as-you-go portion gets to $264.0 million which represents all of the capital
A@
projects which are outstanding.
Mr. Traudt referred the Board to Page 10, Debt as a Percentage of Market Value. It starts at less
than 1.0 percent and goes a little above 1.5 percent which is a little higher than the AAA average statewide,
but it is still under the two percent guideline the County established. On Page 11 is Debt Service as a
Percent of Expenditures. This ratio approaches the ten percent mark over the ten-year period. This
number grows to a point which is in excess of either the statewide averages for either AA or AAA
jurisdictions. This is basically where the County has done about as much as it could do under these
guidelines. On Page 12 is Debt Per Capita. That number increases dramatically. When they looked at
some of the numbers in May, one of the ratios was always a little out of line, and that is debt per capita. If
the County actually brought on an additional $218.0 million of debt over the next ten years, given the growth
assumptions, the debt per capita number is very high. It does not mean the County cannot afford to fund
that amount of debt provided it chooses to dedicate the resources to do so.
Mr. Traudt said Page 13 shows Debt as a Percentage of Personal Income. The County is slightly
above the statewide averages for AAA jurisdictions, but it is substantially below the statewide AA average.
So, when debt is measured against the wealth of the community, it is much in line with the averages. He
said that is all the information they had prepared for Case I of the Debt Capacity Analysis.
Mr. Traudt said that Case 2 - Debt Capacity Alternative, assumes that revenue and the operating
budget will grow at the same rate of seven percent. In this case, debt capacity over that same ten-year time
frame would be about $112.0 million, which is illustrated on Page 15. Ms. Thomas asked where any debt
money would come from. Mr. Traudt said it would only come from the money that is currently allocated to
that purpose, and the growth of that portion of the budget. Mr. Bowerman asked if the Board could hold a
referendum. Mr. Traudt said no, this is saying that the only dollars going to fund debt would be the $9.0
A@
million per year which is the amount currently being used to service debt. That would create over ten years
about $112.0 million. That $112.0 million would be the debt capacity if budgetary discipline is not exercised.
On the chart on page 15, another $45.0 million could be added for pay-as-you-go projects.
A@
Mr. Traudt said that on Page 16 (Debt Capacity Alternative - Case 3) they had added one additional
piece of information. If the goal is to get to the same $218.0 million of debt capacity, and the revenue and
operating budget grew at the same seven percent rate, it would cause a tax rate increase of five cents in
2005, and another five-cent tax increase in 2007 in order to generate enough additional dollars to get back
to the $218.0 million total debt capacity over the ten-year time frame.
Mr. Traudt said the chart on Page 17 (Debt Capacity Alternative - Case 4) shows what would
happen if the tax rate were dropped by one cent. Debt capacity would then drop by $9.0 million over the
ten-year period.
Mr. Traudt said all of the cases are summarized on Page 18. Case 1 generates a total funding
capacity of about $268.0 million, the key being the one-half a percent differential in the rates shown for
revenue growth and operating budget. Case 2 showed a reduced funding capacity. Debt is reduced to
$112.0 million. This is where revenue growth and the operating budget both grow at seven percent. Case
3 is the five-cent tax increase in 2004 and 2007 which gets back to the same $268.0 million without shifting
any dollars in the operating budget. Case 4 shows the impact of a reduction by a penny. Case 1 is
basically the concept of shifting a small amount of future growth in the operating budget to capital. This
results in a significant increase in capital funding without building in a planned tax increase. That is the
approach being recommended for consideration today.
Mr. Traudt said additional considerations are listed on Page 19. First is that all of the numbers in
the report are based on assumptions, therefore, growth assumptions may not be realized, and the numbers
will change. For planning purposes, they believe these are a reasonable set of assumptions.
Mr. Dorrier asked if the assumptions for the years five to ten years away are more likely to be wrong
than the assumptions for the next couple of years. Mr. Traudt said it is more likely that the assumptions for
the out years would change.
Mr. Dorrier asked if there are any guidelines set out for accounting work to deal with the accuracy
of the assumptions. Mr. Traudt said those asked to perform future analyses do not have a crystal ball in
terms of guaranteeing the accuracy of those assumptions. They tried to use both reasonable and
conservative assumptions so they do not expect to see a significant downside from the information they are
generating. They do recognize that they can't control the economy of Albemarle County.
Mr. Dorrier said a seven-percent growth rate is being presumed. Mr. Traudt said that over a ten-
year time frame, to believe that a 9.8 percent growth rate would continue, would be a rather aggressive
assumption. They are more comfortable backing that assumption down somewhat. If it continues to grow
at that rate, the analysis would be adjusted, and it would mean more dollars, and probably more projects.
Mr. Traudt said the second caveat is that the reduced operating expenditure growth (6.5%) does
not imply that all additional costs in the next five to ten years can be absorbed without a tax increase. It
means that if the assumptions are realized, and the one-half of one percent is shifted, and if the growth in
the operating budget can be controlled, there are sufficient dollars to gradually increase capital funding to
get closer to the objectives.
Mr. Traudt said point three is that additional operating costs associated with new capital projects,
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 22)
i.e., firefighters, school openings, juvenile detention, etc. have not been included in this analysis. These
may require additional revenues over the projected 6.5 percent. They did not attempt to analyze all of the
projects and all of the operating costs associated with those projects.
Mr. Traudt said that point four is that there are limitations on making ten-year projections for both
revenues and expenditures. They are only based on what is known or thought today.
Mr. Martin said he believes it is worthwhile to take serious exception to point #3. He thinks it is
significant to note that firefighters, school openings and juvenile detention have not been included in this
analysis. Ms. Thomas agreed. He thanked Mr. Traudt for the presentation.
Mr. Tucker said staff is just beginning review of the capital improvement program with the CIP
Technical Committee. Any guidance that can be given that committee will be a tremendous help. Also, the
first part of the presentation dealt with policies. If the Board is comfortable with those policy changes, it
would be helpful for staff to know that as soon as possible. He said if the Board wants to discuss any one of
these scenarios further, staff will schedule that item on an agenda.
Mr. Bowerman asked why the consultants had not looked at point #3 in this analysis. Mr. Traudt
said they looked at no specific projects. They were only asked to look at the Countys ability to fund capital
=
projects in the aggravate.
Mr. Bowerman said it is clear that if a level of $218.0 million in new debt were reached, the
operating needs associated with that number would not be six and one-half percent growth. Mr. Traudt
referred the Board members to Page 8 (Cumulative Growth in Operating Budget - Case 1). He believes Mr.
Bowerman is asking how much of the operating expenditures shown will be necessary to fund the
inflationary aspects of current services being provided, and how much of it will be available to fund the
operating side of new projects. He said they dont have an answer to that question.
=
Mr. Bowerman said that theoretically on Page 8, the growth in operating costs associated with the
increase in debt (assuming zero inflation) should be enough to cover current debt, plus the new debt and
the operating costs associated with that debt. What it does not take into account is deviations in the inflation
rate and deviations in the way this Board chooses to fund the operating budget. Mr. Tucker said that is
correct.
Mr. Bowerman said a question the Board will be asked is, if the economy is growing at a rate of 2.5
to 3.0 percent, why is the County growing at 7.0 percent, and assuming that it will grow at 10.0 percent on
both the revenue and expenditure side to fund all of these new facilities. Leaving the tax rate alone, the
Board is going to get kicked around answering that question.
Ms. Thomas referred to Page 7 and asked why a seven percent revenue growth was assumed.
She said the County has not met the services needed each year, nor the State mandates at a seven-
percent growth in the last years. That figure was at 9.8 percent (Page 6). Something drastic would have to
change.
Mr. Martin said the Board has a proposal before it, and he thinks it is up to the Board to now give
staff some directions as to whether it accepts the recommendations to change the policies a little. He
assumes the Board members would like to move forward with Case 1. Mr. Bowerman said this is new
information and he would like to reserve judgment, and not sign off on it today. He asked that it be put back
on the agenda at another meeting. It was the consensus to put this on next week's agenda for a Board
decision.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 20. QUIP Update by Kirk Dewyea, Quality Improvement Coordinator.
Mr. Tucker said, as an organization, the County is focused on the quality and the efficiency of the
operation, and the effectiveness of its outcomes. Those outcomes guide many of the processes including
budgeting. Several Board members have suggested that performance budgeting be considered as a
standard operating procedure. The type of approach that will be gone through today, and which will occur
in the future, will help move in that direction and allow staff to prioritize needs, set goals and evaluate efforts
in an objective way.
He said the Board has heard about some pieces of this quality effort as staff has begun new
initiatives. This afternoon he wants to give the Board a comprehensive look at how quality improvement
and performance excellence have been integrated into work processes, and how those efforts will be
accelerated by moving performance efforts to the forefront.
Mr. Tucker said in the 1990's, policies were adopted to take deliberate steps toward services,
establish a quality council and goal themes, develop training and leadership, customer service and teams,
develop a strategic plan, a mission statement, organizational goals, and empower teams at all levels of the
organization to make improvements and changes in services. Examples are: In 1995 a comprehensive
customer satisfaction survey that measured citizen awareness of and satisfaction of County programs and
services was completed; a three-year assessment and improvement program of all County parks was
completed; a strategic plan for a continuously-improved process was completed; and a multi-disciplinary
neighborhood team to work with residents on a variety of issues was created, particularly for the Esmont
and Greenwood areas. There was a comprehensive employment training program, there was an advanced
leadership institute, and new employee orientation was improved. Internally, the Engineering Department
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 23)
took on the task of using its own employees to manage construction tasks. Finally, Kirk Dewyea was hired
as the Quality/Performance Coordinator, and he is conducting a program of studies on quality
improvement.
Mr. Tucker said Local Government has dedicated itself to important philosophies as to how it does
business and how it works with the citizens. This is an organization which desires to set and achieve high
standards. It is an organization with dedicated and loyal employees who take pride in what they do, who are
committed to excellence, and who have a sincere and strong desire to provide the best service to the
citizens, and who have the confidence to work in teams to achieve goals. Having adopted these policies,
the organization is faced with the challenge of keeping performance efforts moving forward. The
organization must assess itself and examine questions (see page 4 of handout).
Mr. Tucker said as the organization moves to a higher level of accountability and performance
excellence, certain organizational realities must be recognized and put into place. There is no substitute for
leadership judgement, commitment and involvement. Improvements must focus on processes, and not
people. Performance excellence is a continuous pursuit. Management will be by fact, focusing on results
and creating value. The organization will be measured continually based on high standards (the Baldridge
Criteria).
Mr. Tucker said he will ask Mr. Dewyea to explain the Baldridge Criteria. He said this is something
that business is using, and Chesterfield County has recently decided to use this process.
Mr. Dewyea said Albemarle County will be on the front edge of a movement to evaluate itself using
the Baldridge Criteria. A lot of organizations focus on only one aspect, such as quality, and that is an
unhealthy way to run an organization. He said the Baldridge Criteria are accepted worldwide as the best
model for assessing an organizations health. It started in 1988 as an award to promote total quality
=
management and improve the competitiveness of America. By 1995, they deleted the word quality from
A@
all documents and focused on performance and results. Today, the Criteria are being used by major
corporations, all branches of the military, many Federal government organizations, schools and health care
institutions. (Mr. Dewyea than explained the Criteria using a slide presentation. Refer to Page 5 of the
hand-out which is on file in the Clerks Office.)
=
Mr. Dewyea said Local Government will move through three phases. Phase One is firming up the
foundation. Staff has already begun to restructure meetings and department heads have been formed into
a leadership council. Senior leaders will be recommitted through coaching and training. Staff will seek a
statement of support for Performance Excellence from the Board. A member of the Chesterfield Board of
Supervisors has been invited to attend a Supervisors meeting and discuss their strategic planning and how
=
that has translated into budget actions. Staff will try to engage the Board members into the strategic
planning process to facilitate strategic thought and actions.
Mr. Dewyea said Phase Two is to be proactive and be out in front of any internal or external
scrutiny. Staff wants to set clear service objectives county wide; get an overview of each departments
=
services and mandates; will conduct a process and procedural analysis of each department; define
recommended changes to improve efficiency and effectiveness of each department; establish performance
measures for key processes; and, once this is done, staff can build an information and analysis system to
track measurable results and continuously improve.
Mr. Dewyea said Phase Three is continuous improvement. In the Spring of 2002, an annual
Baldridge assessment will be conducted. In Fall, 2002 a report will be made on successes. Staff will
continue to evaluate performance measures, with the bottom-line goal being to integrate strategic planning
and performance measures into the budget process.
Mr. Tucker said he wanted to summarize how focused staff is on performance excellence. He said
this will translate into concrete measurable improvements on the way staff works and ultimately in the way
citizens are served. The Board will also realize some substantial benefits from this effort. Staff believes
citizens will receive better service, improved access and better communication with county government, and
have increased faith in the Countys stewardship. For the Board, the process will more closely allocate
=
resources to its established objectives in the budget process, and Board members will be able to evaluate
and communicate progress to the citizens by linking goals to budgets and results. Employees will have a
clearer direction of their departmental action plan, enhanced skills training and support in continuous
improvement efforts.
In closing, Mr. Tucker said the organization is committed to performance excellence. It is also
dedicated, through the steps outlined in this presentation, to move ahead to the next level of providing
outstanding service.
Mr. Martin asked if this is the same Quality Improvement Program as in the past. Mr. Tucker said
the quality improvement is generally the same program. It has been realigned and some changes made.
The quality council, which was outside of the organization, was not working. The department heads have
now been made the leadership of that Quality Council. The Baldridge Criteria effort will be a new effort.
Mr. Bowerman said he looked at this and substituted the word citizen everywhere it said
A@
customer and found that it would apply to citizens also. Mr. Tucker said the citizens are the Countys
A@=
customers. Mr. Bowerman said it is hard to measure what the citizen is getting for his tax money, but the
County does deliver something to them in exchange for that money.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 24)
Ms. Thomas said it is difficult to distinguish between customers. There is the customer who is
A@
across the counter from a County staff member and then there is the general public that expects a liveable
community for the next 25 years. She said the Neighborhood Association said to her several years ago that
they were not happy with the emphasis on customers. They feel they are the public expecting the best
possible job, whereas a customer was more often a person on the other side of the counter. What sped up
that persons interaction with County government might not be the best result for the long term good of the
=
public. Whenever the Board has talked about quality improvement things, she is uncomfort-able from
several aspects, and that is one of them. She is worried about where the public fits in, and the goals and
policies the Board sets. She has never seen how the Board will get better cell tower place-ments from all
A@
of this. She said a lot of time goes into this. Time is sometimes good all by itself when staff gets to feel they
are working to share their own organization. She is not suggesting time is wasted, but it can turn into
something that takes an awful lot of time. What she hears most often from staff, whether in the schools, or
general government, is that they want to know they are doing their job better than it is being done today.
When they get together and talk, they feel they are working in that direction, and then a few months later
they say it did not develop into anything. Then they become bitter. She has no guidance, but a lot of
frustrations. It is difficult to make this turn into something that makes this better for the long-term for the
public.
Mr. Bowerman said one can use different terms, citizens, neighborhoods, customers, or public.
They differ in constituency whether it is a business offering a product or service, or a government, or the
military. Embarking on a task and it not being carried through is okay because it is part of the learning
process. He sees that as positive; what does not work is discarded. It is the process of constantly trying to
improve the organization and the people within it that is the real challenge. An organized way to deal with
those issues is needed. This process seems flexible enough to allow mistakes. He has heard many
comments from people praising County staff, someone came out to view the problem and it was fixed.
There have been other people who complained that they were given the go around. He thinks the
A@
principle is a good one, and there needs to be something formal like this in an organization of this size.
Ms. Patty Cornell said she works in the Human Resources office. As a new employee she went
through QUIP and the new employee orientation. She was impressed that Mr. Tucker starts each new
employee orientation session. Because he bought into the program, she does also.
Mr. Martin asked if there was anything Ms. Thomas wanted to do about this today. Ms. Thomas
said she is just laying down a challenge. She doesnt care what it is called, or what is done, she
=
appreciates that there is a search for excellence. She wants to keep searching in that direction, but is
frustrated that what has been done in the past hasn't been effective.
Mr. Dorrier said he is 100 percent behind it. He said this has something the other plan did not have,
and that is a quantifiable results. He thinks it will only work if the School System buys into the program. Mr.
Tucker said they have their own school improvement programs for each school. It is slightly different, but
there will still be the Quality Council which has school representatives. They will benefit from what local
government is doing, and they are interested in the Baldridge Criteria.
Mr. Perkins said there is a buzz word stakeholders and those stakeholders have to be identified.
A@
Those are the citizens of this County. It has been said that the stakeholders should do this or that, but the
problem is, how to get the stakeholders to show up and voice their opinion. Because there is such a small
turnout on issues, does the Board just react to the comments made at that hearing? What is the QUIP
program for the Board of Supervisors? How does the Board give the leadership and the direction that the
County is to go in, and how does it get a true reading of where the County should be going for those
stakeholders? Mr. Tucker said that is addressed in Phase I. Staff will bring the Board some goals and
objectives in the spring for the next year. He said staff has shied away from bringing the Board totally into
this, but at the same time staff realizes the Board does have to be involved.
Ms. Humphris asked how the Board should indicate its support. Mr. Tucker said it can be done by
consensus, but he has heard no one express opposition to the direction staff is taking.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 21. Reappropriations, Discussion continued from September 20, 2000 (see
minutes of September 20 for a detailed staff report regarding this item).
Mr. Bowerman said the Board has discussed most of this before because a great deal of it was
highlighted during budget discussions. He asked that staff highlight those items which have changed since
that time. Mr. Tucker said the Board discussed this about three weeks ago, but he wanted to remind the
Board members that the surplus shown is much larger than anticipated, but it has been that way in every
community he has talked with. The Federal and State governments are looking at eight to ten percent in
unanticipated revenues, the City of Charlottesville had about five percent, and Albemarle is in the four to
five percent range. This was put on the agenda in case the Board members had specific questions about
projects.
Ms. Roxanne White said the Daily Progress reported this morning that there is a $7.8 million
surplus. She said the revenue surplus was only $5.0 million, there was $1.5 million in savings. The total
amount was $6.5 million as far as what could be considered additional money at the end of the year. Mr.
Tucker said the $7.8 million is a valid number. It is the net Fund Balance after taking away the dedicated
fund balance for cash flow, etc. Ms. White said that number included some dollars left over from the prior
year.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 25)
Mr. Bowerman said the $250,000 in drainage improvements in Wynridge have not even started yet.
Ms. White said there was $1.5 million added in savings, but about $1.0 million of that is to be
reappropriated because there are projects which have been approved, but which have not been completed.
It can be said they are savings, but they are only savings because those projects are not completed, and
reappropriations are to be made so they can be completed.
Ms. Thomas said Planning staff is down by two personnel, so there should be some money there.
When the Board is frustrated because things are not moving along and wants to hire a consultant, where do
those unspent salary moneys actually show up. Ms. White said it goes back into the Fund Balance at the
end of the year, and is then termed expenditure savings.
A@
Ms. Thomas said she may be the only Board member who feels this way, but at some point, she
thinks the Board must discuss some of these projects as if they had been a part of a regular budget work
session. Just because there is more money does not mean they should just be slipped in without giving
them the same scrutiny. Mr. Bowerman said especially the projects that were not discussed during the
regular budget hearings. Ms. Thomas referred to Section 2 of the staffs report and said it includes a more
=
realistic cost for some things which have already been approved, but it also includes others which are new.
She wants to be sure that at some point, the Board has the same discussion it usually has for other things
which appear in the budget requests.
Mr. Dorrier said he agrees with Ms. Thomas.
Mr. Bowerman asked if the Board should discuss the new projects at this time. Ms. Thomas said
either today or after the public hearing. At some point she believes the public wants the Board to be
comfortable in its mind about each of these projects.
Mr. Bowerman said he did not think the Board would make a decision immediately after the public
hearing anyway. Mr. Tucker said a detailed analysis of each of the items was provided the Board along with
the other paperwork. If the Board wishes to ask questions today, staff is present to answer those questions.
Mr. Dorrier said he believes after the public hearing is the appropriate time. Mr. Bowerman agreed.
Mr. Martin said if there were questions, the Board members should proceed today.
Ms. Thomas questioned the new Human Resources payroll system ($60,000) and the financial
management system ($190,000). Mr. Tucker said he would like to put some of this into prospective. Both
of those systems were in use when the County moved into this building in 1981. Staff has been trying to
make do with those systems but has gotten to the point where a large overhaul is needed. The City is also
revamping their entire financial management system, as is the University. Staff feels good about this
system since a lot is being done in-house, as well as purchasing some software. Much of this is tied to the
schools because they have so many permeations, particularly with staff doing many different part-time jobs,
and keeping track of that so their check is accurate.
Mr. Bowerman asked if this new system will allow the collection of better information on specific
questions. Mr. Tucker said it should do that, but it is primarily on the Human Resource side, and the Payroll
side is more for data entry. Ms. White said this will remove the present system from the main-frame. The
new system should be much more efficient and user-friendly. Mr. Melvin Breeden said they have been
using archaic software and equipment. Those systems are more expensive to update and maintain than
buying new software. Over the next five years, this kind of money will be spent to upgrade the mainframe.
The County will probably not be able to do without a mainframe for two or more years, but it should be
headed in that direction, so there will not be major, costly updates needed from IBM on the operating
system. The County does a lot of things with its payroll, especially related to schools, that are not found in
most payroll packages. On the financial management system, there are a lot of changes coming in the
next couple of years on some of the G.A.S.B. (Governmental Accounting Standards Board) requirements.
Hopefully, the new system will be in compliance with that so reports can be made. There have been
comments in the last couple of audits that the financial management system needed improvements, and
this is an effort to try and do that.
(Note: Mr. Martin left the room at 3:40 p.m.)
Ms. Thomas asked if this new system will save manpower. Mr. Breeden said that not many new
employees have been added to the Finance Department in recent years because of automation. (Note:
Mr. Martin returned to the meeting at 3:45 p.m.) Mr. Breeden said the real estate appraisal system is about
finalized and ready to go into place. They have found that it will cut staff, but most of that will be handled
through attrition and reassignment. He said there may be some of that in the payroll system, but it is hard
to predict. It will be hard on staff to run two systems, and it will probably take two to three years to get the
systems installed. During that time he does not believe there will be a big change in staffing requirements.
He said there was a comment at the CIP Technical Committee meeting yesterday that is relevant to this
situation. It was said that computers get faster and faster, but humans can only do so much. There is not
but so much that can be done even though the systems are better.
Mr. Perkins said the estimates for Board Room renovations seems to be very high. He thinks that
what the Board has now works, and he cannot see spending that type of money. Mr. Tucker said the Board
had talked about this item before, and did indicate that it needed a second look.
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 26)
Mr. Bowerman said it is important to let the urban public be able to see the meeting if they so
choose. Ms. Thomas said she thinks the Board needs to decide what is not working in this room. If
something is not working, it should be fixed, but this room was designed with a great deal of thought and it
continues to work pretty well for the public.
Mr. Dorrier said he thinks the room works fine, but he thinks the Board should consider televising its
meetings. Ms. Thomas said cable TV is not available all over the County, so only a portion of the County
would have access to Board meetings.
Ms. Humphris said she would rather not do it at all unless it is well done. She was trying to listen to
City Council's meeting Monday night, and the sound was very bad. It was nerve racking.
Mr. Martin asked if there were other items that the members would like to discuss. Ms. Thomas
said she had a few questions, but did not need to discuss them today.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 22. Other Matters not Listed on the Agenda from the Board.
Mr. Dorrier said he met a planner named Mr. Kreines who spoke to the Board about the cell tower
policy, and he is coming to Charlottesville on October 18 to give another presentation. He is willing to come
a day earlier to give and hold a planning workshop, and he would not charge for it. He has developed plans
in California and has worked on comprehensive plans. Mr. Dorrier suggested holding a special meeting of
the Board on October 17 so the Supervisors could attend a workshop. Mr. Martin said he thought Mr.
Dorrier wanted a workshop, not a Board meeting. Mr. Dorrier noted that if two members of the Board
attend, it is a Board meeting. Ms. Humphris said she and Ms. Thomas have another meeting at 4:00 p.m.
that afternoon. Mr. Tucker asked if this is something the Board has not heard before. Ms. Thomas said she
understands that Mr. Kreines has been in on the planning process for a number of California counties and
cities. She sees it simply as a way to see what other localities have done. It might have no relevance.
Mr. Dorrier said Mr. Kreines is willing to give a workshop on comprehensive planning to members
who want to attend, and also staff members. Mr. Bowerman said he would like to know what his agenda
will be so he will know what to expect. Mr. Dorrier said his total focus would be on providing the big picture
to a revised comprehensive plan aimed at implementation, not just regulation. Mr. Bowerman said the
Board usually identifies a need, and then finds someone to speak to it. Mr. Martin asked Mr. Tucker to work
with Mr. Dorrier to set up a meeting or whatever is needed.
___________
Mr. Davis said there is a resolution before the Board regarding the Ivy Landfill litigation. He asked
that the Board adopt that resolution authorizing the County Executive to execute a settlement agreement as
outlined in the resolution.
Motion to adopt the following resolution was offered by Mr. Perkins and seconded by Ms. Thomas.
Roll was called, and the motion carried by the following recorded vote:
AYES: Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman, Mr. Dorrier and Ms. Humphris.
NAYS: None.
RESOLUTION
SETTLEMENT OF IVY LANDFILL LITIGATION
BE IT RESOLVED,that the County of Albemarle, Virginia (the "County")
(I) authorizes a settlement with certain plaintiffs in the lawsuit
styled Gertrude Weber, et al. v. Rivanna Solid Waste Authority,
et al., pending in the United States District Court for the Western
District of Virginia, Charlottesville Division, Civil Action No.
98-0109-C and
(ii) authorizes the execution of a Settlement Agreement and
Release (the "Settlement Agreement") with such plaintiffs and
certain plaintiff-related parties, except for Gertrude and Michael
Weber (the "Webers") and Pamela and Ed Strange (the
"Stranges"); and further
BE IT RESOLVED,that the Settlement Agreement is in all respects approved,
subject to its signature by all plaintiffs and plaintiff-related
parties, except for the Webers and the Stranges; and further
BE IT RESOLVED,that the Settlement Agreement and Exhibits thereto,
substantially in the form of the draft presented to the County
Attorney, are authorized and approved in all respects, with such
changes therein as the officer or officers executing the same
shall approve; and further
BE IT RESOLVED,that the County Executive is hereby authorized in the name of
and on behalf of the County to execute and deliver the
Settlement Agreement; and finally
October 4, 2000 (Regular Day Meeting)
(Page 27)
BE IT RESOLVEDthat the County Executive is hereby authorized to execute and
deliver such other documents and instruments and to take such
other and further actions as may be in any way necessary or
appropriate to effectuate the foregoing resolutions and to carry
out the purposes thereof, and that the taking of any such action
and the execution of any such additional documents or
instruments shall conclusively evidence the due authorization
thereof by the County.
__________
Mr. Martin asked if the Board members wanted him to revise his greeting in the front of the County
Handbook. It was the consensus of the Board to have Mr. Tucker revise it if needed.
__________
Mr. Dorrier said the County's tax rate on the County's web page is still shown as $0.72/$100.00; it
should be changed to $0.76/$100.00. Mr. Bowerman added that the Board's agenda for this week was not
on the web page either.
_______________
Agenda Item No. 23. Adjourn. With no further business to come before the Board, the meeting
was adjourned at 4:30 p.m.
________________________________________
Chairman
Approved by the Board of County
Supervisors
Date 12/06/00
Initials LAB