1996-03-11 adjMarch 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 1)
000199
An adjourned meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County,
Virginia, was held on March 11, 1996, at 1:00 p.m., Room 241, County Office
Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was
adjourned from March 6, 1996.
PRESENT: Mr. DaVid P. Bowerman (arrived at 1:05 p.m.), Mrs. Charlotte
Y. Humphris, Mr. Forrest R. Marshall, Jr., Mr. Charles S. Martin, Mr. Walter
F. Perkins (arrived at 1:02 p.m.) and Mrs. Sally H. Thomas.
ABSENT: None.
OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Robert W. Tucker, Jr., Deputy
County Executive, Richard E. Huff, II, Assistant County Executive,..Roxanne W.
White, and, County Attorney, Larry W. Davis.
Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 1:05 p.m., by the
Chairman, Mrs. Humphris.
Agenda Item No. 2. Budget Work Session: 1996-97 County Operating
Budget.
Mr. Tucker presented an overview of the budget. He mentioned that these
work sessions are starting with a Board Reserve of $185,508. Staff has yet to
hear about the State's budget, but it is to be printed today. He wanted the
Board to know that this budget is short almost $260,000 of fully funding the
new Pay Plan, as recommended by the consultant, Mr. Hendricks.
Board of Supervisors. Requested $296,553; recommended $301,533.
Present was Ella W. Carey, Clerk.
Mr. Tucker recommended funding of the requested budget, increasing it
slightly to include one transcriber and adding funds for membership in the
Virginia Institute of Government which is a new agency.
County Executive. Requested $436,604; recommended $436,604. Present
was Robert W. Tucker, Jr., County Executive.
Mr. Tucker stated that this budget shows an 11 percent increase in
operating expenses, which reflects an expansion of the scope and volume of
work. In particular, budget development activities have been expanded.
Another expanded item is the ongoing costs associated with the joint Local
Government/ School operating budget review.
Mr. Marshall asked about replacement chairs for the ones the Board
members are sitting in, chairs that would not look as ominous, which would
allow him to sit upright and be more comfortable. Mrs. Humphris agreed,
saying that she too had difficulty with the chairs. Mr. Tucker replied that
he would look into that. Mrs. Thomas asked what amount of money they were
talking about. Mr. Tucker replied that staff will have some chairs brought in
to test, and when a choice is made, a cost can be determined.
Human Resources. Requested $252,061; recommended $253,323. Present was
Juliet Jennings, Director of Human Resources.
Ms. Jennings said that, with a staff of 13, the department provides
services and support in the areas of policy administration, recruitment,
selection and retention, compensation and benefits, and safety. They also
assist in the training of employees. They provide these services to all
employees in General Government and the School Division. They also serve the
general public by advertising general vacancies, receiving applications and
providing information. There are no significant changes to the baseline
operating budget because of programs. The increase is primarily due to a
$31,434 increase in early retirement benefits and a $7045 addition to the
School Transfer for development and training. They also requested a full-time
Project/ Research Manager for a cost of $19,086.
Mrs. Thomas replied that the increase in personnel actions and
complaints raised a flag of concern to her. If this is a problem, it should
not be ignored. Mr. Tucker replied that it was not something that had
:, 000200
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 2) ......
occurred in the past, and, with training and other issues, staff will try to
correct this.
County Attorney. Requested $327,778; recommended $318,938. Present was
Larry W. Davis, County Attorney.
Mr. Davis pointed out that this is the second year that the County has
had an in-house County Attorney. There are certain areas where the office has
taken on additional involvement, particularly with the School Division and the
Social Services Department. Last year, a half-time paralegal position was
added. This year he would like to have that position funded as full-time.
This would allow the office to handle recodification of the Albemarle County
Code, rather than having it done by Municipal Code Company, which would cost
thousands of dollars. One request that was not recommended was money to fund
law clerks from the University; these clerks are more reliable when they are
compensated.
Mrs. Thomas said she did not know the significance of the items not
recommended for funding. Mr. Davis replied that the County Code has not been
recodified since 1981; it needs to be brought up-to-date as to language and
references which are no longer applicable. Recodification should take place
about every ten years. With the technology now available, the Code could be
put out on the Internet so that anyone who wanted to use it would have access
to it. Also, there is now only one clerical position in his office. When
that person is unavailable, the attorneys having to perform clerical duties,
which is an inefficient use of personnel. The Preventive Law Program would
provide legal updates on items such as sexual harassment or EEOC education on
a regular basis.
Finance. Requested $2,254,121; recommended $2,238,457. Present was
Melvin A. Breeden, Director of Finance.
Mr. Breeden stated that the increase in the Finance operating budget
reflected historical spending to meet actual needs, as well as increases to
the cost of postage, office supplies and copy supplies. The department is
involved in a long list of programs, including some that people may not know
about out, such as: licensing, going-out-of-business permits, assistance to
taxpayers, debt set-off payments, Division of Motor Vehicles stop programs,
tax relief for the elderly, the land use taxation program, the County's
insurance programs, budget revenue projections, accounting and payroll
functions for the Jail and the 911 Center, supervision of outside locations
for automobile decal sales, dealing with mortgage companies, employee benefits
in the way of "cafeteria" plans, health and retirement program improvements,
the annual audit, direct deposits and many more.
Mr. Marshall stated that he often sees surplus equipment sitting
underneath the stairs on the first floor of the County Office Building. He
asked if these items are auctioned off. Mr. Breeden replied that auctions are
held twice each year. Mr. Marshall asked if money is actually received from
the auction, or if it would be better to just make a deal with an ~antique
dealer." Mr. Breeden said it has been traditional to have the auction. The
County does well financially with vehicles, but gets little money for the
surplus equipment. The equipment is not that valuable. Mrs. Humphris
mentioned that she receives phone calls every year from people saying the
County should donate the old computers to the Schools. She has to explain
that they are not good computers. Mr. Breeden replied that he will take that
into account when the next auction is advertised.
Information Services. Requested $1,362,373; recommended $1,3161,015.
Present was Mr. Fred Kruger, Director of Information Services.
Mr. Kruger said that Information Services provides computer services for
all County and School Division employees. One additional item in the budget
is a request for another clerical person. They have had only one person for
their clerical needs for quite some time, and the workload is becoming
overwhelming.
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meet±hg) 000~01
(Page 3)
Mrs. Thomas asked how they were doing at keeping up with the needs of
the Schools. Mr. Kruger replied that the workload is very high, but they do
their best to keep up with it.
Board of Elections (Registrar). Requested $184,528; recommended
$184,528. Present was Mr. James Heilman, Registrar.
Mr. Heilman stated that his office had two tasks: to register the
voters and conduct the elections. This year, there are two significant events
occurring: a Presidential election and the advent of the National Voter
Registration Act. Presidential election years usually lead to significantly
higher numbers of registrations, 'changes and deletions, The NVRA will have a
significant impact on his office. The primary change to this year's budget is
to cover some of the added expenses of these two events. State law requires
that there be one voting machine in each precinct for every 700 voters; as the
voter rolls go up, the number of needed machines goes up.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the new voting machines were working well. Mr.
Heilman replied that they were.
Circuit Court. Requested $69,499; recommended $69,007.
Mr. Huff noted that this budget has an increase of 2.5 percent over the
previous year's budget.
Mrs. Thomas asked what caused the 3.7 percent decrease in salaries.
Tucker replied that Judge Peatross' secretary retired and this changed the
salary expenditure.
Mr.
General District Court. Requested $10,915; recommended $10,915.
Mr. Huff said that this budget was requested at a decrease from the
previous year's budget. The County Executive recommended that it be funded at
the requested amount.
Magistrate. Requested $16,165; recommended $16,165.
Mr. Huff noted that the budget had decreased significantly from the
revised budget, which reflects telecommunications changes done with a
supplemental appropriation in mid-year. Their operating budget is fairly
flat.
Juvenile & Domestic Relations Court. Requested $37,621; recommended
$37,621.
Mr. Huff reported that there were no new programs in this budget.
will want to discuss staffing, but that will be done under the Sheriff's
budget.
Staff
Clerk of the Circuit Court. Requested $473,142; recommended $467,859.
Mr. Huff noted that there was a 5.4 percent increase over the current
year, and includes $3000 to repair record books, $1000 in additional indexing
costs, $1070 in increased training costs, plus $5170 in replacement furniture
and equipment. The new program is a debit-card reader, which does away with
the manual billing process for making copies. It should increase the amount
of copy fees collected.
Mr. Marshall asked if many of the Clerk's records are on microfilm. Mr.
Huff said "yes~', it is an ongoing process.
Mrs. Thomas asked if the Clerk's Office uses computers. She was
surprised to see a request for a typewriter last year. Ms. White replied that
there was legislation in the General Assembly to provide computerization in
the Court offices.
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 4)
000202
Commonwealth's Attorney. Requested $371,519; recommended $371,519.
Present was Mr. James Camblos, II, Commonwealth's Attorney.
Mr. Camblos said this is the first time in five years that he actually
agrees with what the County Executive has recommended. He noted that it was
recently brought to his attention that his office needs new software from the
Commonwealth Attorney's Association, but computers using CD-ROM are needed to
run that software. Therefore, he needs five new computers for this office in
order to run that program. He did request funds from the State for these
computers. His request to the County includes $8172 to increase the base
salary of an Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney and $1617 to participate in an
intern program with the University of Virginia. He asked-the Board to approve
the budget as recommended, by the County Executive. ~ ?~ ~ ~ ..
Sheriff. Requested $894,736, recommended $745,035. Present was Deputy
Sheriff Vernon Jones, and Deputy Sheriff Ike Wright.
Mr. Huff stated that the County Executive's recommendation for the
Sheriff's Department does provide funds for replacement of weapons and
replacement of two vehicles instead of the four vehicles requested by the
Sheriff, as those two vehicles are not projected to exceed the 100,000 mile
cap required for replacements. The big issue in the budget was two requests
from the Sheriff, which were combined by the County Executive.
Mr. Huff said that on January 31, 1994, the Town of Scottsville, the
Albemarle County Sheriff, and the County of Albemarle entered into a
tripartite service agreement for the purpose of having the Sheriff furnish law
enforcement services in the Town. On December 21, 1994, the agreement was
amended when the County agreed to allow one locally-funded (county) deputy
position to be assigned for law enforcement services in the Town of
Scottsville until July 1, 1996. This amendment specifically indicated that
until July 1, 1996, no locally-funded deputy positions would be assigned for
law enforcement service in the Town.
As part of the Sheriff's 1996-97 budget request, Sheriff Hawkins asked
that funding be continued for 1996-97 for the locally-funded deputy to
continue to provide law enforcement services in the Town. Concurrently,
Sheriff Hawkins requested that an additional 0.74 FTE be provided his office
for manpower needed in the Charlottesville/Albemarle Juvenile Court by
expanding two part-time positions to full-time positions. The County
Executive's budget recommendation is to move the locally-funded deputy, who is
currently assigned to the Town of Scottsville, to the Juvenile Court effective
July 1, 1996, at a net cost to the County of $4172. This net cost represents
the loss of some reimbursement for the benefits of this position by the Town
of Scottsville, but is consistent with the signed agreement dated December 21,
1994. Alternatively, the cost to upgrade the two half-time positions
currently in the Juvenile Court to two full-time positions is estimated at
$38,275 for the 0.74 FTE increase.
Mr. Huff said that given the identified need for additional manpower in
Juvenile Court, staff felt that the agreement with the Town of Scottsville had
served its purpose which was to allow Scottsville time to "get on its feet"
following the boundary adjustment and that the manpower could be best utilized
in Juvenile Court. which would serve the entire County for a relatively modest
cost. If the Board chooses to pursue a new agreement with the Sheriff and the
Town, a new agreement would need to be authored in that the 1994 agreement had
no provision for an extension.
Deputy Vernon Jones was present to represent the Sheriff who was out of
town. He said he would address what Mr. Huff had talked about, and also
wished to address the County pay plan. With the difference that has grown in
the years because of the State's cuts, he asked the Board to put the deputy
sheriffs on the County pay plan. The salary difference between the Sheriff's
Office and the Police Department leads to morale problems. The deputies feel
that their job is just as dangerous as that of police officers, and he
described several situations which have occurred in the courts. He said the
Sheriff is asking for four vehicles to be replaced; one of those vehicles has
98,900 miles on it today, the remaining three have 87,000, 80,000 and 79,000.
It takes six months for a vehicle to arrive after it is ordered, so by the
time the cars were received, these cars would have over 100,000 miles and be
eligible for replacement. Regarding the two part-time positions, the Courts
are becoming busier, requiring a bailiff to be there for longer periods of
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 5)
00020 3
time. He is being required to hold those two part-time employees over quite
often. These two officers could also be used for process-serving and prisoner
transport. Regarding the Scottsville position, he thinks it should continue
and that it is cost-effective to have an officer in the neighborhood there.
Mr. Marshall noted that when they decided to start the Scottsville
position, the Sheriff and the Mayor were the ones who went to the State
Compensation Board and created this position. Mr. Tucker replied that the
State's positions were not just for the Town of Scottsville, but for
additional deputies. The Sheriff was trying to get additional deputies so he
would have more help in the courts. However, if the Sheriff and the Mayor had
not gone to Richmond, those positions might not have happened. Mr. Marshall
said that he would like to remind the Board that if the Mayor had not gone to
Richmond, the position would not have been created.
Deputy Wright stated that the presence of law enforcement in Southern
Albemarle had been enhanced over the last eighteen months by the relations
that have grown with the Albemarle County Police Department.
Mr. Raymon Thacker said that Scottsville had agreed to provide adequate
police protection; they had found in the Code of Virginia that they could
request a deputy from the Sheriff's department for Scottsvitle. They went to
the Compensation Board and pushed this, and then went to court over this. The
day before the suit was to come up in Albemarle County Court, the State
Compensation Board finally agreed to provide two slots in Albemarle; it was
his understanding that one of them was to be for the Town of Scottsville.
They agreed with the County that they would provide the benefits for the
officer and the salary and benefits of the current officer they had.
Scottsville spent $2369 in court costs, they painted three cars, bought brand
new uniforms and firearms, and spent $13,000 to get all of this equipment
ready so that these officers could work for the Town of Scottsville. Then, on
top of that, salary has amounted to about $30,000 to keep these two officers
there. He also stated that this was a minute appropriation when the Town of
Scottsville is paying into the County approximately $340,000 each year in real
estate and personal property taxes.
Mr. Thacker said he did not think the salary of this officer is costing
the County anything Mr. Tucker replied that the Compensation Board would only
pay for a court security officer, so the County shifted a locally-funded
officer down to Scottsville. Mr. Thacker said he felt it was such a small
thing that the Board owed it to the Town.
Mr. Marshall said, for the sake of time, he would request, and if
necessary, beg the Board to extend funding for this position for at least one
more year. He did not know how much actual money to ask for. Mrs. Humphris
replied that the Board is not going to discuss that now. This meeting is only
for the purpose of receiving information.
Mrs. Thomas said a copy of the agreement with Scottsville is right in
front of the Board members. It very clearly states that there would not be
any more locally-funded positions in Scottsville after July, 1996, and the
mayor signed that agreement. She asked what Mr. Thacker expectation was when
he signed that agreement. Did he not think it would not be binding? Mr.
Thacker replied that he thought the results of those police officers would be
such that the County would agree to continue the arrangement.
Mr. Marshall noted that the Town Council of Scottsville was present
today in support of the request. He repeated that he would like to get this
request added to the list of unfunded items, and asked how much money he would
need to request. Mr. Tucker replied that if he was only talking about
extending the agreement for another year, there would not be any additional
funds needed. If the Board wants to add the Juvenile Court position requested
by the Sheriff, additional funds in the amount of $38,275 would be needed.
SCHOOL DIVISION: Requested $40,984,291; recommended $41,180,805.
Present were: Kevin Castner, Division Superintendent, and Karen Powell,
Chairman of the School Board.
Ms. Powell expressed the School Board's appreciation for the Board of
Supervisors' support of education. The proposed FY 1996-97 budget presented a
number of challenges to the School Board. For the coming year, enrollment
growth of approximately 237 students is anticipated. Growth requires
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 6)
000204
additional expenditures. The School Division will receive about 4.8 percent
($2.94 million) in additional funds the coming year to help support almost the
same level of enrollment growth. The revenue picture is not as favorable.
Although revenue from the County is somewhat higher, revenue from the State is
projected to decrease by approximately $586,000 or more, primarily because of
a significant rise in the Division's Composite Index, which measures the
County's ability to pay in comparison with the rest of the State. Albemarle
County's Composite Index increase was the third largest in the State, and
resulted in the largest dollar decrease in the State. If Albemarle County's
Composite Index had remained the same, an increase of approximately $1.1
million would have been realized, instead of the negative swing of almost $1.7
million. Compounding this loss of revenue is an additional required payment
of almost $92,000 to the Virginia Retirement System, and an approximate
$300,000 loss in Federal funds supporting self-sustaining programs such as
Title I which provides remedial support for the most at-risk students. The
School Division also faces the additional pressure of aligning its curriculum
with the revised Virginia Standards of Learning, which is an expensive and
unfunded mandate.
Ms. Powell said inflation continues to take a toll on the School
Division's budget, especially since school and department budgets have been
level-funded for the past four years. In light of this difficult situation,
Dr. Castner reluctantly submitted a budget that attempts to address these
challenges, recommending significant staff reductions, funding decreases for
Albemarle High School and Western Albemarle High School, and a proposal to
change school starting and dismissal times to generate savings in the
Transportation budget. The School Board supports Dr. Castner's efforts in
making these recommendations, but it could not, in good conscience, support a
decrease in the School Division's current level of instructional effort. The
School Board has, therefore, submitted a "maintenance of effort" budget that
restores proposed decreases in staffing, restores funding decreases for AHS
and WAHS, provides partial funding to support alignment of the County's
curriculum with the Standards of Learning including the necessary textbooks
and materials, and provides partial funding to support the remedial services
lost due to decreases in Federal funding. The proposed budget also provides
for a 2.5 percent increase in salary restructuring, plus vesting. The School
Board is currently studying the consultant's recommendations in order to
determine specifically how the restructuring would be implemented.
Ms. Powell said that transportation savings generated by changes in
school starting and dismissal times are part of the proposed budget, although
the Board plans to review recommendations from a study committee concerning
this issue before adopting a final budget. She emphasized that the proposed
budget does not fund a number of priorities including full funding of the SOL
alignment and textbooks, needed HVAC positions, technology support positions,
recruitment initiatives and several other critical areas. The proposed budget
does not begin to address areas such as elementary foreign language and
expanding programs in the arts which have been community concerns for several
years. The School Board is asking for additional funding that percentage wise
is consistent with the 4.8 percent increase for the current year to support an
almost identical level of growth. She emphasized that they anticipate being
in a similar situation a year from now, needing an approximate five percent
increase in new revenue just for growth and to maintain effort. The decrease
in State revenues and loss of Federal funds makes it necessary to request
increased local funding just to stay even. She asked the Board to consider
the unique situation faced by the School Board, and to provide the funding
necessary so that the schools are not forced to go backward.
Dr. Castner said that, in a County dealing with growth, a maintenance of
effort budget is usually the best that can be done. While the schools wish to
maintain effort, they also wish to increase the performance of students,
because school systems go beyond just dollars. The Board will be getting its
money's worth. Entering into the new millennium, the school system must look
forward and prepare its students, and because this is just a ~maintenance of
effort budget",, there is some concern. There are unfunded priorities, and
priorities that they have not even begun to address, that are being addressed
in other school systems. They knew this would be a "tough year" for a budget.
They have communicated their needs, with the idea that those needs changed at
the State level. The Board can expect to see the performance of the students
continue to improve.
Mrs. Thomas said she liked the realization in last year's budget that
some schools needed more help than others because of the students being
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 7 )
00020S
educated there and their socio-economic status. Some schools just needed an
unequal amount of funding. That reversed a trend which started many years
ago. She has not been able to find that in this budget, and asked how this
budget deals with that concern. Dr. Castner replied that they placed
approximately $90,000 in the schools which have the greatest populations of
students with low socio-economic backgrounds. Those schools have specific
action plans, and they are trying to show they are improving in performance.
That was looked at as a three-year project. Those schools are meeting on a
regular basis, and some schools are giving additional time for those students
during the Summer.
Mrs. Thomas asked if there is still funding for that type of effort in
this budget. Dr. Castner said that effort was a continuation of the program,
and it is in the budget. He said that when Federal funding was lost,
particularly for Title I ($200,000), they tried to fund that in this budget.
They have put in $160,000 and feel they can still address those needy areas.
Mr. Perkins urged the School Division to look into privatizing services
in order to save money. He also noted that several years ago this Board was
given a report on how school staff is utilized. He asked how many teachers on
staff do not teach a full load. He asked how many of those teachers get a
free period. He would like to see a list of all the teachers, what classes
they teach and their course load. There is room to use modern technology in
order to teach larger classes, and that is something that should be looked at
in order to save money and expand the educational offerings. Dr. Castner
replied that in some cases, they have looked into a few of those areas, but
anything they can do to change some current structures, should be considered
if there are cost savings. The changes they made with starting times for the
buses did not obtain a pro consensus in the community.
Mr. Perkins noted that a high percentage of the budget is in personnel
costs. He suggested putting certain jobs out for bid, to see if a savings
could be realized. Dr. Castner said that could be considered.
Mr. Marshall agreed that some privatization needs to be looked at. He
appreciates the way Dr. Castner has tried to balance the budget within the
funding available. He did not appreciate the School Board feeling they could
come to the Board of Supervisors with an unbalanced budget and the Board would
have to fund it. He does not like being put in that position. When the
School Board gets the power to tax and can implement a school tax, that would
be fine, but to come at him, in particular, and say he has to increase taxes
in order to give them what they perceive to be needed in the County, he has to
consider whether or not he will support it. He is delighted that the County
Executive and the members of staff have found the money which is needed, and
he does want to spend the money on education. He likes what is being done
with the extra funds for the schools which are socio-economically deficient.
He said everybody needs to look at what is going on in the world today.
Businesses are downsizing and government is going to have to find a way to
downsize if it is going to survive. It cannot continue to put the burden on
the taxpayers. At the local, State and Federal levels, people are "being
taxed to death." Just because Albemarle County only has a $0.72 real property
tax rate, it does not mean the citizens are not paying more taxes when the
assessments go up every year. He does not want to deprive the School System
of anything, nor does he want to deprive any of the other departments of
anything. The Board has to look at the dollars it has and try to spend them
wisely without taxing people out of the County. A lot of people living in the
County do not have children in school, and a lot of people live on fixed
incomes and he does not want to force them out of the County. He wants to do
what is right for all of the citizens. He wants to look at the School budget
closely before he votes.
Dr. Castner replied that when the schools have flat-funded departments
for a period of five years, and paper costs, for instance, go from $1.60 a
pack to $3.00 a pack, inflation is causing them to actually go backwards.
Before he came to work for the County, there was significant downsizing in the
Central Office, and it can't be done again. He understands the Board's
dilemma, but if the schools are going to continue to grow over 200 students
each year, they will be in the same situation next year just to maintain level
funding. He can't change the growth factor. If there was not the growth, the
schools would not be in this position. The revenue picture might be different
this year. They had a surprise with State funding, it was not the
contribution from the Board of Supervisors, it was the State change that
caused this dilemma. Mr. Tucker has told him that next year it will not be as
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 8)
O0020S
bad because it will be factored into the funding. As long as there are 200+
new students each year, just to stay the same will take about five percent.
Mr. Marshall replied that this has happened in the private sector as
well, and they ended up having to do more work with fewer people, meaning the
private sector people are working harder; government employees are going to
have to work harder. A study came out yesterday which showed that the
citizens in the Commonwealth of Virginia have gone nowhere in the last year as
far as their income is concerned, it has remained flat, but the distance
between the "haves" and ~have nots" has increased considerably.
Mr. Martin said he agreed with what Mr. Perkins said about the need to
look at different ways to fund more efficiently. He was a member of the
School Board when it essentially "gutted the Central Office." He remembers
those cuts, and you cannot go back and get those cuts back. Contrary to what
Mr. Marshall is saying, he was very proud of the School Board in their
willingness to stand up and say they have been maintaining over the years, but
this year they are caught in a situation where the State is cutting funds even
though the County is receiving more students. He was proud of the School
Board submitting a budget that asked for nothing more than to be able to
maintain the same level of services already being delivered, including the
fact that there are 200+ additional students. It is not a unanimous opinion
of this Board that the School Board did the wrong thing in' submitting the
budget as it did. He, for one, was proud to see them stand up and do that.
Dr. Castner stated that Mr. Marshall was correct in one sense, that if
they were to balance the budget, the only place they could have done so was in
staffing and class size. That is how the private sector did it, and that is
how the School System could have to do it with the funds that he initially had
available. Those are choices the community has to make. He thinks the issues
are out so the community can understand them. They will then have to decide
whether to take something which is a sense of pride and take that step
backward and how many more years will there be the issue of growth to deal
with. Whether they presented the original budget, or the one before the Board
today, the $1.88 million is the amount he thought they needed just to stay
even. Either way, that has not changed. He feels that figure is credible.
Mr. Martin said this Board has to make tough decisions from time to
time. It is possible the Boards would have had to discuss things this year
which had never been discussed before. Dr. Castner said he is glad the
Schools are in the situation they are in, they are fortunate for that.
Mrs. Humphris said she is often approached and asked why school costs
cannot be cut. She thinks that Mr. Marshall bringing up what private
businesses do reminded her of what she has been telling people. She has had
some experience working in businesses, and it was her experience that in
manufacturing you can find more efficient ways to manufacture widgets, but
when you are dealing with children, it is a lot different than manufacturing
widgets. When the County establishes levels of services the community wants
the County to provide in educating its children, then the Board has to come to
some understanding with the community as to whether they want that level of
service reduced. In this case it would be an increase in the number of pupils
per teacher in the classroom. That is one of those hard decisions. The
community must understand that growth has a lot of dollar costs.
Ms. Powell said there may have been some confusion on media reporting on
where the School Board stood as far as the proposed budget, unfunded versus
unbalanced, or some of the other terms. The School Board did not support some
of the reductions that would have been necessary to present a budget balanced
within the anticipated revenues allocated to the School Division. They were
only divided on how to provide the Board of Supervisors that information. It
was important for the School Board members to be united because they felt
these were necessary funds to continue with the good quality things done in
this School Division. She wanted to be sure there was no misunderstanding.
Mr. Marshall said he may have misunderstood. He had no objection with
the way the budget was presented in past years, where there was a balanced
budget along with a list of unfunded mandates. It was obvious to him that
those programs needed to be funded, and he is not saying he is not willing to
fund these programs. He just does not want to be told that he has to spend
money the Board does not have without a good reason. He has not seen those
figures in the form of unfunded mandates. He feels it is necessary for him to
convey some of the feelings of people in the community who are concerned about
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 9)
000207
the School Board spending more money than the County takes in, because they
perceive that is what everyone in the County wants. He said there are people
in the community who are concerned about living in the community for years to
come. He said government has to look at ways of cutting expenses. He agrees
with Mrs. Humphris about manufacturing. He is a member of a health care
profession, and they are doing it. He is being forced to do it.
Ms. Powell asked if the Board would like to hear more about the unfunded
mandates. Mrs. Thomas said she would like to hear about the unfunded
initiative involving technology. She noted that the School Board's budget
contained funds for two additional technical support analysts, but it does not
include $200,000+ for other related support people and costs connected to
technology. Dr. Castner said in getting ready for the year 2000, technology
will be a part of these children's lives. The schools have an obligation to
be sure they are prepared. In order for these children to get a job, it is
something in which they will have to be literate.
Mr. Frank Morgan said they are fortunate that the Board of Supervisors
has funded a forward-thinking program in terms of technology in the Capital
Improvements Program. This year they are about to put a significant number of
computers, in addition to school networks, into the schools. It has been a
wonderful initiative in light of the fact that it came in at the same time
that the State was providing funds. They were able to use the Board of
Supervisor's support for the required match. The~e are two issues in dealing
with technology. One is to keep the computers operating and they have had a
lot of support through the County's auspices for keeping the networks and the
computers running, and using support staff paid for through County funds. In
fact they are using about 75 percent of the services, while paying for only 25
percent of the costs. The two positions in the budget are to bring them back
to equilibrium so the Schools are paying for the services the schools are
receiving. They continue to increase the number of computers, so their
technology support needs will increase. They were not able to fund the
additional support analysts at this time, although they do see the need for
the additional personnel. The other piece of the technology puzzle is
training. One of the things they have found is that the best way to train
teachers is to have workshops, but also to have people go into the classrooms
with them, and help them develop the skills they need to use technology as an
integral part of instruction. Over the past two years, there have been three
positions called "instructional technology specialist" and their job was to do
just that. Those people are stretched pretty far given the number of
computers going into the schools, and the fact that the teachers are becoming
technologically more adept, therefore, needing more assistance to take it to
the next level.
Mrs. Thomas asked what would happen if the Schools do not get the two
additional instructional technology specialists. Mr. Morgan replied that they
would not be able to provide service in as timely a fashion as they would
like, or at the level they would like to provide. They can certainly continue
supporting teachers.
Mr. Perkins asked whether computer companies could provide these people
rather than adding more staff. Mr. Fred Kruger, Director of Data Processing,
said the role of the two support analysts positions just discussed is to help
install software, local area networks, file servers, and basically help get
things into place and find out where problems exist. The instructional
technology specialist will train teachers and instructional staff in how to
use the technology in the classroom and the instructional area. One component
currently being out-sourced is the actual physical maintenance of the hard-
ware, which has actually been done for a number of years. Another type of
partnership, non privatization, is the County's relationship with the Univer-
sity of Virginia, called Technology Infusion Project (TIP). A graduate
student comes in to coordinate and direct undergraduate students in training
teachers how to use technology in the classroom to support what is a limited
resource, staff. The relationship has been very productive for the amount
spent to acquire the services of this graduate student. There have been 15+
undergraduate students with approximately several thousand hours of resources
in direct instruction to staff. That has been going on for nearly four years.
Training in micro-computer software products is already out-sourced, and has
been for approximately 12 years. They try to balance that with the amount of
dollars being spent. Mr. Kruger said there is a tremendous need for the
instructional technology specialist just discussed. The WAN is about to
explode as far as utilization is concerned. Next school year, every facility
will have access. More and more teachers need training on how to use the
000208
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 10)
Internet, how to use their classroom environment to teach those children how
to prepare for the future. Mr. Tucker said Mr. Kruger had attempted to bring
people in from the private sector to do some of the in-house activities, and
it has not worked out well.
Mr. Bowerman said the private sector has reduced personnel and, in the
field of computer support, when you call for support, you get charged for that
call. He said some of the things mentioned today are a zero-sum game. Many
of the "hits" the School System took were several years ago when they reduced
staff. Some of the comments he has heard today do not make any sense. He
agrees that you should cut inefficiencies, but he does not think he is hearing
about a fat system full of people who are not doing their job. Mr. Marshall
said that is not what he said. Mr. Bowerman said that is the way it came
across to him.
Mr. Marshall replied that where you used to see two druggists and a
technician in his store, now you see just one. The public seems willing to
accept the risk that he will put the wrong drug in the bottle. If they are
willing to accept that, are they also willing to accept some of the cuts that
may need to be made in education? When it comes down to the "nitty-gritty",
people vote with their wallets first. He does not deny that money is needed
for the School System.
Mr. Bowerman said part of the problem are the excesses that were created
earlier, and the Schools are paying for those now. He does not think you can
compare the medical profession with education. Mr. Marshall replied that he
was comparing costs. It is just like any other service-based business.
People can only pay for so much.
Mr. Bowerman stated that the State and Federal governments keep pushing
funding down to this level, and someone needs to provide the monies needed for
education. Mr. Marshall agreed that the Schools took "a big hit" from both
the State and Federal governments and he was willing to make up that money;
what he was hearing was that they were going to get more and more hits in the
future. He wants the School Board to prepare for the future by getting as
efficient as possible and making cuts where they can.
Mr. Kruger added that the County Executive's Office and Superintendent's
Office looked to efficiencies when they combined responsibilities for both
divisions into one County Data Processing Department. There were a lot of
resources they could utilize and provide through a combined effort.
Mrs. Humphris said the Board had just a few minutes before adjourning to
the Auditorium for a presentation of the QUIP Program. She asked if anyone
had any questions. There were none.
Agenda Item No. 3. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. Mrs.
Humphris said she misunderstood the procedure that would be used today. She
had thought that because of the tight schedule the Board would just hear the
department presentations and when they were completed, they would go through
the list of items requested for additional funding. Mr. Tucker said there is
usually not a discussion until the end of the work sessions. If any Board
member requests that an item be added to the list of unfunded priorities, it
is done, and then discussed later.
Mrs. Thomas said she would like to add $8840 for a part-time law clerk
in the County Attorney's Office, and remove $8172 from the Commonwealth
Attorney's budget which is to be used for a supplement of the salary of the
Assistant Commonwealth's Attorney.
Mrs. Humphris said she was having a problem dealing with the funded and
unfunded recommendations. She would like to see a chart listing those items
along with dollar amounts.
Mr. Tucker noted that a call had been received from Senator Emily
Couric's office; it appears that there will be some additional funds from the
State Education Office.
Approved by the ~
County Supervisors
Date ~ ~' 9 ~l
Initials ~
March 11, 1996 (Adjourned Meeting)
(Page 11)
000209
At 3:27 p.m., with no further business to come before the Board today,
motion was offered by Mr. Bowerman, seconded by Mr. Martin, to adjourn until
March 13, 1996, at 1:00 p.m. Roll was called and the motion carried by the
following recorded vote:
AYES:
NAYS:
Mr. Marshall, Mr. Martin, Mr. Perkins, Ms. Thomas, Mr. Bowerman and
Ms. Humphris.
None.
~rd of